Discussion
I have been thinking of buying a S-type for a while to use as a daily. The options for RWD saloon with a manual gearbox which are not your common BMW are thin on the ground and I like the looks of the S-types. I know it's marmite. But I find it classy, classic and understated.
Since it must be petrol, my choice is the 2.5 or 3.0 V6. I heard the 2.5 is the one to have, despite being lower in power?
I would love a STR. But that is auto only. I'm aware of the a Jag should be auto line of thinking. But I need a 3 pedal car. So RWD and manual box is a must. I also quite like driving something which is a bit different from all the Audis and BMWs out there.
So my plan is to find the newest, best shape petrol V6 S-type I can afford and buy that.
About the only sticking point is internal space. Despite having the wheelbase of a small bus, for some reason it seems space inside is at a premium. I wonder how they managed that? I have never been in one, but from photos it seems the rear leg room is less than something like an Omega and seems to actually be on pair with some 2-door cars? It was supposed to be in the same size class as an E Class or BMW 5. But it seems smaller inside.
Since it must be petrol, my choice is the 2.5 or 3.0 V6. I heard the 2.5 is the one to have, despite being lower in power?
I would love a STR. But that is auto only. I'm aware of the a Jag should be auto line of thinking. But I need a 3 pedal car. So RWD and manual box is a must. I also quite like driving something which is a bit different from all the Audis and BMWs out there.
So my plan is to find the newest, best shape petrol V6 S-type I can afford and buy that.
About the only sticking point is internal space. Despite having the wheelbase of a small bus, for some reason it seems space inside is at a premium. I wonder how they managed that? I have never been in one, but from photos it seems the rear leg room is less than something like an Omega and seems to actually be on pair with some 2-door cars? It was supposed to be in the same size class as an E Class or BMW 5. But it seems smaller inside.
Edited by ZackM on Monday 19th April 22:07
Hi, we used to own a s type 3.0 V6 petrol auto and now we own a 5 series touring.
Interior felt larger than our 5 series and was certainly plusher!
Never spent much time in the back though. Like many saloons the boot is useless do to the shape/how you access it.
They are good cars. However, the autobox lunched itself on ours at roughly 100,000 miles. Despite having full jaguar service history. So probably a good idea to get the manual.
It was a great car and I genuinely miss it, the engine is a peach. Drinks fuel though, depending on how heavy your right foot is you will range from 19mpg to 25mpg. 30mpg is possible on very long stints of 70mph.
Interior felt larger than our 5 series and was certainly plusher!
Never spent much time in the back though. Like many saloons the boot is useless do to the shape/how you access it.
They are good cars. However, the autobox lunched itself on ours at roughly 100,000 miles. Despite having full jaguar service history. So probably a good idea to get the manual.
It was a great car and I genuinely miss it, the engine is a peach. Drinks fuel though, depending on how heavy your right foot is you will range from 19mpg to 25mpg. 30mpg is possible on very long stints of 70mph.
I had one, a 2.5 auto
Very comfy car, built for cruising not hard driving, hence the popularity of the auto box. The auto box has a manual gate if you want it. The character of the car does suit auto. Allegedly sealed for life autoboxes need fluid changes.
Any way leaving the auto box to one side...
Rust, check carefully for any signs of rust. The cills are covered with plastic trim panels which can hide significant rust which only becomes apparent when it has broken through into the rest of the car.
Electrics, check it all works, there's lots of toys make sure they function. If you want to connect a phone or use DAB then you will need to install a new head unit, bluetooth modules are available but quite rare.
Coolant check the level, check for leaks.
In general, the car feels smaller inside because of the curved roof profile so choose a lighter interior cream or grey rather than black. Darker exterior colours look better, dark green or blue rather than silver or gold.
Mine was a nice place to spend time, never felt fatigue after long drives and very good over poor road surfaces as they use higher profile tyres
There's plenty about, cheap enough, a lot of car for the money.
Very comfy car, built for cruising not hard driving, hence the popularity of the auto box. The auto box has a manual gate if you want it. The character of the car does suit auto. Allegedly sealed for life autoboxes need fluid changes.
Any way leaving the auto box to one side...
Rust, check carefully for any signs of rust. The cills are covered with plastic trim panels which can hide significant rust which only becomes apparent when it has broken through into the rest of the car.
Electrics, check it all works, there's lots of toys make sure they function. If you want to connect a phone or use DAB then you will need to install a new head unit, bluetooth modules are available but quite rare.
Coolant check the level, check for leaks.
In general, the car feels smaller inside because of the curved roof profile so choose a lighter interior cream or grey rather than black. Darker exterior colours look better, dark green or blue rather than silver or gold.
Mine was a nice place to spend time, never felt fatigue after long drives and very good over poor road surfaces as they use higher profile tyres
There's plenty about, cheap enough, a lot of car for the money.
I went on the look out for an S Type R
Failed on the first day of looking... I couldn't fit!
Seat right back; right down etc... The cabin is VERY narrow, the footwells are very small IMO and the rear seats are small with little to no space left for any passengers with me sat in the car
Yes; I'm not normal sized at 6ft 4 and c21 stone (all through a bad habit of lifting very heavy things)
But still; even if you're tall, you'll need the seat right back & down
For me, there was more room in the X Type!
Failed on the first day of looking... I couldn't fit!
Seat right back; right down etc... The cabin is VERY narrow, the footwells are very small IMO and the rear seats are small with little to no space left for any passengers with me sat in the car
Yes; I'm not normal sized at 6ft 4 and c21 stone (all through a bad habit of lifting very heavy things)
But still; even if you're tall, you'll need the seat right back & downFor me, there was more room in the X Type!
I have run 2 both diesels, both autos a 54 & a 56 plater. All one owner s/h from Jaguar.
Very few problems, one area to check is the heater as its dual circuit & complex. Heater valves & their wiring gives grief.
They are heavy on brakes & sensitive to tyres. The first was an SE on 17" & used Jags approved P6000 which was OK. The second was a Sport & was on PZeros which were OK at best. When they wore out I put it on Falkens & it was streets better.
They are like most modern cars hard on batteries. It's a big boy in the boot & spooky electrical issues start with a battery dying.
The auto boxes need fluid changes as do the diffs, despite Jaguars sealed for life stuff. The manual is a Getrag similar to a 5 series so well proven. V6 petrols are a fiddle to change the plugs on, as the manifold has to come off so there are reports of poor running which is down to people ignoring the plugs.
Very few problems, one area to check is the heater as its dual circuit & complex. Heater valves & their wiring gives grief.
They are heavy on brakes & sensitive to tyres. The first was an SE on 17" & used Jags approved P6000 which was OK. The second was a Sport & was on PZeros which were OK at best. When they wore out I put it on Falkens & it was streets better.
They are like most modern cars hard on batteries. It's a big boy in the boot & spooky electrical issues start with a battery dying.
The auto boxes need fluid changes as do the diffs, despite Jaguars sealed for life stuff. The manual is a Getrag similar to a 5 series so well proven. V6 petrols are a fiddle to change the plugs on, as the manifold has to come off so there are reports of poor running which is down to people ignoring the plugs.
Thanks for the replies.
Today I went to look at a S-type. Firstly, I have to say, despite it not being the roomiest car ever, specially given the external size, I have put the internal space worries to rest. It's large enough. Did the old test of adjusting the seat for me and seating behind myself. Fit no problem and I'm 6'.1". I guess at 6'.4" I could see problems. But then again at this height it would be a problem in many cars. But for my kids, who are still small, it will be more than fine for a while.
What really surprised me is how low it is and how low you sit. I can't think it is much higher than something like a 350Z, RX8 or XK. My legs were basically straight to the pedals. And I still had to put the steering wheel up or it would touch my legs.
It was a diesel and auto, as I just went to see the closest I could find to me. Just to get a feeling. But I like how it drove. Although for mine I would try try to tune the suspension a bit. Are bits from the STR exchangeable? Like I said, I will go for a manual V6 petrol.
