My 2011 5.0 SC lease is up in few months. The great lease deal I got on my car will not be replicated apparently, as Jaguar does not support the V8s with incentives compared to before they came out with the V6s.
So, I took a short test drive in a new XF AWD. I was expecting it to be a dog, but was pleasently surprised. The AWD is transparent, except the rear does not break lose at the smallest nudge like my monster. Power and torque is quite similar to my previous 2010 XF 5.0 NA, the ride is nice, engine sound is good in dynamic. So for normal driving, it's good enough. It did not feel underpowered to me.
Since it was raining, and the roads were wet, I did not try her in fast transitions, and sharp turns.
I remember hating how my old Infiniti G35X would understeer in the corners, even though they claim it is rear wheel drive biased.
How is the XF AWD in the corners - does it feel natural for a rear wheel drive?

 

I would say you don't notice it until it kicks in as it is RWD biased, but I think it's a pretty good AWD system, especially in the twists, it feels very planted--and it goes pretty well in the snow, especially considering the tires that it comes with(mine are Continental Extreme Contact DWS). But if you prefer RWD why not just go for the 3.0 without AWD?

 

I would be curious to see what percentage of 3.0 sales are AWD. I would be willing to wager that in the coming years, especially in norther climates, the percentage is quite high.

 

Here in the NYC/Long Island area, 90% of the 3.0 are AWD. Even all the Jag loaners at my dealer are AWD. Also the residuals % are higher here for the AWD, and so the leases are probably better than the RWD.

 

Not only do you not feel the awd it isn't actually working at all until you need it.

The "intuitive" part is software accepting inputs from all four wheel speed sensors.

There is no conventional transfer case, just a multi disc clutchpack electronically controlled and hydraulically actuated.

Until there is a hint of wheelspin the clutchpack does not operate except it pre-loads to a 90/10 R/F on take off but if no incipient wheelspin is detected it opens the clutchpack to 100/0 R/F.

In winter mode the pre-load on take off is 70/30 R/F.

Switching DSC completely off (eleven seconds on the button) and you have a rear wheel drive car that can bail you out if you overcook it. Four wheel drifting on wet or slippery roads is definitely possible.

As for performance it is no drag strip car but once rolling that supercharger really pushes. In gear acceleration is startlingly quick.

The off the line issues are purely a result of the engine having only 3.0 litres. It takes a split second for boost to build and the supercharger needs engine rpm to boost significantly. This feels a bit like "turbo lag" but it isn't lag at all, its just a supercharger rpm issue.

These modern superchargers are undergeared to overspeed them and then excess boost is bypassed much as a turbo now does.

The end result with the 8 spd and especially in dynamic mode is a very satisfactory car, just a bit slower than the NA 5.0 but less thirsty and with awd. I love mine.

 

Thanks Jagular.
I am OK with 'downgrading' a little to the AWD, even though comparatively optioned it's MSRP is only $4-5K less than the SC. I'm sure I will miss my S/C on occasions, but I'm happy I have had the opportunity to enjoy her.
The XF platform is really exceptional. Regarding fuel consumption, what do you guys see?, as some of the magazine testers complained about the AWD fuel consumption. I guess for the car's weight, you have to lay into her that much more with the smaller motor.
Best I got on my SC is 25mpg. Best I got on my previous 5.0NA was 28mpg.
My total average over 30,000+ miles is 15.5mpg, (was 16.5mpg on the NA) , I guess reflecting my enjoyment level............

 

Yeah it's not a lightning bolt off the line, but I wouldn't call it slow by any means, and as it was said at speed it picks up very quickly. I love the way the engine and exhaust sound, so I usually end up getting around 21mpg, but that's with mixed driving, more with rural areas. I never have the start/stop on as I don't think it's that smooth.

 

Yidal8, I'm averaging 21.1 mpg with about 75% city driving. That's about as advertised, but I'll admit, I was hoping for a bit better. That said, coming from an X300 XJR that I maintained in top condition and drove for 13 years, I find this AWD XF's performance, ride and handling to be very, very impressive. It has all the acceleration and road holding that I will ever need or use, plus the ride imparts confidence yet it's incredibly smooth. Still, I would have bought a RWD V8 XF if I lived south, but for the climate I live in, you can't beat this AWD, IMO. I have a steep drive and this car has plowed up it in 6" of wet snow w/ all-season tires, in situations where my old XJR wouldn't have made it more than a car length. There are still a lot of good deals on 2013 AWD XFs out there. I don't think you'd be disappointed.

 

Yup, just about right now, the XF AWD would be very welcomed here in the NYC area. My driveway is also steep, we are in a rural section with narrow roads, hilly, etc. I seem to be driving the old 99 Pathfinder standby much more this winter....

 

I wouldn't go for any engine besides a v8 in a jag. Makes the car a lot more special.

 

Not even an F Type?

You should drive one of those before you decide against the V6 completely.

The V6 SC is more powerful than the 4.2 V8....

The first Jaguar V8 engine was built by Daimler UK and was a weedy 2.5. Otherwise, the first V8 was 1991 or so in 4.0 litre size.

6 cylinder engines are traditional Jaguar engines, it is the V8 that is new, relatively speaking.

 

Inline-6 engines are traditional Jaguar engines, not V6s! Yuk!

It would be cool if Jaguar made an I-6 or V12 in their current cars, but it would make no sense!

 

Inline 6 is very inefficient by modern standards. Only BMW makes one for reasons not technical.

My point was only that the V8 is not a traditional Jaguar engine.

Jaguar will make supercharged V8 for a good while yet. Naturally aspirated V8 have been superceded by the SC V6 which is a better engine.

 

I drove a new XF as a loaner. It was "stripped" down and a rear driver. My car is a 12 XF Portfolio and when I compared the two my 2012 wins hands down (not a race, just in the way the drive train responds). Yes, my car has a 6 speed trans and the 13 has a 8 speed that feels like it always wants to be in 8th gear. The only way to keep it responsive was to keep the car in Sport and in between 3rd and 5th gear (I think of it as just below "boil").

But in truth, the loaner was not equipped the way I would have if I was buying it, but that should have nothing to do with the drive train. The car had 5,500 miles on the clock, so it was broken in. Just a thought, when you get a loaner like this one, would you add regular or premium gas to it? I suspect that most would add regular, which may reduce the performance of the car (but that damn transmission always hunting for higher ground bothered me). So I had a rear driver, that is lighter than the AWD and even so it felt underpowered (personally, I think the 380 hp engine might make more sense in this car). I also missed the "bark" when it starts and when you accelerate.

In short, the AWD does not bother me and I wish that the SC offered it. I have driven several "performance" Audi's with AWD and found them engaging, yes they weigh a ton in front, but they feel light on their feet when pushed, so AWD is on my must have list. Now it seems that AWD is important; Bentley, AMG, Lambo, Bugatti, GTR all seem to think so.

 

I had a bad experience with the 3.0 S/C (not AWD). I got one as a loaner while receiving warranty service on the 5.0 S/C. First, I hated the start stop system. It's very annoying because it is really not "fast" enough on the restarts and when you turn it off it comes on again after you park the car and start the engine again latter. At the very minimum, start stop systems need to have a user overwrite that is permanent and persistent -- I don't want to have to push a button to turn it off EVERY TIME I step into the car.

Secondly, I believe I have a flawed car... which started to "diesel" at a stoplight. This got louder and soon it's clattering under way. I called the dealership saying that some is wrong and I am going to try to drive the car back since it is still drivable at that time. After about 4~5 miles the engine was barely chugging along and clattering like it's running on one cylinder. Then the engine shut down and could not be re-started. They had to tow it back. I drove a total of maybe 20 miles in that car all of it on 35 MPH local streets from the dealership to work, then to lunch, then BOOM. It was latter confirmed that the engine spun a rod bearing and eventually seized up and cracked (the coolant and oil are mixed).

 

Are you sure the loaner you drove was a 3.0 S/C? Your description sounds more like the way I've heard others describe the 2.0 Turbo. The 3.0 S/C xf is rated 0-60 mph in 5.7 seconds, same as the 5.0 normally-aspirated, as I recall. I've driven both, and while I agree that the 3.0 S/C doesn't have the "bark" of the V8, I didn't notice any diff in performance.