RE: Shed of the Week: Jaguar X-Type V6
Discussion
greenarrow said:
My father in law had one for 10 years from new between 2002 and 2012. It was a 2.5 manual and nothing went wrong with it, ever. Wasn't even that thirsty really, it would do 36 MPG on a brisk 30 mile cross country run on A roads....always low to mid 30s on the motorway at 75-80MPH. I don't really understand why a 3 litre is worth a fraction of an ST220 either. I recall the EVO Magazine comparison between a 2.5 sport and a 2.5 litre Mondeo back when they were new and the Jag absolutely slaughtered the Mondeo for all round point to point pace, composure and road handling...the ST220 I am sure would have fared better, but the X Type 3 litre was a close runner up to the E46 BMW330i in another EVO group test, losing out only because the 330i was faster! I think these X Types are under-rated. Snobs call them mondeos, but ignore the fact that equivalent era Audi A4s are really Passats underneath and the Mondeo Mk3 had a sharper chassis than the equivalent Passat did!
hey got good write-ups in Autocar as well, especially for dynamic appeal. Seems to suggest it was the trim etc that let the interior downEdited by greenarrow on Friday 10th June 12:32
I wouldn't mind trying one as the dynamic stuff is more what appeals to me - having owned cheap runabouts, as long as the trim stays attached and doesn't rattle I'm happy
I cycle past a house most days that always has at least two X-Types parked outside with for sale signs in the windows. They seem to sell fairly well, they change fairly often, and I've never seen him have any other type of car for sale since I first noticed a few years ago. Quite like them, but couldn't see myself with one.
Screechmr2 said:
Last month we did a charity challenge where you had to buy a car for £500, meet at Blenheim palace, go to Silverstone then drive to France and for some challenges (inc going to Abbeville racetrack for more challenges). We used a 2.5 X-type jag. cost £500, fsh, 90+k on the clock, only needed 1 new tyre. Handled all the abuse it got (even when tracked) without any problem, ......
The 2.5 does need to be abused to get any performance out of it, no low down power and brakes didn't seem very strong but I got used to that when racing it round the track.
The 3 litre was invited to an Autocar Best Handling Day back a few years agoThe 2.5 does need to be abused to get any performance out of it, no low down power and brakes didn't seem very strong but I got used to that when racing it round the track.
firebird350 said:
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.
I agree with you. The car looks nice, looks like a Jag with traditional Jag elements such as a luxurious wood and leather interior and yet has the attraction of Ford mechanicals meaning ease of servicing, wide availability of parts, etc.I think the problem is the whole 'mixed breeding' syndrome/bias. Go back far enough and dogs (!) were either pure-bred (ie pedigree) or cross-bred (mongrels). These days terms have been invented for these cross-breeds such as cockerpoo, labradoodle, etc, etc. All very amusing and modern but in the end they are still mongrels - a prejudice (which I don't actually share) that affected the Jaguar X-Type and its relative lack of success. All that long-standing traditionalism about Jaguars and Fords based on this cross-breeding argument came into play and worked against the car's ultimate acceptance.
As said, if you can accept the car purely on its merits as transport then I don't see a problem with owning and driving one.
ks however. As the S-Type and current XF are just as much Ford. Both built on Ford platforms. Edited by 300bhp/ton on Saturday 11th June 18:39
300bhp/ton said:
firebird350 said:
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.
I agree with you. The car looks nice, looks like a Jag with traditional Jag elements such as a luxurious wood and leather interior and yet has the attraction of Ford mechanicals meaning ease of servicing, wide availability of parts, etc.I think the problem is the whole 'mixed breeding' syndrome/bias. Go back far enough and dogs (!) were either pure-bred (ie pedigree) or cross-bred (mongrels). These days terms have been invented for these cross-breeds such as cockerpoo, labradoodle, etc, etc. All very amusing and modern but in the end they are still mongrels - a prejudice (which I don't actually share) that affected the Jaguar X-Type and its relative lack of success. All that long-standing traditionalism about Jaguars and Fords based on this cross-breeding argument came into play and worked against the car's ultimate acceptance.
