XF 2.7d - 3.0d or 3.0d S ?

[brenflys777]

I've been looking at the XF and at the moment only the 2.7d would come within my budget for the age/mileage I'd want, but with the fuel consumption actually appearing better on the 3.0d/dS would it be better to wait for one of them to fall within reach considering the benefit of much more power. If anyone has experience of both it would be helpful to know how much better the 3.0d/s is? Cheers Bren

[anonymous-user]

The 3.0 is miles better than the 2.7. I have the 2.7 in my S-Type and it's exactly the same in the XF. Substantial throttle lag from stationary and it feels like it needs another 50bhp. Funnily enough that's exactly what they gave it in the 3.0. Fuel economy is disappointing too.

Dave

[Simpo Two]

dme123 said:

I have the 2.7 in my S-Type and it's exactly the same in the XF. Substantial throttle lag from stationary and it feels like it needs another 50bhp. Funnily enough that's exactly what they gave it in the 3.0. Fuel economy is disappointing too.

The 2.7 S is my first diesel and the turbo lag takes some getting used to - forget about nipping into those gaps on roundabouts, you'll be nipping into the nearside of the oncoming vehicle! Once it spins up it's very good IMHO.

Coming from a petrol S I'm pleased with 40mpg - but it seems to depend where you get the diesel from.

[Triple7]

The 3.0 in norm or S guise is a far better engine. I drove a 2.7 XF at launch and thought it was awful. Buy the 3.0.

[steve-p]

I would always go for the most powerful engine, given a choice. It's not a question of how often you use maximum power, but how effortless day to day driving is. I doubt there's much difference in economy between the 3.0 and 3.0S. I have had both 3.0 and 3.0S XFs as loan cars for a few days each, and both did 38 MPG over the exact same journeys.

[Triple7]

In addition I think the standard XF seats are somewhat lacking. The 3.0 XF-S (XFR) seats are purrfect.

[jagseven]

I have an XFR but have tried all 3 diesel engines - most reently a 3.0 non S which I thought was very good.

The 2.7 does the job but can feel sluggish at times. Certainly not terrible.
The 3.0 is a noticeable step up and feels right for the car.
The 3.0 S feels similar to the non-S in normal conditions but is noticeably quicker when you lean on it.

For reference the XFR doesn't feel any quicker or muscular at normal low rev/ low speeds - the difference is that as the diesel starts to run out of puff the XFR really starts to fly. I remember comparing the torque curves of the XFS and XFR and the XFS torque is slightly higher than the XFR at low revs (up to about 1600rpm if I remember correctly).

If I had to have a diesel I'd be tempted to go for the 3.0 and save some money. Diesels never feel very sporty to me and the 3.0 is a good balance.

[rdbd]

I had my Diesel S from new for 8500 miles and it returned 32mpg overall which I was happy with considering I spent the last few months always in Dynamic mode and often in Sport.
Regarding non-S, some colleagues did a back to back and returned exactly the same economy. I think that generally the S can get driven quicker and therefore appear to be worse for economy.
Also S comes with 20" as standard...(or at least my car did). Fantastic car and well-recommended.

[cardigankid]

jagseven said:

For reference the XFR doesn't feel any quicker or muscular at normal low rev/ low speeds - the difference is that as the diesel starts to run out of puff the XFR really starts to fly. I remember comparing the torque curves of the XFS and XFR and the XFS torque is slightly higher than the XFR at low revs (up to about 1600rpm if I remember correctly).

Spot on. The 3.0 S feels very fast up to a point. Also you won't use the paddles because you will struggle to get used to changing up at 4500 rpm. part from that it is a truly epic car. Well worth the money.

[brenflys777]

Thanks for all the help.

I've tried the S-type 2.7d and the last shape XJ 2.7d when I had an S-type 3.0 and to be honest I was pretty impressed with them ( particularly the XJ ). They seemed good cars to waft in whilst making very good progress, however unless an XF 2.7d is too good a deal to ignore I think I'd better do some more saving and wait until a 3.0d/s comes within reach.

Cheers Bren

[stinkysteve]

Looked at the figures recently whilst awaiting the XF estate.

Interestingly the brochures list identical MPG for both the 3.0d and 3.0S d.

So the real world examples cited above are spot on the manufacturers claims.