RE: Jag XF Gets Facelift (And Four-Cylinder Diesel)
Discussion
They need to get a touring released pronto to compete in this market, I wrote to Jaguar before we bought our 535D touring to ask if they were going to release one and they replied saying 'No plans at present'I would much rather have a Jag over a BMW, but we need an estate with the dog
ky as a bag of spanners in comparission to the Bimmer unit.Swoxy said:
It should have had this engine in it form the start to steal company car sales from the 520d and A6 2.0 TDI 
It's figures are similar to them, too ...
it has 4bhp more than the 520d, despite being 10% larger capacity. also produces more CO2 so may (?) mean it's up 1 more tax band than that car. it's fuel consumption figures say it also uses about 10% more fuel than the 5er and is a little slower to 60mph. the Audi 2.0 diesel (figures wise) it quite a long way behind the BMW unit. less powerful, more CO2, i think it drinks more fuel too, and is a higher tax bracket.It's figures are similar to them, too ...
Edited by Swoxy on Wednesday 30th March 17:55
does look better than the 5er though, but the engine doesn't seem as if it is. BMW do seem to be the best at diesels around about now, merc do seem to be catching up quickly though!
Edited by E21_Ross on Thursday 31st March 09:21
kambites said:
BMW are also best, by some margin, at making their engines fit the fuel consumption test. It'll be interesting to see whether that gap is maintained in reality; I suspect not.
Not that that necessarily helps Jaguar much, since it's the official numbers people will look at.
BMW have been gaming the tests for years. I don't know anyone that's actually made the official figures on one of their cars for years!Not that that necessarily helps Jaguar much, since it's the official numbers people will look at.
VAG do seem to be a little more honest FWIW...
Nick Young said:
BMW have been gaming the tests for years. I don't know anyone that's actually made the official figures on one of their cars for years!
VAG do seem to be a little more honest FWIW...
Most drivers of cars in this class aren't looking at fuel consumption figures - they're looking at the BIK rate on them. Can't see too many choosing to pay extra to have an XF over a 520d, or 320d ED with options.VAG do seem to be a little more honest FWIW...
VeeFour said:
Nick Young said:
BMW have been gaming the tests for years. I don't know anyone that's actually made the official figures on one of their cars for years!
VAG do seem to be a little more honest FWIW...
Most drivers of cars in this class aren't looking at fuel consumption figures - they're looking at the BIK rate on them. Can't see too many choosing to pay extra to have an XF over a 520d, or 320d ED with options.VAG do seem to be a little more honest FWIW...
VeeFour said:
Most drivers of cars in this class aren't looking at fuel consumption figures - they're looking at the BIK rate on them. Can't see too many choosing to pay extra to have an XF over a 520d, or 320d ED with options.
That is probably true, yes. Which makes the consumption/CO2 test even more of an annoyance. 
Excellent!
Anyone who dismisses the idea of a four pot diesel won't be forced to buy one - however a significant number of people don't even know which are the driven wheels of their car let alone the number of cylinders, the XF is a great car to own however the running costs of my 3.0d S are significantly higher than the 520d I had before. I expected an increase commensurate with the performance but if Jaguar can reach a wider market with the 2.2 all the better.
To my mind the performance/economy figures are close enough to the 520d to render the Jag a player and having owned both I would acknowledge the BMW as the more efficient driving machine but I never looked back at the car after parking, whereas the Jag is the first car I've waxed in years, but it is currently a heart over head decision, the 2.2d might make it a realistic choice for a lot more drivers.
Anyone who dismisses the idea of a four pot diesel won't be forced to buy one - however a significant number of people don't even know which are the driven wheels of their car let alone the number of cylinders, the XF is a great car to own however the running costs of my 3.0d S are significantly higher than the 520d I had before. I expected an increase commensurate with the performance but if Jaguar can reach a wider market with the 2.2 all the better.
To my mind the performance/economy figures are close enough to the 520d to render the Jag a player and having owned both I would acknowledge the BMW as the more efficient driving machine but I never looked back at the car after parking, whereas the Jag is the first car I've waxed in years, but it is currently a heart over head decision, the 2.2d might make it a realistic choice for a lot more drivers.
Does anyone know what the in-gear times are like for this, as 322lbft seems pretty impressive - a 123d makes 300 so makes me think the XF may out perform the 520d on the road rather than at the traffic lights?
I agree with the comments from brenflys - as a company car user who only really likes the XF out of the larger saloons, this new engine means it will be a consideration when I change.
I agree with the comments from brenflys - as a company car user who only really likes the XF out of the larger saloons, this new engine means it will be a consideration when I change.
Paracetamol said:
What jag desperately need to do is to improve the perceived quality of their products. I had a 08 XKR. The plastics feel cheap and hollow as do the doors and dash (even covered in swathes of leather). Door hinges look cheap. Clips break in the engine compartment; plastic covers in the engine bay seem to warp etc etc. Its all very cheepy japaneesey. The late nineties jags felt much better in this respect.
I agree. There's more work to be done. However, try posting that on the Jaguar forum and the hardened Jaguaristi will shoot you down in flames. I very nearly pulled the trigger on a XF last year after twenty years of BMW ownership. However, I just couldn't quite do it. My heart said yes but my head said no. still too many creaky bits of plastic for my liking.Am I the only one that has noticed that the veneered the lids of all the compartments in the centre console don't line up? That sort of thing iiritates me.
pp
Edited by Pickled Piper on Thursday 31st March 12:41
TheEnd said:
There's quite a few of these out testing round Birmingham at the moment, I've seen a couple already today.
Yes, I saw a couple following each other on the M1 the other day.Engine sounds like a winner from the stats, although it probably wont be as creamy as the 6-pot diesels.
tr7v8 said:
Personally it is a sad day when Jag chase the low spec rep market, especially when they were outselling the german competition without. So we end up the same as the A6 & 520d slug slow execs
nevbadger said:
tr7v8 said:
Personally it is a sad day when Jag chase the low spec rep market, especially when they were outselling the german competition without. So we end up the same as the A6 & 520d slug slow execs
and many reps don't care about speed. they want something economical and comfortable to spend all day in.
wouldn't say the new engine sounds like a winner from the stats. competitor yes. winner....hmmmm time will tell. if it's in the market for company cars then the fact it's higher in the tax bracket due to more CO2, and also less fuel consumption for something with the same power then going purely by the facts and figures it's not the winner. as people have said the 4cyl diesels from BMW are remarkably refined so it depends how will this will fair.
still....the more choice the better i say. people complaining about another car out there with a boring engine etc aren't being forced to buy it so it doesn't matter
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff