X-Type Petrols. Real world MPG.
Discussion
Hi Guys and Girls. I've just popped over from my usual hidey hole in the Lotus Elise section. An X-type petrol is on my list of possibles as a now needed second car. I used to own and X-type dieseol so need no converting to them. Just wondering about real world mpg on the petrols (2.5 and 3.0 in particular). Many thanks.
FWDRacer said:
25-26 - there seems very little rear world difference between the 2.5 & 3.0L. Drive it like the pope on a long run and you might make 28mpg.
Surely does better than that on the motorway?! - My 93 2.5 v6 auto Omega CD does high 30s on 80 mph cruise, but poor 26 overall around the housesLooking to get 2.5 0r 3 litre X type - is 3 litre auto noticably quicker to accelerate or sound any more throaty? (I understand it has same fuel con)
Lone Granger said:
FWDRacer said:
25-26 - there seems very little rear world difference between the 2.5 & 3.0L. Drive it like the pope on a long run and you might make 28mpg.
Surely does better than that on the motorway?! - My 93 2.5 v6 auto Omega CD does high 30s on 80 mph cruise, but poor 26 overall around the housesLooking to get 2.5 0r 3 litre X type - is 3 litre auto noticably quicker to accelerate or sound any more throaty? (I understand it has same fuel con)
If you are that concerned by mpg I would steer clear of the x-type. I have never worked mpg out in my life, but would guessestimate that the figures between 25 - 28 are about right for the 2.5. I have heard it said (and it would make sense) that the AWD will be a big factor in the mpg.
I drove the 3 litre and it does have more go than the 2.5. I didnt notice any sound difference, and cant see any reason why there would be. You may get a few more mpgs out of the 2.5, but if you want the extra performance then the 3 litre is the one to buy so at least you know you couldnt have that one just a little quicker. It didnt bother me as it was a daily barge for cruising in comfort.
If you are concerned by mpg perhaps pay out a little more and buy the 2.2 diesel. Amazing fuel economy and full of torque. Having passengered in a friends 2.2 derv, I was thoroughly impressed and, as much as diesel is a swear word in my world, I would stringly consider one if buying another x-type.
Shnozz said:
Lone Granger said:
FWDRacer said:
25-26 - there seems very little rear world difference between the 2.5 & 3.0L. Drive it like the pope on a long run and you might make 28mpg.
Surely does better than that on the motorway?! - My 93 2.5 v6 auto Omega CD does high 30s on 80 mph cruise, but poor 26 overall around the housesLooking to get 2.5 0r 3 litre X type - is 3 litre auto noticably quicker to accelerate or sound any more throaty? (I understand it has same fuel con)
If you are that concerned by mpg I would steer clear of the x-type. I have never worked mpg out in my life, but would guessestimate that the figures between 25 - 28 are about right for the 2.5. I have heard it said (and it would make sense) that the AWD will be a big factor in the mpg.
I drove the 3 litre and it does have more go than the 2.5. I didnt notice any sound difference, and cant see any reason why there would be. You may get a few more mpgs out of the 2.5, but if you want the extra performance then the 3 litre is the one to buy so at least you know you couldnt have that one just a little quicker. It didnt bother me as it was a daily barge for cruising in comfort.
If you are concerned by mpg perhaps pay out a little more and buy the 2.2 diesel. Amazing fuel economy and full of torque. Having passengered in a friends 2.2 derv, I was thoroughly impressed and, as much as diesel is a swear word in my world, I would stringly consider one if buying another x-type.
I really would like an economical car (cos i am a tad broke) however i am a sucker for a bargain, and a 6 yr old 3 litre 4wd leather and wood jag + lovely styling for £2400 rather appeals!! - I am hoping Auction prices around Christmas will provide this
If I average over 26 local and 30 on a careful motorway cruise (with cruise set) then i will have to accept that you cannot have everything - I know returning to a nicely polished silver X Type in the rain is more likely to provide a smile than looking at my old 93 Omega!
I dont mean to sound a killjoy, but if money is that tight, I would look elsewhere. The x-type is a great car but not very economical, particularly if you do give it some. I did 100 miles in mine between my house>northampton>mk and back this week on a mix of the A45/A508/A5/A509 so a good all round mix of dual carriageways and country lanes. Thats used about 30 litres worth. As I say, never worked out mpg and really wouldnt want to, but I do know it doesnt take long before I am back at the pumps!
You dont want to have to cruise around in neutral or worry about giving it some beans every time a nice straight opens up. Plenty of smaller engined non 4WD cars that will return better mpg and equal performance. Dont get me wrong, I loved my Jag (it gets collected saturday by its new owner) but I wouldnt want to try and run it on a tight budget (I may be risk adverse but I dont run anything on a budget).
You dont want to have to cruise around in neutral or worry about giving it some beans every time a nice straight opens up. Plenty of smaller engined non 4WD cars that will return better mpg and equal performance. Dont get me wrong, I loved my Jag (it gets collected saturday by its new owner) but I wouldnt want to try and run it on a tight budget (I may be risk adverse but I dont run anything on a budget).
Shnozz said:
I dont mean to sound a killjoy, but if money is that tight, I would look elsewhere. The x-type is a great car but not very economical, particularly if you do give it some. I did 100 miles in mine between my house>northampton>mk and back this week on a mix of the A45/A508/A5/A509 so a good all round mix of dual carriageways and country lanes. Thats used about 30 litres worth. As I say, never worked out mpg and really wouldnt want to, but I do know it doesnt take long before I am back at the pumps!
You dont want to have to cruise around in neutral or worry about giving it some beans every time a nice straight opens up. Plenty of smaller engined non 4WD cars that will return better mpg and equal performance. Dont get me wrong, I loved my Jag (it gets collected saturday by its new owner) but I wouldnt want to try and run it on a tight budget (I may be risk adverse but I dont run anything on a budget).
Unfortunately just missed yours and another chaps at £1500 - at that price, to hell with the mpg!You dont want to have to cruise around in neutral or worry about giving it some beans every time a nice straight opens up. Plenty of smaller engined non 4WD cars that will return better mpg and equal performance. Dont get me wrong, I loved my Jag (it gets collected saturday by its new owner) but I wouldnt want to try and run it on a tight budget (I may be risk adverse but I dont run anything on a budget).
Ideally a 3 litre manual with LPG conversion already done or diesel are other options - i guess both would carry a premium though..
Any other nice AWD X Types out there at c £1500 cash?
Thinking about getting a AWD for the winter, was looking at A4 but I am drawn to this for same reason as OP, £2000 - 2,500 for a 3.0L AWD X-Type, which looks great and is a bit different. Much miss understood car IMO.
Sounds like the 2.5L and 3.0L don't really have much difference in the MPG, even the official figures only differ by a mile or so.
Shame they never did a Diesel AWD.
Sounds like the 2.5L and 3.0L don't really have much difference in the MPG, even the official figures only differ by a mile or so.
Shame they never did a Diesel AWD.
I've just traded in my 3.0l X Type Sport Manual on an X350 XJ4.2. Whoever gets my X Type will get a real bargain. 68000 miles and I spent shed loads on it in the last few months. New transfer box, prop shaft, wheel bearings, lambda sensors and four P Zero Asimmetricos two weeks ago! It's at Swallows Jaguar Rooksbridge. If you want one, get over there quick!
Around town 25mpg, but on my daily motorway commute 30-31mpg 2.5 sport. Good winter car BUT need winter tyres on, if on standard 225 /17 or 18, in snow great traction, however rear wheels will push car straight on at junctions right/left hand junctions even at slow speed. I have 06 AWD no viscous, earlier models had viscous until Jag removed it about 2005? and I had an 03 AWD Sport, were better in snow.
3.0se Manual 02 plate, viscous coupling.
Town: 20-22mpg, runs better on Shell than anything else.
Out of town progress: High 20s.
Cruising: Mid 30s.
Driving Miss Daisy: Will do 40mpg over a tankful (Bristol - Cornwall and back)
Standard 16" wheels - not used it in snow yet (last big snow I was in a Connect with chunky tyres and didn't get stuck unlike many 4x4 drivers - it's about technique as much as traction
)
MAM's old one has had the big jobs done. Good car to be had there
Town: 20-22mpg, runs better on Shell than anything else.
Out of town progress: High 20s.
Cruising: Mid 30s.
Driving Miss Daisy: Will do 40mpg over a tankful (Bristol - Cornwall and back)
Standard 16" wheels - not used it in snow yet (last big snow I was in a Connect with chunky tyres and didn't get stuck unlike many 4x4 drivers - it's about technique as much as traction
)MAM's old one has had the big jobs done. Good car to be had there
Edited by Six Fiend on Monday 29th October 17:31
I keep flitting back to Jag X Types in my search for cars. What I really want is an XJ, but the more compact size and the fact that they're generally younger appeals. What has really put me off though is what I've heard about the AWD transfer boxes. Are these really as much of a problem as people say?
Gassing Station | Jaguar | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff