XJR vs 360

Born_2_Kill_83 · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:28

O.k fair enough didnt relise my last post has been done before but as a couple of you laughed at my F360 comment I thought I'd let you explain your giggles in here.
Firstly I would like to point out my orginal comment was about mid-range performance 50-120mph lets say, not handling or from a standing start, granted the 360 is a lot better. My old man has a friend with a 360 and I can promise you the 360 up to around 120mph managed to 1/2-1 car length away, not a great deal in it hense the comment of 360 mid-range performance.
For the people of you who havent been in a 360 or XJR, heres what your looking at on the clock Clicky Click (Sorry the phone was upside down)

[TW]Fox · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:33

I'm sorry but a Ferrari 360 is another league to your XJR. XJR's are nice cars, but they are not Supercars. They are not even the definitive supersaloon. It's a quick Jag. Thats that.

Born_2_Kill_83 · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:35

[TW]Fox said:
I'm sorry but a Ferrari 360 is another league to your XJR. XJR's are nice cars, but they are not Supercars. They are not even the definitive supersaloon. It's a quick Jag. Thats that.

O.k we could look at this on paper, how much Torque has a 360 got?

TripleT · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:37

I hope this isn't going to be one of these "in gear" races up a hill towing a caravan because its pretty poor if it is.

I'll check back later and I better see people changing gear!

Gibbo · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:41

Hi there

Am sorry but as other have mentioned the 360 is another league to the XJR, one is a precision handling tool and the other is a cruising barge.

I raced an XJR in my Mustang when it was N/A with around 380BHP and needless to say I pulled away from the guy quite easily on both straight and twisty parts. The guy was so miffed he insisted on making dangerous move by overtaking on double whites after catching traffic, some people just can't accept been beaten.

From your video clip and taking account that your speedo is accurate which it most probably is not your car (XJR) takes 17.5-18s to do 60-130mph, now thats not particular quick. Look a little further down this forum and you will see a Golf GTI with remap (307BHP) doing the same in 15s. Now I am not sure what my car was when N/A but I'd assume it was 14-16s and now it can do a 60-130mph in 10s flat.

So no your car is nowhere near Ferrari 360 performance, as I believe a 360 does the 60-130mph dash in around 12-13s area.

Born_2_Kill_83 · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:42

Gibbo said:
Hi there

Am sorry but as other have mentioned the 360 is another league to the XJR, one is a precision handling tool and the other is a cruising barge.

I raced an XJR in my Mustang when it was N/A with around 380BHP and needless to say I pulled away from the guy quite easily on both straight and twisty parts. The guy was so miffed he insisted on making dangerous move by overtaking on double whites after catching traffic, some people just can't accept been beaten.

From your video clip and taking account that your speedo is accurate which it most probably is not your car (XJR) takes 17.5-18s to do 60-130mph, now thats not particular quick. Look a little further down this forum and you will see a Golf GTI with remap (307BHP) doing the same in 15s. Now I am not sure what my car was when N/A but I'd assume it was 14-16s and now it can do a 60-130mph in 10s flat.

So no your car is nowhere near Ferrari 360 performance, as I believe a 360 does the 60-130mph dash in around 12-13s area.

Love Mustangs which one was it?? Edit - one in the sig?
...keep in mind I dont have the 320BHP Jag

InvaderGIR · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:44

Gibbo, if I saw the 'stang, I'd bend over ready for a beating!

Love that car of yours...shame I don't have £40k to buy it off you

And yes, the fact that the XJR is a saloon and the 360 is, well a Ferrari means Jag is the loser.

InvG

Tax Evader · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:44

In straight-forward acceleration the 360 Modena is at least 4 seconds quicker to 125mph than the 4L XRJ.

playworker · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:46

I'm not sure what this thread is all about but in response to Fox's comment about the XJR not being a supercar - neither is a 360.

I've had a run-in with a 360 before, 40 up to 120ish (leptons

) and it only pulled a couple of car lengths against my tatty old Neesan - he definitely wasn't happy about it either

They might be ~400bhp but the torque is only ~270lb/ft which funnily enough is almost exactly what my car makes too

Gibbo · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:47

Loowi_ashley said:
Love Mustangs which one was it?? Edit - one in the sig?
...keep in mind I dont have the 320BHP Jag

HI there

At the time it was a standard Saleen S281 with simple bolt-on mods making 380BHP, same as any Mustang GT V8 with simple bolt-ons. Problem is the XJR is too heavy.

