RE: Jag XE: 75 per cent aluminium and over 75mpg

[unpc]

Fittster said:

EricE said:

Not sure about that lightweight claim... if Jaguar had such great lightweight engineering prowess then surely they would have shown it off where it matters, with the F-Type, arguably their current sportscar flagship?
Instead it’s really a quite lardy beast for a newly designed car in this day and age.

If it was a newly designed car you might have a point but as it is a shortened version of the old XK platform you don't.

Quite.

[oldtimer2]

A Scotsman said:

4WD as an option? Estate versions? Anyone know..

I think that what we will see in September is a 2 litre, 4 door saloon. Jaguar have said they are working on a crossover (the concept was displayed at the recent Goodwood Festival of Speed)and plan a coupe. Not sure about an estate car version if they do the crossover.

I think they said that the new in line 2 litre 4 cyl engine is adapatable to fwd, rwd, awd and 4x4 configurations, can be petrol or diesel or hybrid and is designed to take auto or manual transmissions. They also said they could make smaller or larger capacity versions (without saying how they would make them larger ie in line or V). From that I conclude it will appear in just about every model they make.

[ORD]

monthefish said:

ORD said:

Back on point, if Jag cant outclass the current 3 series, they don't deserve success. The 320d is an extremely easy target.

Rubbish.

But don't take my word for it, how about Autocar's

Autocar said:

To go into the individual performance characteristics of each engine option would take more space than we have, but just taking the key model – the mid-range 320d diesel – provides an example that, with a few variances here and there, is broadly representative of the range as a whole.

A standard, manual, two-wheel drive 320d hits 62mph from rest in 7.5sec and carries on to a top speed of 146mph.
The equivalent Audi needs 8.4sec and hits 140mph, while the C220CDI Mercedes also requires 8.4sec, although its top speed is 144mph. But in terms of what matters – the feeling you get when you put your foot down – the BMW is in a league of its own.

But there’s always more to a BMW than bald performance. The diesels are the smoothest, quietest powerplants in the class,



For in terms of outright ability, currently there is nothing that gets close to the 3-series, let alone looks likely to beat it. What must be so terrifying for rival manufacturers is the car’s ability across the board. It gives not just outstanding performance, but combines it with fabulous economy. It’s not just the best-handling car in the class, but the best-riding, too.

The 3-series is a triumphant testament to BMW’s driver ethos and engineering prowess, and now stands head and shoulders above its competition, towering clearer of the pack than any other new BMW, or any other class-leading car, we can think of.

And until someone can devise a way of attacking successfully on such a myriad array of diverse fronts, the position of the 3-series as the world’s best small saloon looks more secure than ever.

I wish Jaguar every success with this car, but to say the 3 series is an 'easy target' is absolute nonsense, and completely without basis or justification, and I can only assume there is some hidden agenda behind your comments.

I'm going to say it, so prepare yourself... sometimes Autocar is wrong.

I would be amazed if Autocar test drove a 320d on standard suspension, so all comments on the handling and chassis go out of the window if you are interested in a boggo version. A F30 on basic suspension is a very average drive. Plenty of understeer and roll and imprecise, weightless steering.

The engine is also absurdly loud and crude sounding (although, in fairness, the blend of performance and economy is very impressive).

If Jag can't beat that, I'd be surprised.
Iw

[Osinjak]

Never mind all that, the inside of 3 Series is one of the most uninspiring places to sit, extraordinarily dull. No sense of occasion, none whatsoever.

[Martin 480 Turbo]

What ORD said.

The base spec 320d and A4 tdi cars are "a ripp-off" or to put it
gently; the German marques are experiencing a strong market for some
years now. Some competition would do no harm.

(Even some of us in the fatherland are fed up with the current status quo.)

Still have an E30 in the shed, but last bimmer for me was an E91
Touring. That was sluggish had some flimsy parts on it an the
runflats ruined the ride. The F31s interior is a little better but
the numb steering and automatic gearbox have killed the driving machine for me.

...

Jag needs an inlane 6, though.

Edited by Martin 480 Turbo on Tuesday 29th July 18:11

[Newro]

Clivey said:

KTF said:

Newro said:

Breaks: my god are they good.

Yes, who doesnt like a good holiday

Very fitting, given that I am Austrian too. I really should stop writing replies at work where I don't have time to proofread them.

[EricE]

Fittster said:

EricE said:

Not sure about that lightweight claim... if Jaguar had such great lightweight engineering prowess then surely they would have shown it off where it matters, with the F-Type, arguably their current sportscar flagship?
Instead it’s really a quite lardy beast for a newly designed car in this day and age.

If it was a newly designed car you might have a point but as it is a shortened version of the old XK platform you don't.

[loudlashadjuster]

zeppelin101 said:

If you're only getting 43mpg out of any 2.0l diesel from the current crop then you're doing something wrong!

OK, it was a 2009 but the Touran I had only averaged 44 MPG over 38k according to the glass-half-full computer.

Current C220 (OK, it's a 2.1) is at 38.2 MPG after 26k as I said.

OK, a heavy right foot doesn't help, but living in a particularly crumpled bit of the Chilterns with lots of cold starts and immediate 50-80m 7-10% climbs to balance out the relatively efficient M1/M25/M40 cruising, there's little chance of me getting much more.

For every person like me though there is someone in Norfolk who has a 40 mile commute across the fens and can probably manage the official average I guess.

andybu said:

Never mind the XF and its competitors fuel economy debate, what will get the XE selling in volume (in the home UK market, anyway), is the size of the potential BIK tax bill for the company car user and the likely 3 year residual value for the leasing companies.

They are two sides of the same coin. You can't get the attractive BIK without class-leading CO2. Sad, but that's the world in which we find ourselves in

[Newro]

Kawasicki said:

jamieduff1981 said:

Well I've had RWD cars for years and have no problem getting to work in Scottish weather. If you're worried about oversteer the first time it rains, learn how to drive. There are already cars for incompetent lead-footed buffoons who should be on buses. They have 4 rings front and back and a Quattro badge.

Likewise I seem to manage with RWD bootspace.

Even my wife (look out - she's a woman) drives around in a RWD car with my 2 little girls in the back. I even let her go out when it's snowing.

Ditto.

I learned driving with a RWD drive car in Austria in the winter. Make sure you have proper tyres and don't drive like an idiot who thinks there is nothing in between zero and full throttle and you'll be fine.

There are many reasons why I actually prefer RWD over FWD when driving on snow and ice. Fun being only one of them.

[jamieduff1981]

Clivey said:

Kawasicki said:

Well argued, you've swung me round.

I've just looked in your profile / garage.

Haha fair cop - you had me

[wemorgan]

Martin 480 Turbo said:

Jag needs an inlane 6, though.

Edited by Martin 480 Turbo on Tuesday 29th July 18:11

They're making an I4 instead. I guess they know what their customers are asking for.

[ORD]

wemorgan said:

They're making an I4 instead. I guess they know what their customers are asking for.

Not sure the customers actually want inline 4s - they get what they are offered as regard engines, and the stupid obsession with CO2 and nonsense official mpg figures skews production decisions.

[wemorgan]

ORD said:

Not sure the customers actually want inline 4s - they get what they are offered as regard engines, and the stupid obsession with CO2 and nonsense official mpg figures skews production decisions.

If customers are obsessed with mpg, then most likely customers are asking for low mg cars = low cylinder, hybrids etc.
IMHO if customers feel OEM are forcing a product on them, then they'll likely reject it.

[Urban Sports]

chungasarnies said:

Limpet said:

the weakest 3-series in a long time (based on 2 years and 46k in an F30, not the gushing reviews)

Go on then - why is it so much worse than before? Those I know with 320EDs say they're great (this is not to say I don't hope the XE ups the game)

It's not, he's talking bowlocks, it's a far superior car to the e90 and is as much as a leap forward that the e90 was over the e46 if not more, I've owned all 3 and driven all generations back to the e30.

I'd say the F30 is the most progress they've made between generations.

Edited by Urban Sports on Tuesday 29th July 20:09

[anonymous-user]

Urban Sports said:

chungasarnies said:

Limpet said:

the weakest 3-series in a long time (based on 2 years and 46k in an F30, not the gushing reviews)

Go on then - why is it so much worse than before? Those I know with 320EDs say they're great (this is not to say I don't hope the XE ups the game)

It's not, he's talking bowlocks, it's a far superior car to the e90 and is as much as a leap forward that the e90 was over the e46 if not more, I've owned all 3 and driven all generations back to the e30.

I'd say the F30 is the most progress they've made between generations.

Edited by Urban Sports on Tuesday 29th July 20:09

I think people are getting confused between being "good" and being "sporty". The current 3er is undoubtedly the best 3 series ever built in terms of being a "car" (quieter, faster, more economical, safer, better equipped etc) but it is NOT as "sporty" as the previous series. However, that is a complaint (if you like sporty cars) that can be levelled at every single new mass produced passenger car. The simple fact is "sporty" is not what the majority market wants these days.......

[Urban Sports]

Max_Torque said:

Urban Sports said:

chungasarnies said:

Limpet said:

the weakest 3-series in a long time (based on 2 years and 46k in an F30, not the gushing reviews)

Go on then - why is it so much worse than before? Those I know with 320EDs say they're great (this is not to say I don't hope the XE ups the game)

It's not, he's talking bowlocks, it's a far superior car to the e90 and is as much as a leap forward that the e90 was over the e46 if not more, I've owned all 3 and driven all generations back to the e30.

I'd say the F30 is the most progress they've made between generations.

Edited by Urban Sports on Tuesday 29th July 20:09

I think people are getting confused between being "good" and being "sporty". The current 3er is undoubtedly the best 3 series ever built in terms of being a "car" (quieter, faster, more economical, safer, better equipped etc) but it is NOT as "sporty" as the previous series. However, that is a complaint (if you like sporty cars) that can be levelled at every single new mass produced passenger car. The simple fact is "sporty" is not what the majority market wants these days.......

You may be right, BMW tried to iron out some of the criticisms over the e90 generation particularly with regards to ride and comfort, they have done very well, mine rides so much better than my e90 M Sport, tyres are probably the big one here.

However mine hasn't been without its niggles but the car is a big step forward over the e90.

I'm replacing mine next year and I can't think if anything that I can afford that will do the job better, so to remove the worst thing about my car I'll have to get one with a better engine or maybe a 5 series with a better engine.

Edited by Urban Sports on Tuesday 29th July 20:59

[Pesty]

cookie1600 said:

In over 113,00 miles in my Aero 2.0 petrol convertible, I have averaged just over 40mpg on the 60 mile round commute to work (mixed dual carriageway, A and B roads) through Sussex with 43.0mpg regularly through the Summer - including some 'spirited' top down driving.



I could probably eek more than 55mpg out of the OH's diesel when I use it, if it wasn't for queueing traffic in the mornings.

Anyhoo, perhaps fuel consumption changes slightly when you have to pay for it yourself, I guess most Jag XE's will be leased as company cars and won't see anywhere near the headline figure?

People belive the obc?

[sege]

'It will be the true driver's car in the segment'.

wow! So it will have a manual gearbox and clutch and won't have EPAS with no feedback!

Interest definitely piqued!

[jamieduff1981]

Pesty said:

cookie1600 said:

In over 113,00 miles in my Aero 2.0 petrol convertible, I have averaged just over 40mpg on the 60 mile round commute to work (mixed dual carriageway, A and B roads) through Sussex with 43.0mpg regularly through the Summer - including some 'spirited' top down driving.



I could probably eek more than 55mpg out of the OH's diesel when I use it, if it wasn't for queueing traffic in the mornings.

Anyhoo, perhaps fuel consumption changes slightly when you have to pay for it yourself, I guess most Jag XE's will be leased as company cars and won't see anywhere near the headline figure?

People belive the obc?

Mine have always compared fairly well with brim to brim tests. Close enough that in mind mind the computer is right. Higher quality cars may not work as well - as we've learned with ride quality, handling, suitability for people under 60, reliability, electric parking brakes and automatic gearbox implementation.

[ORD]

wemorgan said:

If customers are obsessed with mpg, then most likely customers are asking for low mg cars = low cylinder, hybrids etc.
IMHO if customers feel OEM are forcing a product on them, then they'll likely reject it.

I think the car market is an exception to that rule. How else can one explain the number of people who buy diesel cars to pop to and from the shops? The chap selling the car knows full well that it is wholly inappropriate product for the buyer, but the buyer has no clue and takes what he is told is the right car for him.

The same is true of "sporty" 4-cyl cars. The manufacturers crank up the turbos to get impressive pub bore performance figures and cheat the official mpg figures then sell the car as sporty and efficient. In the real world, it is neither because it sounds like crap, is dull as dishwater to drive and gets pretty much the same fuel efficiency as an NA 6 cyl. It will also go pop in about half the time it takes a 6 cyl to wear out, but nobody mentions that.

Audi and BMW could sell a turd on a stick to most punters, to be honest.