Jaguar F Type V6S vs Porsche Boxster S

Dr House · 15 Oct 2013 at 20:43

[ui]ICEMAN;25121143 said:
The 991 and 981 interiors are almost identical and certainly not different in quality. There is no F Type R either, the top model is the V8S

Ah, well I was not that impressed by the Boxster I had as a loner however it was a base spec with no extras which is why it probably just felt cheap to me.

The F Type I saw in the dealership has a beautiful interior.

pioneer2000 · 21 Oct 2013 at 12:08

Hmmm, well popped into Jaguar this weekend- certainly a nice car in the flesh, but definitely wider than expected and the interior was a tad disappointing.

Test drive of a V6S booked for next weekend, but still more impressed by a Boxster to look at / live with.

What concerns me about the Jag is the ridiculousness of its weight, so will be interested to see how this exhibits itself on the road.

Gibbo · 21 Oct 2013 at 20:01

pioneer2000 said:
Hmmm, I really don't see why the 911 is favoured so much over a Boxster - surprised people still have a problem with the image of it!

Many claim the Cayman is dynamically better than the 911, and the Boxster is virtually identical to the Cayman, so surely that makes the Boxster a better drivers car than a 911 cab?

I think Jaguar are being a little cheeky trying to pass off the F Type as a 911 competitor... it lacks 4 seats for a start!

Because the 911 handling is extremely unique and even though the mid-engined Porsches have better balance, most say the 911 is still the quicker car, even if they had the same power levels, not sure I agree with that, but I've driven Cayman R and new Boxster, they are amazing, but I prefer the driving dynamics of my 911, it's more challenging and awarding.

theone8181 · 21 Oct 2013 at 20:15

Gibbo said:
Because the 911 handling is extremely unique and even though the mid-engined Porsches have better balance, most say the 911 is still the quicker car, even if they had the same power levels, not sure I agree with that, but I've driven Cayman R and new Boxster, they are amazing, but I prefer the driving dynamics of my 911, it's more challenging and awarding.

Weight over the rear wheels and as for the interior it is leather in the boxster just like the 911 isn't it?

Gibbo · 21 Oct 2013 at 20:28

theone8181 said:
Weight over the rear wheels and as for the interior it is leather in the boxster just like the 911 isn't it?

I don't car about interior, when I buy a car that is the lowest importance on my list.

But I do believe all Porsches now share the same interior materials.

pioneer2000 · 21 Oct 2013 at 23:11

I think it's pretty clear that a MR setup is always going to give the best balance in a car - seems the F Type is getting some flak as it's got a real weight split of about 52/48 (even though Jaguar seem to claim 50/50 for the V6), which combined with the weight of the thing makes for some less than amazing handling.

Simon · 21 Oct 2013 at 23:19

Since when was 50/50 the be all of handling ?

Housey · 22 Oct 2013 at 00:03

pioneer2000 said:
I think it's pretty clear that a MR setup is always going to give the best balance in a car - seems the F Type is getting some flak as it's got a real weight split of about 52/48 (even though Jaguar seem to claim 50/50 for the V6), which combined with the weight of the thing makes for some less than amazing handling.

It's 5/95 left to right though, they hide that bit.

hurfdurf · 22 Oct 2013 at 00:11

Simon said:
Since when was 50/50 the be all of handling ?

pioneer2000 · 22 Oct 2013 at 00:26

Well, no as Ferrari and the like do pretty well with say 42:58 with the 4588 Italia.

My point was that a 50:50 or more rearwards distribution is "better" than a front heavy car. The Boxster is 46:54 which makes the Jaguar look pretty nose heavy.

Bear · 22 Oct 2013 at 06:57

Dont you just love a forum full of nerds, just drive the ******* thing and stop whining about it. Judge the car on the experience instead of the numbers on a piece of paper, cars rarely make sense but can be a right laugh all the same. Cars should be about the experience / enjoyment etc not some top trumps fag fest

Jonnycoupe · 22 Oct 2013 at 07:15

pioneer2000 said:
I think it's pretty clear that a MR setup is always going to give the best balance in a car - seems the F Type is getting some flak as it's got a real weight split of about 52/48 (even though Jaguar seem to claim 50/50 for the V6), which combined with the weight of the thing makes for some less than amazing handling.

lol, it handles amazingly and offers compliance required on UK roads... even though pioneer2000 'seems to claim' 52/48 split....

It masks the weight very well and the V8S is supercar quick, driving the thing is a total event, it doesnt really matter about the paper stats.

