Jaguar F-Pace Forum banner
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So, now having removed the Macan from the equation, I have spec'd an FP 3.0D and it's now virtually the same as the entry RRS. Circa £65K. I assume some of you good folks have been through this conundrum and have gone for the FP. As the Rugby referee states (almost) 'can you give me a reason for not awarding the points to the RRS'?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
The F Pace is a more engaging car to drive - steering is more accurate, turn in sharper, body control very well resolved and much lighter with less roll and inertia during manoeuvers. It is also faster (feels considerably faster than the official time differences), so far is proving to be more economical and specification wise is better value when specified like for like.

Personally, I think the RRS interior (other than the dated infotainment) is a nicer envornment, build quality is much better, interior noise is lower and the car is supremely comfortable. On the downsides, the extra weight goes against the sharpness of the handling, the steering feels a little detatched but is acurate, performace is brisk rather than fast and economy is around 4 - 5 mpg lower.

I chose the F Pace over the RRS because of the better handling / performance, and because theRRS seems to be the default choice of many friends. If the performance element was less important than the comfort element, then I would have gone RRS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
381 Posts
pb1695 said:
The F Pace is a more engaging car to drive - steering is more accurate, turn in sharper, body control very well resolved and much lighter with less roll and inertia during manoeuvers. It is also faster (feels considerably faster than the official time differences), so far is proving to be more economical and specification wise is better value when specified like for like.

Personally, I think the RRS interior (other than the dated infotainment) is a nicer envornment, build quality is much better, interior noise is lower and the car is supremely comfortable. On the downsides, the extra weight goes against the sharpness of the handling, the steering feels a little detatched but is acurate, performace is brisk rather than fast and economy is around 4 - 5 mpg lower.

I chose the F Pace over the RRS because of the better handling / performance, and because theRRS seems to be the default choice of many friends. If the performance element was less important than the comfort element, then I would have gone RRS.
I was going to say that! :p Plus, dare I say the RRS is starting to look a little long in the tooth when parked next to an F-Pace. I'll have my next car 3-4 years and want it to look as fresh as possible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
473 Posts
JLRnumber5 said:
So my spec 3.0D is coming in at just under £61k. An RRS HSE Dynamic to the same (or as close as possible spec) is £74k. Big difference.
When I looked at the RRS v Macan v FP SC in September last year the Macan and FP were within a couple of hundred on similar spec but as JLR says it was a 13k uplift to the RRS, BUT on investigating dealer financing the RRS was the cheapest based on 3 year agreement, 10k annual mileage, and putting 20k into the deal which I found very surprising.... It became obvious that LR where taking the strongest residual position hence financing less.

Porsche were a joke, lowest residual, which the financial incompetent salesman tried to tell was a benefit at trade in time, to which I had to demonstrate on his pad that at the highest APR and lowest guaranteed residual it meant I was financing more and at higher interest rates which equalled a spectacularly bad deal for me and that Porsche we just taking the p*ss :twisted: if I had been buying outright rather than financing then maybe it would a different argument as Macan residuals are strong it was just for the purposes of a PCP Porsche kept them low.

I chose to not go with the RRS for the reasons others have stated as I wanted more of a performance orientation rather than comfortable cruising, the test drive was good but it rolled into corners to much for me. When I finally got to test drive an FP 3D months later I much preferred the handling.

So you pays your money and makes your choice BUT if financing certainly back in September over three years the finance cost was next to identical for the RRS v FP SC or 3ltr D with similar spec even if the purchase cost was 13k different....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
948 Posts
I'm coming out of an RRSport and into an F-Pace 3.0dS, if I were to specced a RRSport to the level of my FP I would require the dynamics model so you are talking £10k+. And even then it wouldn't handle or go as well as the FP and you will still miss out on some key features of the FP.

No brainer for me.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top