No V6, No Guilt: Why The Jaguar F-Type Is More Appealing Without It

It's got very little to do with running costs: the removal of the V6 from the F-Type range has subtly but significantly changed the F-Type's image
No V6, No Guilt: Why The Jaguar F-Type Is More Appealing Without It

You’re sitting in a showroom, spec’ing your new car. As you look down the trim level descriptions you see a grade that suits you perfectly, giving you everything you need and excluding nothing you can’t happily live without. You’re about to tick it.

Then the shiny-teethed salesman points out that for just £25 a month more you could have the grade up from that, quickly dazzling you with a brochure of gadgets, luxuries and alleged financial advantages. The little voice in your noggin says you don’t need any of these things and it’s more sensible to get the lower trim option, but the devil who holds the key to your wallet knows how to press your buttons.

Remote video URL

Get the lower grade and that demon will always nag at you, saying you should have got the nicer one. Spend out on the upgrade and you’ll know you’re wasting money on tech you probably won’t use and definitely don’t need.

The exact same principle used to go for the Jaguar F-Type when it came to choosing an engine. After the four-cylinder version arrived, customers no doubt sat, sweaty-palmed and guilt-ridden (whether they admit it or not) over whether the four-pot was a cop-out and whether they should go for the much more characterful and sports car-appropriate V6.

Most didn’t; the V6 has been canned because so few people were actually buying it, but to those choosing four-bangers there was always that knowledge that within reach was an engine that would have felt so much richer. My own words from what seems like a very short three years ago give an anti-four-pot opinion that I stood by until the very moment the V6 left the building.

No V6, No Guilt: Why The Jaguar F-Type Is More Appealing Without It

Now there’s a new F-Type coming, with no V6 (unless you live in the USA). There’s only the wild new 444bhp V8 in either rear- or all-wheel drive and the Ingenium 2.0. The choice is suddenly clearer; the F-Type’s identities better defined. For the masses it’s a four-cylinder sports GT, not as lithe or dynamic as a Cayman or Boxster but much more affordable than a basic 911. It’s affordable to run in a way the V6 never was and yet still benefits from the aura of the small-volume, big-noise V8. It’s the Carrera 2 to the (now also canned) F-Type SVR’s GT3, if you’ll forgive the obvious flaws in the analogy.

You can now buy a four-cylinder F-Type knowing that it’s the only realistic way to access the stunning shape and new face, which makes it look like a Maserati from a parallel dimension, while resting assured that the wider model range has deep enough performance pedigree to still make you feel good about your own car.

No V6, No Guilt: Why The Jaguar F-Type Is More Appealing Without It

I wrote in that piece years ago that the four-pot Jag F was a fraud. At the time it really did feel like that when it was butted up against the six. Now, though, it feels like the car’s personality has shaken off gremlins. If you want an F and you’re not minted, you get the Ingenium engine because that’s your option and you can afford to fuel it. That, now there’s no engine upgrade temptation for your wallet demon to exploit, is absolutely fine by me.


Tomislav Celić

Honestly, just like the Stang, I’m glad they got rid of it.

Want to pose and have good fuel economy/reliability? 4 cyl.

Want a fun car? V8.

V6 didn’t make any sense.

12/07/2019 - 09:53 |
4 | 14

Ah, but where the Mustang’s V6 was a fantastically dreary unit shared with all sorts of dull crossovers (and objectively worse than the 2.3L turbo in every measure), the blown 3.0L Jag engine was a wonderfully noisy donk which not only made its debut in the F-Type (where it arguably out-shone the V8) and was a defining feature of the car’s character, but also maintained a clear performance advantage over the four-banger (which sounds like a vacuum cleaner in comparison).

And anyway, a Jaguar with fewer than six cylinders? William Lyons would be turning in his grave.

12/07/2019 - 10:22 |
16 | 0

I get that the Ingenium engine is more affordable and essentially lets Jaguar sell more F Types. But I feel that an almost-grand-tourer should have at least a 6 cylinder engine.
It’s not quite an Audi TT type of sports car (in which case smaller engines make sense) but in Porsche 911 territory. That and the fact the V6 was one of the best sounding engines out there, it’s a real shame they killed it

12/07/2019 - 10:09 |
22 | 0

Looking at what Ford did with the EcoBoost Mustang I think Jaguar made the right call. I was definitely in the mindset of “why have the lesser spec when you can have so much more?” Then I got a ride in one, and I understood. It was still fun, still looked great, so job done.

Also, not that jags are typically modified, but seeing what has been done to the EcoBoost in the aftermarket scene there are some gnarly examples out there putting down very impressive times…. a LOT faster than my GT lol

edit* that sound of that 6 was indeed something to remember and will be missed.

12/07/2019 - 11:03 |
10 | 2
Emil Klotz

More choice is always better, and the V6 was a great sounding car
They shouldn’t have killed it or the manual
But still happy because we have a RWD V8 again in the most beautiful car in the world

12/07/2019 - 12:32 |
6 | 0

The problem is that the 4cyl actually sucks. It has such a narrow power band to deliver all it’s power and it shows, with the ZF gearbox desperately switching ratios constantly to try and stay in that band. It’s awful to drive and very frustrating.

If I see that single tailpipe that shows you have a 4-banger f-type will I judge you for your poor choice? Yes.
But will I still admire your beautiful car? Also yes.

12/07/2019 - 13:12 |
12 | 4

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

I’ve driven all four engines and the 4 banger makes no sense. It’s slower, less engaging, less comfortable and less practical than a Cayman, and no more characterful. The V6 and V8 have such a strong personality advantage over the Porche equivalent that the I4 doesn’t.

12/07/2019 - 15:09 |
2 | 2

No more V6 f type memes

12/07/2019 - 14:43 |
0 | 0
TheDriver 1

Im fairly sure the V6 S was the sweet spot in the range…

12/07/2019 - 14:50 |
10 | 0

This makes no sense…
It’s good that the better engine has gone because now people that can’t afford it won’t be sad about it?
I own a V8 F type and even I’ll admit that the V6 was probably the best engine choice. There’s no reason to buy a 4 banger f type over a Cayman besides looks.

12/07/2019 - 15:04 |
4 | 0
Dave 15

The 4-Pot is still a fraud. It just cheapens the car’s entire image.

12/07/2019 - 15:43 |
4 | 0
adam thompson

So what I’m hearing is that living in the US, if I were to buy a new F-Type I could still get the V6? The only time I’d not spec a V8? I’m in

12/07/2019 - 20:10 |
2 | 0

good for selling high volumes.. who bothers with a v6 or 4 pot on a real sport car? this is a sports commuter. Remove the 4 and 6 cyl options and sell less true sports cars, or leave many options and sell more.

FD rx7 vs 3000gt, one only came bad ass, the other came as a vr4 bad ass 10 percent of the time, and 90 percent are just junk.

i like porsche’s take, make a nice sport model and then some S and then some GT and them some GTS. the cayman basic models still move, maybe jag should have dropped the 4 pot instead.

12/07/2019 - 20:21 |
0 | 0



Sponsored Posts