Had to spread the good news - seems Jaguar have a winner on their hands. I've heard there were some problems with early cars, but I've had absolutely no problems and I'm delighted with it.
I got my 2003 spec 2.5 Sport in September and it just gets better and better. Handling in the wet is phenomenal and the engine is loosening up nicely.
On the downside, the mpg could be better, but thats about it!
Nice to be able to praise a 'british' product.
|
I like the new advert for the Jaguar XKR, really neat with the rockets and chain guns. I wish I could buy one it would certainly sort out the JCBs and the tractors holding up the rush hour traffic! It's good to see the producers of the Bond movies using Jags and Astons again instead of boring old BMW's.
Seriously I would really like a Jag but at the moment I need an estate, but when the kids leave home, well....
|
|
I have heard that there is an x type estate isn the pipeline. Due in about a year.
|
|
|
|
Great cars no doubt...provided you never need to open the glove box...sorry, boot. I run a saloon now, but simply couldn't have a Jag, X or S no matter how good a 3.0 man with 4WD might be to drive. The kids just wanna take too clobber, whether its just to the park (bikes) or the coast in the summer.
|
|
|
|
Simon,
Couldn't agree more...had my 2.5 SE Auto for a year and it does get better and better.
Few minor niggles fixed promptly by dealer such as leaking washer nozzles - see X-Type website for the X community..mainly Americans with good taste...no kidding!
Regards,
Matt35.
|
No traction control problems, then Simon? Tbey must have fixed them. I remember taking a Jaguar engineer around the Alpine circuit at Millbrook to demonstrate how bad it was. (It was locking up the offside front wheel on left hand bends.)
The reason for the T-Bird, XK8 and Aston in the new Bond movie is, of course, that Ford coughed up more to prep and have its cars in the movie than BMW was prepared to spend.
There will be a credit at the end, "Automobiles furnished by Ford Premier Division", or something like it.
HJ
|
|
In fact, Ford donated all the vehicled free of charge, but didn't pay for any of the modifications (which totalled £1 million) for 4 Jags and 4 Astons!
|
|
Whatever the reason its good to see all the old marques back in the Bond films. British Secret Service and BMWs didn't really hit the spot somehow.
|
|
I couldn't agree with you more. An Aston and an XKR is exactly the kind of cars that should be in the bond films. A good advert for British engineering at its best.
|
|
|
|
There will be a credit at the end, "Automobiles furnished by Ford Premier Division", or something like it. HJ
It's even more blatant than that. I saw a TV ad for the Jaguar a couple of days ago which was almost entirely composed of shots from the film, and ended with the slogan: "See it in the new Bond movie".
At that's being more honest about your product placement rather than just trying to do it subliminally.
|
There was an interesting TV show about the prepping of the cars, bits of which were repeated on the monitors around the show stand. The ice racing XKR and Aston needed to be converted to four wheel drive to be capable of performing the stunts and the standard Aston V12 didn't leave enough space under the bonnet to accommodate the rocket launchers, so a good ole pushrod V8 had to be employed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looked like a Chevy lump to me.
HJ
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looked like a Chevy lump to me.
Yep, it was mentioned that they fitted the Chevvy V8 in place of the Aston V12 lump.
|
|
|
|
HJ
Absolutley no traction control problems. Are you thinking of the fwd 2.0?
Mine is 4wd, and the fun you can have on wet roundabouts never ceases to amaze me. I could have opted for DSC at about £400 but didn't seem the point....
By all accounts the 2003 model have the earlier problems (weeping washer noozles, rocking seats, boot locks) sorted. The 3 series and tupperware C class have their own problems, and its nice to have a little more exclusivity!
Simon
|
No. I was thinking of the 2.5 and 3.0 manuals in which I drove the Jag engineer around Millbrook's alpine circuit to show him hat was wrong with the traction control. Maybe he said nothing then went quitely back to Jaguar and fixed it. They were early production cars and they drove much better with it switched off.
HJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Had a walk around the main dealers showroom in Luton last week, they had pre registered about a dozen or so.
Seems they didn't reach targets last month & were offering a saving of around 15%ish on list.
Lots of colour/spec choice, didn't get the cheque book out, though!
Mark
|
Trade Sales have 2.1 V6s with standard air and alloys at £16,999. They're not selling in the volumes Jaguar needed them to sell. But I do suggest that anyone who fancies one drives before they buy.
HJ
|
The 2.5 4wd doesn't have traction control unless you mean the optional DSC?
Its always worth driving before you buy - and not just around the block.
I tried the 2.1 V6 and didn't like it. It was far too 'ordinary', and in base trim seemed a bit cheap inside.
But I also tried the A4 (boring to drive), S60 (turbo lag of epic proportions), 3 series (nothing special), X5 (nice, but slow as a diesel) and C class (nasty interior) before deciding on the 2.5 X Type Sport.
My tips on the X Type - stick to 2.5 or 3.0 - Sport spec has by far the best seats - choose interior colour carefully, as the black dash looks best (therefore black, red or tan seats)- choose options carefully as it can get very expensive.
|
Tried all the same - different conclusion.
The X type drove and felt like a Mondeo (which is fine, the Mondeo drives well). Just a bit ordinary.
The 3 series was the best drive but not very comfortable and everyone and his wife has one.
The A4 was ditch dull in all respects but built well.
Don't remember the S60 having too much turbo lag, certainly not the 2.4T which was the best all round package of the bunch (IMHO).
|
Interesting thread to read, as I am also after a car in this market sector.
My findings were:
X-Type - The 2.5 Sport I drove did nothing for me. Cumbersome gear change with all that four wheel drive gubbins spinning away, and was suprisingly sluggish: Nailing the throttle at medium revs picked up speed, sure, but didn't thrust the car down the road with the same effortless grunt that my current Vectra GSi Estate, with similar power, similar weight, but a much fatter torque curve, does.
MG ZT - Much better than the X-Type, and more rewarding to drive. Beautiful steering feeback, nothing rattled, Serene cruising, and more instant grunt than the X-Type. My only worry would be residual value, as this will be my car.
Audi A4 - Booooring. More common than Posh.
3 Series - See A4, and also, too small.
Merc C - Too small, and I don't want the baggage that comes with the badge.
Volvo S60 - The T5 does indeed suffer chronic turbo lag, followed by warp drive accelaration. I was amazed at the contrast between the two. The 2.4T however, as recommended to me by HJ as being the better of the two, has already built up colossal torque by the time it reaches 1800 RPM, and which it holds to the red line. A wonderful car, effortlessly fast, wonderful to cruise in, and what I am about to buy.
/Steve
|
Steve,
Couldn't agree more about the 2.4T engine. I had a V70 (new shape) 2.4T for a couple of years, as recommended by HJ and it was a tremendous engine but a bit thirsty if driven hard. I now have a V70 D5 not as quick up to 60mph but, with more torgue than the T5 I think the in gear acceleration is just as good as the 2.4T, and a lot cheaper to run e,g, averaged 42-44 mpg cruising at up to 100mph in France this year, with 4 up and luggage stacked up to the roof.
Enjoy your new S60 2.4T it's a fabulous drive.
|
|
|
I guess its different strokes for different folks.
The S60 2.OT had chronic turbo lag so I didn't try any others. The dealer seemed very surprised at my comments and didn't offer the 2.4T as the solution.
I thought the S60's suspension was too soft, the gear change was ponderous (my X Type box is much better), rear seat room was poor (especially headroom) and the leather seats seemed poor quality as they were more like plastic than leather. On the plus side the stereo was the best I've ever heard and the equipment levels were very generous.
Guess we should be glad were not all the same!
Simon
|
Just shows what happens when dealers don't take much interest!
My guess is that a 2.4T with the sports suspension set up would have given you an altogether different experience.
I wouldn't have bothered with the 2.0T and would agree that it's underpowered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