So 2.5 vs 3.0, does it matter? I had heard the 2.5 was more reliable.
All together it confirmed my intentions to buy one. I really like everything about the car. It looks good, different, special, feels special inside, has loads of presence, very comfortable and drives nicely. I wish the STR came with a manual as I would love the extra power and by what I heard, tuning the V6 is a no-go. But that is a mild letdown compared to the rest.
Now if I can find one without rust....
I agree the darker colours look nicer. But there is a blue-ish silver which also looks nice.
So either that or some other dark shade of silver-ish colour or black would be my choice. I think dark green looks great on the Xk8 and XK. But here I prefer the above. Although I wouldn't turn down a green S-type. Blue I'm not so sure.
Can't wait to drive a petrol with a manual.
Today I went to look at a S-type. Firstly, I have to say, despite it not being the roomiest car ever, specially given the external size, I have put the internal space worries to rest. It's large enough. Did the old test of adjusting the seat for me and seating behind myself. Fit no problem and I'm 6'.1". I guess at 6'.4" I could see problems. But then again at this height it would be a problem in many cars. But for my kids, who are still small, it will be more than fine for a while.
What really surprised me is how low it is and how low you sit. I can't think it is much higher than something like a 350Z, RX8 or XK. My legs were basically straight to the pedals. And I still had to put the steering wheel up or it would touch my legs.
It was a diesel and auto, as I just went to see the closest I could find to me. Just to get a feeling. But I like how it drove. Although for mine I would try try to tune the suspension a bit. Are bits from the STR exchangeable? Like I said, I will go for a manual V6 petrol.
So 2.5 vs 3.0, does it matter? I had heard the 2.5 was more reliable.
All together it confirmed my intentions to buy one. I really like everything about the car. It looks good, different, special, feels special inside, has loads of presence, very comfortable and drives nicely. I wish the STR came with a manual as I would love the extra power and by what I heard, tuning the V6 is a no-go. But that is a mild letdown compared to the rest.
Now if I can find one without rust....
I agree the darker colours look nicer. But there is a blue-ish silver which also looks nice.
So either that or some other dark shade of silver-ish colour or black would be my choice. I think dark green looks great on the Xk8 and XK. But here I prefer the above. Although I wouldn't turn down a green S-type. Blue I'm not so sure.
Can't wait to drive a petrol with a manual.
I've always liked these since I first saw one, but then I loved the 60s S-Type too!
And my preference was always for a 3 litre manual. After all manual MK2s and 60s S-Types are far more sought after than Autos.
The only thing that put me off was their size, and to a lesser extent reading about issues with their electric hand-brakes.
Good luck finding the right one.
And my preference was always for a 3 litre manual. After all manual MK2s and 60s S-Types are far more sought after than Autos.
The only thing that put me off was their size, and to a lesser extent reading about issues with their electric hand-brakes.
Good luck finding the right one.
They are nice indeed. Interestingly, more road presence than many cars. Things like 3 series, C-class and the like don't have the same presence IMO. Infinitely more presence than a Lexus IS. A STR even more. It looks the business without getting into chav or vulgar territory like M cars and modern AMGs and Audis. Once the diesels are run to the ground, I can see it becoming a classic. It is already becoming a rare sight. Back in the day they were quite common. But not now. Probably killed by rust, like most cars of that era. But the ones which are cared for will just become more special with time. STR will definitely be a collectible.
Out of curiosity Mr.Tidy, what problem did you have with the size? Not large enough? It's interesting that although it is supposed to be E-class size, it almost sits in between the C and E-class in size. I like that actually. Not as small as a C but not as large as an E, which to me is a bit too large.
Out of curiosity Mr.Tidy, what problem did you have with the size? Not large enough? It's interesting that although it is supposed to be E-class size, it almost sits in between the C and E-class in size. I like that actually. Not as small as a C but not as large as an E, which to me is a bit too large.
Edited by ZackM on Wednesday 21st April 21:02
ZackM said:
Out of curiosity Mr.Tidy, what problem did you have with the size? Not large enough? It's interesting that although it is supposed to be E-class size, it almost sits in between the C and E-class in size. I like that actually. Not as small as a C but not as large as an E, which to me is a bit too large.
Well even my daily spends over 90% of the time with just me in it so my BMW E46 325ti fitted the bill just fine! A couple of years ago I wanted a 130i but couldn't find one in budget so my compromise has ended up being a 330i, even though it is bigger than I would have liked.Edited by ZackM on Wednesday 21st April 21:02
So an S-Type would have been larger still which for my circumstances just seems pointless, or even a PITA!
I had a 1999 3.0 manual S-Type a few years ago and really liked it. Not a particularly fast car, but drove really well
Nice inside, perfectly big enough for a normal family. Looked brilliant, it was the better looking (in my opinion) pre-facelift
Mine had very few issues over the 18 months or so that I ran it, other than creaky suspension and some lacquer peel which never constituted actual problems
Nice inside, perfectly big enough for a normal family. Looked brilliant, it was the better looking (in my opinion) pre-facelift
Mine had very few issues over the 18 months or so that I ran it, other than creaky suspension and some lacquer peel which never constituted actual problems
Mr Tidy said:
Well even my daily spends over 90% of the time with just me in it so my BMW E46 325ti fitted the bill just fine! A couple of years ago I wanted a 130i but couldn't find one in budget so my compromise has ended up being a 330i, even though it is bigger than I would have liked.
So an S-Type would have been larger still which for my circumstances just seems pointless, or even a PITA!
So it was too big. Ok. For me I need the size. True I will spend a lot of time alone in it. But I need to do the eventual school run and the like. Also when we are all together, I rather be in the S-type than my wife's SUV. So it's perfect in size by being spacious enough and luxurious, without being too large. Something like an E-class, specially in estate guise would be just way too large. So an S-Type would have been larger still which for my circumstances just seems pointless, or even a PITA!
I thought about buying an E-class estate actually. Because we travel quite often. At least used to before covid. This is the only disadvantage of the S-type. As most saloons, the boot is not the best. Very wide but so shallow. But since at least 9-10 months of the year I will be driving around town and not cross country, I hope the S-type will do it. Otherwise my wife's SUV will have to do it. But I would prefer doing it RWD.
therealsamdailly said:
I had a 1999 3.0 manual S-Type a few years ago and really liked it. Not a particularly fast car, but drove really well
Nice inside, perfectly big enough for a normal family. Looked brilliant, it was the better looking (in my opinion) pre-facelift
Mine had very few issues over the 18 months or so that I ran it, other than creaky suspension and some lacquer peel which never constituted actual problems
That's interesting you prefer the looks of the early cars. The interior of the newer cars, where you spend most time looking at, is much superior. But the facelift interior also came in the earlier exterior cars too. These would be 2002-2004. I heard the creaky stuff is also more common in the early cars?Nice inside, perfectly big enough for a normal family. Looked brilliant, it was the better looking (in my opinion) pre-facelift
Mine had very few issues over the 18 months or so that I ran it, other than creaky suspension and some lacquer peel which never constituted actual problems
Edited by ZackM on Tuesday 4th May 08:06
Almost drove to see a STR today. Talked to the seller on the phone. Car sounds good. Full service history. Fair price too. But I know I don't want to buy it. So it didn't feel right to drive it. Also, once I drive that it will probably spoil the V6 experience. But I really don't want an automatic.
But the STR is a beauty.
But the STR is a beauty.
So I have started looking at cars. Drove a couple too.
But I'm finding myself gravitating towards the earlier style cars. I definitely want the facelift interior. Looks much better. But on the outside I keep looking at the facelift S-types and finding them not as appealing. Mainly from the rear. From the front the recessed headlights do look a bit nicer. But from the rear I find the earlier design more appealing for some reason. Maybe because it looks more muscular or more sporty. The S-type is supposed to be a sports saloon of sorts from Jaguar.
So am I the only one who seems to be finding this:
more appealing than this:
I mean, the earlier style rear just looks more sporty somehow:
Maybe because the facelift rear is so plain:
But I'm finding myself gravitating towards the earlier style cars. I definitely want the facelift interior. Looks much better. But on the outside I keep looking at the facelift S-types and finding them not as appealing. Mainly from the rear. From the front the recessed headlights do look a bit nicer. But from the rear I find the earlier design more appealing for some reason. Maybe because it looks more muscular or more sporty. The S-type is supposed to be a sports saloon of sorts from Jaguar.
So am I the only one who seems to be finding this:
more appealing than this:
I mean, the earlier style rear just looks more sporty somehow:
Maybe because the facelift rear is so plain:
Edited by ZackM on Tuesday 4th May 08:08
ZackM said:
So I have started looking at cars. Drove a couple too.
But I'm finding myself gravitating towards the earlier style cars. I definitely want the facelift interior. Looks much better. But on the outside I keep looking at the facelift S-types and finding them not as appealing. Mainly from the rear. From the front the recessed headlights do look a bit nicer. But from the rear I find the earlier design more appealing for some reason. Maybe because it looks more muscular or more sporty. The S-type is supposed to be a sports sedan of sorts from Jaguar.
So am I the only one who seems to be finding this:
more appealing than this:
I mean, the earlier style rear just looks more sporty somehow:
Maybe because the facelift rear is so plain:
Where is the fuel filler on the car in the top pic?But I'm finding myself gravitating towards the earlier style cars. I definitely want the facelift interior. Looks much better. But on the outside I keep looking at the facelift S-types and finding them not as appealing. Mainly from the rear. From the front the recessed headlights do look a bit nicer. But from the rear I find the earlier design more appealing for some reason. Maybe because it looks more muscular or more sporty. The S-type is supposed to be a sports sedan of sorts from Jaguar.
So am I the only one who seems to be finding this:
more appealing than this:
I mean, the earlier style rear just looks more sporty somehow:
Maybe because the facelift rear is so plain:
ETA maybe the image is flipped.
Peanut130 said:
also the later cars are dearer to tax
Oh yeah? One more plus then. On the looks, I think what I'm seeing here may be a product of the aging.
When the facelift came out, because it was new it looked more modern. But today, since both are old, this makes less difference.
I think that in the case of the R, the boot spoiler completes the design and lines of the rear way better than the almost not there boot spoiler of the facelift. The earlier cars were also seen as more conservative in style. But today I think it's the opposite. The facelift car from the rear looks like a police car while the earlier cars look sporty as a sport saloon should.
I would like to get some opinions on that, if this is just me, or time has indeed changed the perceptions here.
Edited by ZackM on Tuesday 4th May 11:41
I think I know what you mean. The first S-types have a built in spoiler or lip on the boot lid. Then the STR adds a spoiler on top of that, giving it a sporty look.
The facelift boot lid just drops in a curve. And because of the position and shape of the taillights, it's not possible to have a proper boot spoiler. So it has just that little thing in between, which looks more like a piece of trim than a spoiler.
The facelift also falls for the modern car curse of lowering the lower part of the rear bumper. The first S-type shape has the bumper actually kicked up a bit, similar to the Lotus Carlton, which again helps with the sporty appearance you are talking about.
It all gives a more aggressive look to the rear of the older STR. I agree the rear of the newer STR is a non event.
The facelift boot lid just drops in a curve. And because of the position and shape of the taillights, it's not possible to have a proper boot spoiler. So it has just that little thing in between, which looks more like a piece of trim than a spoiler.
The facelift also falls for the modern car curse of lowering the lower part of the rear bumper. The first S-type shape has the bumper actually kicked up a bit, similar to the Lotus Carlton, which again helps with the sporty appearance you are talking about.
It all gives a more aggressive look to the rear of the older STR. I agree the rear of the newer STR is a non event.
Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff