Poor old Jaguar X-Type
- Thread starter [TW]Fox
- Start date
- Status
While I like the X Type in terms of concept (cheap luxury), looks and price it always seemed like Jag was trying to build there own Rover 75! The X Type is a very smart looking machine.
However as a bargain Jag I would be looking at the XJ6 V6. When James May on Top Gear reviewed in 2002 ish he had me sold. The new lightweight aluminum XJ, 240bhp V6 motor and all the Jaguar toys. Best of all, they now seem to be very sensible money £8000 and up! here
However as a bargain Jag I would be looking at the XJ6 V6. When James May on Top Gear reviewed in 2002 ish he had me sold. The new lightweight aluminum XJ, 240bhp V6 motor and all the Jaguar toys. Best of all, they now seem to be very sensible money £8000 and up! here
Absolutely, that is what I would do …well it's what I did. I bought the 3.6 V8 as I specifically wanted the V8 (I wanted a 4.2 really but couldn't find the right one), but I did drive the V6 and it was lovely, very smooth and really gives you 92.5% of the car the V8 is, I knock a bit off as despite having very close power figures, 240bhp for the V6 and 264bhp for the V8 they do feel different, the V8 has noticeably more low end shove lower down the rev range and is just more effortless and relaxed than the V6 not to mention that it makes a much better noise, and it was the noise that sold me.
Surely the S type is more like the 75
Speaking of which, S Type Rs are pretty damn cheap now, 2002 plate with high-ish miles I guess for under 7k I've seen!
Surely the S type is more like the 75
Speaking of which, S Type Rs are pretty damn cheap now, 2002 plate with high-ish miles I guess for under 7k I've seen!
Hardly, the S-Type is more like a 5 series or an E class, it's a rear wheel drive executive saloon. That originally had a price tag to match. As you pointed out though, not anymore, they are a steal now!
I know the 75 isn't directly comparible, but just look at them, very similar lines/size imho
So so cheap now, but guessing the running costs of a V8 or the R are rather on the high side?
Last edited:
Well they aren't cheap to run, but as V8's go, I wouldn't say they are particularly expensive, especially compared to the Germans.
The S-Type V8's will be cheaper to maintain than an X350 XJ because they do not have the complex and fearsomely expensive air suspension, when/if these go wrong, they can be eye wateringly expensive to put right, the S-Type doesn't really have anything like this. Although the older ones did have some gear box issues iirc, I imagine most of the mint high miler bargains would have had anything like that sorted already though.
The 4.2/3.6 Jaguar V8's are pretty bomb proof to be honest, it's the other bits that can cost the money on Jags. The older 4.0 nikasil lined V8 and I think also the 3.2 had some issues, but most of those are in the past now, and anything running around with one of these engines should be ok now, it probably either escaped the period of problems without issue or has been modified and fixed and will be fine. It was to do with high sulphur content of petrol in the late '90s and the effect on the nikasil lining of the cylinders in these engines, anyway you can read up on that issue in detail if you like, its well documented enough. Basically if it's a post 2000 car it should be fine, if it's an S-Type or an XK with a 4.2 V8 or is an X350 XJ of any kind, it's not affected anyway.
The S-Type V8's will be cheaper to maintain than an X350 XJ because they do not have the complex and fearsomely expensive air suspension, when/if these go wrong, they can be eye wateringly expensive to put right, the S-Type doesn't really have anything like this. Although the older ones did have some gear box issues iirc, I imagine most of the mint high miler bargains would have had anything like that sorted already though.
The 4.2/3.6 Jaguar V8's are pretty bomb proof to be honest, it's the other bits that can cost the money on Jags. The older 4.0 nikasil lined V8 and I think also the 3.2 had some issues, but most of those are in the past now, and anything running around with one of these engines should be ok now, it probably either escaped the period of problems without issue or has been modified and fixed and will be fine. It was to do with high sulphur content of petrol in the late '90s and the effect on the nikasil lining of the cylinders in these engines, anyway you can read up on that issue in detail if you like, its well documented enough. Basically if it's a post 2000 car it should be fine, if it's an S-Type or an XK with a 4.2 V8 or is an X350 XJ of any kind, it's not affected anyway.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 12,681
- Location
- Tyneside
Excellent thread Fox.
The X-Type is the next car I want.
The X-Type is the next car I want.
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classif...o_10_years_old/page/2/sort/priceasc&logcode=p
Eeek!!!! Shame it isnt around the corner or that would be mine
Eeek!!!! Shame it isnt around the corner or that would be mine
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
When you drive your car do you stroke the dashboard lots or something
I tend to operate switchgear, yea
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 1,764
- Location
- Leicester UK
Sorry for joining the thread late, but I have to go back to the 'Poor Man's...' argument. Something that seems to have been missed is not just that the cheaper cars are the 'poor man's whatever' isn't it usually down to the car being out of charachter for the company or a particularly bad model?
The 316i is often called the poor man's BMW, not because its cheap but because it didn't follow what a BMW did and was particularly low in spec. Same goes for the Boxter, which costs more than most of us on here could afford brand new, it's still a good car but when compared to the rest of Porsche's offerings it is a poor man's Porsche and particularly to smaller engined non-S models are, in my opinion, the Porsche to buy if all you want is the badge.
The 316i is often called the poor man's BMW, not because its cheap but because it didn't follow what a BMW did and was particularly low in spec. Same goes for the Boxter, which costs more than most of us on here could afford brand new, it's still a good car but when compared to the rest of Porsche's offerings it is a poor man's Porsche and particularly to smaller engined non-S models are, in my opinion, the Porsche to buy if all you want is the badge.
You say that as if you need to have one or the other.
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2009
- Posts
- 162
- Location
- High Wycombe
Got one, love her, had her since new, can't bring myself to sell her. She's 9 this year and still running strong, I posted piccies on the show us your car thread a few months back. I have yearly Jag service and do 10K a year and she runs smooth as glass. That V6 is good for a few more years yet I reckon.
- Status