Now I've got 500+ BHP and shed loads more torque so it would be easier.

Gibbo · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:50

playworker said:
I'm not sure what this thread is all about but in response to Fox's comment about the XJR not being a supercar - neither is a 360.

I've had a run-in with a 360 before, 40 up to 120ish (leptons ) and it only pulled a couple of car lengths against my tatty old Neesan - he definitely wasn't happy about it either

They might be ~400bhp but the torque is only ~270lb/ft which funnily enough is almost exactly what my car makes too

Hi there

Question is though how do you know it was a fair race, he may have been in too high a gear and not changed down or not gone down low enough been over confident.

That Jag XJR is taking 18s to do 60-130mph, wheras the Ferrari I'd imagine does it in circa 12-13s and hence is a lot quicker.

Get yourselfs on an airfield where things are equal and both drivers are properly going for it and accelerate from 30-155mph through the gears and you will soon see that red Ferrari leave you for dust, unless your in something of similar power/performance.

Born_2_Kill_83 · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:50

playworker said:
I'm not sure what this thread is all about but in response to Fox's comment about the XJR not being a supercar - neither is a 360.

I've had a run-in with a 360 before, 40 up to 120ish (leptons ) and it only pulled a couple of car lengths against my tatty old Neesan - he definitely wasn't happy about it either

They might be ~400bhp but the torque is only ~270lb/ft which funnily enough is almost exactly what my car makes too

Some-one that thinking sense at last!! 270lb/ft isnt excellent and a 360 is not a supercar

Born_2_Kill_83 · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:52

Gibbo said:
HI there

At the time it was a standard Saleen S281 with simple bolt-on mods making 380BHP, same as any Mustang GT V8 with simple bolt-ons. Problem is the XJR is too heavy.

Now I've got 500+ BHP and shed loads more torque so it would be easier.

I would come back and say tang V8 GT is ***** at handlling even so for the shelby version but think I'm right in saying Saleen sorted at the brakes and suspension, or am I thinking Roush

DONT SWEAR

Dangerous

Gibbo · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:53

Loowi_ashley said:
Some-one that thinking sense at last!! 270lb/ft isnt excellent and a 360 is not a supercar

Hi there

The torque is only relevant though if your a lazy driver, the whole idea of a Ferrari is its racy/revvy engine and to drive it properly. So yeah if you catch one of guard you may indeed keep up, but all things been equal in a proper race they are indeed quick cars irrelevant of the low torque.

The new M3 is one quick car, it has not a huge amount of torque but when driven properly its damn quick.

If you want to race towing caravens up hills and only using high gears then yes torque will come into play. Also I'd imagine the Ferrari is geared in such a way that plenty of torque gets to the road from its short gear ratios.

Gibbo · 29 Jun 2007 at 11:55

Loowi_ashley said:
I would come back and say tang V8 GT is ***** at handlling even so for the shelby version but think I'm right in saying Saleen sorted at the brakes and suspension, or am I thinking Roush

Hi there

Both Roush, Steeda and Saleen sort the suspension.

Steeda make the best handling Mustang and hence why my car has all their handling parts and setup. Still to say they are ***** shows how mis-informed you are as even the standard Mustang GT and Shelby are capable, fair enough they can be vastly improved but they are far from *****. In standard form they are on par with things like a Monaro which people seem to rave about, just the Mustang is very easy to improve drastically and for little money in all departments.

Nathan · 29 Jun 2007 at 12:05

that youtube vid does not look much quicker than my 306 LOL

Jez · 29 Jun 2007 at 12:07

Nathan said:
that youtube vid does not look much quicker than my 306 LOL

He takes it up to 130mph quite quickly, your 306 wont even DO 130!

edit: infact its 150+, miles miles faster than the average car

BigDannyO · 29 Jun 2007 at 12:09

3 MPG!

TripleT · 29 Jun 2007 at 12:10

Jez said:
He takes it up to 130mph quite quickly, your 306 wont even DO 130!

edit: infact its 150+, miles miles faster than the average car

His 306 will do 140mph indicated

P.S - i haven't seen the vid cos I'm at work.

Jez · 29 Jun 2007 at 12:12

TripleT said:
His 306 will do 140mph indicated

P.S - i haven't seen the vid cos I'm at work.

Fair enough, but not a chance in hell it will be as fast as that. The vid shows it accelerating fairly quickly up to 155mph indicated.

No-where near supercar performance, but very brisk all the same!