Which Jaguar?

[BlueRex]

Hi All,

Just after a bit of advice and interested in a few perspectives. Appreciate this is a ‘what car?’, but thought I might get a few more specific thoughts in here rather than ‘Car Buying’.

I’m looking to buy either an XK (4.2), or an XF SV8. My budget is about 10k, although I could go to a little more for the right example, so I’m in the range of earlier, pre- facelift and pre-5.0litre, cars. This obviously means older cars at higher mileages.

Obviously, they’re different vehicles, but as my Jaguar knowledge for both isn’t the deepest, I was wondering if there were any clear reasons recommended by former owners that would favour one over the other - I mean more in terms of reliability or running costs than the clear difference in size.

I suspect the answer is ‘not really’, as both appear to have similar MPGs, tax brackets, and day to day performance.

I have 3 children (5,3 and 1) but we have an Outlander for family duties, so it’s likely I’d only be using the car once or twice a week for a 100mile round trip to work. We tend to go out as a family at weekends, so unlikely to see more than 10,000 miles a year.

I don’t know if one sits on a more modern architecture than the other, or if one is known to be a bit more reliable, but if anybody has driven both, owned both or has some particularly favourable experiences from one or the other, then I’d appreciate any insights!

[reddiesel]

Great to read of your interest in acquiring a Jaguar Rex and I am sure there will be many opinions expressed and good advice offered . There are two Models of the XK available with the 4.2 engine , the X100 ( XK8 ) and the X150 ( XK ) both models then subdivide into Normally Aspirated or Supercharged variants . The X100 is made from Steel and the later X150 from Aluminium . Out of these two models the later X150 is in my opinion a better secondhand buy , you have none of those dreaded box sections and associated corrosion to worry about and the X150 is a better driving dynamic as well . I shall stick my neck on the block and say its much better visually too . My only concern is at a budget of £10k you will be very much at the bottom of the marketplace and although I think its still doable you will have to know what to look for because there is plenty of rubbish out there .

[reddiesel]

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202203033...

I think this one for example is very interesting

[300bhp/ton]

Likewise, not sure which XK you are referring too. The latter X150 is dynamically better and looks more racy shall we say, although personally I much prefer the visuals of the older X100. But the X100 really hails from the DB7 and earlier XJS platform. Dynamically it is much older than just the age on the registration plate. But I'm sure they will be a bonafide classic.

The XF... meh, personally not really a fan of the styling at all on these. But they are probably good cars. I much prefer the S-Type visually. Which is actually the same platform up until 2015, when the XF switched to the D7 platform (a new car really styled to look the same as the older one).

Suspect you'll buy more XF for your money however. But it'll probably not retain its value as well going forth either.

[reddiesel]

The SV8 is comparatively a rarity , I wouldn't imagine there would be more than a few hundred out there . I wouldn't buy an Xf of any sort simply because I have never been attracted , however if I was , this is the sort of thing I would be considering and from a reputable Jaguar Specialist

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202205035...

[BlueRex]

reddiesel said:

Great to read of your interest in acquiring a Jaguar Rex and I am sure there will be many opinions expressed and good advice offered . There are two Models of the XK available with the 4.2 engine , the X100 ( XK8 ) and the X150 ( XK ) both models then subdivide into Normally Aspirated or Supercharged variants . The X100 is made from Steel and the later X150 from Aluminium . Out of these two models the later X150 is in my opinion a better secondhand buy , you have none of those dreaded box sections and associated corrosion to worry about and the X150 is a better driving dynamic as well . I shall stick my neck on the block and say its much better visually too . My only concern is at a budget of £10k you will be very much at the bottom of the marketplace and although I think its still doable you will have to know what to look for because there is plenty of rubbish out there .

Thanks reddiesel. Yes, sorry, should have been more specific - it’s the X150 that I personally prefer of the XK models (the styling of at least).

Yes, budget is the slight snag! I could probably go to 12-13k at a push, but take your point that I’m looking at early, more leggy examples.

Appreciate the comments on the corrosion risk of the earlier cars, not something I was so familiar with.

Thanks for the link to the example below - I’m aiming to make some enquiries this weekend so will add to the list to explore a bit further.

[miniman]

I bought an early X150 XK 4.2. It’s lovely, gets 30mpg on a run and goes like a bd when you want it to. It currently has an irritating fault with the adaptive headlights that seems to have no impact other than an annoying flashing warning light on the dash, everything else seems to work fine. Fixes seem to range from smacking the headlight (doesn’t help) through to replacing the headlight units at a cost of around £1500 a side.

Long story short - go in eyes open that fairly innocuous electrical faults can have potentially high costs to resolve.

Alternatively, if you want one with a headlight fault for less than £9k then give me a shout

[BlueRex]

300bhp/ton said:

Likewise, not sure which XK you are referring too. The latter X150 is dynamically better and looks more racy shall we say, although personally I much prefer the visuals of the older X100. But the X100 really hails from the DB7 and earlier XJS platform. Dynamically it is much older than just the age on the registration plate. But I'm sure they will be a bonafide classic.

The XF... meh, personally not really a fan of the styling at all on these. But they are probably good cars. I much prefer the S-Type visually. Which is actually the same platform up until 2015, when the XF switched to the D7 platform (a new car really styled to look the same as the older one).

Suspect you'll buy more XF for your money however. But it'll probably not retain its value as well going forth either.

Thanks 300. That’s an interesting point as to the retention of future value - that helps square pushing the budget a bit for a decent XK150.

I had no idea the early XF shared the S Type platform. On the grounds of running costs, I had considered the v6 petrol, but if I was going to go down the XF route it would seem more sense to try and find a V8 - which led me to the SV8, as the 5.0 NA seem a bit out of budget.

Have to say, on both your and reddiesel’s thoughts above, I’m swayed more toward the XK150.

[BlueRex]

miniman said:

I bought an early X150 XK 4.2. It’s lovely, gets 30mpg on a run and goes like a bd when you want it to. It currently has an irritating fault with the adaptive headlights that seems to have no impact other than an annoying flashing warning light on the dash, everything else seems to work fine. Fixes seem to range from smacking the headlight (doesn’t help) through to replacing the headlight units at a cost of around £1500 a side.

Long story short - go in eyes open that fairly innocuous electrical faults can have potentially high costs to resolve.

Alternatively, if you want one with a headlight fault for less than £9k then give me a shout

Thanks Miniman! That’s positive on the mpg numbers for the XK, too. Not a massive consideration when buying a v8 Jag, but worth bearing in mind as I’ll be using it a couple of times a week for a circa 100mile round trip.

I might bear your offer in mind! I’m trying to go into the purchase with my eyes open to the fact that I’ll be looking at older cars that were expensive when new - so honest provenance and known issues that can be addressed in time, I figure, is better than taking a complete punt!

[craigjm]

The x150 has a more modern and advance underpinning over the XF. The XK is built on the 2003 platform and the XF is on the Ford DEW98 platform that underpinned the s-type and hails from the late 90s.

[reddiesel]

BlueRex said:

miniman said:

I bought an early X150 XK 4.2. It’s lovely, gets 30mpg on a run and goes like a bd when you want it to. It currently has an irritating fault with the adaptive headlights that seems to have no impact other than an annoying flashing warning light on the dash, everything else seems to work fine. Fixes seem to range from smacking the headlight (doesn’t help) through to replacing the headlight units at a cost of around £1500 a side.

Long story short - go in eyes open that fairly innocuous electrical faults can have potentially high costs to resolve.

Alternatively, if you want one with a headlight fault for less than £9k then give me a shout

Thanks Miniman! That’s positive on the mpg numbers for the XK, too. Not a massive consideration when buying a v8 Jag, but worth bearing in mind as I’ll be using it a couple of times a week for a circa 100mile round trip.

I might bear your offer in mind! I’m trying to go into the purchase with my eyes open to the fact that I’ll be looking at older cars that were expensive when new - so honest provenance and known issues that can be addressed in time, I figure, is better than taking a complete punt!

Happy to help you out in any way Rex within say a 75 mile radius of MK should you spot anything . The good news with the X150 is that because of their method of Construction poor ones are relatively easily spotted . Things like kerbed alloys , cheap mixed make tyres and a lack of paperwork are good warning signs . The car can be colour sensitive with Silver being especially anonymous . Its a fine car in my opinion and vastly underpriced for what it is . You wont run one on the cheap but once you are on top of the cars maintenance needs apart from the usual consumables not much ever goes wrong . There is so much known about these cars that seldom will you ever encounter an issue nobody hasn't encountered before , I think you will be well impressed by the cars capabilities and its a stunning design .

[Simpo Two]

I would have have the XK every time, for the looks, and you can have a convertible if you want. A great partner for the family car.

The XF may be fast and all that but it just looks like an ordinary car (to me at least).

[deadslow]

miniman said:

I bought an early X150 XK 4.2. It’s lovely, gets 30mpg on a run and goes like a bd when you want it to. It currently has an irritating fault with the adaptive headlights that seems to have no impact other than an annoying flashing warning light on the dash, everything else seems to work fine. Fixes seem to range from smacking the headlight (doesn’t help) through to replacing the headlight units at a cost of around £1500 a side.

Long story short - go in eyes open that fairly innocuous electrical faults can have potentially high costs to resolve.

Alternatively, if you want one with a headlight fault for less than £9k then give me a shout

dash fault light for headlights can sometimes be caused by a corroded earth in the wheel arch - worth a look - cheap fix

[NortonES2]

12-13K would also get you an early but high mileage XFR.

[Golan]

Simpo Two said:

I would have have the XK every time, for the looks, and you can have a convertible if you want. A great partner for the family car.

The XF may be fast and all that but it just looks like an ordinary car (to me at least).