As said, if you can accept the car purely on its merits as transport then I don't see a problem with owning and driving one.
ks however. As the S-Type and current XF are just as much Ford. Both built on Ford platforms. Edited by 300bhp/ton on Saturday 11th June 18:39
Against that background anything and everything that could be used against the car was. For me the problem with the X-type was never the small percentage of shared Ford parts, it was the Ford influence over the styling that ruined it. It didn't help that aside from the top of the line models all of the engines were unappealing, and some very conspicuous bits of the interior looked cheap and awful. Best example is the surround on the centre console - on an XJ it's stitched ambla (fake leather), on an S-Type it was rather unfortunate looking moulded stitching effect in plastic, but on the X-type it was just smooth plastic while obviously looking like the intention was for it to be stitched leather effect. Right smack bang in the middle of the car.
I had a 3 litre SE X-Type.
Loved it until the engine broke with a mere 68k miles in clock.....
Quick. Handled well. Lots of toys. A big noisy exhaust. Seated 5 people regularly without a problem. Great sound system - tape player & radio on the console & six cd changer in the very large boot.
Fuel consumption wasn't brilliant however you buy a 3 litre V6 & you have to expect regular visits to the petrol station.
Being honest there was nothing I dis-liked about my X-Type.
BTW. If any buys the SOTW & needs a spare 17" wheel & tyre I have one for sale. Never been used & the tyre still has the little rubber bobbles from where the tyre was in the mould.
If interested please PM me.
Loved it until the engine broke with a mere 68k miles in clock.....
Quick. Handled well. Lots of toys. A big noisy exhaust. Seated 5 people regularly without a problem. Great sound system - tape player & radio on the console & six cd changer in the very large boot.
Fuel consumption wasn't brilliant however you buy a 3 litre V6 & you have to expect regular visits to the petrol station.
Being honest there was nothing I dis-liked about my X-Type.
BTW. If any buys the SOTW & needs a spare 17" wheel & tyre I have one for sale. Never been used & the tyre still has the little rubber bobbles from where the tyre was in the mould.
If interested please PM me.
Mr Tidy said:
I remember thinking that a 3 litre manual ought to be pretty entertaining when they depreciated enough (as they have now) but that picture of rust is worrying!
A pretty easy fix though & it's not like its rivals don't suffer similar problems. Both the E46 (front wings and boot) & the equivalent Mercedes (anywhere it would seem!) can suffer serious rust (in fact any 10 year old car really).alec.e said:
dme123 said:
Best example is the surround on the centre console - on an XJ it's stitched ambla (fake leather)
On some of the Super V8/ Sovereign models, the center console is real leather. Worth mentioning here that even on the bits that were "leather" in the X-Type it was pretty awful (but no worse than what BMW call Dakota)
dme123 said:
I think if it had been a really great looking car, moved the game forward maybe or had some real appeal to the younger buyers Jaguar were courting then the underlying platform wouldn't have mattered. AS it was the styling was horrible, from the awkward and obviously FWD proportions to the tacky "Past Times cheap tat" detailing. Instead of appealing to 3 series and A4 buyers it appealed to older buyers who wanted an XJ but could only afford the little one. Some people did like the styling at first, but the whole retro fad passed quickly and it immediately looked stale. Sales figures show this clearly, with a very sharp falloff after the first year. There were also fairly catastrophic reliability problems in the US.
Against that background anything and everything that could be used against the car was. For me the problem with the X-type was never the small percentage of shared Ford parts, it was the Ford influence over the styling that ruined it. It didn't help that aside from the top of the line models all of the engines were unappealing, and some very conspicuous bits of the interior looked cheap and awful. Best example is the surround on the centre console - on an XJ it's stitched ambla (fake leather), on an S-Type it was rather unfortunate looking moulded stitching effect in plastic, but on the X-type it was just smooth plastic while obviously looking like the intention was for it to be stitched leather effect. Right smack bang in the middle of the car.
I suspect that's being a little too hard and over critical. The entry level model was never going to have the same interior as the top range models. Against that background anything and everything that could be used against the car was. For me the problem with the X-type was never the small percentage of shared Ford parts, it was the Ford influence over the styling that ruined it. It didn't help that aside from the top of the line models all of the engines were unappealing, and some very conspicuous bits of the interior looked cheap and awful. Best example is the surround on the centre console - on an XJ it's stitched ambla (fake leather), on an S-Type it was rather unfortunate looking moulded stitching effect in plastic, but on the X-type it was just smooth plastic while obviously looking like the intention was for it to be stitched leather effect. Right smack bang in the middle of the car.
300bhp/ton said:
I suspect that's being a little too hard and over critical. The entry level model was never going to have the same interior as the top range models.
No of course, but instead of going it's own way it had an obvious cheap replica. It just made it look even more like a cost reduced version of the car you actually wanted.Not entirely sure I agree with the reviews on the handling, the controls are badly weighted - the brakes being both soft in initial response and overservoed, and the steering being probably one of the numbest this side of a Bedford van (On the other side of that coin a light, smooth clutch and tight gearchange combined with the above makes it very easy to drive) - it does remain fairly composed given how soft the ride is but always feels underdamped and gives a chunk of understeer on turn in unless you throw the car in - not something you can usually do on the road much...
Lot of car for the money though these days. The main problem is nearly every one under 2k you will be able to stick your thumb through the sills on it'll be so rotten, I looked at dozens last year for my brother and gave up after about 9 months of "Yes mate, it's in great condition, no rust!" - traveling for an hour and immediately finding either a big hole in both sills or a ropey patch slapped over the top of the rust just so they could sell it on...
The electrics are shocking too, door lock issues, fan controllers, fuel level sensors drop out for fun, headlight loom problems, dash/clock control units have issues, ECU's are prone to getting water in the plugs....
Lot of car for the money though these days. The main problem is nearly every one under 2k you will be able to stick your thumb through the sills on it'll be so rotten, I looked at dozens last year for my brother and gave up after about 9 months of "Yes mate, it's in great condition, no rust!" - traveling for an hour and immediately finding either a big hole in both sills or a ropey patch slapped over the top of the rust just so they could sell it on...
The electrics are shocking too, door lock issues, fan controllers, fuel level sensors drop out for fun, headlight loom problems, dash/clock control units have issues, ECU's are prone to getting water in the plugs....
Edited by PhillipM on Sunday 12th June 10:41
silentbrown said:
No, that one has a proper cassette player in the dash. There's even a button labelled "tape". CD Changer in boot was an option. In-dash CD became standard in 2004, I think.
Despite having no CD, it does have the mega-expensive (at the time) satnav option.
Oh yes! I can see that "tape" button, it's right next to the button with "CD" on it. This will have a CD changer in the boot.Despite having no CD, it does have the mega-expensive (at the time) satnav option.
greenarrow said:
ST220 I am sure would have fared better, but the X Type 3 litre was a close runner up to the E46 BMW330i in another EVO group test, losing out only because the 330i was faster! I think these X Types are under-rated.
Close enough for a box of cigars apparently ....even with a tired clutch on the press demo they were lent
For shed money they are ok we have had a few come in p/x plus points are 4 wheel drive and the 2.5 V6 is a lovely engine (if you can be bothered getting some revs up). The 2.1 V6 is a complete waste of time and petrol one to avoid.
As said above there is no steering feel whatsoever it's a numb driving experience controls are not nicely weighted - it's never going to be a drivers car but maybe ideal for people on a budget looking for a nice "badge" to potter off down to the golf club in!
The Mondeo comments are nonsense anyone who's driven both will tell you that ( having had loads of Mondeos and several X types they do not feel similar, Mondeo is a much better steer) a few bits of trim cross over both but so what?
If buying at shed prices check for rust check for leaky transfer box and be ware of engine warning lamps ( can be tricky to resolve 02 sensor faults there are 4 sensors on the V6 and can be prone to wiring / signal problems - but will still run fine).
As said above there is no steering feel whatsoever it's a numb driving experience controls are not nicely weighted - it's never going to be a drivers car but maybe ideal for people on a budget looking for a nice "badge" to potter off down to the golf club in!
The Mondeo comments are nonsense anyone who's driven both will tell you that ( having had loads of Mondeos and several X types they do not feel similar, Mondeo is a much better steer) a few bits of trim cross over both but so what?
If buying at shed prices check for rust check for leaky transfer box and be ware of engine warning lamps ( can be tricky to resolve 02 sensor faults there are 4 sensors on the V6 and can be prone to wiring / signal problems - but will still run fine).
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff