X Type 3.0 V6 Sport - good to own and drive?
Discussion
I bought a 2 year old one 5 years ago with 15k on the clock from Jaguar, as I didn't want to use my XJS every day any more. Had nothing but probelsm with it from numerous electric gremlins to ABS problems and a broken front spring.
However, it was damn quick and handled like a dream. And I was able to drive it easily through inches of snow (I'm in NE Scotland), which I couldn't do in the XJS.
However, it was damn quick and handled like a dream. And I was able to drive it easily through inches of snow (I'm in NE Scotland), which I couldn't do in the XJS.
I've only got the 2.5 V6 rather than the 3 but find it superb. Not quite sure why anyone would be critical of the underpinnings of the mondeo anyway, given its one of the best in its class. The only problem with the Ford was that I wanted something a bit more classy. The Jag looks good, good interior, has the right badge, and the Mondeo underneath is capable 
Shnozz said:
I've only got the 2.5 V6 rather than the 3 but find it superb. Not quite sure why anyone would be critical of the underpinnings of the mondeo anyway, given its one of the best in its class. The only problem with the Ford was that I wanted something a bit more classy. The Jag looks good, good interior, has the right badge, and the Mondeo underneath is capable
Do not confuse the X-type underpinnings to be from the new (very good) mondeo. Its the older mondeo its based on.The x type is a nice car, but. I really don't think the 3.0 v6 is that great in the car. Maybe its the 4wd system that made it seem bogged down when we had one for a few days. The fuel comsumption was totally unjustifiable aswell. If you have the money to spend, the 2.2D is quite a nice car. Try one as its only a matter of opinion.
MaM,
A pal of mine has had a supremely high spec X Type 3.0 Sovereign for about a year. I helped him judge it before he committed to it. He really loves the drive but is very surprised by the modest mpg.
Last week when my S Type was in for service I had as a loan car the latest version (just out) of the X Type 2.2 diesel with the auto box, not previously avaiable on this model. Wow! This was some improvement! I've driven a number of X Type models previously and they were all OK, but this was something else. I suggest you give it a go, if only for comparison purposes.
R.
A pal of mine has had a supremely high spec X Type 3.0 Sovereign for about a year. I helped him judge it before he committed to it. He really loves the drive but is very surprised by the modest mpg.
Last week when my S Type was in for service I had as a loan car the latest version (just out) of the X Type 2.2 diesel with the auto box, not previously avaiable on this model. Wow! This was some improvement! I've driven a number of X Type models previously and they were all OK, but this was something else. I suggest you give it a go, if only for comparison purposes.
R.
Stedman said:
Shnozz said:
I've only got the 2.5 V6 rather than the 3 but find it superb. Not quite sure why anyone would be critical of the underpinnings of the mondeo anyway, given its one of the best in its class. The only problem with the Ford was that I wanted something a bit more classy. The Jag looks good, good interior, has the right badge, and the Mondeo underneath is capable
Do not confuse the X-type underpinnings to be from the new (very good) mondeo. Its the older mondeo its based on.The x type is a nice car, but. I really don't think the 3.0 v6 is that great in the car. Maybe its the 4wd system that made it seem bogged down when we had one for a few days. The fuel comsumption was totally unjustifiable aswell. If you have the money to spend, the 2.2D is quite a nice car. Try one as its only a matter of opinion.
I do realise that its based on the older mondeo. I still categorise the older mondeo as a very good car. I haven't driven the new shape one, but the previous model was still one of the best mid size saloons I have driven.
Not quite sure what you mean by the 4WD making the car bogged down. Sure, they aren't a sports car and the weight of it will always prohibit a flying launch, but I find the torque of the V6 sufficient and it certainly doesn't feel bogged down. If anything, it feels more asthmatic higher up the rev range. The 4WD, rather than being a hinderance, is hugely reassuring IMHO and when its pissing down with rain, high winds etc, cruising is unpressured and without fear.
Fuel consumption unjustifiable? Compared to your Ford Ka or to your Dad's XJ? I wasn't surprised by the quoted figures given its weight, the 4WD and the V6. I get the quoted figures.
The car is certainly not faultless, but your passenger seat appraisal from your Dad's loan car for a few days doesn't lead to the same conclusions I have about the car. That said, I don't disagree that the 2.2 diesel is a cracking car if you can handle being a pikey and owning a derve.