I agree with Simpo,
I had an S type R which I had for years and it was always "just an ordinary looking car"... Don't get me wrong it was a lovely drive and went like stink.
Now I have an 2010 XKR and I'm VERY happy with it... The gorgeous looks and I used to think that my S type was quick, the 5.0L is on another level but you'll be paying North of £17,000 for a well kept one.

[Krikkit]

deadslow said:

miniman said:

I bought an early X150 XK 4.2. It’s lovely, gets 30mpg on a run and goes like a bd when you want it to. It currently has an irritating fault with the adaptive headlights that seems to have no impact other than an annoying flashing warning light on the dash, everything else seems to work fine. Fixes seem to range from smacking the headlight (doesn’t help) through to replacing the headlight units at a cost of around £1500 a side.

Long story short - go in eyes open that fairly innocuous electrical faults can have potentially high costs to resolve.

Alternatively, if you want one with a headlight fault for less than £9k then give me a shout

dash fault light for headlights can sometimes be caused by a corroded earth in the wheel arch - worth a look - cheap fix

My other half bought an X150 and we've had this issue - silly placement of the earth point in the drivers' side wheel arch where it's exposed to all the road grub, in the passenger arch it's covered by the liner.

Anyway, 20 minutes relocating it and it's good as gold again.

Had an intermittent rear light issue which was due to a broken bulb holder in the rear cluster which temporarily broke the connection, then the control unit just shut off the whole light.

[jamieduff1981]

BlueRex said:

I had no idea the early XF shared the S Type platform. On the grounds of running costs, I had considered the v6 petrol, but if I was going to go down the XF route it would seem more sense to try and find a V8 - which led me to the SV8, as the 5.0 NA seem a bit out of budget.

The X202 S-Type platform was superb though - in my opinion superior to the E39 BMW 5-series that most German fanboys gush over. The XF is dynamically very good because the S-Type was dynamically very good.

Next part - the X150's aluminium body is certainly newer and more modern than the S-Type/XF's steel body, however it's worth noting that pretty much all of the moving parts connecting the wheels to the subframes are identical between both. Jaguar used the same front and rear, upper and lower control arms, uprights, tie-rods etc on the X202 S-Type, the X350 XJ, the X250 XF and X150 XK/XKR so don't let anyone tell you the actual suspension is more modern on the XK because it's the exactly the same stuff, which is good if you're in the market for an XK actually since there's no luxury coupe tax on the suspension bushes since they're the same as all the other contemporary Jag parts. Each engine and trim combination of all the above got their own separate spring and damper sets so those are different between SE/Comfort and Sport spec on an S-Type, so it's no suprise that the thing you'll feel different between an XF and XK is mostly just the spring and damper choices.

[NortonES2]

Also the supercharged 5.0 had the e-diff, both xfr and xkr.

[miniman]

deadslow said:

miniman said:

I bought an early X150 XK 4.2. It’s lovely, gets 30mpg on a run and goes like a bd when you want it to. It currently has an irritating fault with the adaptive headlights that seems to have no impact other than an annoying flashing warning light on the dash, everything else seems to work fine. Fixes seem to range from smacking the headlight (doesn’t help) through to replacing the headlight units at a cost of around £1500 a side.

Long story short - go in eyes open that fairly innocuous electrical faults can have potentially high costs to resolve.

Alternatively, if you want one with a headlight fault for less than £9k then give me a shout

dash fault light for headlights can sometimes be caused by a corroded earth in the wheel arch - worth a look - cheap fix

Yeah done that

[reddiesel]

jamieduff1981 said:

The X202 S-Type platform was superb though - in my opinion superior to the E39 BMW 5-series that most German fanboys gush over. The XF is dynamically very good because the S-Type was dynamically very good.

Next part - the X150's aluminium body is certainly newer and more modern than the S-Type/XF's steel body, however it's worth noting that pretty much all of the moving parts connecting the wheels to the subframes are identical between both. Jaguar used the same front and rear, upper and lower control arms, uprights, tie-rods etc on the X202 S-Type, the X350 XJ, the X250 XF and X150 XK/XKR so don't let anyone tell you the actual suspension is more modern on the XK because it's the exactly the same stuff, which is good if you're in the market for an XK actually since there's no luxury coupe tax on the suspension bushes since they're the same as all the other contemporary Jag parts. Each engine and trim combination of all the above got their own separate spring and damper sets so those are different between SE/Comfort and Sport spec on an S-Type, so it's no suprise that the thing you'll feel different between an XF and XK is mostly just the spring and damper choices.

I have always found both the X150 and X350 surprisingly sensitive to tyre choice and rim size Jamie which does affect the ride irrespective of shared componentry . I point that out as a point of discussion rather than argument . Its interesting you introduce the X350 XJ onto these pages , I was tempted to recommend an XJR to the OP but some of these prices being asked for the X350 version are a topic all on its own . Do they make the Steel version more of a bargain ?