Tuesday 29th July 2014

Jag XE: 75 per cent aluminium and 75mpg

The pre-launch tech bragging has only just begun!

---

'It will be the true driver's car in the segment'. More than anything else, that's the kind of statement we want to hear most from Jaguar about the upcoming XE. A 'supple ride' and 'precise handling' are promised as well. And following the XF and XJ saloons, both renowned for their superb dynamics, the signs are encouraging.

September 8 is getting closer...

Jaguar is claiming the XE's monocoque, with 75 per cent of the car' structure formed from aluminium, is a 'milestone in body engineering'. A new alloy is being used for the car with a particularly catchy name: RC5754. Emotive. A highly recycled aluminium, it dramatically reduces energy consumption and lifecycle CO2.

When Jaguar's Chief Technical Specialist; Body Complete (Dr Mark White) says the XE will have a "body structure with unrivalled low weight", you would like to think this will stand true. Having been disappointed by a slightly chubby kerbweight for the aluminium F-Type, we're hoping the XE can fulfil the promises of an aluminium intensive structure.

With just over a month until the XE's London reveal, expect more teasers on the car's technical detail over the coming weeks. It has to be good, doesn't it?

 

[Limpet]

Just as the F-Type is up against the weakest 911 in a long time, so the XE will be up against the weakest 3-series in a long time (based on 2 years and 46k in an F30, not the gushing reviews)

If it's even half the car it promises to be, it will do well. I'm genuinely excited by this car.

[Limpet]

nicfaz said:

A friend really wanted an X-type when they came out, but the equivalent 3-series had 30bhp more, did 10mpg more and was quite a bit cheaper to lease on the company scheme. Hard to overcome that really.

Factor in BIK as well, and that is basically why I drive a 3-series, and probably why 50% of the other guys who drive them do too. They are so attractive to company users that they are basically a no brainer unless you REALLY want a diesel A4, Passat, C-class etc...

[Limpet]

chungasarnies said:

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)

Floating and wallowing suspension when pushed, and excessive body roll when cornering with any degree of enthusiasm. You can specify better dampers as an option.

Numb steering. Absolutely no feel whatsoever. You can specify better steering as an option.

Some woeful material quality. Silver plastic trim on centre console around the iDrive controller is worn visibly already just from things brushing it in general day to day use. Silver plastic coating on gearknob is also pitted and marked (and neither of us wear rings). You can specify better interior trim as an option. The plastic around the climate control panel creaks, and visibly moves if you even lightly press it. 80s Citroen style.

Average build quality. First creaks and squeaks started materialising from about 10,000 miles onwards.

Comically soft paint. Front of the car looks like it's done 100k+ - peppered with chips and marks.

Niggling faults - clonking front suspension, FEM body control module failed at 3 weeks old, wiring fault causing spurious bulb failure warnings, heater blower motor became noisy and the car periodically reports a headlamp levelling system failure on start up which disappears next time you cycle the ignition. No fault has ever been found.

Poor refinement - engine is plain loud, and the wind noise from the A-pillars is irritating

It does a genuine 53 mpg in mixed driving, well over 60 on a sub 80 mph motorway cruise, and performs really well for daily use. It's also very comfy with a fantastic driving position.

The E90 I had before was a far better drive though.

Edited by Limpet on Tuesday 29th July 11:03

Edited by Limpet on Tuesday 29th July 11:28

[Limpet]

jamieduff1981 said:

I'd choose a Mondeo over any sub-M3 BMW 3-series if paying for it with my own money.

Yep, me too.