Shnozz said:
Stedman said:
Shnozz said:
I've only got the 2.5 V6 rather than the 3 but find it superb. Not quite sure why anyone would be critical of the underpinnings of the mondeo anyway, given its one of the best in its class. The only problem with the Ford was that I wanted something a bit more classy. The Jag looks good, good interior, has the right badge, and the Mondeo underneath is capable
Do not confuse the X-type underpinnings to be from the new (very good) mondeo. Its the older mondeo its based on.The x type is a nice car, but. I really don't think the 3.0 v6 is that great in the car. Maybe its the 4wd system that made it seem bogged down when we had one for a few days. The fuel comsumption was totally unjustifiable aswell. If you have the money to spend, the 2.2D is quite a nice car. Try one as its only a matter of opinion.
I do realise that its based on the older mondeo. I still categorise the older mondeo as a very good car. I haven't driven the new shape one, but the previous model was still one of the best mid size saloons I have driven.
Not quite sure what you mean by the 4WD making the car bogged down. Sure, they aren't a sports car and the weight of it will always prohibit a flying launch, but I find the torque of the V6 sufficient and it certainly doesn't feel bogged down. If anything, it feels more asthmatic higher up the rev range. The 4WD, rather than being a hinderance, is hugely reassuring IMHO and when its pissing down with rain, high winds etc, cruising is unpressured and without fear.
Fuel consumption unjustifiable? Compared to your Ford Ka or to your Dad's XJ? I wasn't surprised by the quoted figures given its weight, the 4WD and the V6. I get the quoted figures.
The car is certainly not faultless, but your passenger seat appraisal from your Dad's loan car for a few days doesn't lead to the same conclusions I have about the car. That said, I don't disagree that the 2.2 diesel is a cracking car if you can handle being a pikey and owning a derve.
Stedman said:
Shnozz said:
I've only got the 2.5 V6 rather than the 3 but find it superb. Not quite sure why anyone would be critical of the underpinnings of the mondeo anyway, given its one of the best in its class. The only problem with the Ford was that I wanted something a bit more classy. The Jag looks good, good interior, has the right badge, and the Mondeo underneath is capable
Do not confuse the X-type underpinnings to be from the new (very good) mondeo. Its the older mondeo its based on.The x type is a nice car, but. I really don't think the 3.0 v6 is that great in the car. Maybe its the 4wd system that made it seem bogged down when we had one for a few days. The fuel comsumption was totally unjustifiable aswell. If you have the money to spend, the 2.2D is quite a nice car. Try one as its only a matter of opinion.
Ask him about your Lotus Shnozz, he might be able to teach you some stuff about that too........
I am on to my 2nd 2.5 v6 Sport(2003 & 2006 cars) and I really like the car. Forget the Mondeo crap (journalists with little knowledge wrote that rubbish in 2001 and unfortunately it stuck, nobody complains a Bentley GT is a VW in drag or an Audi TT is a Skoda Fabia), the Mondeo never came with awd, the ford V6 duratec engine was totally reworked by Jaguar. Look in an Aston and Ford switch gear is evident.
The car is very sure footed on the twisty stuff, i prefer the 2.5 to the 3.0 in that
it returns at least 1 mpg better and averages about 25. Also the Sport version handles very differently to a classic or se as it has a tauter suspension setup.
Look for a 2003 onwards car as Jaguar made improvements in 2003 to answer the problems raised by the initial launch cars of 2001-2
The car is very sure footed on the twisty stuff, i prefer the 2.5 to the 3.0 in that
it returns at least 1 mpg better and averages about 25. Also the Sport version handles very differently to a classic or se as it has a tauter suspension setup.
Look for a 2003 onwards car as Jaguar made improvements in 2003 to answer the problems raised by the initial launch cars of 2001-2
dominicf said:
I am on to my 2nd 2.5 v6 Sport(2003 & 2006 cars) and I really like the car. Forget the Mondeo crap (journalists with little knowledge wrote that rubbish in 2001 and unfortunately it stuck, nobody complains a Bentley GT is a VW in drag or an Audi TT is a Skoda Fabia), the Mondeo never came with awd, the ford V6 duratec engine was totally reworked by Jaguar. Look in an Aston and Ford switch gear is evident.
The car is very sure footed on the twisty stuff, i prefer the 2.5 to the 3.0 in that
it returns at least 1 mpg better and averages about 25. Also the Sport version handles very differently to a classic or se as it has a tauter suspension setup.
