Anyone driven or heard the 2 litre yet?

M

MOz

New member
Not even sure if they're out there yet.

Not interested in "I've heard it on videos" etc. Has anyone driven or heard a 2.0 in the flesh yet?

Is it as dull as one imagines?
 
I hope it is a dull as it sounds :)

There will be a hairdresser along with one at some point :) But no, not seen or heard one yet.
 
I've been keeping a eye out for reviews. The press don't seem to have go hold of one yet, so I don't think there are any at the moment. New models seem to go to reviewers before the dealers get any. My guess is that it'll sound something like a Merc A45 or CLA45 which makes a good stab at it.

I might be wrong, but possibly the only way to make a 4 pot sound as good as a 6 is to have a much higher rev range. i.e. if it could sound like a bike when accelerating, now that would be something special.
 
Ben the guy at Thruxton skid pan got to drive one. He was telling me that they were very impressive given the stats. He didn't illucidate more than that though.
 
One of the you tube vids has a short burst of over-run banging which sounded pretty good.

I only ask as I'm considering forgetting the V8 and thinking about a 2.0 coupe as an only car to include my commute.

I'm certainly going to test drive one.

I'm not a hairdresser either.
 
Spoke to a dealer and they reckon it's a great effort at making a 4 sound not a lot like a 4
Performance figures also look like a great effort.

Trouble is for me is I have a 3.0S XF as a daily and when you take out the 2ltr 4cyl, although the performance on paper is great, it's a truly horrible drive. Always revving high to get moving, then labouring in overly high gears to get the mpg, while the 3l and 5l just move around with sublime ease
I expect the F-Type to be similar, but as others have said want to hear and then test one
 
By all accounts the 4 pot Boxter performs well and better than the 6 pot. Why shouldnt Jag be the same? I suppose the lardy weight is an issue
 
howard said:
By all accounts the 4 pot Boxter performs well and better than the 6 pot. Why shouldnt Jag be the same? I suppose the lardy weight is an issue
Click to expand...

I had a 981 Boxster S for 3 years and I can assure you the 4 pot engine maybe 0.1 second quicker on 0-60 times (are you really going to notice?) , but it does not match the aural experience in any way shape or form
 
Abergele 380S said:
howard said:
By all accounts the 4 pot Boxter performs well and better than the 6 pot. Why shouldnt Jag be the same? I suppose the lardy weight is an issue
Click to expand...

I had a 981 Boxster S for 3 years and I can assure you the 4 pot engine maybe 0.1 second quicker on 0-60 times (are you really going to notice?) , but it does not match the aural experience in any way shape or form
Click to expand...

I was just about to comment as I read this thread. My wife has a 6 cyl 981 and it has a lovely noise. We looked at the new 4 cyl last month and yes it goes, it also sounds "nice". But not great.

My daughter has the V6 F Type rag top and it parks in an underground bay. It is a very pleasing experience on a morning to drop the roof and fire it up! I assume that the 4 cyl will not replicate such an experience. Nor will it produce the burble, bang roar.
 
I haven't driven the 2ltr F Type but I spent a day with the XE with the new engine and was very impressed. It was the 250 bhp model but I believe the F Type will have about 300 bhp so with the weight saving over the V8 and the V6 it should be a reasonably quick and very nimble car.
Steve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top