[Pickle77]

Sorry to copy your idea Rich91!
I know that this topic has been raised before, but I don't think that a definite answer has been given as to why the 240 is more than £3k more expensive than the 200 (in the RSport model).
Does anyone know what else you get for your money, apart from twin exhausts and the engine tweak? Also, did anyone test drive both versions and decide that the 200 was enough?
Thanks. :-bd

 

[Rich 91]

No worries mate, 3k Is a massive difference in price if it's just a simple software upgrade. Like to know everyone's thoughts on the matter.

 

[tobes]

Brakes?

Surely the discs are larger and shocks etc uprated.

Slightly different I know but my twin turbo 535d is vastly different to the single turbo same engined 530d. A 40bhp difference on these gets larger vented discs larger calipers 10mm lower ride height different final drive ratio larger torque convertor etc etc

Is compression the same on 200 and 240?

I actually think 3k is cheap for 20% power increase.

 

[Spud211]

I've ordered the 200 - mostly as I think £3k extra (Plus the interest) is ridiculous for a 40bhp power increase. On a car this size, I am confident that isn't going to make a big difference. I've only driven the 240 but I'll feed back when I get my car!

This was certainly the case with the BMW 116i vs 118i - again a 40bhp ish difference and 3k price difference, but both cars drove exactly the same unless you were really working them in the high revs...which you won't be on that/this sort of car.

Parts wise there will be a few small differences I am sure, but we'll need to have a dig through TOPIX to be 100% sure. The major difference is likely to be purely the engine remap - I would be very surprised if they needed to uprate the brakes or other parts given how small the power difference is.

The main reason why they can charge £3k more ? Just because they can (and they will make more money on it). Enough people will pay for it just because it's there...

 

[tobes]

A 40bhp increase on 200HP is a huge difference in the same weight car. 20% It will be very noticeable to anyone with a heavy foot. 0.7 secs difference to 60 is a huge margin but only relevant if you ever actually use it.

 

[Pickle77]

Thanks for your replies everyone.
On the 'value for money' subject, I had an Abarth 500 upgraded to Essesse standard in 2012 and the package was; - an 18.5% power increase remap, a new set of special wheels (with tyres), lowering springs, and, most importantly , classy badging! - cost - £2700.
Now, I appreciate that Fiat and Jaguar are in different price leagues, but unless the 240 does have enhanced brakes and/or suspension, I think that the 3k is expensive, especially as the 10.5% upgrade of the 180 over the 163 is only about £500 more.
As for the benefits of the extra power provided by the 240, I would like to have the option of that extra acceleration and torque, but my driving style is more relaxed than racy , so I would probably be content with the 200.
But each to their own of course.
However, it is frustrating that there is apparently no published detail from JLR of exactly what the 240 upgrade entails, and unfortunately the sales persons' knowledge of such detail is often stunted, or unreliable .

 

[tobes]

Thanks for your replies everyone.
On the 'value for money' subject, I had an Abarth 500 upgraded to Essesse standard in 2012 and the package was; - an 18.5% power increase remap, a new set of special wheels (with tyres), lowering springs, and, most importantly , classy badging! - cost - £2700.
Now, I appreciate that Fiat and Jaguar are in different price leagues, but unless the 240 does have enhanced brakes and/or suspension, I think that the 3k is expensive, especially as the 10.5% upgrade of the 180 over the 163 is only about £500 more.
As for the benefits of the extra power provided by the 240, I would like to have the option of that extra acceleration and torque, but my driving style is more relaxed than racy , so I would probably be content with the 200.
But each to their own of course.
However, it is frustrating that there is apparently no published detail from JLR of exactly what the 240 upgrade entails, and unfortunately the sales persons' knowledge of such detail is often stunted, or unreliable .

There is a large difference in price scale between the Jag and the 500 as you did point out so % wise the 240 still seems a better buy performance wise fir the increase.

Possibly the 200 is over engineered (doubt it) but whatever the difference is 40bhp for 3k is cheap and no different to any other manufacturer for as long as I can remember.

320>325>328>330 as an example.

As for what else is changed other than obvious ecu, boost and exhaust the specs are so vague on the xe it's impossible to tell. 3 brake sizes across the range but no clue which gets the lower or middle sized discs. But do seem to be vented on 240 and S.

Still think if anyone actually wants 20% more power that 3k is a bargain but then again I have a lead right foot.

 

[Spud211]

I guess we'll find out as more 200's are delivered

From a cost standpoint it makes much more sense for Jaguar to equip both the 200 and 240ps petrols with the same parts, especially given that we know the engines themselves are identical, as the manufacturing efficiencies you gain will far outweigh any extra cost of the parts. Unless of course they expect one of the two models to vastly outsell the other. Most major car manufacturers work this way (BMW/Audi included), as do many other industries.

Curious to see!

 

[Pickle77]

..............Still think if anyone actually wants 20% more power that 3k is a bargain but then again I have a lead right foot.

Fair 'nuff Tobes, I bow to your greater knowledge of such matters, particularly in relation to prestige cars.