Look for a 2003 onwards car as Jaguar made improvements in 2003 to answer the problems raised by the initial launch cars of 2001-2
Couldn't agree more. The is more cr@p spouted about this car than any other IMO. At the time I bought mine I compared it to BMW, Merc and Mondeo estates and preffered the 4WD Jag to any of them, not only performance by also the interior which is a nicer place to be than anything in it's class. The only car that actually betters it IMO is the Audi A4 Avant but you pay a massive premium for one and the servicing in my experience is much dearer with Audi.The car is very sure footed on the twisty stuff, i prefer the 2.5 to the 3.0 in that
it returns at least 1 mpg better and averages about 25. Also the Sport version handles very differently to a classic or se as it has a tauter suspension setup.
Look for a 2003 onwards car as Jaguar made improvements in 2003 to answer the problems raised by the initial launch cars of 2001-2
flasher said:
dominicf said:
I am on to my 2nd 2.5 v6 Sport(2003 & 2006 cars) and I really like the car. Forget the Mondeo crap (journalists with little knowledge wrote that rubbish in 2001 and unfortunately it stuck, nobody complains a Bentley GT is a VW in drag or an Audi TT is a Skoda Fabia), the Mondeo never came with awd, the ford V6 duratec engine was totally reworked by Jaguar. Look in an Aston and Ford switch gear is evident.
The car is very sure footed on the twisty stuff, i prefer the 2.5 to the 3.0 in that
it returns at least 1 mpg better and averages about 25. Also the Sport version handles very differently to a classic or se as it has a tauter suspension setup.
Look for a 2003 onwards car as Jaguar made improvements in 2003 to answer the problems raised by the initial launch cars of 2001-2
Couldn't agree more. The is more cr@p spouted about this car than any other IMO. At the time I bought mine I compared it to BMW, Merc and Mondeo estates and preffered the 4WD Jag to any of them, not only performance by also the interior which is a nicer place to be than anything in it's class. The only car that actually betters it IMO is the Audi A4 Avant but you pay a massive premium for one and the servicing in my experience is much dearer with Audi.The car is very sure footed on the twisty stuff, i prefer the 2.5 to the 3.0 in that
it returns at least 1 mpg better and averages about 25. Also the Sport version handles very differently to a classic or se as it has a tauter suspension setup.
Look for a 2003 onwards car as Jaguar made improvements in 2003 to answer the problems raised by the initial launch cars of 2001-2
I had a 2002 2.5 sport for 3 years. Fantastic drive & never let me down once. I can agree it can feel a bit bogged down at first but that is a charictaristic of the V6 engine & the rather tall first gear - not the awd. Get the revs up & it flew once it was moving.
I've now got a 2.2d & it is not as good to drive. The back end feels too light in the corners & while the great shove of torque is fun it's ultimately not as quick. It does do 50% more miles on a full tank though!
I've now got a 2.2d & it is not as good to drive. The back end feels too light in the corners & while the great shove of torque is fun it's ultimately not as quick. It does do 50% more miles on a full tank though!
Shnozz said:
Stedman said:
Shnozz said:
I've only got the 2.5 V6 rather than the 3 but find it superb. Not quite sure why anyone would be critical of the underpinnings of the mondeo anyway, given its one of the best in its class. The only problem with the Ford was that I wanted something a bit more classy. The Jag looks good, good interior, has the right badge, and the Mondeo underneath is capable
Do not confuse the X-type underpinnings to be from the new (very good) mondeo. Its the older mondeo its based on.The x type is a nice car, but. I really don't think the 3.0 v6 is that great in the car. Maybe its the 4wd system that made it seem bogged down when we had one for a few days. The fuel comsumption was totally unjustifiable aswell. If you have the money to spend, the 2.2D is quite a nice car. Try one as its only a matter of opinion.
I do realise that its based on the older mondeo. I still categorise the older mondeo as a very good car. I haven't driven the new shape one, but the previous model was still one of the best mid size saloons I have driven.
Not quite sure what you mean by the 4WD making the car bogged down. Sure, they aren't a sports car and the weight of it will always prohibit a flying launch, but I find the torque of the V6 sufficient and it certainly doesn't feel bogged down. If anything, it feels more asthmatic higher up the rev range. The 4WD, rather than being a hinderance, is hugely reassuring IMHO and when its pissing down with rain, high winds etc, cruising is unpressured and without fear.
Fuel consumption unjustifiable? Compared to your Ford Ka or to your Dad's XJ? I wasn't surprised by the quoted figures given its weight, the 4WD and the V6. I get the quoted figures.
The car is certainly not faultless, but your passenger seat appraisal from your Dad's loan car for a few days doesn't lead to the same conclusions I have about the car. That said, I don't disagree that the 2.2 diesel is a cracking car if you can handle being a pikey and owning a derve.
Oh-and its not a passenger seat appraisal, have driven both the XJ and X. Whoever said i was trying to re-educate Shnozz, i wasnt, i was offering my opinion.
Well put it this way
If ford had made a 3 litre 230 hp 4x drive mondeo and called it a cosworth and lanched it in early 2000, everyone would have been wetting themselves in excitement
Stick a jag badge on, and everyones disapointed?, the X type is perhaps not in the mould of a traditional jag (probably why it came in for so much flack), but that does not make it a bad car, i have considered getting a 2.5 or 3 litre myself on several occasions
If you want a fast and sporty saloon, i'd try one, they also come with un jag like manual gearboxes something that should be a option on all the jag range!
If ford had made a 3 litre 230 hp 4x drive mondeo and called it a cosworth and lanched it in early 2000, everyone would have been wetting themselves in excitement
Stick a jag badge on, and everyones disapointed?, the X type is perhaps not in the mould of a traditional jag (probably why it came in for so much flack), but that does not make it a bad car, i have considered getting a 2.5 or 3 litre myself on several occasions
If you want a fast and sporty saloon, i'd try one, they also come with un jag like manual gearboxes something that should be a option on all the jag range!
Edited by peter450 on Saturday 16th August 09:54
I couldn't agree with peter450 more. I think if Ford had made a car with the same dynamics as the Xtype V6 sport, then marketed it as the Cosworth Mondeo (the heads were in fact made by Cosworth), it would now be a legend.
Unfortunately the X type just can't seem to shake off the prejudice of being associated with the Mondeo, which is crazy when you consider how highly regarded the Mondeo is within the motoring press.
As has been said before, the only significant parts the X type borrows is the chassis (the best bit) and the engine block, the other parts are relatively insignificant ie. the wiper motors and air conditioning units. Everything else on the car has either been thoroughly redesigned by Jaguar or is completely new.
Unfortunately the X type just can't seem to shake off the prejudice of being associated with the Mondeo, which is crazy when you consider how highly regarded the Mondeo is within the motoring press.
As has been said before, the only significant parts the X type borrows is the chassis (the best bit) and the engine block, the other parts are relatively insignificant ie. the wiper motors and air conditioning units. Everything else on the car has either been thoroughly redesigned by Jaguar or is completely new.
Edited by skidrisk on Monday 18th August 14:00
First post here so hello & be gentle!
I've got a 2003 X-Type 2.5 & think it's a good car. Not had any major problems with it other than it seems to chew tyres (especially fronts) for fun & it loves petrol stations! Probably get about 25mpg but I don't really care as (a) it's a second car that doesn't get used a lot & (b) if I wanted economy I would have bought something else. The fact it shares some components with a Mondeo doesn't worry me either as it simply means the local Ford garage can service it every year for half the price of the Jaguar one.
Only reason I wouldn't get another one is I've never had 2 cars the same.
Forgot to say it's also a great cruiser & will do the twisty stuff as well. This car also gets more comments from people than any other car I've owned despite it being one of the cheapest I've had in ages (paid £7k for it about 15months ago).
I've got a 2003 X-Type 2.5 & think it's a good car. Not had any major problems with it other than it seems to chew tyres (especially fronts) for fun & it loves petrol stations! Probably get about 25mpg but I don't really care as (a) it's a second car that doesn't get used a lot & (b) if I wanted economy I would have bought something else. The fact it shares some components with a Mondeo doesn't worry me either as it simply means the local Ford garage can service it every year for half the price of the Jaguar one.
Only reason I wouldn't get another one is I've never had 2 cars the same.
Forgot to say it's also a great cruiser & will do the twisty stuff as well. This car also gets more comments from people than any other car I've owned despite it being one of the cheapest I've had in ages (paid £7k for it about 15months ago).
Edited by northwest monkey on Monday 18th August 00:17
Saw what appeared to be a superb car today - right up until the moment I looked under the oil filler cap on the engine and found it crusted with the dreaded white condensation gunk. Low miles is not always a good thing - when I spoke to the owner I discovered it had spent its life doing lots of very short journeys. Always guaranteed to make me run away!
The prices seem to vary hugely - can anybody tell me what changes occurred to the car in 2003 and why post 2003 cars have far greater value?
The prices seem to vary hugely - can anybody tell me what changes occurred to the car in 2003 and why post 2003 cars have far greater value?
Gassing Station | Jaguar | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff