Jaguar XJ Sport (X350) | Shed of the Week
Another slice of prime British beef, all the better for being served in aluminium wrapping...
This week we delve into the silky but fading world of the old-school Jaguar XJ. Shed believes that if any car deserves some sort of long-service medal for stalwart service to the SOTW cause it’s the XJ. Not because of the number of appearances, mind: Shed doesn’t really keep records as he finds they tend to work against him, but his gut tells him that fewer than one XJ a year has popped up on here over the last decade. No, his respect for this model is more to do with the fact that those examples have been popping up on SOTW consistently right through the last decade and long before it.
Of course, there have been revamps and reshapes along the way but the old XJ was a recognisable and respected sight on our roads for over four decades from 1968 to 2009, a year before its replacement by the entirely different X351. The 2003 X350 3.0 Sport we’ve got for you here is significant for two reasons. One, it’s a first-year example of the last of the old-shape XJs. Two, it was the first Ford-designed Jag. And three, most importantly for Sheddists looking for posh but wallet-preserving transportation, the X350 was the first – and last, as it turned out – aluminium-bodied old-shape XJ.
Again that’s important, this time for two reasons. One, because using aluminium instead of steel reduced the XJ’s weight by around 40 per cent, allowing Jaguar to deliver a package of respectable performance and economy in its petrol versions without having to resort to fancy turbochargers and such like. With the lowest-powered Duratec V6-based 240hp AJ30 3.0-litre V6 fitted, the 3.0 Sport weighed not a lot more than 1,500kg, which seems almost freakishly low by any 2024 standards, let alone those for luxury saloons.
That made it good for a 0-60mph time in the mid-sevens, a top waft of 145mph and an average fuel consumption figure of 27mpg. Sport models could also be had with 3.5-litre or 4.2-litre V8 engines. For another £10k or so new the 300hp 4.2 knocked a second and a half off the V6’s 0-60 time and added 10mph to the top end, but the numbers for the 262hp 3.5 V8 weren’t far enough away from the 3.0 V6’s to make it worth the bother. Even Jaguar thought so, dropping it early on in the X350’s career.
The second justification for aluminium was that it laid to rest the serious rust worries that nagged earlier steel cars, whose sills could vanish faster than a politician’s promise. X350s could still corrode but that was cosmetic rather than structural. X350 subframes were made of steel but the MOT certificates for our shed paint a refreshing picture of solidity. Apart from the usual scattering of browned-up brake pipes that infest just about every old car Shed sees these days, rust isn’t mentioned anywhere on this XJ’s record. Arguably the worst advisory in the 23 tests you’ll find online was for a gradual loss of horn, something with which Shed is becoming depressingly familiar. The Jag’s horn eventually gave up completely at some point before the Jan ’23 test so we assume that it’s now back up to full manufacturer spec.
Being a Sport model this one has a blacked-out grille which blends poorly with the glorious pearl blue body paint, unless you like the Romford bookmaker look of course in which case it looks great. The cream leather has retained its creaminess without acquiring much in the way of creases or bolster collapse, but don’t expect masses of room inside the cabin or boot. Aluminium could work wonders but it couldn’t miraculously transform the internal limitations of a 40-year-old design. 2007-on cars got new seat backs that freed up a little extra knee room for back seat passengers, and by that time you could also get more modern (i.e. not wood) metal trim made from guess what. The X350’s Fordish buttons and central locking system could both become sticky but on the plus side our car doesn’t seem to have the sometimes troublesome sunroof.
Electronics were never that great on XJs, and the ones Ford provided for the X350 weren’t much more reliable. Your computerised CATS air suspension system could go on the wonk, that was besides from compressor failure, or you might be robbed of nice features like the electronically adjustable pedals, but with a petrol motor you had none of the EGR or DPF issues that could bring down diesel-powered cars. The 3.0 was a surprisingly sporty drive too. Some say that the older X308 was a better Jaguar but that the X350 was a better car.
Despite our shed’s long MOT, anti-Jagists might take the view that with 167,000 miles on the clock the next ownership experience could easily end up like Shed’s love life - short and not that sweet. There’s no getting away from the £415 road tax, but we’re told that it’s been serviced every 10,000 miles and it does look good. You’d want to check things like gearbox and engine mounts as wear in these areas will degrade the Jaaagness somewhat. Remember, this was a £44k car when new so £2,000 now doesn’t seem a lot to ask. As Shed has thought to himself on more than one occasion while approaching an angry foe with an inadequate piece of equipment in his hand, what could possibly go wrong?
). Does that suggest the seller wants to deny the buyer of their consumer rights?
Although I do quite like it.
BUT
The guy that looks after my Merc always warns me that Ford cheaped out on things under the bonnet like sensors, coolant hoses, plastic connectors etc which start to let the side down after a while.
I still fancy an XK5.0 though.....
Forums | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff