For you Jaq fans. News XF-R rated at 510hp!!!
here is the picture you requested.....

and some of the engine specs can be found here on BMW'S WEBSITE.....
http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Conte...s/Default.aspx
These aren't even M-spec.

your point about critical thinking??? I dont know exactly what the "problem" was that required critical thinking on this string?
My point was NOT that this car is weak----It was that it has no alluring traits to make one choose it over other cars other than looks. Its not the strongest in its class or even close....its heavy....its not super gas efficient...its a Jag; so its GARUNTEED not to be the most reliable....so why buy it?? All one can say is LOOKS.....
Do realize that the 1991 Ferrari 512TR---which is 25 year old design(close to 30?)--- is just as fast as the 2008 Audi R8. Isnt there something inherently wrong with that in your book??
The 2008 Audi R8 is a CHICK CAR!!
The car is hardly weak, that is a riduculous assertion and I think others pointed it out ats well.
The R8 is a great sports car that is incredibly balanced. It is about about the driving experience, not the size of the cupholders or mirrors, hardly a chick car.
To call the 510 hp Jag a old car that's 4 years late to the game is not very true. The car likely handles far better than the W211 car and I bet it will hate more driver involvement. Don't get lost in the I NEED MORE POWER game like AMG did in 2003. Their long string of cars that were quick but complete devoid of driver involvement hurt them and they now are trying to change that and build cars that a driver might want to select.
Every Jag that I have tested in the last 20 years has been very similar....Stunning interiors.... very snug fitting and with very comfortable ride(even with the R types). These are GENTLEMANS cars. People buy them because they are beautiful and different; not to mention their dealership service is TOP NOTCH! The smell and interior feels like a Bentley or Rolls.
People dont buy these cars based on performance. So I doubt it will be very engaging.
Ask yourself this question.....If Motortrend or C&D did a comparison with this new Jag against the E63/M5/CTS-V....where would it finish??
Think back to all the comparisons youve read and done yourself.....take a guess?
The car is hardly weak, that is a riduculous assertion and I think others pointed it out ats well.
The R8 is a great sports car that is incredibly balanced. It is about about the driving experience, not the size of the cupholders or mirrors, hardly a chick car.
Just noticed the M3 in your sig....now it makes sense.
Where exactly did I say I was talking about a mercedes benz V8tt??
here is the statement I made---
The JAG is WEAK....just like your M3!!!
All the other models in its class had 500hp since 2003.....As a new model, it should PUSH the envelope. But that's not Jaguar's way....which is why its frustrating to like their cars. When everyone else has 500hp--they have 400hp. Just before everyone else goes to 570hp--they come up with 500......thats just weak.
Just noticed the M3 in your sig....now it makes sense.
Where exactly did I say I was talking about a mercedes benz V8tt??
here is the statement I made---
Where you using a CRYSTAL BALL to know I was "talking about the mercedes motor with turbos not the BMW motor."
The JAG is WEAK....just like your M3!!!
All the other models in its class had 500hp since 2003.....As a new model, it should PUSH the envelope. But that's not Jaguar's way....which is why its frustrating to like their cars. When everyone else has 500hp--they have 400hp. Just before everyone else goes to 570hp--they come up with 500......thats just weak.
Of course, I own an M3 so that automatically makes me stupid.
I mean, with points as great as incredible as that, the rest of what you say must be equally impressive.
My weak M3 would beat down any car you own around a road course and if that E55 you were talking about is stock, in a straight line as well. Not that it matters, as you obviously don't know what you are talking about.
All other models have 500 hp since 2003? Really? Hmm, I don't think the M5 and E55 is everyone. Not to mention, the E63 isn't exactly going to walk away from this thing and neither is the M5. It will take their next generation counterparts to do so.
What clearly is weak is your intellect, not the car.
Last edited by sticky2; Jan 10, 2009 at 06:23 PM.
Performance and luxury I'm sure makes it completely different. Life is too short and there are WAY too many cool cars out there to devote yourself to one type/brand of car and worship it your entire life. It's WAY more fun to get out and drive/own as many types/brands of cars you possibly can.
To each their own!
Every Jag that I have tested in the last 20 years has been very similar....Stunning interiors.... very snug fitting and with very comfortable ride(even with the R types). These are GENTLEMANS cars. People buy them because they are beautiful and different; not to mention their dealership service is TOP NOTCH! The smell and interior feels like a Bentley or Rolls.
People dont buy these cars based on performance. So I doubt it will be very engaging.
Ask yourself this question.....If Motortrend or C&D did a comparison with this new Jag against the E63/M5/CTS-V....where would it finish??
Think back to all the comparisons youve read and done yourself.....take a guess?
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Sticky2- not sure if the new M3 can beat the E55 in a straightline, but through the bends no doubt. It's a really good car, as is the R8.
The looks are kind of disappointing since the concept car's design did not translate well into the production design. Hey, good for Jag for adding some serious punch. Supposedly, the the XF's chassis is pretty good.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...est/index.html
Tom

TMC I thought the same thing, it should be like 4 flat to 60 in the R. And yeah, I think it could've looked better, more aggressive.
I mentioned the time mostly to show HYEPWR how far off he was with his ridiculous comments about the M3 being weak, not to compare to the E55.
Last edited by sticky2; Jan 11, 2009 at 03:31 PM.
I mentioned the time mostly to show HYEPWR how far off he was with his ridiculous comments about the M3 being weak, not to compare to the E55.
average E92 M3 is 12.60-12.50 @ 111-114
Last edited by Thericker; Jan 11, 2009 at 04:00 PM.
Cause EVERY M3 owner I know is a Know-it-all A-HOLE like yourself....
Im done talking to u......Please feel free to go back to popping that collar on your pink collared shirt and slap on your Varne sunglasses and weave through traffic at 140mph on conjested highways with ur M3 buddies.....
Cause EVERY M3 owner I know is a Know-it-all A-HOLE like yourself....
Im done talking to u......Please feel free to go back to popping that collar on your pink collared shirt and slap on your Varne sunglasses and weave through traffic at 140mph on conjested highways with ur M3 buddies.....
ricka- how ya doing bud? been working like a portuguese man o war on a site in the big tx, back with the fam before heading back south. love the SL, sahweet.
ricka- how ya doing bud? been working like a portuguese man o war on a site in the big tx, back with the fam before heading back south. love the SL, sahweet.
From my personal experience, from a stop, the DCT spanks a stock M5. From a roll, the lower the starting speed the better for the M3 as the M5 does pull up top but the cars are far closer than Gustav would have you believe. I ran a modified M5 when stock and beat it from a stop and now that I'm modified it is neck and neck from a roll until 130 where the modded M5 pulls. It is close enough that if a stock M5 has passengers vs. a stock DCT M3 with just driver, the M3 pulls (just my personal experience)
I have a Powerchip tune, rpi scoops, cat delete, evosport underdrive pulley, and am in the process of getting a new tune, full exhaust, and shorter gears which should be done before Saturday, hopefully.






