It doesn’t take a genius to figure out which of the Jaguar Land Rover partnership is the breadwinner. People cannot get enough Evoques, LR4s and Range Rovers, even though the competition can do pretty much everything else in a more competent fashion, for less money. But at least Land Rover stands for something.
Never mind the snide remarks about the Kardashians and McMasions in my prior piece. Land Rovers have fought in wars, kept the peace, carted around countless dignitaries and monarchs and been to the kind of places that require vaccinations before you depart. And people remember that.
What about Jaguar? How many people still remember them for the E-Type versus their history of questionable reliability? I’d place my money on the latter being the brand’s defining characteristic that doesn’t have to do with their country of origin. Watching the XJ make an appearance in the latest James Bond movie, I was struck by how appropriate it was for M to be chauffeured in a dark colored XJ (note to Jaguar: get Bond in an F-Type next time around), but I doubt many people shared my sentiments. That’s a shame because there is a fair amount of history linked with the XJ and the various institutions of the United Kingdom as there is with Land Rover. Think of Margaret Thatcher leaving number 10 Downing Street after being ousted by her own party or Tony Blair arriving at Princess Diana’s funeral if you need examples.
The current shape XJ (now employed by David Cameron) was an enormously polarizing design when it debuted in 2009, and a good part of that sentiment had to do with the fact that the XJs had undergone mild, 911-style evolution in the preceding decades, during which they were the ride of choice for all manner of British VIPs. The 2005 redesign that introduced an all-new aluminum construction was barely distinguishable from the generation before that. Meanwhile, BMW had introduced the Bangle-look 7-Series and Audi’s A8 was starting to get some traction among luxury buyers. Sales were unsurprisingly dismal, and the radical change in design was deemed necessary.
Personally, I love the look, even if its more French than British. To me, it recalls the profile of the Citroen C6, with the quirky French styling cues replaced by a masculine, squared-off stance. Unlike the supercharged V8 versions, this one doesn’t have absurdly sized shiny rims, but the design doesn’t suffer for it the way that some cars, like Bangle BMWs and current Audis, look a bit wonky when devoid of big dubs.
The big news for the XJ this year is the addition of all-wheel drive and a new supercharged 3.0 V6 engine. The two drivetrain options come bundled together, as a response to the twin desires of more modest fuel consumption and improved winter-weather traction. Since it was 25 degrees and sunny for most of the week, I didn’t get a chance to try out the all-wheel drive system.
Alex Dykes last clocked a blown V8 Supersport at 4.3 seconds to 60 mph, and based on my own impressions of that car, I’d concur. It is a seriously fast set of wheels. Not having the capability to do instrumented testing, I will have to take Jaguar’s estimate of 6.1 seconds for the V6 car at face value – but I’d never complain that the V6 felt slow. The reluctance of the 8-speed automatic to downshift upon applying the throttle was noticeable, but once the transmission complied, there was no shortage of power available. Fuel economy in mixed driving was roughly 23 miles per gallon – not much better than the 21.5 mpg Alex managed with his Supersport, but I suppose some of the blame – and the appeal of the 3.0 – could be pinned on the AWD system.
Thanks to its aluminum construction, the XJ feels light on its feet. The chassis is a credit to JLR’s engineers, which managed to strike a balance between providing engaging handling while isolating the car’s occupants from the road surfaces, especially poor ones. The lack of big rims and low profile tires also play a part in delivering such good ride quality.
The one blight on this car is the Start-Stop feature, which was far from unobtrusive. I don’t have any philosophical opposition to these systems, but myself and several other passengers noted that the system was rather abrupt in cutting power and re-starting the engine; certainly, it operated in a manner that was inconsistent with the overall supple, isolating nature of the car’s ride and NVH characteristics. Some of TTAC’s Europe-based commenters have been skeptical of the efficacy of these systems with respect to fuel economy, but North Americans have had little exposure to them. I expect many will elect to disable this system.
Although the somewhat clumsy infotainment system is shared with the Range Rover, the rest of the interior is all Jaguar. Gone is the black plastic and the aluminum looking trim, replaced by acres of wood and dead bovine hyde. Your eyes will forget about the rather lackluster digital gauge cluster and instead gravitate to the long, arcing section of wood that spans from A-pillar to A-pillar just above the dashboard. When these cars end up as one of Murilee’s Junkyard Finds, I will be going into the carcass of an XJ and extracting this piece to hang in my future garage.
While I criticized the Range Rover for not offering much above and beyond its rival aside from a great badge, there are plenty of compelling reasons to pick an XJ over its rivals. There is an argument to be made for the Audi A8 being a more precise drive, but I prefer the increased isolation and the wood-and-leather cabin of the XJ compared to the more austere Audi – or any of its rivals. Since I’m not overly concerned with tech features, the Jag’s superior road manners give it the edge over the 7-Series, S-Class or LS460 in my books. At an as-tested price of $86,000, it’s neither the cheapest or the priciest car in its class.
Jaguar hasn’t been associated with the “Grace, Pace and Space” mantra in some time, this car would be the perfect manifestation should they ever decide to use that as the brand’s messaging. There is no shortage of power, comfort or elegance, and as far as I’m concerned, it’s the most beautiful 4-door car on sale today. But judging by recent sales figures, more people are choosing the A8 – at least the addition of all-wheel drive gives them one less excuse for ruling out the XJ.
You sold me, now can I borrow $86K, pay you back as soon as I can!
Junebug
DON’T BUY IT NEW. LEASE IT. $800 a month for an XJ-L (mine has a V8).
If I had it to do all over again, I’d have waited for the supercharged small engine instead of getting the V8. I can’t drive this car fast and neither does my girlfriend. That’s what the SRT is for!
FORD selling off Jaguar, just as they’d actually made it an awesome line was PURE STUPIDITY. This car is extraordinary and fun to drive – everything the MK-Taurus isn’t. It appeared to me as if Ford wanted to offer the MKS, XJ and ASTON MARTIN RAPIDE to fulfill segment/price demands. Not a bad idea: a Twin Turbo V6, a V8, a Supercharged V8 and then a V-12.
But they ballzed it up.
I think a V12 would have a low-take rate. Just look at how few BMW 760Li units there are…
Why can’t you drive the Jag fast?
While the steering is quick, the length makes bobbing and weaving quite troublesome. I prefer to take it on nice, slow drives through Manhattan – ESPECIALLY through the tunnel to NJ and onwards to the Poconos. It’s relaxing, but driving fast doesn’t feel great with a wood steering wheel.
Question: Do you, after however many months of ownership, feel the XJL is worth the additional length over the XJ? I’d think that heavily-sloped roof would be a hindrance for rear-seat passengers, but perhaps not…
The XJ-L is only worth the length over the XJ if you ride with rear seat passengers or happen to be very tall (like me) and put your seat WAYYYYYYY back in whatever car you’re in. Everyone makes fun of me saying “I drive from the back seat LOL.
Don’t know about that. Only without Jaguar does Ford have a chance, a small one but a chance, of reviving Lincoln. Part of the Lincoln story is that it got pushed down in the market hierarchy to leave room for Jag at the ultra-luxury level. Wouldn’t be politic to design and build a world class Town Car that might be seen as competing with the XJ, or a genuinely sporty Lincoln competing with other Jags.
“When these cars end up as one of Murilee’s Junkyard Finds, I will be going into the carcass of an XJ and extracting this piece to hang in my future garage.”
We’ll go together and arm wrestle for it. One of these sits in our office parking lot (surprisingly, driven by a plebe), and it sure is purdy. I’m surprised at the decent fuel economy you saw.
I bet you there will be no shortage of these in junkyards. Unfortunately.
They have to sell them first! It’s been around for years, and I’ve seen two on the street in La Jolla. One of them wasn’t registered. I still can’t look at one without being reminded of RoboCop.
The XJ is the best selling large luxury car in Canada. I see plenty of them on the road here. Must be the British influence here. Also, they’re priced quite a bit cheaper than the Germans are.
Good news for your junk yard prospects then! Actually I’m kidding. With their high aluminum content, these will probably go straight to the scap smelter.
I’ve been following the Canadian sales numbers, and the XJ only took off once it became available with AWD. While it wasn’t bottom feeding like the Equus, it was consistently 2nd last among the full size luxury sedans.
The XTS seems to occupy the sweet spot of the segment, outselling #2 and #3 combined. That is, if you assume the XTS is a competitor to the import flagships.
