Classics left to die/rotting pics - Vol 2
Discussion
Spydaman said:
Found this :-[quote author="@jetjames" source="/post/1985231/thread" timestamp="1410075929"]Been driving past this for years and never knew it was there. The wife spotted it
[url href="http://s757.photobucket.com/user/jettajim/media/Mobile%20Uploads/1FC890DF-8318-4467-BB7E-ABD8E6115BEE_zpsvcpr5v9j.jpg.html"][img src="http://i757.photobucket.com/albums/xx219/jettajim/Mobile%20Uploads/1FC890DF-8318-4467-BB7E-ABD8E6115BEE_zpsvcpr5v9j.jpg"][/url]
I've been walking past this since 2012. Streetmap shows it sitting in the same place in 2009, but the front of the house was much smarter then, plus the lashed up plywood gates weren't there, instead just a carport and brick garage. The Land Cruiser has also been a fixture all that time, though is obviously in use.
shakotan said:
Classic? Probably the worst example ever to bear a Jaguar badge.
I always thought that the X Type was unfairly maligned. I had a rental 2.5 V6 Sport when they first came out for about 3 months - I thought it was a great drive. Decent handling, sound built quality and engine sounded good. Only the rear space was a disappointment but most cars in the class were cramped in the back and comedy fuel consumption (4wd and V6). Lack of development meant that it outstayed it's welcome and was past it compared to the latest German big 3 by the end though.
21st Century Man said:
Strange how the generation of Mondeo upon which it was based was widely praised, yet the Jaguar wasn't. It was the same car, just alternatively branded.
And with a different set of expectations.I remember Skoda always used to do well in the old JD Power satisfaction surveys, whereas VW and Audi were never as good as they were made out to be. When I sold Hyundais we had the same thing: nobody expected "cheap" brands to be well built and reliable, so when they were, people praised them. The typical VW / Audi / other German car buyers expected perfection, and then moaned when they didn't get it.
21st Century Man said:
Strange how the generation of Mondeo upon which it was based was widely praised, yet the Jaguar wasn't. It was the same car, just alternatively branded.
I worked for JLR at the time that both were current (I soon came to my senses and left), so drove various different X-Types and Mondeos.The "lesser" FWD X-Types felt hamstrung by being deliberately not as good as the 4wd versions - suspension felt less adept, the chassis was resolutely nose-led, the diesel was just an old-school diesel. The 3.0 Sport AWD was actually a nice car to pedal along and had enough poke to be worthwhile, decent steering and a very Jaguar ride/handling compromise. It wasn't quite a 330i, but it wasn't a dog by any means and rode better than the BM.
Where the X-Type also fell down (all variants) was packaging - the Mondeo was a capacious car in cabin and boot, and very practical. The Jaguar designers managed to lose most of that and give you a car that felt little better than a Focus (in terms of interior space / boot space) yet weighed more than a Mondeo. I still don't quite know how.
Oh, and as above - price-point expectations. The ST220 was competitively priced, the X-Types not-so-much...
havoc said:
Where the X-Type also fell down (all variants) was packaging - the Mondeo was a capacious car in cabin and boot, and very practical. The Jaguar designers managed to lose most of that and give you a car that felt little better than a Focus (in terms of interior space / boot space) yet weighed more than a Mondeo. I still don't quite know how.
I've heard once or twice that Jaguar are the masters of the least internal space for the most external size. I think the first time I heard it was in relation to the XJS. It was one of the bigger names in the automotive world. Clarkson, Brewer, someone like that. havoc said:
21st Century Man said:
Strange how the generation of Mondeo upon which it was based was widely praised, yet the Jaguar wasn't. It was the same car, just alternatively branded.
I worked for JLR at the time that both were current (I soon came to my senses and left), so drove various different X-Types and Mondeos.The "lesser" FWD X-Types felt hamstrung by being deliberately not as good as the 4wd versions - suspension felt less adept, the chassis was resolutely nose-led, the diesel was just an old-school diesel. The 3.0 Sport AWD was actually a nice car to pedal along and had enough poke to be worthwhile, decent steering and a very Jaguar ride/handling compromise. It wasn't quite a 330i, but it wasn't a dog by any means and rode better than the BM.
Where the X-Type also fell down (all variants) was packaging - the Mondeo was a capacious car in cabin and boot, and very practical. The Jaguar designers managed to lose most of that and give you a car that felt little better than a Focus (in terms of interior space / boot space) yet weighed more than a Mondeo. I still don't quite know how.
Oh, and as above - price-point expectations. The ST220 was competitively priced, the X-Types not-so-much...
I read somewhere that they chopped 4 inches out of the floorpan as it had much better rear legroom than the XJ series and that would never do.
After a string of Volvo 940's (and 740 & 960) Estates, I bought a more modern X type 2.5 V6 Estate. looked very smart, drove and handled well.
But the seats were back breaking within 30 mins of driving and the rear luggage area was a struggle to get one dog cage in whereas the Volvos would get two in. 6 months was enough - went back to a 940.
But the seats were back breaking within 30 mins of driving and the rear luggage area was a struggle to get one dog cage in whereas the Volvos would get two in. 6 months was enough - went back to a 940.
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff