You are here:
Forums
Sedans
Jaguar X-Type
Jaguar X-Type

2563 messages, Last post on Sep 24, 2009 at 2:58 PM
You are in the Jaguar X-Type Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
| I have been beating my head against a wall for a few weeks trying to decided between a BMW 325i with Sport, Premium and Nav or X-Type with VDP, Nav and Bluetooth. I have a dealer locked in to order the X-Type with all my options for $36,300...but the BMW is an awesome car too, but about 2K more expensive. What do you all think? | |
|
|
|
Replying to: toohuman (Dec 15, 2005 4:53 pm) 1. The Jag has AWD standard, the BMW doesn't. 2. The Jag is a bit larger inside, a bit classier, and has a much larger trunk. 3. The Jag has the BMW outgunned on HP, but, is heavier. The Jag felt more athletic to me. 4. The Jags of late have been doing better than BMW in consumer reliability ratings. 5. Handling wise, I couldn't really tell any difference between the 2 cars. 6. The Jag depreciates worse than the BMW will. When I got down to brass tacks in negotiating with the two dealers, the Jag ended up $6K cheaper than a comparably equipped 325i w/o AWD. This negated the depreciation factor for me. I would try negotiating for a bigger discount on the Jag - perhaps by contacting one of the larger dealers. I went to Jaguar - Lexington,Ky to get the deal I wanted. Just my 2cents worth: Oldengineer
|
|
|
Replying to: toohuman (Dec 15, 2005 4:53 pm) Quick answer is the BMW's a performance car, and the jag's more of a lux car, particularly as you have them configured, the bmw's way ahead with perf and handling. Have you driven them both back to back? |
|
|
I did drive both of them back to back. I have decided that I want/need a client/traveling car more than a performance car. I have a very nice Bullitt for performance, so I decided to go with the Jag. I feel the BMW, while probably a better car, is simply too ordinary. It seems like every attorney I know has one and I like a bit of variety in my life. The wife however, really likes the BMW so I will likely get her one next year and keep the Jag for myself. I do really appreciate your comments.
|
|
|
Replying to: oldengineer (Dec 15, 2005 8:45 pm) I've heard the rear seat of an X-Type is more comparable to a Lexus IS and the perfomance and handling more like a Lexus ES.
|
|
|
Replying to: jaxs1 (Dec 16, 2005 7:43 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: toohuman (Dec 16, 2005 4:02 pm) Regards: Oldengineer
|
|
|
Replying to: oldengineer (Dec 18, 2005 8:16 pm) Cheers, Stephen D.
|
|
|
Replying to: toohuman (Dec 19, 2005 7:05 am) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: jaxs1 (Dec 16, 2005 7:43 pm) 2005 Jaguar X-Type vs. 2005 BMW 3-series Front head room: 37.2 vs. 37.0 in. Front shoulder: 54.5 vs. 54.4 in. Rear head room: 37.5 vs. 37.4 in. Rear shoulder: 53.7 vs. 54.2 in. Front Leg Room: 42.4 vs. 41.4 in. Rear Leg Room: 34.4 vs. 34.6 in Luggage Capacity: 16 vs. 10.7 cu. ft. Generally, both cars are rather small, especially in the back seat, but Jaguar comes in a bit larger than BMW, especially in the luggage and front leg room category. I drove my friend's 3-series and it drove fine, accelerated smoothly and shifted well, but it didn't particularly stand out or differ from the Jag. Objectively speaking, the Jaguar is a bit more pleasant to drive and the driver's seating position is better at least for me. The biggest difference was in turns! Since the bimmer is a RWD, I had to be really careful with throttle on turns or I would have the rear end come around, whereas in the Jag I can floor it without worrying about doing a 360 in the middle of a busy intersection. At the end it comes down to personal preference because they are both nice cars. As for me, as soon as I can find a brand new Bimmer with AWD and a trunk big enough to fit a 32-inch flat screen TV (it fit in my X-Type's trunk), which would cost me no more than mid $20s, I will be sold. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans
Jaguar X-Type
Jaguar X-Type
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2008 Jaguar X-Type



Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats