From XC60 to Porsche Macan or BMW X3?

[volvorocks]

Originally Posted by Arianne

Keyless entry is standard across the range as is keyless start. You can use an app on your smartphone to start the car remotely and tell it how long you want it to warm up on cold mornings. If someone breaks in, the car shuts down as soon as the brake is applied to access the transmission.

Arianne

Congrats on your order Arianne. The F pace is a sure fire winner.

Couple of questions:-

I take it you are going for the 3.0? If so, how have you convinced the wife to convert to auto?

Secodly, yes 'keyless entry and start' is indeed standard, although I see 'keyless entry and start' as an £800 option.

Do you know what the difference is?

Is Jag calling the same system that Volvo have as standard ie NON PCC 'keyless entry and start' because you use the fob to get in and place the fob in a hole and press a button so technically 'keyless start and entry'. Does the £800 option have some 'extra' features maybe, such as those you mention above?

To me the PCC is a genuine handsfree/keyless/entry/start system.

Cheers

[K5 Gus]

Volvorocks,

I think you must be looking at the wrong model ? If you look at the configurator for the 3.0d S which Arianne has gone for there is no option for Keyless as it is standard, but you do get that option if you go for the basic 2.0 version.

[volvorocks]

Originally Posted by K5 Gus

Volvorocks,

I think you must be looking at the wrong model ? If you look at the configurator for the 3.0d S which Arianne has gone for there is no option for Keyless as it is standard, but you do get that option if you go for the basic 2.0 version.

Thanks, you appear correct. Yep, see it is standard on 3.0. Confused me with Arianne saying keyless was standard across the range, and I had built a 2.0d and it was part of a pack or option, as you say.

Regards

[Arianne]

Originally Posted by volvorocks

I take it you are going for the 3.0? If so, how have you convinced the wife to convert to auto?

Secodly, yes 'keyless entry and start' is indeed standard, although I see 'keyless entry and start' as an £800 option. Do you know what the difference is?

Is Jag calling the same system that Volvo have as standard ie NON PCC 'keyless entry and start' because you use the fob to get in and place the fob in a hole and press a button so technically 'keyless start and entry'. Does the £800 option have some 'extra' features maybe, such as those you mention above?

To me the PCC is a genuine handsfree/keyless/entry/start system.

The keyless entry is a true version, just like the Volvo. Here's the extract from the configurator. My earlier mistake - it's standard on the Portfolio, S & First Editions but optional on the entry level Prestige and R-Sport versions at £800. The salesman showed me that you can leave the key in Mrs A's handbag and the car will unlock on approach, start up by just pressing the start/stop button and will lock by either pressing the button on the door handle on leaving or by pressing the lock button on the key itself.

Yes, we do look set for the 3.0d V6 S version, subject only to the test drive. The auto box is standard with no manual variant, thank goodness! Metal silver paddle shifters are standard (black on the R-Sport). Mrs A had, as you correctly recall a very strong dislike of the auto option when we bought the XC60 - dislike being an understatement!

However, two years of low level, drip-drip, attrition and I have been given the 'green light' to take the auto box. Additional material that has supported my case includes deploying the lad (a very powerful ally when deployed correctly as Mrs A loves him to bits ) and also various quotes such as that from Jeremy Clarkson:

It’s much better to have a manual when you are driving on a track for fun. Because then you are in charge and you have more control. But at all other times, a car with a manual gearbox is like a television with no remote control. A damn nuisance.

Speed is one thing. A while back, Richard Hammond and I had a bit of a drag race - with police permission, I should add, in case the Daily Mail is reading this - on a Romanian motorway. He was in a Ferrari California with a double-clutch flappy-paddle gearbox. I was in an Aston Martin DBS with manual. Both cars accelerated at exactly the same rate, but every time I changed gear, I would drop back about 10 feet. His changes were seamless. Mine weren’t. Mine couldn’t be.

Then there’s traffic. It’s always bad to be caught up in a slow-moving jam, but when I am in a car with a manual ‘box, I am tempted sometimes to get out and kill myself. Because constantly balancing the clutch pedal is wearisome and painful. It’s like being in a gym. And nobody in their right mind would choose to visit one of those.

Country roads? Town? Car parks? I can think of no place in the real world when a manual gearbox is better than a modern paddle-operated manual or a smooth-shifting auto. And yet, in cheaper cars, there seems to be no appetite to make a change.

Money is one reason, of course: double-clutch systems are expensive. But so is fuel injection. And that’s never cited as a reason by anyone for launching a car these days with twin-choke Webers.

