RE: Jaguar XF: Driven

[robsco]

Beautiful from the front end (pangs of previous generation Quattroporte from the front three-quarter), but dulls off towards the rear as though the designers lost interest. A common theme in the world of car design recently? Still, it is a far more attractive looking car inside and out than anything the Germans are churning out at the moment.

[Dr Jezz]

Interesting how so many opinions on this thread, esp. comparing a V8 german with a V6 Brit at different price points have taken such a similar turn to those in the recent Evora 400 article (+2 standard GT versus 2 seater extreme track german at different price points). It does feel as if PH has perhaps been taking Chris Harris' piece of pre-release rambling, seemingly intended to auto-regulate nationalistic fervour, rather too much to heart:

http://jalopnik.com/how-auto-journalism-fails-when...

[filski666]

" if you want a faster, more enjoyable XF until the V8 SVR arrives"


What information do you have that there is an SVR coming?

[jakeb]

I still cant get over the "bird st" they insist on sticking on the boot lid and steering wheel. Models of old looked much better with "J A G U A R" and the nice smiley cats face........ A simple round logo on the boot would suffice

However it does look nice and i would consider an estate version

[Ares]

williamp said:

Ares said:

RacerMike said:

Did PH review the same car as everyone else?!

http://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/jaguar/xf/30-v6...

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/jaguar/xf/firs...

EVO were fairly derisory about the XF too. It is possible that beyond national pride, it just isn't a brilliant car?

No they werent:

Verdict:

Not a truly complete £50K sports saloon, but a fine car and new chassis seriously impresses

http://www.evo.co.uk/jaguar/xf/16513/jaguar-xf-rev...

Oddly, they do mention a more expensive Audi...



Personally I have always felt whatcar are the most unpatriotic. Here are their thoughts:

http://www.whatcar.com/car-news/jaguar/xf-saloon/2...

EVO:
"Bland engine; doesn’t feel as fast as numbers suggest; some interior issues"
"The supercharged ‘six’ has so far failed to wow us in the XE, and is even less vibrant here."
"It’s a nice place to be, but some of the minor details and unfortunately placed cheap plastics mar the overall experience, as does a slightly high-set driver’s seat"

[crimbo]

RupertM said:

There doesn't look to be a lot wrong with the panel gaps or the colour to me. Perhaps you should consider a career in metrology or spectrophotometry if you can tell so much from some press shots.

crimbo said:

Wow, are the side shots real?

The doors look a different colour and the panel gaps are shocking. The crease on the door really does not look right next to the crappy vent/grill in the front wing.

Just lazy and careless design.Should be built to a higher standard than it looks.

Who cares how it drives it will feel like and other car it has suspension and tires is going to be no real improvement. If it handles on rails it's going to be too firm for the road and if it's comfy is going to be soft in the bends. So how it drives is not important.

Is the engine going to be so much better than before,nope!

So basically you are buying it because of its looks and it's new and with them panel gaps it's looks terrible. So well done jag, brilliant you have built a slack half arsed looking car that instantly looks not up to the quality standard you expect of the brand or the image you are looking or charging for.

And are you serious about jag having to try hard to get from 550bhp to 600bhp from a supercharged 5 litre v8 to keep up with the new m5 or merc.

Yeah real hard that, according to a pistonheads right up it needs a smaller pulley, intercooler, induction kit and a remap for over 620bhp and that comes with a 3 year warranty.

So there is no reason at all that they can't launch with an R version other than a marketing stunt so cut the rubbish.

Edited by crimbo on Sunday 16th August 01:15

SERIOUSLY! you dont think the door lines look very obvious on the side photo with the sunset. It looks terrible to me really obvious and ugly. Maybe its because its white but they stand out alot and take your eye off the shape. I just see black lines all over the car where the panels and doors are

[Alex P]

Ares said:

williamp said:

Ares said:

RacerMike said:

Did PH review the same car as everyone else?!

http://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/jaguar/xf/30-v6...

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/jaguar/xf/firs...

EVO were fairly derisory about the XF too. It is possible that beyond national pride, it just isn't a brilliant car?

No they werent:

Verdict:

Not a truly complete £50K sports saloon, but a fine car and new chassis seriously impresses

http://www.evo.co.uk/jaguar/xf/16513/jaguar-xf-rev...

Oddly, they do mention a more expensive Audi...



Personally I have always felt whatcar are the most unpatriotic. Here are their thoughts:

http://www.whatcar.com/car-news/jaguar/xf-saloon/2...

EVO:
"Bland engine; doesn’t feel as fast as numbers suggest; some interior issues"
"The supercharged ‘six’ has so far failed to wow us in the XE, and is even less vibrant here."
"It’s a nice place to be, but some of the minor details and unfortunately placed cheap plastics mar the overall experience, as does a slightly high-set driver’s seat"

EVO have some very inconsistent writing when it comes to this engine. They love it in the F-type (especially S-trim, which is the same as what is in the new XF) and David Vivian reviewed it very positively in issue 210 in the XE S (335 BHP version). If you look at the current information on EVO's website it says that it is a brilliant engine in the XE and that the S is might well be the only XE you want/need.

However Adam Towler and Stuart Gallagher seem less keen in the reviews I have read saying that it is short of low down torque and a bit bland.

I have driven an XE S and I can definitely say that it is not bland at all. Yes it is quieter than in an F-type, but then it should be as it is a family saloon. However that can be remedied by pressing the dynamic mode which opens the exhaust valves and changes the nature of the car (gearbox/steering/damping etc.). I came away amazed by how much character they had put into the power train of a 4 door saloon. For British roads and everyday driving I think Jaguar have cracked it with the XE S. I say this having worked in the motor trade for 8 years selling cars including RX8s and Mitsubishi EVOs.

The XF S petrol will be different because it is in a different market with different expectations of refinement. The salesman I was speaking to said he had driven a new XF S and that everything is more refined/toned down compared with an XE S. Where the XF does score over the XE is in having a lot more rear legroom and a bigger boot + a more Jaguar like cabin. Though I like the XE interior it is not a patch on the interior of my parent's 2010 petrol XF.

[Ares]

Is inconsistency between writers a good thing? I'd say it is, it allows for opinion, otherwise all reviews become too political and risk corruption.... "must praise Audi.....must Praise Porsche.....etc"

[RoverP6B]

The V6 isn't long for this world anyway, it's a cheap bodge based on the V8 block run up in a hurry to fill the gap between the end of the supply of Ford Duratec V6s and the arrival of the new Ingenium straight-six.

[anonymous-user]

RoverP6B said:

The V6 isn't long for this world anyway, it's a cheap bodge based on the V8 block run up in a hurry to fill the gap between the end of the supply of Ford Duratec V6s and the arrival of the new Ingenium straight-six.

While the engine is an obvious lash-up job and I have also read statements/interviews with JLR people saying that it is theoretically possible to make a straight 6 from the Ingenium architecture I have not heard that one is definitely coming. I really hope it is, even a good V6 is only as good as a mediocre I6.

[David87]

filski666 said:

" if you want a faster, more enjoyable XF until the V8 SVR arrives"


What information do you have that there is an SVR coming?

Whilst the article is indeed garbage, I too would be pretty confident there will be an SVR variant at some point.

[RoverP6B]

dme123 said:

While the engine is an obvious lash-up job and I have also read statements/interviews with JLR people saying that it is theoretically possible to make a straight 6 from the Ingenium architecture I have not heard that one is definitely coming. I really hope it is, even a good V6 is only as good as a mediocre I6.

I've seen articles basically confirming it. I also disagree that a mediocre I6 is as good as a really good V6. If that were true, then the straight-six in the Rover SD1 - 24-valve but only SOHC, basically a stretched Dolomite Sprint head on a Triumph 2500 block, and about as reliable as you'd expect something that complex built by British Leyland in the late 70s and early 80s to be - would be considered as highly as the Alfa Romeo Busso engine, and the old BMC C-series in the MGC and Austin-Healey 3000 would be as fine a unit as the Dino V6 in the Fiat and Ferrari Dinos (and Lancia Stratos). The 1950 Lancia V6, albeit OHV, was a much more modern, lightweight and efficient unit than most of the straight sixes around at that time.

[aeropilot]

dme123 said:

RoverP6B said:

The V6 isn't long for this world anyway, it's a cheap bodge based on the V8 block run up in a hurry to fill the gap between the end of the supply of Ford Duratec V6s and the arrival of the new Ingenium straight-six.

