Jaguar S-type 3.0 V6, good car?
Discussion
I've found a few of these for rediclously low prices. I can get insured on 1 for a very competative price and have a 3.0 V6 under the bonnet pushing out 240 horses to the rear wheels.
Has anybody got any experiance with these? It seems like an awful lot of car for the money. Closest comparison I can find is a Golf 2.8 4motion, but these are twice the price, slower and the same on fuel!
I'm guessing there is a catch, can anybody enlighten me?
Has anybody got any experiance with these? It seems like an awful lot of car for the money. Closest comparison I can find is a Golf 2.8 4motion, but these are twice the price, slower and the same on fuel!
I'm guessing there is a catch, can anybody enlighten me?
Edited by StottyZr on Monday 11th April 14:26
StottyZr said:
I've found a few of years for rediclously low prices. I can get insured on 1 for a very competative price and have a 3.0 V6 under the bonnet pushing out 240 horses to the rear wheels.
Has anybody got any experiance with these? It seems like an awful lot of car for the money. Closest comparison I can find is a Golf 2.8 4motion, but these are twice the price, slower and the same on fuel!
I'm guessing there is a catch, can anybody enlighten me?
I honestly don't know what this means.Has anybody got any experiance with these? It seems like an awful lot of car for the money. Closest comparison I can find is a Golf 2.8 4motion, but these are twice the price, slower and the same on fuel!
I'm guessing there is a catch, can anybody enlighten me?
Anyway, the facelifted S-types from 2004 onwards are the ones to go for. Very well sorted car with the vast majority of foibles and niggles sorted. Decent turn of speed too, the 6 speed ZF auto is pretty good with that engine but many prefer the manual.
Well the looks of the thing are sure to divide opinion. Some like the retro lines, others find it ugly, plain and simple. I have had the 3.0 V6 in the X type. It also appears in the previous gen XJ and early XF models. Based on a Ford unit, it is creamy smooth and fine mated to either manual or automatic boxes. They do not like being low on oil so check for low end rumbles, but if serviced well, will cope with big miles no problem. MPG was not good, however, my X type was AWD and auto so perhaps that was my own fault. I never had to spend anything on it save for routine servicing, so would conclude it is a good unit. It certainly had some poke...!!
carlingofblack said:
Well the looks of the thing are sure to divide opinion. Some like the retro lines, others find it ugly, plain and simple. I have had the 3.0 V6 in the X type. It also appears in the previous gen XJ and early XF models. Based on a Ford unit, it is creamy smooth and fine mated to either manual or automatic boxes. They do not like being low on oil so check for low end rumbles, but if serviced well, will cope with big miles no problem. MPG was not good, however, my X type was AWD and auto so perhaps that was my own fault. I never had to spend anything on it save for routine servicing, so would conclude it is a good unit. It certainly had some poke...!!
This all sounds great tbh. I was expecting some horror stories explaining why not to buy one! I think I may start scouring the classifieds for the next couple of months and find myself a bargain. As far as I'm concerned 25mpg is a small price to pay for the car.V88Dicky said:
Anyway, the facelifted S-types from 2004 onwards are the ones to go for. Very well sorted car with the vast majority of foibles and niggles sorted. Decent turn of speed too, the 6 speed ZF auto is pretty good with that engine but many prefer the manual.
Anything after 2002 should be fine, as this is when they got the new engines, revised rear suspension and improved dash/centre console, as well as more rounded mirror caps. They are easily spotted by the badge:
pre-2002 is the full coloured 'roundell' on the bonnet.
2002 - 2004 is the silver 'jaguar face' badge incorporated into the top of the grille.
2004 onwards is the jaguar head in the small circle incorporated into the grille.
Also, the very early cars had the rubbing strips along the doors.
They are good cars, with no catches as such. In a decent colour (black/siler) with some nice wheels and mesh grille, they look pretty good too.
I ran a 2000 model (3.0L V6 Auto) for a couple of years, it would do 30MPG on a long run and generally averaged around 23MPG. Comfortable to drive and had a decent turn of speed when required.
The early ones do have a crap gearbox, mine failed at 90k miles and cost £1200 to repair. Aside from that it was 100% reliable and independant Jaguar servicing was pretty reasonable.
The early ones do have a crap gearbox, mine failed at 90k miles and cost £1200 to repair. Aside from that it was 100% reliable and independant Jaguar servicing was pretty reasonable.
monthefish said:
Anything after 2002 should be fine, as this is when they got the new engines, revised rear suspension and improved dash/centre console, as well as more rounded mirror caps.
They are easily spotted by the badge:
pre-2002 is the full coloured 'roundell' on the bonnet.
2002 - 2004 is the silver 'jaguar face' badge incorporated into the top of the grille.
2004 onwards is the jaguar head in the small circle incorporated into the grille.
Also, the very early cars had the rubbing strips along the doors.
They are good cars, with no catches as such. In a decent colour (black/siler) with some nice wheels and mesh grille, they look pretty good too.
Cheapest 2002+ is £3,000 :/ I'm currently looking at £1,000 for a 2000 registered car. I can't see the upgrades warranting £2000 more?They are easily spotted by the badge:
pre-2002 is the full coloured 'roundell' on the bonnet.
2002 - 2004 is the silver 'jaguar face' badge incorporated into the top of the grille.
2004 onwards is the jaguar head in the small circle incorporated into the grille.
Also, the very early cars had the rubbing strips along the doors.
They are good cars, with no catches as such. In a decent colour (black/siler) with some nice wheels and mesh grille, they look pretty good too.
StottyZr said:
V88Dicky said:
I honestly don't know what this means.
I have a problem with words. I get the word "years" and "these" mixed up occording to my original post. 
If you're going down this road may as well get the 4.2 V8, virtually the same fuel 'economy', same road tax but nearly 100lb/ft more torque and the fact you have a V8 to listen to!
geeteeaye said:
What about the use of the word 'rediclously'?
If you're going down this road may as well get the 4.2 V8, virtually the same fuel 'economy', same road tax but nearly 100lb/ft more torque and the fact you have a V8 to listen to!
Yeah I heard that but I've tried finding a 4.2 V8 and... can't. I would guess these would be much more expensive too? If you're going down this road may as well get the 4.2 V8, virtually the same fuel 'economy', same road tax but nearly 100lb/ft more torque and the fact you have a V8 to listen to!
I have the spelling ability of a 7year old. Its the youth of today, if we don't have a spell check we are useless
StottyZr said:
I've found a few of these for rediclously low prices. I can get insured on 1 for a very competative price and have a 3.0 V6 under the bonnet pushing out 240 horses to the rear wheels.
Has anybody got any experiance with these? It seems like an awful lot of car for the money. Closest comparison I can find is a Golf 2.8 4motion, but these are twice the price, slower and the same on fuel!
I'm guessing there is a catch, can anybody enlighten me?
I'm lead to beleive the centre diff changes around 2003. This is only what I've read on a forum though, so might be worth checking out. If it is true, then a pre 03 car would be my pick.Has anybody got any experiance with these? It seems like an awful lot of car for the money. Closest comparison I can find is a Golf 2.8 4motion, but these are twice the price, slower and the same on fuel!
I'm guessing there is a catch, can anybody enlighten me?
Edited by StottyZr on Monday 11th April 14:26
StottyZr said:
This all sounds great tbh. I was expecting some horror stories explaining why not to buy one! I think I may start scouring the classifieds for the next couple of months and find myself a bargain. As far as I'm concerned 25mpg is a small price to pay for the car.
My Dads gets about 35mpg on the long motorway journeys, and its not that bad on the shorter ones, doesn't get used that much on the short journeys anymore.Makes quite a nice noise too,
My Dads is a 03, with about 45k miles I think, he's owned it from new, mint condition, and was offered around £7k for it last year on a trade in. So he's kept it.
neelyp said:
300bhp/ton said:
I'm lead to beleive the centre diff changes around 2003. This is only what I've read on a forum though, so might be worth checking out. If it is true, then a pre 03 car would be my pick.
Why would an S-type have a centre diff??
totally misread the topic. Thought it said X-Type. Cerberus90 said:
My Dads gets about 35mpg on the long motorway journeys, and its not that bad on the shorter ones, doesn't get used that much on the short journeys anymore.
Makes quite a nice noise too,
My Dads is a 03, with about 45k miles I think, he's owned it from new, mint condition, and was offered around £7k for it last year on a trade in. So he's kept it.
I checked the Jaguar forums and found the general tone is that the car averages over 30mpg. On long journeys at 70mph 38mpg is claimed which is amazing in my eyes. This car seems like a win win win. If experiance has taught me anything, it has to be too good to be true...Makes quite a nice noise too,
My Dads is a 03, with about 45k miles I think, he's owned it from new, mint condition, and was offered around £7k for it last year on a trade in. So he's kept it.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff