I agree, but it's silly to compare the F-Type, which represents the return of Jaguar into a segment they've been out of forty years, to an iconic American nameplate with GM marketing dollars behind it. I don't think they really have the same target buyers, although that's just a perception on my part not backed up by data. At the Chicago Auto Show last week, there were many more people circling the over styled Z06 than looking at the F-Type coupe. New Corvettes always sell to the faithful; let's see how strong they are in 2015. And for comparison and accuracy, in 2003 Maserati, which sold only the Coupe and Spyder into a more robust US economy, had 917 sales in the US.
This argument always baffles me. Most people view this Jag, any Ferrari, any Porsche, and a Corvette as sports cars. Those who claim to know the difference, as if anyone actually does, are such a small part of the market as to be inconsequential. The vast majority of Corvette buyers will use their cars the same way as the vast majority of F-Type and 911 buyers. Apples to apples. I totally agree they need coupes, what I questioned was your insistence that the coupe needed to be introduced first.
No, not really. This car goes up against the California, not the 458. California is a GT. Its really a question of how you are going to use the car. If it's a DD, then it's more likely thought of as a GT. I don't see it going up against the 911. I see it going up against the Corvette, at least in the states. Overseas the Cayman/Boxster. The difference is are they daily drivers or not and can you use them on longer trips. Very, very few would use a 458 on a long trip. GT's are better daily drivers instead of weekend cars. The 911 is probably the only car in the world that skirts between these two well. But, most 911 are coupes, not convertibles. Again, says a lot. I'm not insisting but I'm being practical. Look at the market they are selling in. Their primary market outside the US is the UK -- and the UK has crappy weather. Only in the US are convertible sales strong. In most parts of the world, soft top convertibles are not very popular. Why would you make a car for world sales and introduce the second most popular type first? Doesn't anyone at Jag actually live in the UK and realize: the weather there stinks!
For me, it was a choice between this or a 911. Actually, the purchase was so spur-of-the-moment it didn't go up against anything .
It must be something in the water over there. After all, their ancestors were responsible for things like this: Image Unavailable, Please Login
I was speaking with my Jag dealer this past week and he told me that in the last month he's lost at least three sales of the roadster to the coupe, which isn't available yet. Future sales, to be sure, but doesn't feed the dealer while he has to wait... He says the 'vert has been disappointing, as he's been forced to sit on V8S cars too long.
at 6-4 I don't fit in the convertible...I hope I will have more room in the coupe? I tend to doubt it however
I took two pics of the F-type coupe from the Philadelphia Auto Show last weekend. I think the car looks great in person. Sorry for the lousy cell phone pics. Jim Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Well... I think 81 grand for a V6 with 380HP and 0-60 just under 5 is pushing the limits of poseurdom. Looks good driving down the street, not much under the hood. Can't really say that about Ferrari. But it's also a gripe I have with all modern cars. I just think in Jag's case, they seem to not care much about weight at all. Yes, it has an aluminum body but the rest of the gimmicks --like the AC that pops out of the dash and the pop up rear wing-- just reek of "show me" gadgets at the expense of weight. It seems more like marketing people were involved than engineers. "We need DRAMA!" Besides, Ferrari's were always overpriced from the beginning. This is nothing new. But the Jag is a mass produced car. For a car with a base model V6, I would expect it to be cheaper than it's 70 grand starting point. The coupe is cheaper though buy 4 grand and I think that's about right. I'm just not sure how many want to spend $65 grand for a no options Jag with 340 HP and a V6 under the hood.
Great points all.... but a Jag is not a Porsche. Cayman S 0-60 time: 4.4 sec $63,000 MSRP Jag Coupe 0-60 time: 5.1 sec $65,000 MSRP Cayman S curb weight: 2888 lbs Jag coupe curb weight: 3477 lbs I'll stick with my idea of under powered and over weight.
Doesn't anyone at Jag actually live in the UK and realize: the weather there stinks! [/QUOTE] I think you might be surprised just how popular convertibles are here in the UK. It's a strange thing, something to do with our lack of sunshine most of the year, the first sign of a nice day and all the roofs are down.
If I may generalize out your comments to also include the roadster: 991 Carrera S Cabs are slower (at least 0-60 as tested by most magazines) with 95 less bhp and optioned moderately are about $135,000 - $140,000. The V8S extravagantly optioned is $30,000 less. At 550 bhp, the F-Type RS Coupe dwarfs the power output of a Carrera S coupe for significantly less money. I think it's a silly metric but it's the one you chose. I know you think the F-Type competes against a Cayman but at least in V8 guise most consider it in the same market space as a 911. I agree with you on the overweight part. The up/down center vent is wholly unnecessary. And, as a final thought, given the rationale you've expressed here, why are you so keen on getting a 4C with its 4 cylinder turbocharged engine which is slower to 60 than a Cayman-S and weighs just as much (in US spec)? I'll take a guess that it's because it's a sexy low production volume car. Which, by the way, would be a good enough reason for me. I look forward to getting my V8S next month.
Ya know I just saw a brand new Cayman s on the streets and it's a really fine looking car. I think it's better looking than the 911.
Lets not forget the real reason 90% of owners buy certain cars, IMAGE! In many peoples minds a Jaguar is still an old persons car. Porsche, Ferrari etc. have spent years building an image, an image Jaguar does not have. The first Jaguar to ever interest me was the XKRS and I think that it is going to take a while for Jaguar to change peoples minds. I doubt that many buyers of these cars really look that close at the power to weight ratio they are more interested in heated and cooled seats (I remember when Porsche started offering these in the 2nd gen 997 I said there goes the ballgame). I do not live in perfect convertible weather but I see far more Porsche and Ferrari convertible than coupes. I think the coupe is a very nice looking car and the V6 might be underpowered but for most of the drivers of these cars it is all they will ever need. After all you don't need 550hp to go 45mph (average speed on most highways in my area during rush hour).
I agree with the points about jaguar's image current image. They've been sort of lost for quite some time. The s-type sedan that is basically a Taurus was another example out of a long line of mediocre cars that turned people off to the brand. Jag needs to restore the cache it had in the '60s. If I were them I wouldn't be shy about having the Etype sprinkled into the ftype marketing. I'd also hire a world class race prep organization and take the ftype racing.
Jaguar f type s coupe with 550 hp versus 911s coupe versus alfa 4c versus corvette z06? F type coupe is truly the most stunning new coupe with the most seductive style.