While the engine is an obvious lash-up job and I have also read statements/interviews with JLR people saying that it is theoretically possible to make a straight 6 from the Ingenium architecture I have not heard that one is definitely coming. I really hope it is, even a good V6 is only as good as a mediocre I6.

All I've seen is media speculation and nothing confirmed by anyone about an I6. The same sources also state that with the same 500cc modular design route as BMW have gone down, a 1500cc 3 cyl engine could be a possibility as well, following exactly what BMW have done. That would imply they equally do a 3L I6 as per BMW, or equally, as presumably they will be going down the 4L V8 route (2 x I4's in a common block) they could equally do a 3L V6 from two I3's in a common block. From packaging point of view, I suspect a I6 isn't on the cards as the new XE and XF shell architecture would have had to have been design for the packaging of a I6 from day one, and I suspect that would have leaked out by now.
With my betting hat on, I think the 'new V8' will be two joined I4's of 4L and there will be a I3 and a new V6 from two I3's joined.

[kambites]

I'd be surprised if Jaguar have designed their current crop of cars to be able to take an inline-6? They're horrible things to package.

[williamp]

kambites said:

I'd be surprised if Jaguar have designed their current crop of cars to be able to take an inline-6? They're horrible things to package.

Its the age old marketing v engineering argument. If their major markets (china??) would like an inline six, then marketing will push for it, and engineering will have to try and make it work.

From reading JLR weekly (sorry,. Autocar...) they mentionned the Ingenium engine has been designed to be scaleable. So the guts of the 2 litre four can be the developed into a 1.5 three, 2.5 5 cylinder, 3 litre six etc. Not sure about a 6 litre V12, but you never know...

[Ares]

kambites said:

I'd be surprised if Jaguar have designed their current crop of cars to be able to take an inline-6? They're horrible things to package.

Are they? Even in fairly small capacity 3l size? BMW manages - mine fits with loads of space?

[RoverP6B]

With FWD applications no longer requiring six-cylinder engines, there's little point in accepting the compromises of a V6 when the straight six is an inherently superior design. It's not that hard to package straight sixes these days.

[kambites]

Ares said:

kambites said:

I'd be surprised if Jaguar have designed their current crop of cars to be able to take an inline-6? They're horrible things to package.

Are they? Even in fairly small capacity 3l size? BMW manages - mine fits with loads of space?

Personally I'm on the opinion that the god-awful front-end styling of modern small (as in 3- and 1- series) BMWs is mostly down to their insistence on stacking with inline sixes. All manufacturers have had to push their bonnet lines up to meet the minimum bonnet clearance legislation but IMO BMW's styling has suffered far more than the competition and I suspect that's because of the length and height of their engines.

Obviously it's a trade off. A straight-6 is smoother, simpler and probably lighter for the number of cylinders.; a V6 gives you more flexibility for weight distribution and drive-train packaging. I suppose personally, I prefer straight sixes in saloons and GTs and V6s in sports cars.

Edited by kambites on Thursday 20th August 20:06

[elementad]

RoverP6B said:

With FWD applications no longer requiring six-cylinder engines, there's little point in accepting the compromises of a V6 when the straight six is an inherently superior design. It's not that hard to package straight sixes these days.

Don't 'v's offer more torque normally? Also I prefer the sound of a v than straight - more burbley.

I'm no expert. If straight 6 is more superior than v6 then why don't or haven't BMW made a straight 8 instead of using v8 engines in m3s? Surely they could get them to fit.

[ORD]

elementad said:

Don't 'v's offer more torque normally? Also I prefer the sound of a v than straight - more burbley.

I'm no expert. If straight 6 is more superior than v6 then why don't or haven't BMW made a straight 8 instead of using v8 engines in m3s? Surely they could get them to fit.

From what I have read, the I6 layout is superior to a V6 in all except packaging. The V6 is the most easily packaged 6 cylinder engine for lots of applications, but V6s are rarely excellent engines. I read something quite comprehensible to a layman explaining why a V6 is inherently less balanced and efficient than an I6 or a flat 6. I can't now find the link, sorry.

I doubt Jaguar will make an I6. Two 3 cyl banks used to build a V6 seems more likely. These ingenium engines are boring as hell, aren't they? No idea why Autocar has such a hard on about them. Modular Eco engines! Wow!

I will take that back if the V12 turns up