Flappy-paddle ‘boxes were lamentable when they first came out. They were jerky and imprecise, and you could never parallel park on a hill. But now they are smooth and there’s some inbuilt creep, and they are wondrous. And so surely, it is time to wave goodbye to the manual.

Oh, I know there will be some snuffly noses and damp handkerchiefs from the purists. But look at it this way: when we are all driving hybrid cars that can find their way around by themselves and sipping fuel in the same way that a vicar sips his tea at an old lady’s funeral, there’s nothing to stop people who crave the past driving a big V8 with a manual ‘box and a longwave radio.

In the same way that today the horse is completely useless. You can’t even eat it. But the countryside is full every weekend with people using them just for fun.


And finally, Mrs A decided that the rotary knob thingy is intuitive because you just turn it to Drive, Park, Reverse or Neutral (there's also a snow/winter setting I think but Mrs A is not bothered about that one so I stayed quiet - I have learned that it can be counterproductive to do the full-on data dump )So there you go, problem solved!

Best wishes, Arianne

[RoyMacDonald]

Originally Posted by volvorocks

It seems strange the the 3.0 petrol is stated as 63 litres whereas the 3.0 diesel is stated as 66. Seems odd that? Range will be low with the petrol.The 2.0 is 60 litres, which is understandable and makes sense as it will be more economical.

Regards

Be interesting to see what the real world mileage is. It's a very heavy car so I'm a bit dubious about the quoted mpg figures which could make range an issue. The weight was something I noticed particularly with my Range Rover. The big engine coped easily with it but in braking and on corners you really noticed how heavy it was. The XC60 was just so much better on the roads around here. The new XC90 surprised me with how well it coped and I think that must be down to it's relatively light weight. The review of the F Pace does say it handles well though so I guess a test drive is the only way to find out.

[RoyMacDonald]

Originally Posted by Arianne

AdBlue tank capacity is 17ltrs on F Pace.

I just noticed on the Range Rover web site that the 3 litre V6 does 560 miles per litre of Ad Blue. Is that the same engine that's in the F Pace?

I also noticed it is almost the same weight as the Range Rover so it's surprising how quick it is.

I also noticed that the Range Rover to my spec is £112,000 now so that is more than twice the price of a new XC90 to the same spec.

[Arianne]

Originally Posted by RoyMacDonald

It's a very heavy car so I'm a bit dubious about the quoted mpg figures which could make range an issue. The weight was something I noticed particularly with my Range Rover. The big engine coped easily with it but in braking and on corners you really noticed how heavy it was. The XC60 was just so much better on the roads around here. The new XC90 surprised me with how well it coped and I think that must be down to it's relatively light weight. The review of the F Pace does say it handles well though so I guess a test drive is the only way to find out.

Volvo XC60 D5 AWD R-Design (215bhp) - 1847kg

F Pace 3.0d V6 S (300PS) - 1884kg

Source: Parkers

I thought the F-Pace was quite light considering its size, perhaps because over 80% of it is made from aluminium? The reviews do make mention of the V6 diesel being the heaviest power unit anchored into the nose of the thing - such that the smaller 2.0d units offer a degree of agility for 'point & turn' but they then acknowledge this is at the margins and it's highly unlikely I am ever going to push any car to that extreme. I enjoy driving but I don't think I am that good at it!

Arianne

[Ninja59]

I would say in honesty that the F-Pace continues Jag's trend of being heavier than it's competitors (despite lots of clever construction).

In regards to the F-Pace it is hard to compare as it falls between the smaller SUV's - Q5,Macan etc. and the larger ones Q7, Cayenne etc. but let us focus on the Macan as most reviews have compared it with the F Pace.

The Macan diesel is a similar weight. So where is the difference? Well the Macan is steel and aluminium. The F Pace is all aluminium (I know there is a slight difference in length, but even then I would be expecting an alu car to be fair bit lighter).

[Harvey1512]

Jaguar are going to sell these by the bucket load. It looks lovely, it has the Jag emblem and initial press reviews are positive. Huge profits are coming Jaguars way. Car nerds, like us, may pick apart the odd option or geeky ommission but these cars will be swamping leafy suburbs in the very near future. Evoques and Cayennes will suddenly become greatly available in the second hand car market in Cheshire and Surrey. Relax and enjoy.

[Chief inspector]

I must say the Porsche and Jaguar don't really appeal to me, I will provably revert to estate cars after the XC60.