ALL WHEEL DRIVE is a prerequisite now in the North. Especially with this “Day After Tomorrow” level winter we are getting.
” I still can’t look at one without being reminded of RoboCop.”
Yes! These have 6000 SUX written all over them. A British tradition?
Last year before they got AWD, I went to look at one and the salesman was practically begging me to buy it. Offered to buy snow tires, take $10K off the sticker, you name it. I like that they have AWD now, but now it is with a V6 and not a V8 and I don’t like that. On top of that they are trying to get the same money for a V6 as the V8 and that kind of pisses me off frankly and they are going to try to pull that with the Range Rover too for 2014.
“driven by a plebe”
That saddens me.
I previously assumed only the affluent were being punished by those ergonomics.
I’m guessing the reason that the 5.0L V8 in the XF and XJ doesn’t have AWD is that it would have required extensive re-engineering to implement it, while the 3.0L supercharged V6 was already in development (and is apparently supposed to make an appearance in the large Range Rover as well). Hopefully in the coming years, Jaguar will release an implementation of the V8 with AWD to round things out.
But if I had to pick a flagship sedan, this would be it…even if it did spend its days in the shop.
Correct on all counts. It’s a great motor too. I don’t miss the N/A V8. This does the job just fine.
My 2000 XJR ittermittently goes into “engine failsafe mode”. And throws a code indicating abnormal throttle pedal position sensor range. For the love of god, why can’t a god damned throttle cable just be connected directly to a butterfly? Anyways, if anyone has any clue what’s wrong with it, I’d be much obliged. I already had the TB rebuilt.
Check the boards on Jaguarforums.com and jaglovers.org.
They’ve been stumped. I contemplating a re-rebuild or a new unit for 1600.
That also happened with Wheeler Dealer’s XK8, so at least you’re in good company. “‘Old out yer ‘and, mate.”
I saw that episode. That was a relatively-cheap fix for what would have been considered a write-off.
I’ve noticed that faulty throttle-position sensors that render the car to “limp-home mode” are a major issue on the Jaguar XK of that era, at least. I’ll bet it’s the same part in your XJ.
You’re right, it does look French. But given the general sense of aesthetics that France has, the statement is a compliment, IMHO. It’s a pretty car. Your comments about the engine beg a question that’s been rolling around in my head for a while: When will the time come when luxury car makers stop targeting superannuated male teenagers (who are buying bragging rights about horsepower and 0-60 times)? And why must every luxury sedan be a “sports sedan”? I’m not suggesting that luxury cars return to the days of marshmallow suspensions and cars that heel over like an old 12-meter America’s cup yacht under full press of sail beating to windward, but when are we gonna lose this “sports sedan” b.s.? I would venture that 80% of the passengers in a “sport sedan” being driven in a “sporting manner” are not entirely pleased, and the other 20% are totally terrified.
In 95% of normal driving in the U.S., a sedan that hits 60 in 6 seconds is plenty quick. If you want quicker than that — and are prepared to use the incremental additional quickness — buy a “sports car” and have at it.
If I owned this car and somebody in a “tangerine scream” Focus ST was to do the stoplight race thing, then let him do it. The color of the car tells you all you need to know . . .
a top end luxury car like this need enough torque to feel effortless in acceleration and at high speed. the 0-60 time is a poor proxy for that, but is still useful in that context. waftable torque is the common phrase I think.
Lots of large luxury cars are sold in Southern California. We have ridiculous ‘traffic calming’ stop signals on many of our freeway entrance ramps. The ability to achieve 80 mph from a rest in as few seconds as possible is quite desirable as a result.
Apparently the best selling luxury sedan in the US is the E350, so I think the consumers feel the same way. The manufacturers (particularly the Germans) seem to feel differently, but I think the modern base level engines provide enough waftability that the massive motor + dubs options are not as in demand as marketing and certain journalists would claim.
At $86k, I want the V8. I don’t care how good the Supercharged V6 is, I want the V8 rumble for $86k.
Personally, in an $86k luxury sedan I’d want absolute silence, with a whole lot of noise in my sports car instead. But I’m currently in a position for neither, so dreams must suffice.
As much as I used to hate the looks of the old Jag-YOU-ars I actually really like the looks of these newer ones. Jag-YOU-ars have managed to make their big cars look sleek versus the German brands who seem to have made their newer large cars look down right porkish in comparison.
When I can buy the shell from a junkyard in a few years do you think a LS-X engine would fit?
“When I can buy the shell from a junkyard in a few years do you think a LS-X engine would fit?”
LS engines fit in everything. Practically a bolt in. I’ve always shared the sentiment that Jaguars would make the best use of an LS-swap.
There’s a shop in SF doing LSx conversions in 98+ XJs and XKs.
“I want the V8 rumble for $86k.”
Isn’t it ironic that as V-6’s and turbo 4’s take over everything, what once was the Call of the Male Redneck might become the acoustic signature of rarest luxury?
So just how corrosion resistant is aluminum when used on a chassis?
I only have my experience with aluminum wheels in winter, and once the clear coat paint fails, they go south. I’ve read about aluminum corrosion on the 2000+ Mercedes CL’s body panels, but I don’t frequent the Range Rover or A8 forums to get a glimpse as to how the body holds up.
Gmt800 suburbans have aluminum hatches. The corrosion will bubble up some beneath the paint and it might flake off. Then it’s just exposed bare aluminum beneath. Generally starts around the lock mechanism.
IIRC from High School chemistry, Aluminum instantaneously oxidizes on contact with air to form an impenetrable barrier … you will never actually touch bare aluminum unless in a vacuum. Hence scratches repair themselves and you should never see corrosion. If your wheels are going rusty, they’re not aluminum.
Aluminum is typically used for masts and booms for sailboats (a few exotics are using carbon fiber, for the weight savings). For appearances, these are usually painted with some sort of baked on enamel. However, from a longevity standpoint, apparently it is better to not paint the aluminum. Something about the painting slows the formation of the protective aluminum oxide coating.
Of course, a salt water environment is the most challenging. Interestingly, several French manufacturers build sailboats with unpainted aluminum hulls. They are not pretty to look at, but there are apparently no concerns about corrosion, other than possible electrolysis below the waterline as the result of the use of bronze propellers and shafts.
I used to crew a yawl/ketch(mizzen mast directly over the rudder post) with bare aluminum spars. As you mentioned, they’re not pretty. Most of the boats from the same builder had painted masts. My first day working on the boat, I was tasked with cleaning the rig while it was removed. I suspect that this would have done the protective aluminum oxide coating no good at all, but I came to learn that the captain wasn’t all-knowing. I spent two days working at it with compounds and abrasives and generally rethinking my decision to quit my regular job to sail professionally. When the riggers showed up to hook the main mast to a crane and re-step it, the first thing out of one of their mouths was, ‘that looks like s**t.’
My 1968 Hobie 16 has an unpainted aluminum mast and boom. No corrosion, no issues. It has never been stored indoors.
Sailboat masts are usually made of aluminum alloy (6061 alloy typically), and, in most cases, anodized.
For what it’s worth, cathodic protection acutally works on boats. I’m not sure if that might have been employed on the vessels in question.
I think that if stainless stainless screws are used to attaching fittings to aluminum masts, booms, etc., without being isolated with non-metallic washers, corrosion will result in the aluminum. How this might translate to auto production I have no idea.
I’m worried about the insurance costs on these aluminium cars. Because of aluminium’s sensitivity, they have to be repaired in special, sealed-off areas using specific tools and the people repairing them need special training.
…Which is why I *really* don’t understand why the next F-150 needs to be aluminium when those cars get beat up so often through daily use…
My understanding is the XJ is designed so it is easy to replace a whole pannel if there is a prang.
My biggest concern on this car would be reliability. I would have to be really comvinced that they have it sorted before considering it.
There is a truly awful Netflix Original Series, a supernatural mystery called Hemlock Grove. For all of its logical fallacies, perhaps most egregious to this viewer is the fact that one of the main characters drives around in an (absolutely gorgeous) red ’61 XK150, and the engine starts RIGHT up on the first try EVERY TIME. It’s his daily driver, and it never lets him down. In fact, he ends up letting IT down by crashing it into a felled tree trunk.
I thought Hemlock Grove was kinda awful but amusing – the way horror series often are. The car was awesome though. Before you get all upset that it starts every time – he makes no bones that its authentic. If I had a Jag like that – RESTO MOD for sure.. Screw authenticity.. They don’t make cars that good looking anymore.
