The pic of the car that Karl Franz posted above is not that bad. However, every other time I've seen the car (in other pics and videos) I've cringed a bit. I agree that the car looks to be a bit thrown together and the design does not flow well as a whole. The aero package, especially in the front of the car, looks like a cheap aftermarket package to me. That said, 3.6 to 60 is amazing if true (I'm skeptical).

 

The official 0-60 from Jaguar is 4.2, and and 4.6 for the XKR. The 510 hp XKR was tested to run 0-60 in 4.0 seconds, 0-100 in 8.8, and 1/4 mi in 12.3@119. The XKR-S has 40 more hp, more aggressive shifts, and and wider tires allowing for a harder launch. After driving it, C&D estimated 0-60 of 3.6, 0-100 of 8.4 (I think it will likely be better than this, around 8.0), and 1/4 mile of 11.9 and said the official performance figures are very underrated. I agree the looks are a bit boy-racerish but better than any other sports car Jag has ever put out. Thank the supercharger for a broad power band. No denying its performance, but it carries a $30K+ premium over the XKR, and I'm not sure it's worth that. Even as fast as it is, $132K is steep for a Jag. Top Gear wasn't kind to it (see the link I posted), especially when compared to the GTR.

 

+1 on the less attractive brother comment... Not ugly, but not the prettiest machine. That said, the XKR-S is the first Jag that appealed to me visually. I prefer the look of the CX-16 concept, though.
I wish I could drive one. Once I heard that it was only an auto, I lost interest. I was hoping that the auto would be decent, but I would have preferred a dual clutch manual (consistent with DCT in GT-R or Porsche's PDK). I'd love the opportunity to judge this for myself, though.

One thing that kept me in the Jag camp (as opposed to Aston), is the ownership and maintenance. In my area, I'd have to travel quite a distance to receive support on my Aston, whereas Jaguar is only 50 miles away.

(As opposed to the nearest GT-R or Porsche certified service center - both within 3 miles)

 

@TahoeM3: Okay, but nearly a half a second off of a 0-60 time when we're already down around 4 seconds is a lot, even with a 40 bhp increase. I look forward to seeing some actual test results.

 

Yeah, I really like that one too. I especially like the back end and the side-hinged door. Not sure if that'll make it into the production model or not though.

I think I read that Jag plans to use a turbocharged V6, but that the engine bay has room for a V8, which could be tempting.

 

I think Aston would take a bath on the production and R&D costs. I don't know how profitable Aston is, but I see a lot of old MY left overs on dealer lots. I think Aston needs to consolidate instead. Just my .02.

Oh, and I'd wish they would switch over to using AMG engine blocks right now. That would motivate me to buy.

 

Yeah, that CX-16 has changed my next car decision...

~390HP or so (I forgot exactly how much), plus an electric boost of about 80HP (or so), with a steering wheel mounted button looks just awesome.

Looks like there are plans for a V8 (and diesel based on the press release from Jaguar). I'm thinking the S/C V6 might be a little lighter, but a supercharged V8 would take the cake. I would pay whatever they wanted for a 550HP version (how cool would it be to have the same 550HP supercharged V8 (or maybe even the scaled down XKR version 510HP), along with a 100HP 'push to pass' button?).

 

True, but it mirrors the improvement quoted by Jag (4.6 to 4.2 s). Hopefully someone will test it soon. My X5 does 0-60 in 4 seconds flat, so if it feels faster than that I will let you know.

Here's a quote from C&D from their initial review...

"After a day herding this quickest of all cats over mountain roads, we’re inclined to doubt Jaguar’s performance claims. Unless something goes terribly wrong, the XKR-S will be much quicker to 60 than the company forecasts. Hell, last time we tested an XKR, it did the deed in 4.0."

 

There are probably a few reasons why AMs aren't moving well, but adding more performance would certainly help that. On the other hand, The Jaguar XKR was officially listed in a recent article I read to be the car that sits on a dealer's lot the longest, so go figure.

Supercharging would be much less expensive than boring and stroking the engine further, IMO. Even better, they could team up with someone who has already done it (but they won't). From personal experience, supercharging makes a huge difference with this engine.

There has been talk about the alliance with MB but that has been rumored for a long time with no results yet. And last I heard the deal for AM to build the Maybach fell apart, so that doesn't bode well for AM getting access to those AMG engines.

Even still, if they did use those engines, they would have to reengineer the car...new engine and transmission mounts (assuming it was paired with MB's MCT), then retuning the suspension for any changes to the weight balance. Not cheap. Slapping on a SC would be a whole lot easier.

 

Wow, your X5M does 0-60 in 4 seconds flat?! That's amazing! Have you modded it? If I recall correctly, that is significantly faster than the V10 M5.

EDIT: Amazed, I did a search. I saw the 4.0 seconds from C&D, but I also saw 4.5 s, 4.7 s, and "under 5 seconds" from other sources (Edmunds, etc.). That's quite some variance in the numbers. Odd.

 

I still think Astons are the most beautiful cars that money can buy, bar none. It's a proper gentlemen's car that sounds amazing. But relying on looks and sound can only get you so far. I absolutely agree with your opinion to increase performance in order to increase appeal. We just have different opinions on ways to do so. I believe Porsche's former CEO now heading Aston, so it looks like they will stay NA, which I would love. But they really need to juice more power out an engine and reduce weight, which are all expensive.

I remember reading about the deal falling through with Maybach, but I don't remember what happened exactly. But my own take is that Maybach is a failing brand and that shouldn't really damage relations with Aston because Maybach is falling faster in popularity than Blackberry. Merc even considered cancelling the whole line altogether. So I don't know how much that failed partnership hurt really discussions of AMG engines in Astons. Again, don't know much about Astons (except that they are drop dead gorgeous). I am just guessing.

Also, why do you think that Astons are not moving? Again, I am not familiar with Astons. I tried to pick up a vantage v8, but some dealerships are not willing to seriously discuss (Towbin Motors is terrible. Run!)

 

Not to threadjack here, but yes 4.0 seconds from C&D, 1/4 mile in 12.5@112. The only other tested time was 4.3 seconds on an X6M but that was a preproduction version without launch control. The official 0-60 time from BMW is 4.5 seconds but that is conservative as usual. Any sources that listed 4.5 s didn't actually test it but used BMW's numbers. And I've never seen anyone list 4.7s.

Mine is completely stock and I have done one launch control run timed by VBox, and I got 4.3 to 60, 10.3 to 100, and the 1/4 in 12.8@109, middle of the day in 90+ degree humid Florida summer weather. It was less than 2 wks old at the time and had around 1200 miles on it. It has loosened up since then. I have also run 4.5 s 0-60 in the rain without launch control but just brake torquing, and 4.7 with nothing but stomping on the gas off the line...all done in similar temps. It is very quick off the line and would beat my Vantage easily because of better traction and low end torque, but the Vantage would beat it up top.

With a chip upgrade on the X5M, it gets even better...add 80 hp and 117 lb ft of torque. I know a guy who has run 0-60 in 3.45 s with chip and filters only in 50 degree weather. The 0-100 was 8.35 and 1/4 mile was 11.7@119.6. All timed runs...I'll track down the pictures. That's impressive for a 5300 lb SUV, no? And the handling is very impressive, too.

Here's a link to the timed runs...scroll down to the bottom of the page for the latest.
http://www.xoutpost.com/bmw-sav-foru...s-begun-2.html

 

????!!!!!
That was exactly my reaction.
I believe this is a self-contained question and answer of two possible reasons Astons are not moving...

 

Here's another test from Motor Trend with 0-60 of 4.0 seconds. I drive one everyday...it is very quick and leaps off the line. See my post above about 3.45 s 0-60 and 1/4 in the 11s with just chip and K&N filters.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...rbo/specs.html

 

Damn Tahoe, that's incredible! 4.0 seconds is faster (just) than my V12V. Maybe I need a supercharger now.

Okay, back to the Jag vs. Vantage S discussion. Sorry for the diversion . . .