Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Jaguar XF 2009 Jaguar XF
427 messages, Last post on Nov 12, 2009 at 2:43 PM
You are in the Jaguar XF Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: mentir (Apr 10, 2008 7:05 am) While running errands at lunch tody, saw a shiny, black XKR coupe. Goodness, me oh my, I thought that I might propose marriage to it... Also, I saw my first XF on the road, it crossed the road I was on while waiting upon a red light. It was black, or very dark blue, and somewhat surprisingly to me, didn't really catch my eye. Maybe it was the dark color?
|
|
|
Replying to: laurasdada (Apr 10, 2008 12:28 pm) I guess I can only speak to my own personal experience as my car (XJR) has been exceedingly reliable to own. And for the record, I too will be letting some time pass before considering buying an XF for the new model bugs to be worked out; not because it's a Jag, but because it's a new model. Oops, I see we're getting sidetracked by talking about the car rather than CLS lease rates.
|
|
|
Replying to: nyeagle (Apr 10, 2008 8:59 am) There isn't 1 car in MB entire line-up that's recommend by CR. That's pretty embarassing in 2008. MB's prestige and reliabilty have done a complete 180 over the last decade. They aren't what they were in the 80's and 90's. Audi's A3, A4, and A6 are all recommended, and BMW has several cars that are recommended as well. Jag has done welll in JD power over the last couple years in initial quality. The XK was a brand new car last year, and overall it did quite pretty good for reliability. If I had to buy an E class or an new XF, I'd take my chances with the Jag all day long. When it comes to lease payments, $150 /mo sounds like a lot. But why spend 800 on a car you don't really want. I'd pay 950 all day long vs 800 if something really made me smile and I wanted it. I was in an 80k MB CLS recently, and it was one of the more uncomfortable cars I've been in. Chopped windows w/ poor visibility, poor use of space, and way too cheap looking materials for a MB product. Just remember, it's cheap to lease for a reason.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: mentir (Apr 10, 2008 12:53 pm) I actually broke my first model year rule with my last car and it didn't bite me at all. A few known first model year issues (electric, of course...) covered under warranty. But out of warranty, no issues. I did sell it after 5.5 years and 67k miles of ownership because, after all, it was a CHRYSLER! 300M, really enjoyed it. Marginal buile quality, but reliable...
|
|
|
Replying to: laurasdada (Apr 11, 2008 9:27 am) I think Jag was almost too agressive on Supercharged pricing. There isn't any car in the market for just over 62k w/ 420 hp and all the futures the XF has for the money.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: rjlaero (Apr 12, 2008 11:23 am) Jag has to sell cars, they can't screw up the pricing. IMO, of course. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: rjlaero (Apr 12, 2008 11:23 am) The XF rode much better then the 5 series and I drove them over the same type of roads so I could compare them on equal ground. The XF I drove only had the 18 inch wheels so I am sure a 19 Inch wheeled car would be about equal to the handling of the 5 series and a SC XF with the dynamic suspension would surpass a five series. I could adjust the driver's seat to a position where I would be comfortable driving and still sit in the rear seats comfortably. I like the little divot they cut out of the roof/headliner to give an inch or two of extra headroom. I am five foot 11 with shortish legs and a longer torso so someone a littler taller then me but more evenly proportioned would fit even better. The driver's seat didn't look very comfortable but it was very comfortable. Just the right amount of firmness but I would have liked some additional side bolstering. I assume the SC XF would have that. After driving the XF I priced out a 550i with the same features and came out to a MSRP of $71,195. Even a SC XF doesn't break 66,000. The XF I drove only had a MSRP of around 55,950. That is a freaking steal.
|
|
|
Replying to: british_rover (Apr 12, 2008 12:02 pm) 1. Handling. Not even close to 5 series with the sport package. Feels bigger, haevier and does not communicate well through the steering 2. Ride. Very good. Similar to 550 Sport, maybe more comfortable. 3. Seats. Very good but do not have as many adjustment as sport/comfort seats in 2007+ 5-series. 4. Engine/transmission. Surprisingly slower than BMW550 or E550. Kind of not willing. Maybe I am not used to SC engines but it was like power comes and goes unless you constantly push it. 5. Price. Good if you buy, but buying the first production year British car is very risky. Leases are somewhat high. $200+ per month compared to a well equipped BMW 550 ($70K). Need to point here that with all the options SC XF has BMW 550 will come close to $75-76K and the lease payment will be higher accordingly. Verdict - a great car for Jaguar enthusiasts. Needs better powertrain and a couple of years to get rid of bugs. |
|
| You don't even know IF there will be bugs. Maybe they took care of all that before they put it on the market. Who is to say that you didn't have BUGS in your 2007 BMW. | |
|
Replying to: SergeyM (Apr 16, 2008 10:15 am) 1. Handling - I agree with SergeyM, it wasn't close. There is something about BMW's feeling of connectivity to the road that has not been duplicated by the British (or the Japanese). I had the sense of being connected to the road and looking forward to the next corner. The Jaguar's handling characteristics were similar to my current car the Infiniti M45 Sport. I enjoyed driving it and it felt safe and secure on the road, but my enjoyment level was not as great as when driving the 535i (with Sport and Sport Auto). This was probably the most telling factor for me that led me to the 535. I loved driving it. 2. Ride - Very similar. A push. 3. Seats - not as good as the BMW's comfort seats. The BMW's seats have the ability to articulate the upper portion of the seat to conform to your upper body. It truly makes a big difference. 4. Engine - I would call this a push. However, I really like the power from the turbo charged 3.5. It is a great engine. No lag, plenty of power. In fact, it is only .2 seconds slower than the 550 from 0-60. 5. Interior - this is tough - I liked the fit and finish of the Jaguar, but there were a number of items that seemed gimmicky, namely the vent covers and the gear "knob". When you start the car, the vent covers roll open, like the car is waking up. Some folks may experience a wow factor at the test drive, but I can't see this as being anything important in the long term (and another item to break down). The knob gear shifter was interesting, but seemed out of place in the sport car. 6. Exterior - the XF wins hands down. It really is a work of art. Ian Callum, the designer, used his experiences with with Aston Martin and the XK to make a beautiful car. 5. Price - I am really disappointed with the lease packages from Jaguar. There are many of us who play the "lease game" on these types of cars (sport sedans) and with 535i with a MSRP of 57,000 would have a 200-300 lower monthly payment that the Jag with a lower MSRP. So, I decided on the 535 given the better handling characteristics and the lease-friendly numbers. Hopefully when my lease runs out in 3 years there will be a more improved XF, or I will splurge on the XK convertible. By that time, hopefully, the residuals on the XF or XK will be reasonable. |
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Jaguar XF
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
