Best Smoker Barges 1-5 large [Vol 7]
Discussion
BrownBottle said:
Baryonyx said:
The post-facelift interior was a massive boon for these cars. Makes them look a bit more like a Jaguar than the old 'urinal' console in the pre-facelift models. The exterior styling though, I've never quite reconciled with.
Not a fan of the styling either, tbh the XJ350 is a superior car in pretty much every way and is creeping into budget in R form although no doubt won't be the best examples at this price range.http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2014...
Baryonyx said:
The overlap between X350 XJ and the S Type must pit the tattiest of the petrol XJ'S against the best S Types, but even then the X350 feels utterly from another planet to the S Type. It feels classically 'Jaguar'. The attentive buyer may yet find some 'big petrol fear' depreciation on a good petrol X350. I hear the 3.0 V6 is a pleasing enough unit and the V8's no doubt impress even more.
On the subject of the XJ-R, they were a consideration I gave thought to when buying my XJ. However, much like the sums I did when I had my A8 4.2, the fuel economy just didn't quite add up for me. Both the XJ-R and the S8 would struggle to top 20mpg (I am told) in any condition, whereas the XJ and the A8 will happily return slightly more modest returns in day to day use. Granted, I am doing less car miles now that I also have a motorbike but I still couldn't justify the costs.
I have written up a reader's ride thread on my XJ, see the link below. After giving it it's first week of home use, tootling to nightshifts and back again in the morning, it is a revelation.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
I had 1998 XJR - averaged 19 mpg, then 2 X350 XJRs which both returned 23mpg. And I didn't drive like Miss Daisy either. On the subject of the XJ-R, they were a consideration I gave thought to when buying my XJ. However, much like the sums I did when I had my A8 4.2, the fuel economy just didn't quite add up for me. Both the XJ-R and the S8 would struggle to top 20mpg (I am told) in any condition, whereas the XJ and the A8 will happily return slightly more modest returns in day to day use. Granted, I am doing less car miles now that I also have a motorbike but I still couldn't justify the costs.
I have written up a reader's ride thread on my XJ, see the link below. After giving it it's first week of home use, tootling to nightshifts and back again in the morning, it is a revelation.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Those aluminium bodies save weight.bmthnick1981 said:
Now that's a rare sight. 
Audi can't have sold many of those as they looked so much like the 100...
harry kular said:
Found a nice e38 728 sport over my side of the water. Like the interior, and the ad sounds good!
http://www.usedcarsni.com/2001-BMW-7-Series-728I-S...
Certainly not cheap, but it's a good spec and colour scheme. There can't be too many left with that mileage either.http://www.usedcarsni.com/2001-BMW-7-Series-728I-S...
BGarside said:
bmthnick1981 said:
Now that's a rare sight. Audi can't have sold many of those as they looked so much like the 100...
harry kular said:
Found a nice e38 728 sport over my side of the water. Like the interior, and the ad sounds good!
http://www.usedcarsni.com/2001-BMW-7-Series-728I-S...
The fact that it's over the water in NI isn't a problem (who doesn't mind a road trip for a new car!), but I think the price is pretty steep, even considering that it's got the 'right' spec. It's a shame that isn't a bit cheaper, otherwise I would be picking up the phone this morninghttp://www.usedcarsni.com/2001-BMW-7-Series-728I-S...
r129sl said:
BGarside said:
bmthnick1981 said:
Now that's a rare sight. Audi can't have sold many of those as they looked so much like the 100...
E65Ross said:
0a said:
A potential engine problem is a £200 fix, always good news in my book! How much depreciation are you experiencing on your top end luxury BMW again Ross?
Perhaps you will 'upgrade' to an A6 in the coming weeks
Very little depreciation.....and I don't think I'll be getting an A6 any time soon!!Perhaps you will 'upgrade' to an A6 in the coming weeks
The E65 is more comfortable, more spacious, quieter and the engine I such smoother and more refined. The diesel, despite being a modern one and of 6 cylinders it just isn't as other or refined as a nice petrol.
KrisP said:
The fact that it's over the water in NI isn't a problem (who doesn't mind a road trip for a new car!), but I think the price is pretty steep, even considering that it's got the 'right' spec. It's a shame that isn't a bit cheaper, otherwise I would be picking up the phone this morning
I agree re price, I wouldn't be prepared to go over £4k. Can't see that selling quickly over here so there should be room for a decent haggle.BGarside said:
bmthnick1981 said:
Now that's a rare sight. Audi can't have sold many of those as they looked so much like the 100...
They were rare for a reason though; they were completely outclassed by the E32, the W126 and the XJ40. I remember going for test drives of all four in the eighties with my dad (who bought a Jaguar in the end). The Audi felt a much more downmarket car than the other three.
It's quite a novelty now though and a good buy for someone in such good condition.
dbdb said:
BGarside said:
bmthnick1981 said:
Now that's a rare sight. Audi can't have sold many of those as they looked so much like the 100...
They were rare for a reason though; they were completely outclassed by the E32, the W126 and the XJ40. I remember going for test drives of all four in the eighties with my dad (who bought a Jaguar in the end). The Audi felt a much more downmarket car than the other three.
It's quite a novelty now though and a good buy for someone in such good condition.
The Audi 200 was aimed as a rival to six cylinder BMW E28 and latterly E34 and six cylinder W124.
The Audi 100 was aimed as a rival to four cylinder variants of the above.
The 100/200 weren't great handlers - the entire engine is forward of the front axle line. They were however light before it became as relevant as it is today. They were the most aerodynamic car in the world which helped fuel economy and gave less wind noise than my W124 has.
Full galvanising meant that rust was something that happened to other peoples cars and four wheel drive was available with the five and eight cylinder engines.
Pro con ten was also an excellent safety innovation.
Piersman2 said:
I had 1998 XJR - averaged 19 mpg, then 2 X350 XJRs which both returned 23mpg. And I didn't drive like Miss Daisy either. Those aluminium bodies save weight.
My brother had a Super V8 X350 some years ago. He averaged about 22 mpg with it. It was stolen and he bought a BMW 740iL. That struggled to better 18mpg, but he found it underpowered after the supercharged Jag. I guess these things are relative; I thought the BM was pretty fast - but obviously much slower than the supercharged Jaguar Those aluminium bodies save weight.
He traded that in for an XJ Supersport fairly recently. That's even more economical than the Super V8 - averaging over 23 mpg.
Supercharged Jags with the aluminium body are surprisingly good on petrol. I suspect much more economical than the X300 or X308 - which I believe could be pretty savage.
MJK 24 said:
The Audi V8 was the rival to the BMW E32, Mercedes W126 and Jaguar XJ40 and was priced at that level.
The Audi 200 was aimed as a rival to six cylinder BMW E28 and latterly E34 and six cylinder W124.
The Audi 100 was aimed as a rival to four cylinder variants of the above.
The 100/200 weren't great handlers - the entire engine is forward of the front axle line. They were however light before it became as relevant as it is today. They were the most aerodynamic car in the world which helped fuel economy and gave less wind noise than my W124 has.
Full galvanising meant that rust was something that happened to other peoples cars and four wheel drive was available with the five and eight cylinder engines.
Pro con ten was also an excellent safety innovation.
The Audi V8 is the car which replaced the Audi 200. The Audi 200 was aimed as a rival to six cylinder BMW E28 and latterly E34 and six cylinder W124.
The Audi 100 was aimed as a rival to four cylinder variants of the above.
The 100/200 weren't great handlers - the entire engine is forward of the front axle line. They were however light before it became as relevant as it is today. They were the most aerodynamic car in the world which helped fuel economy and gave less wind noise than my W124 has.
Full galvanising meant that rust was something that happened to other peoples cars and four wheel drive was available with the five and eight cylinder engines.
Pro con ten was also an excellent safety innovation.
The 100 was aimed at the W123/E28, then at the W124/E34 and priced accordingly. The 200 Turbo and 200 Quattro were priced at S Class, 7 Series and Jaguar XJ money throughout their life.
In 1985, an Audi 200 Turbo was £19,998, the 200 Quattro was £23,043. Both used 2144cc turbo 5 cylinder, the Quattro having 4 wheel drive, whilst the Turbo was front wheel drive.
At the same time, the BMW 528i was only £14,285 and the Mercedes 280E was £15,485.
In 1985, the BMW 735i was £20,345 and the Jaguar Sovereign 4.2 was £18,995. The Mercedes W126 280SE was only £17,895 - so six grand less than the 200 Quattro at list price. The 380SE was £22,355.
By the time this particular 200 Turbo was delivered, in 1989, the 200 Turbo was £27,449, whilst the four wheel drive and manual only Quattro version was priced at £29,992.
A BMW E34 525i was only £19,810, whilst the fast and impressive 535i was still only £25,000. A Mercedes W124 230E was priced at £19,430 and the 300E was £26,500.
The BMW 730i was £24,500, whilst the 735i was £30,700. The Mercedes 300SE was £29,000, with the 420SE being priced at £34,780. The Jaguar XJ6 3.6 was £23,000, and the Sovereign 3.6 was £30,500.
I posted this some time back and it was rather scoffed at on PH, mainly by Volvo owners, but here is the DVLC’s accident data from 1993 for larger cars distilled into a graph. The Audi was a fair bit behind BMW, Mercedes and Jaguar in safety terms, at least here.
The Mercedes W124 is generally slightly smoother aerodynamically than the Audi 100/200, with smaller engined models measuring 0.29. In the mid 1980s, the car with the lowest cd was the Renault 25 - at 0.28.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff