For those who have had both how does the structure stiffness compare?

I have a 2001 996 cab and have also had a CLK550. The 911, although quite old is a stiff structure and while you get squeaks from door rubbers over bumpy roads it's massively better than the CLK which by comparison seemed to have only modest connection between the front and back end.

So F type or XKR for a road trip car:
XKR has more space, but F type is a bit wider (more shoulder room). F type is potentially AWD and 8 speed not 6. But otherwise they're pretty similar. My preference would be for the XKR as it room for cameras, jackets and bits and bobs behind the front seats, but if the chassis is substantially more flexible over bumpy roads this would be annoying. Anyone have any input?

cheers

 

My F type was the very first convertible that I rode in that does not have Cowl Shake. My XK 8 convertible did have the shake. Get the F if that's important to you. I can get my golf clubs in the F boot, FWIW.
Doc

 

X150 and X152 are both basically the same chassis, so there's always that to consider. The x100 was about the same as a Lincoln LS of that era, so nothing spectacular.

 

Never driven let alone owned any 'vert but I have read that the X150 was originally designed as a coupe then the 'vert followed whilst the X152 was designed firstly as a 'vert then the coupe followed. And of course the X152 came out as a 'vert only for the first year (2013) before the coupe followed a year later.

 

I believe the x150 XK/XKR chassis was shortened for the x152 F-type... Assuming that the floorpan was shortened between the front and rear bulkheads the x152 all else being equal it would end up a bit stiffer for the F-type. However, I have yet to see anything written or hear from someone who owns both, whether it's noticeable.

 

Actually reverse for the XK also; First designed as a 'vert, then came the coupe.

 

Rear cradle & front subframe on RWD models are interchangeable on these vehicles (coupe & vert)

 

I have both. 07 XK 4.2 and a 14 F Type V6S. The XK is a more comfortable GT, while the F is a much more taut sports car. I prefer the XK for longer trips.

 

Also have an 07 XKR. Comfortable for longer trips. Drove an F type (V8). Great high performance car but zero interior storage space. I’m 6’3” so not much room either. One good argument for an F Type is the look. Suggest read the Car and Driver long term test.

 

I have learned that the DB9 has some underbody metal panels that provide additional stiffening to the chassis. I am confident that this can be effective having played around with chassis stiffening on an early Miata.
Are any of the XK / XKR underbody panels rigid metal, or is it all just plastic ?

 

Plastic
Drive an XK150, I doubt you be concerned about chassis rigidity afterwards.
wj

 

Comparing the drive of an XK150 to an X150, would certainly be convincing.

 

I have a coupe... and of course, it's fine.
The convertible is the unknown and various reviews have noted that the F type appears to have a stiffer chassis than the convertible X150 - the question is, how bad is it. Merc CLK was quite poor, yet 20 year old 996 cab is dramatically better.

 

I have a vert, have driven coupe. Also have a flexible flier xk100 vert.
Only you know what you feel is 'stif' enough. Drive one and decide. I'm quite satisfied with the xk150 vert's chassis.
wj

 

I agree - a decent test drive is the bottom line. But it's good to hear that people are in general happy with it.

 

I did a fair bit of test driving of both body styles before I bought mine, and if there's a big difference between the two in structural rigidity I couldn't notice it even when driving on some truly terrible roads in the process. It was a pretty major reason why I bought a convertible, because coming from a C4 Corvette that was super noodly when the roof was off I didn't want anything like that. On paper it's only about 60% of the torsional stiffness of the XK coupe but in practice I'm not sure how much of a difference that makes. There's no cowl shake anywhere and the 996 coupe that I used to have was a far more rattly car than this one is.
I think the only reason the F-Type actually has slightly higher torsional rigidity is because Jaguar made it by essentially lopping half a foot out of the XK's wheelbase, so there's less forces acting on the center section of the car.

 

thanks!