It’s supposed to be a 59 XK150 but it’s a replica with a mismatched front bumper and wrong size side mirrors. If the show is awful, why watch? It’s okay to watch stupid shows and enjoy it.
There is nothing wrong for a multi-billionaire to have an XK150 that starts every time that he turns the key on if he has the money to keep it in tip top shape. I have a XK140 that I literally use every day and even though I am not even close to being a millionaire, the car is always well maintained and it has never stalled on me, not even once in 15+ years. So basically it starts every single time without problems.
And I actually like the show. I am not going to badmouth it, thinking it will make me look smarter than the rest……
The XJ is a great car but dismissing Land Rover products so easily is wrong. The sell strongly because their offroad ability is immense and almost nothing compares with the luxury off a top spec RR. BMW X5? No offroad ability. Jeep Cherokee? Interior no where near as good as a RR. Seriously what competes?
“Jeep Cherokee? Interior no where near as good as a RR.”
Both interiors appear top notch to me. I can’t really point at anything that says the RR interior is appreciably better than the new GC.
Clearly you have been in neither because the new RR’s interior is amazing, miles better than almost anything out there. The new GC’s interior looks good, not near the quality of the RR, but good, until you sit in the seats. Some of the most awful and uncomfortable I have ever sat in. The front ones are bad, the back ones are just torture and terrible. It’s not a company problem because the 300’s seats front and back are quite nice.
A coworker just took delivery of a new JGC with the top interior. I only spent 10 minutes with it but it was beautiful. I have not been in the latest RR, but while I expect the Rover to have better materials, at the price point it sells at it certainly should. More of a concern is long term reliability and in that regard I’d trust almost anything before the RR.
Luxury cars are like high end stereo components. You end up paying alot more for an incremental improvement.
As for reliability – if you can afford a RR you can likely afford a few backup vehicles. It’s down the list of priorities for the owners.
It’s the ‘near luxury’ 50k segement where people expect a car to be luxurious and somehwat reliable where its a greater concern.
You’re comparing a ‘top spec’ Range Rover, which will easily go for six figures, with a Jeep Grand Cherokee?
Off road ability? More like side of the road ability.
Derek, we seem to have very similar taste in cars, as I think this XJ is beautiful too. My family has had too much experience with rubbish Jags in the past, so I would avoid owning one like the plague though.
Still, if it’s ever possible, I owe you a coffee at some point so we can swap opinions.
JS, you’re in Canada right?
Ottawa, wishing I could be back in Toronto.
If you are ever in town, let me know. I don’t get up to Ottawa much but I’ll be in Perth at the end of July to visit my old summer camp.
I am very dubious of the Jaguar trend to downsize its engines. It simply doesn’t match with it brand values of pace and grace mixed with British tradition and a healthy dose of opulence. Who spends north of $85K for a luxury car and cares about gaining 2 or 3 MPGs? XJs should have V8s.
That is even more so the case for the 2.0 XF. The 2.0 Ford EcoBoost is OK for sub $30K family cars but has no place in luxury cars like Jaguar.
Tell that to BMW, Audi, and Mercedes. Thats the competition. The A8, 7er, and S class all have or will have six cylinder engines.
Even more reasons not to do it.
“XJs should have V8s.”
Many of the greatest Jaguars of all time used 6 cylinders.
That was in an era when cars weighed a lot less. The 4,000+ lbs cars of today need significantly more power to provide the effortless propulsion that is synonymous with the XJ.
Hasn’t the XJ pretty much perpetually weighed 3800-4000lbs?
So for this V6, Jaguar went the GM route and sawed two cylinder off their V8?
The Jaguar AJ30 engine is a modified Ford Duratec.
Yea, but this isn’t the AJ30. It’s listed as a 90-degree V6.
It is based on the Jaguar 5.0 V8.
This will be hell of a buy at CarMax in another year or two. The resale value is for crap; the CarMax extended warranty is better than the Jaguar new car warranty; and (while tastes certainly differ) I think it’s the handsomest 4-door sedan ever built.
As if. Carmax’s cars are almost always overpriced compared to other local dealerships, who likely put just as much effort into making their offerings sale-worthy…
Don’t know if I’d shop at Carmax, but Jaguar prices drop like a rock in the DC area. Depreciation is a killer for all luxury cars here, but Jags seem to get it worse than most.
Call me a heretic, but I actually liked the previous series XJ better – high tech construction with old school styling. Interesting mix. It just seems like Jaguar is trying too hard with this one.
I love that car. Alex Dykes owns one.
I agree. There was a sense of grace and elegance that came with the Jags of not too long ago. I remember all the problems of 20 years ago; I had to learn what “mineral oil” was and why it was all over our driveway. But there was something really cool about them.
Saying that TTAC European commenters are “skeptical” to the effects of start-stop system is a huge understatement. The fact that it doesn’t work, or at least that it doesn’t work nearly as good as advertised, is a fact that can be easily proven.
The only reason for popularity of this stupid device in Europe is the fact that EUs method of measuring fuel consumption is totally disconnected from reality, with slow driving speeds and prolonged periods of being stationary. In real life, the savings are miniscule.
It is one of many things that make cars look good in EU fuel economy numbers, but do nothing in real world (which makes it one of the better ones – many downsized engines are in fact much worse in real life than their “normal” counterparts).
I couldn’t remember if it was you who wrote the great comment on start-stop or not, but I had you in mind when I wrote it. Now that I’ve experienced start-stop, I’m not a fan.
Derek, is the feeling of start-stop pretty much the same as in a hybrid? I pretty quickly got used to it in my car. The motor does not do a great job of moving the car off the line; unless you nurse the throttle, the engine snaps on. Odd, yes, but after a couple of weeks I really don’t pay attention.
No, it’s much jerkier, not nearly as smooth.
Good news. I kinda felt bad that our new Audi didn’t have this kinda feature. But if it doesn’t help gas mileage that much I don’t care.
Still with the weather in NorCal being generally variations of perfect I think it might help some.. 10% wouldn’t be enough for me though.
this car must hold the record for high-waistedness, good grief man, look at those slits for windows. I was driving behind a BMW 2002 the other day which of course is all top and little bottom ..and it was starting to look good to me
Still prefer the pre-2009 designs of the XJ, this simply looks like an angry Buick.
I find the imagined poor reliability of late model Jaguars versus the realtime reliability of Range Rovers troubling. I don’t have sales figures in front of me, but if Range Rover, or even the full Land Rover line enjoys a sales spike because folks think late model Jaguars are thought to be troublesome, I doubt if LR buyers are doing their research. Did I dream this, or wasn’t Jaguar in the top five positions for JD Powers? And, where was Land Rover? Sure, if you asked your dad about Jaguars when he was growing up in the 1960s/1970s, he’d probably say they were horrible to own, but you don’t have to remember very far back at all to have heard the experiences of disgruntled LR owners. Maybe, potential LR buyers should do the Packard thing first, and ask the man who owns one.
And as for what the XJ looks like, no, it doesn’t look like a traditional Jaguar, but it’s outward design is competitive with other cars in its class. Look how many Panamera’s are on the road, and by at least one auto writer’s account, the only redeeming aspect of that cars design is that when you’re driving it, you’re spared the experience of having to look at it.
I see one of these very frequently parked a block or two from where I work. It is just downright sexy, no doubt about that. But I am concerned how well you can see out of the doggone thing. And don’t tell me it has cameras and blind spot warning thingies so I don’t need to worry.
All those guys who were chopping the tops of old Mercurys back in the 50’s and 60’s — did they have any idea they were just on the vanguard of a fashion trend?
Maybe the people driving it use those newfangled blind spot preventers – mirrors. I think its too big to be fun to drive…but I doubt the insurance is much higher then other luxo barges..
The problem for Jaguar is that there are just not alot of people who want this kind of car vs. a lux SUV. That’s why they are suffering. A millionare friend of mine was trying to decide between a Porsche Panamera and a Cayenne. Of course a Pananmera is more sporty when it comes down to actual performance on a track. But in the real world a Cayenne is plenty capable – and has the high view and high ride height that his wife loves. (It also makes it easier to deal with car seats).
In short the bulk of big luxo drivers is old white men – who remember such cars from their youth.. But its just fallen out of favour. Younger rich people just aren’t interested. Its too big to be even a sporty luxo cruisers and not practical enough to be a family luxo mobile.
The XJ seems to be the car that autojournos always reccomend but nobody actually buys. Those that do invariably stick a leaper on the hood, though.