Evaluation of Weight 

"CAcoalminer" (CAcoalminer) 10/12/2016 at 20:04 • Filed to: None

3

39

Two days ago, I had the distinct pleasure of driving a friend’s 2016 Jaguar F-Type R and came away quite confused. This is a vehicle that checks all of the boxes concerning what a sports car should look like- it’s low, wide, short, and an absolute pleasure to behold. Inside, the vehicle seems to stick to its predecessors traditions of an “intimate” interior. Combine these two aspects with the fact that I’m well aware of the vehicle’s “lightweight aluminum body structure” from all of Jaguar’s marketing and I was certain that this would be a recipe for a great driver’s car. It isn’t.

Yes, the car makes exciting noises and is supremely powerful but I couldn’t ever get past one overriding factor- the weight. Having owned 2 Ford GTs that possess roughly the same power, I was excited to experience the rush that comes from nailing a decent sized, supercharged V8 in a relatively light vehicle. Unfortunately, this feeling just never showed. Yes, there is lots of magnificent exhaust noise but it isn’t accompanied by the force of the acceleration throwing you back like an eager horse or blur the scenery around you like the Enterprise entering warp drive. Oddly, the experience was eerily similar to the one I had when test driving a 2007 Aston Martin Vantage back when they were new. In both cases, the looks and sounds just never matched up with the actual experience. There was always something holding each car back from living up to the expectations that I had for them. In the case of the Aston, it was the power, as 380 hp just wasn’t enough. For the Jag, it was the weight, as every sensation seemed to be watered down. The first few times you fully depress the throttle in a 991 Turbo S or Ford GT, you basically hold on for dear life as the world around you flashes by at a genuinely astonishing rate and you are expecting for the car to take off at any moment. In the Jag, you depress the accelerator and just enjoy the roar behind you but are not provided with the same rush of the other two. Maybe I’ve been spoiled by being privileged enough to drive quite a few amazing vehicles over the years but the F-Type R’s acceleration just didn’t give me the nervous excitement that a proper sports car should. It’s probably a bit like Stouffer’s lasagna. If that’s the only kind of lasagna you’ve ever had, you probably think it’s quite good, maybe even great. However, once you experience a friend’s homemade version whose recipe has been passed done over generations or eat at an exquisite restaurant like Tony’s Di Napoli in New York (one of the few reasons to venture into the city), you’ll never view that cardboard box the same way again.

Not surprisingly, the disappointment doesn’t end when you reach a corner. The excessive mass means that you are required to partake in hard straight line braking or the car will just plow miserably around the bend. Of course, then you reach the corner exit and are ready to deploy the power again... except you can’t because the differential doesn’t seem to ever want to lock up and instead is more than happy to let you destroy the rear tires all day long. Think of the parent who is much more interested in his or her phone than his or her children who are on the verge of starting WWIII on the playground and you’ll have a pretty good idea. Maybe they are both unaware of their duty or simple don’t care, either way, you won’t be booting the throttle mid-corner and riding a surge of power and howling exhaust into the next bend. No, you’ll be relegated to a game of “How much patience can my right foot exhibit?” But it has all-wheel drive you proclaim! I’m here to tell you, it really doesn’t matter. You will feel the front start to grip once the rears have been overwhelmed but it’s a bit like throwing a bucket of water on a wildfire. Yes, you put out some of the fire but it’s a bit too little too late. In addition, even when the front wheels do start taking some of the load, they are only receiving a maximum of 37% of the total power. Not surprisingly, when around 340 hp (550 hp x 63%) is still being delivered to wheels that are already spinning, the result is not going to be traction miraculously being regained all of a sudden. I won’t even mention the cramped cabin because criticizing this car anymore just seems cruel.

All is not lost though. The R does ride decently, the cabin is adequately trimmed, and the transmission is a terrific mechanism (fast shifting when you want but more than happy to poodle around town). However, the standout really has to be the exhaust. It just has so much character and personality that it almost makes you forgive the car for its handling woes.

My good friend, Richard, a man who doesn’t particularly care for driving quickly and is much more concerned with what image his vehicle projects, is, not surprisingly, quite smitten with his F-Type R. He says it makes him feel like a rockstar, as he allegedly can’t go anywhere without someone commenting on how beautiful his car is or what an amazing sound it produces. Upon hearing this, I just shook my head while allowing it to fall into my hands.

So, the best way that I can sum up the 2016 Jaguar F-Type R is if you care about style over substance, you will absolutely adore it. It looks sensational, makes a sound that is guaranteed to put a smile on even a Honda Insight driver’s face, and will make you seem much more popular than you actually are. If however, you want cars that make nice noises and perform well, check out something from Germany (or possibly the U.S.).

Evaluation:

Having driven the F-Type R and felt firsthand its corpulence, I decided to research the vehicle’s actual curb weight. I suspected around 3,800 lb but was shocked to learn it’s actually most likely closer to 4,000. So, I decided to see how that stacks up in the current market. In addition, I researched the rear-wheel drive, 2015 version of the R as well to get an idea of just how much weight was gained by moving to all-wheel drive.

Marketing materials discussing all of the aluminum used throughout the F-Type.

Actual chassis and body of the F-Type.

2016 Jaguar F-Type R (AWD) :

Curb Weight- 4,008 lb (53/47%) (MT), 4,088 (C&D)

Length, Width, Height- 176.0 x 75.7 x 51.6 in

Trunk Volume- 11 cu. ft.

2017 Acura NSX (AWD) :

Curb Weight- 3,876 lb (42/58%) (MT), 3,854 lb (R&T), 3,868 lb (C&D)

Length, Width, Height- 176 x 76.3 x 47.8 in

Trunk Volume- 4 cu. ft.

2016 Mercedes-AMG GT S (RWD)

Curb Weight- 3,698 (48/52%) (MT), 3,683 lb (R&T)

Length, Width, Height- 179 x 76.3 x 50.7 in

Trunk Volume- 12.4 cu. ft.

2017 Audi R8 V10 Plus

Curb Weight- 3,642 (42/58%) (MT),

Length, Width, Height- 174.3 x 76.4 x 48.8 in

Trunk Volume- 8 cu. ft.

2015 Porsche 911 Turbo S (AWD):

Curb Weight- 3610 lb (39/61%) (MT), 3,588 lb (C&D)

Length, Width, Height - 177.4 x 74.0 x 51.0 in

Trunk Volume- 4.7 cu. ft.

The comparison I found most insightful was the one between the current Z06 and the RWD R because they seem to be extremely similar in many aspects and yet their weights are just so vastly different.

2015 Jaguar F-Type R (RWD) :

Curb Weight- 3873 lb (52/48%) (MT), 3,917 lb (C&D)

Length, Width, Height- 176.0 x 75.7 x 51.6 in

Trunk Volume- 11 cu. ft.

2016 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 Z07 (RWD) :

Curb Weight (Manual)- 3,499 lb (MT), 3,536 lb (R&T)

Curb Weight (Automatic)- 3,550 lb (49/51%) (MT)

Length, Width, Height- 177.9 x 77.4 x 48.6 in

Trunk volume- 15 cu. ft.

Why I compared them:

1. Both have relatively large, supercharged V8s with intercoolers

2. Both feature an 8-speed automatic transmission

3. Both are 2-seat, sports cars

4. Both have very similar dimensions

Note- For those wondering why I included trunk volumes, it is due to my love of traveling in performance cars and I thought it would add an interesting layer to the comparison.

wiffleballtony > CAcoalminer 10/12/2016 at 20:15

2

I’ve always felt that British performance cars, while brilliant, always seem to only get 80% of the performance equation down.

Decay buys too many beaters > CAcoalminer 10/12/2016 at 20:16

4

This is why I’ve been sticking with my boring, slow, FR-S rather than “upgrading” to either a muscle car or one of the hot Japanese turbo 4s despite then all being easily within budget. I haven’t driven anything that feels as good (except a Caymen GTS and a V8 Miata). Power deficiency is easy to rectify, weight and poorly sorted chassis dynamics are not. Cars have become too fat.

CAcoalminer > wiffleballtony 10/12/2016 at 20:19

0

I absolutely agree with that.

CAcoalminer > Decay buys too many beaters 10/12/2016 at 20:22

1

Well said.

However, I would hesitate to refer to your FR-S as boring or slow. I’ve never had the pleasure of driving one but they seem like quite an engaging driving experience.

Rico > CAcoalminer 10/12/2016 at 20:40

0

It’s quite strange how Jaguar hasn’t nailed the “weight savings” aspect of the aluminum. The new XE boasts quite a bit of aluminum too but weighs only about 60 lbs less than the C300 and BMW 330i.

Also I didn’t know you were in the tristate area! From the name I always assumed west coast.

Rico > wiffleballtony 10/12/2016 at 20:43

1

McLaren just scoffed politely at that comment.

CAcoalminer > Rico 10/12/2016 at 20:57

1

It really doesn’t make any sense at all to me. Where is all that weight coming from?

Haha. I’m actually from Texas. I just did quite a bit of business in the tri-state area and would always love stopping by Tony’s. As for the username, it’s a play on a very old high school nickname.

Rico > CAcoalminer 10/12/2016 at 21:09

0

It’s tough to say, maybe the engine or suspension? I know it’s not the interior materials or sound deadening. Also if I recall correctly many reviewers preferred the V6 model because it felt more nimble at 3691 lbs.

Ah that’s cool, I’ve never been to Tony’s but now that you’ve reminded me about it I should take my girl there.

wiffleballtony > Rico 10/12/2016 at 21:15

0

Hot Takes Salesman > CAcoalminer 10/12/2016 at 21:15

0

So, the answer here is AMG GT S, because the 4.0 V8 sounds fantastic and the whole car to me is pretty great.

djmt1 > wiffleballtony 10/12/2016 at 21:48

0

Can I have definition of “performance cars” because I can think of many a man in a shed who would disagree with you.

djmt1 > CAcoalminer 10/12/2016 at 21:53

1

Bring on those Inline 6s because JLR’s prehistoric Ford(ish) engines are holding them back, literally.

JGrabowMSt > CAcoalminer 10/12/2016 at 22:05

0

You just did a bunch of business and didnt stop to say hi?!

Cooommmeee ooooonnnnnn.

Just kidding, no big deal.

As far as the weight, I would put Jaguar into the Benz club a bit. Their cars are powerful porkers because the owners dont want creaking, rattling or any funky noises after the first year or two.

I would say (possibly out of some experience), that Audi has nailed the power to weight with its structural rigidity quite well. Benz is okay, but the cars are heavy. Overpowered so they hide it well, but very heavy. German engineering doesnt get old.

Compare that to some American luxury cars, and we’re plastic fantastic. Just give a new Cadillac 3 years. It’ll rattle like crazy because the plastic gets old and brittle. Not that the Europeans dont use plastic, but they use it differently, and FCA has come a long way since the split with Benz as far as learning how to make a good, quiet interior, but with age, it still shows its ugly head that the plastic is not being used wisely in places.

At the same time, just look at the curb weight of a Challenger Hellcat and an Alfa Romeo Giulia. They both put down a lot of power, but the Alfa barely ticks in above an FR-S in weight. Nice quiet ride too, very solid. The Hellcat is awesome, but it has a lot of plastic.

CAcoalminer > Rico 10/12/2016 at 22:10

1

Those make sense, especially the engine. Concerning the V6 model being preferred, I remember that as well. Maybe, I’ll try swing by the dealership and try one.

Glad that I reminded you. I hope the two of you enjoy it!

CAcoalminer > Hot Takes Salesman 10/12/2016 at 22:11

0

Haha. It is quite a nice vehicle.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > djmt1 10/12/2016 at 22:12

0

So F-Type with a modern Ford engine like the Voodoo would be better?

CAcoalminer > djmt1 10/12/2016 at 22:12

0

I agree. I can’t wait to see (and hear) the new I6s.

wiffleballtony > djmt1 10/12/2016 at 22:14

0

I was referring to production cars with a reasonable volume ie Aston Martin, Jaguar etc.

djmt1 > Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies 10/12/2016 at 22:17

0

A Voodoo would make anything better. Stair lifts, sowing machines, ice cream dispensers. ANYTHING...

That said Jaguar really need lighter drivetrains. All their stuff (apart from the new 4 bangers) is too big, too old and too heavy.

djmt1 > wiffleballtony 10/12/2016 at 22:24

0

Etc? It’s just Aston and Jag and even then I would say they build GT cars as opposed to performance and definitely sports cars. I’d say only McLaren would cover your definition and given the extraordinary success they’re having I say they got the equation right and some.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > djmt1 10/12/2016 at 22:42

0

No, they need to throw caution to the wind and build a V12.

wiffleballtony > djmt1 10/12/2016 at 22:50

0

What about Lotus, TVR, Bentley?

djmt1 > Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies 10/12/2016 at 22:50

0

Well they are developing I6s at the moment...

and did say the new engines are modular...

and that the Inline engines can bolt together to become Vs...

Yup, we need to find some wind and now.

CAcoalminer > JGrabowMSt 10/12/2016 at 23:05

0

Haha. I apologize, my friend. Unfortunately, the trips were never very happy ones as they were filled with BoD meetings, appointments with creditors, and stressful negotiations. The meals afterwards were definitely the highlights of my trips!

That’s actually quite a good point that I never considered. So, you’re assuming that the extra weight is coming from overengineering the vehicle so it lasts over time?

djmt1 > wiffleballtony 10/12/2016 at 23:14

0

Out of all the British brands that have sold road cars this year I would say:

GT Cars: Aston, Bentley, Morgan and Jaguar.

Comfy barges: Bentley, Jaguar and Rolls Royce and Land Rover.

Performance cars: Lotus, McLaren, Ariel, BAC, Caterham, Ginetta, Noble, Zenos, and Radical.

TVR haven’t built car in almost a decade now but we only have a little bit longer to wait and that will certainly be a performance car.

Decay buys too many beaters > CAcoalminer 10/13/2016 at 01:41

0

I wouldn’t either, I’ve just become so weary of defending a vehicle that is not a “numbers” car to a bunch of internet racers to whom spec sheets and straight line speed are all that matters. Starting off any defense by calling it boring and slow deflates 90% of their argument!

It’s definitely worth a test drive for anyone who considers themselves a fan of driving. It’s not going to light your hair on fire and when you get a corner wrong the lack of torque to save you is absolutely infuriating. That said, take a corner just right, just on the edge of grip, and it is bliss. Plus it’ll be chomping at the heels of just about anything else on the track (except those guys driving Lotuses on Hoosiers O.o)

AMGtech - now with more recalls! > CAcoalminer 10/13/2016 at 04:32

0

I had much the same thoughts when I experienced one almost two years ago. It was so very disappointing. To be honest, after all the hype, I didn’t think the exhaust was that amazing either, still very good mind you but blown away by the then pre-production AMG GT-S.

BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires > CAcoalminer 10/13/2016 at 04:59

0

Their line is that the weight savings they’ve made using the aluminium architecture have been ‘reinvested’ in other areas of the car. One of the main ones of those is the double-wishbone suspension which is heavier than a comparable strut setup, but offers better camber change during corners.

Although I’d have like to have seen a lighter car (mainly because I think that 1400kg is about as heavy as a mid-size car should be), the magazine review of the XE’s suspension have been glowing so it has paid off somewhere...

CAcoalminer > Decay buys too many beaters 10/13/2016 at 08:54

0

I understand. That’s frustrating that some people only look at statistics rather than wanting to drive the vehicle and experience the sensations that it delivers. Oh well. Their loss.

Good to know. Glad you seem to be enjoying it!

CAcoalminer > AMGtech - now with more recalls! 10/13/2016 at 08:56

1

The AMG GT-S is quite the achievement for Mercedes. I’m so glad we have such a variety of terrific sports cars to choose from these days.

CAcoalminer > BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires 10/13/2016 at 08:59

1

Interesting. Thanks for sharing.

JGrabowMSt > CAcoalminer 10/13/2016 at 09:27

0

“Lasts” is a strong word, I dont want to necessarily say that it means the car will last longer, but it will bulk things up to prevent unseen breakage on basic items.

My SL600 for example has a chubby curb weight at ~4165lbs. This is supposed to be a sports car, yet it lives in a weight class of small crossovers and SUVs. At the same time, the doors weigh a ton and at 20 years old still close with a very satisfying thunk. The interior still has no rattles, and a lot of the interior leather trim consists of panels that are glued into place. They separate, but we’re not talking about 10 plastic trim clips that now have to be fished out.

The overall construction is heavier, so sure, bushings may fail, and Ive seen some very squeaky R129s before, but the same could be said for an older Jag, Aston or Audi I would think. Poorly kept ones are a money pit, decently good ones just need TLC, and a well preserved example will still run like new.

Look at a C5 ‘vette, and you’ll see that even the best preserved example still has ill fitting front and rear bumpers, and as much plastic inside as a dollar store.

I think its really just down to adventageous use of materials to prevent them from deteriorating as quickly, from a squeak and rattle perspective, but the car itself as a whole, if not regularly maintained, stands no better chance than the run of the mill econobox of the 90s.

SCARPS22 > CAcoalminer 10/13/2016 at 09:53

0

“one of the few reasons to venture into the city”. Really?! There are about a million or so good reasons to venture into NYC. Have you got Metrophobia or something?

CAcoalminer > JGrabowMSt 10/13/2016 at 09:56

0

I understand. Very well explained.

SkyNet > CAcoalminer 10/27/2016 at 11:19

1

Great read.

I wonder if the answer is secretly 911 Carrera S.

CAcoalminer > SkyNet 10/27/2016 at 23:00

0

Thank you. I’m glad you enjoyed it.

Having yet to drive the 991.2 Carrera S, I can’t comment on that particular model. However, the 991.1 Carrera S really is a great vehicle. Plenty of space, reasonable amounts of power (enough to make things exciting without being dangerous), sonorous engine, and understatedly good looking. Add to that that you can have the excellent PDK or decent manual (I don’t like the 7th gear) and it’s truly a standout.

SkyNet > CAcoalminer 10/28/2016 at 09:45

0

And still fairly low weight.

CAcoalminer > SkyNet 10/28/2016 at 20:38

0

Very good point.

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > CAcoalminer 11/30/2016 at 12:31

1

It’s probably a bit like Stouffer’s lasagna.

Burn!