Janesy B · 22 Oct 2013 at 08:11

Bear said:
Dont you just love a forum full of nerds, just drive the ******* thing and stop whining about it. Judge the car on the experience instead of the numbers on a piece of paper, cars rarely make sense but can be a right laugh all the same. Cars should be about the experience / enjoyment etc not some top trumps fag fest

and as if most people here are good enough drivers to extract the difference/small advantage in pointless numbers from the cars anyway.

pioneer2000 · 22 Oct 2013 at 11:20

Janesy B said:
and as if most people here are good enough drivers to extract the difference/small advantage in pointless numbers from the cars anyway.

That's a bit of a throwaway comment though - one could easily say "why does anyone need a car that does 155mph when they can't drive it that fast", "Why do people need automatic spoliers for downforce" when they don't drive like that on the roads" etc.

The fact is, Jaguar advertise the F Type as a lightweight, sports roadster. It's not light (in fact it's likely the heaviest around) and it's not as well balanced as others. So this has the knock on effect of making the car more expensive to run and potentially less enjoyable as it's more prone to understeer.

I'll see what I think come the weekend, but from a purely spec point of view, it's stumbled a little already - I gather the road presence and noise of the thing is what makes up for it.

[ui]ICEMAN · 22 Oct 2013 at 12:15

Please just go drive it. I've owned/driven just about every super and hypercar made in the last decade. I also used to race in the Ferrari challenge so I have a reasonable feel for the handling characteristics of cars.

The F Type drives as well as any other front engined rear wheel drive sports car. You do not feel the weight, even in the V8, it feels very nimble. All the reviews rave about it so just hold your judgement until you've driven it. The upside to the extra weight is wonderful ride quality and excellent noise dampening with the hood up.

As I stated already, the V8 is also seriously quick. After dispatching with the 600hp 997TT this weekend, the guy sold his car and bought a .2 997TT just yesterday! A lot of people will underestimate the F Type, it is honestly nothing like any other Jaguar on the road today, and that's a very good thing for a sports car.

Jonnycoupe · 22 Oct 2013 at 12:52

pioneer2000 said:
The fact is, Jaguar advertise the F Type as a lightweight, sports roadster. It's not light (in fact it's likely the heaviest around) and it's not as well balanced as others. So this has the knock on effect of making the car more expensive to run and potentially less enjoyable as it's more prone to understeer.

Prone to understeer? Yes for the fraction of a second you power on and get MASSIVE oversteer that you simple limit by changing the car DSC settings.

I really hope you are not using weight balance as vehicle dynamics balance.

Which competitor set are you comparing it to in terms of the weight comparison? I guess thats why you used the word 'likely' as you dont actually know? Cos its only really the Porsches which are lighter, it helps when your tractive effort is generate at the same end as the wheels; the much smaller body doesnt need to be as stiff!

Basically its obvious you havent driven one!

Janesy B · 22 Oct 2013 at 13:14

pioneer2000 said:
That's a bit of a throwaway comment though - one could easily say "why does anyone need a car that does 155mph when they can't drive it that fast", "Why do people need automatic spoliers for downforce" when they don't drive like that on the roads" etc.

The fact is, Jaguar advertise the F Type as a lightweight, sports roadster. It's not light (in fact it's likely the heaviest around) and it's not as well balanced as others. So this has the knock on effect of making the car more expensive to run and potentially less enjoyable as it's more prone to understeer.

I'll see what I think come the weekend, but from a purely spec point of view, it's stumbled a little already - I gather the road presence and noise of the thing is what makes up for it.

No, my point is for this thread is that both cars are very capable and you'd be well into illegal speeds on public roads to find the differences. So you might as well drive both, but the one you like and forget about the numbers.

Simon · 22 Oct 2013 at 13:14

pioneer2000 said:
Well, no as Ferrari and the like do pretty well with say 42:58 with the 4588 Italia.

My point was that a 50:50 or more rearwards distribution is "better" than a front heavy car. The Boxster is 46:54 which makes the Jaguar look pretty nose heavy.

Do you know what polar moment of inetria is?

You could have a car with 1 ton numberplates at each end, it would still have 50:50 weight distribution, but certainly wouldn't handle very well!

I guess you can always put a bag of sand in the boot if you really want 50:50 weight distribution (A BMW USP for many years- but hardly relevant)

pioneer2000 · 22 Oct 2013 at 14:40

Jonnycoupe said:
Which competitor set are you comparing it to in terms of the weight comparison?

Well the Boxster and 911 are the obvious comparisons.

pioneer2000 · 22 Oct 2013 at 14:42

Janesy B said:
No, my point is for this thread is that both cars are very capable and you'd be well into illegal speeds on public roads to find the differences.

Well In that case we might as well all buy A45 AMG's as without breaking the law we could never tell the difference between that and a supercar and they are so much more practical...! :eek: