RE: Shed of the Week: Jaguar X-Type V6
Discussion
yonex said:
I think i'd take the S-Type, I always thought the design was a bit to retro and IMO it just doesn't work well as a saloon car.
That'll be the S type with the silly oval grill as a throw back to the mark II, I'd say that aging a lot worse than this. And by all accounts is much more retro in design than the x type.My friend has owned several, and quite likes them, although he says the 3.0 auto is a keen on the old 'go-go motion-lotion' as his BMW 740.
I've always liked the shape, it seems to encapsulate the classic Jaguar saloon shape well, but I just can't my brain to understand why they are like an 'inverse -TARDIS'; they seem bigger from the outside than the inside, and having sat in my friends I just felt plain claustrophobic (and I'm average build, 6' tall).
I think I would happily have a 3.0 auto, but would prefer a manual and wouldn't be interested in a 2.0 fwd at all. The 2.5? I'll leave that to other Shed-lovers....
I've always liked the shape, it seems to encapsulate the classic Jaguar saloon shape well, but I just can't my brain to understand why they are like an 'inverse -TARDIS'; they seem bigger from the outside than the inside, and having sat in my friends I just felt plain claustrophobic (and I'm average build, 6' tall).
I think I would happily have a 3.0 auto, but would prefer a manual and wouldn't be interested in a 2.0 fwd at all. The 2.5? I'll leave that to other Shed-lovers....
STiG911 said:
"7x17 X-Sport Alloy Wheels, Alarm, Alloy Wheels - 18in Aruba (ilo 16in), Alloy Wheels 17in Andros"
I wouldn't worry - looks like it comes with a set of wheels for each day of the week.
Terrible advert, might as well have been written by a 4 year old.I wouldn't worry - looks like it comes with a set of wheels for each day of the week.
Decent Shed though this week.
Bought a 3.0 recently to waft to work and back in for a grand. I was expecting it to be terrible but hilarious, but so far it seems to be surprisingly good! I think I'll keep it until it inevitably spews it's gearbox or transfer box across the road, whenever that may be.
Do get some strange looks driving it as a 28-year old, especially given its actually fairly nippy and I don't tend to drive it in the traditionally sedate Jaaaag manner people expect.
Do get some strange looks driving it as a 28-year old, especially given its actually fairly nippy and I don't tend to drive it in the traditionally sedate Jaaaag manner people expect.
I do like these and they still look so modern on the outside IMO. Every time i look at them and how cheap they are it does look tempting. The biggest problem for them though is the Lexus GS300 for me. I'd look past the Jag every time and get one of those all things considered if i was after a car like this.
Had a 3.0 manual for 4 years and sold to the brother of a PHer.
A little drinky about town but would do high 30s with the cruise set on the motorway.
Article mentions the water pump - yeah, a £40 part and a one hour job tops. I did mine
It'll throw all 4 lambda sensors at some point too.
Wonder what the sills are like under the plastic covers? Can be like cheese but a repair doesn't need to be cosmetically perfect as it'll be covered up again.
I'd have another one if the auto-box was better!
A little drinky about town but would do high 30s with the cruise set on the motorway.
Article mentions the water pump - yeah, a £40 part and a one hour job tops. I did mine
It'll throw all 4 lambda sensors at some point too.
Wonder what the sills are like under the plastic covers? Can be like cheese but a repair doesn't need to be cosmetically perfect as it'll be covered up again.
I'd have another one if the auto-box was better!
PROPER colour combo there, nice wheels, looks the bees - other than the steering wheel which is uglier than I remember them being at that vintage?...
There's one around the corner from here - similar vintage in flat-as-a-fart blue(*) with bits of rust and general lack of care showing - not moved in 6 months - shows what a bit of love can do (tho underneath they could be similarly f
ked of course!!)
(*) it's a similar colour to the 21-year-old 405dogvan only my paint is in slightly better nick!! ;0
There's one around the corner from here - similar vintage in flat-as-a-fart blue(*) with bits of rust and general lack of care showing - not moved in 6 months - shows what a bit of love can do (tho underneath they could be similarly f
ked of course!!) (*) it's a similar colour to the 21-year-old 405dogvan only my paint is in slightly better nick!! ;0
Edited by 405dogvan on Friday 10th June 14:28
Soupr said:
yonex said:
I think i'd take the S-Type, I always thought the design was a bit to retro and IMO it just doesn't work well as a saloon car.
That'll be the S type with the silly oval grill as a throw back to the mark II, I'd say that aging a lot worse than this. And by all accounts is much more retro in design than the x type.My wife loves the X-Type despite having use of all the other cars. It's cosmetically very good but she enjoys being able to throw the X-Type around and park it without worrying about costly damage. If we break it, we fix it.
The only reason to get a 2.5 is because there are many more to choose from, bizarrely. I've had that engine before. Everything you hear is true. They cost exactly the same to run as the 3.0 but lack the power. Depending on driving style that may not matter. The 3.0 is an over-square engine that develops very similar torque to the 2.5 for the first half of the rev range. Higher up the 3.0 leaves it for dead. If someone just wants it to stooge around in the 2.5 will feel just as pokey. You have to rev the 3.0 to get the benefit over the 2.5.
Soupr said:
That'll be the S type with the silly oval grill as a throw back to the mark II, I'd say that aging a lot worse than this. And by all accounts is much more retro in design than the x type.
Yes, but it had a much nicer engine (V8), I used to rent them quite frequently in the US and thought they were ok? Not quite at shed money but they're out there...if you're brave 
leon9191 said:
My neighbour has one and his is extremely loud as well, its a diesel but it does not sound right at all.
The diesels are really rough, they were just about acceptable in a £15k Mondeo and it was a pretty desperate move to put them in a supposed "luxury" car. The 2.2d goes well enough despite the racket, but the 2.0 is a bit of a slug.
dme123 said:
leon9191 said:
My neighbour has one and his is extremely loud as well, its a diesel but it does not sound right at all.
The diesels are really rough, they were just about acceptable in a £15k Mondeo and it was a pretty desperate move to put them in a supposed "luxury" car. The 2.2d goes well enough despite the racket, but the 2.0 is a bit of a slug.Apparently its the Ford Transit 2.2D that they dropped in.
Reasonable turn of speed but very unrefined.
I thought i wouldnt mind as i bought the car at the right price, but it really put me off mine.
The 2.2D is probably the lesser of two evils - given its chain driven and doesnt suffer so much with expensive injector problems.
And the pre Euro IV version with 155BHP, no DPF and mechanical EGR valve.
Edited by daemon on Friday 10th June 15:15
A lot of car for the money and nice colour combo. Prefer the Estate version, but at this price probably a non-starter (in all ways)...
Drove a friend's long distance (almost exactly the same) and I remember not a bad engine and decent performance but it gave me terrible back-ache after an hour or so for some reason.
Drove a friend's long distance (almost exactly the same) and I remember not a bad engine and decent performance but it gave me terrible back-ache after an hour or so for some reason.
Having owned a 2.2 X-Type in the past they're a nice place to sit. The handling wasn't bad for such a big car either, though I found it to be very tyre sensitive - it preferred the OE P-Zero Asimmetrico over the Kumho KU39 I fitted (lesson learned - buy cheap, buy twice). Granted the engine wasn't the last word in refinement but it had enough get up & go (and on long motorway runs 50+ MPG) and didn't sound anywhere near as loud as a friend's 2.0 XType. I was lucky enough to buy my 55 plate car (2.2 SE saloon in dark metallic blue) back in 2012 for £4100 and sold it in 2014 for £3750. Being the SE it had the built in nav option too, which I prefer over the normal stereo & HVAC system, plus an iPod connection in the centre console.
I can't see why you wouldn't choose one of these at this price, though be prepared for plenty of Grandad pipe & slippers jokes, and to be told by some management types "You're being paid too much" when they don't realise it costs less than 4 months rent on their Audi.
I can't see why you wouldn't choose one of these at this price, though be prepared for plenty of Grandad pipe & slippers jokes, and to be told by some management types "You're being paid too much" when they don't realise it costs less than 4 months rent on their Audi.
I never understood why people didn't like these. My dad still has a 2003 Mondeo ST220 and it's a fabulous car. It's comfortable, it's easy to drive, it holds the road in a way that nothing that size has any right to. Ok, it's not _fast_ by today's standards, but to call it slow would be ridiculous. Then a Jag like this comes along with basically the same engine, same chassis but 4 wheel drive and a nicer interior and no one likes it. Very strange, I always thought.
theJT said:
I never understood why people didn't like these. My dad still has a 2003 Mondeo ST220 and it's a fabulous car. It's comfortable, it's easy to drive, it holds the road in a way that nothing that size has any right to. Ok, it's not _fast_ by today's standards, but to call it slow would be ridiculous. Then a Jag like this comes along with basically the same engine, same chassis but 4 wheel drive and a nicer interior and no one likes it. Very strange, I always thought.
Relatively speaking they werent great cars, compared to what BMW and Merc were doing at the time.I always felt they were built for "showroom appeal". They looked good in brochures and to look at, but the plastics were hard with sharp edges and the leather hard and slippy.
Still, you cant really complain at that price - though i'd probably find a late 02 / 03 facelift S Type 2.5 or 3 litre instead.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff