I, too, have owned a V8 S-type and two XJ8s (X308). XJ8 is a far superior vehicle!

OBTW, rented and drove a Lincoln LS all over California one winter. Junk compared to the S-type.

But as noted above, subjective and opinionated, for what it's worth.

 

Never heard that before. Evidence?

IMO and Jaguar's its pedigree goes back to the S-type (and its ancestors). Maybe I can see the similarity and you can't?

You can get an XJ with a V6. A DIESEL! Very traditional XJ...

 

JagV8- you start to get used to Plums unsubstantiated opinions and nit picking non sense and filter it out after a while.


Evidence- *lmao*

 

After 4 months I figured on no reply....

 

I think the "parts bin" exercise he's referring to is that the "S"type directly shared many parts with the Lincoln LS as well as the Ford Thunderbird. The XJ was a stand alone machine for the most part.

 

Nope, the Jaguar engine team picked the best possible tensioners
for the V8 and they don't fail ever. There is no evidence of that
whatsoever.

The BMW M60 V8 produced from 1992 to 1995 was produced using
nikasil liners and caused them no end of warranty grief.

But that's ok, the Jaguar engine team decided to keep on using it
in 1997.

Guess the evidence was insufficient.

LMFAO

 

Just my opinion but I feel that the X308, along with the X100 are the last of the "old" Jaguars, and the S-Type was the first of the "new" ones.

I mean that the S-Type was the first Jag of the DEW98 platform, and that basically continued right up until now. The X350 XJ, X150 XK, X250 XF, X351 XJ and X152 F-Type all have more or less the same chassis which is a development of what was first seen in the S-Type.

It's days are numbered now with the XE, new XF and the F-Pace being a new platform.

But if it had not been for the S-Type, the other models since may not have been as good as they are...

 

We had a s-type in the family. IMO Ford made a mistake using the platform for the LS .... they spent gobs of money making it a Jaguar level platform and then destroyed the aura around it by making people think it was a Ford skinned as a Jaguar. Jaguar needed to scale up production numbers to support the dealers.

It only sold well for about 18 months ... The use of the detuned Jaguar V8 hurt the whole Jaguar brand. Tata still used the platform until just recently .. it was a well designed setup.

 

S-Type looks to have sold over 30,000 per year for 5 years which is a lot for Jaguar. A lot more than XJ or XK. The XF is a tweaked S-Type and has managed the same, though never with the same peak sales so far as I can see.

But... buy what you like. Very much personal taste.

 

It's (as many have said...) a matter of taste and driving preferences. We have this argument (discussion?) over in Lotus land often...comparing the Elan to the Europa to the Esprit to the Elise ad nauseam. Going back to the car's basic purpose or mission profile...and if it matches your preferences/mission style/travel...then it's the right platform for you.

I have (now) 3 versions of the marque (should have my head examined...). I knew the XF was the follow-on to the S-Type, and, from my experience, even in 2L trim, is an sprightly, well-behaved, and comfortable short- to medium-distance highway cruiser (any more than 300 miles in a stretch, and the driver seat shape doesn't fit this 60-something butt as well as I like it...but that's its' only fault). Has all the gadgets without looking like an aircraft instrument panel, everything works, and it just does what it does with class.

Long distance cruise being 'wafted' from point a to point b in quiet, smooth comfort...I'll take the XJ8. Nothing like 8 cylinders under the bonnet, 24 mpg in highway mode. No, no GPS/satnav, had to fiddle to get a bluetooth and stereo input adapter fettled in to give some modern conveniences...but, I knew that going in. That you pull up to a light next to a slammed kid's car...and he's the one taking photos of YOUR car says something. It has presence; when I take the Mrs out for dinner at a posh restaurant...guess which car is parked in front when you come out, with the mercs and beemers? I can tell you it's not the Jetta or Chevy Equinox. So...indulge yourself. After all, it's YOUR ride, and no excuses for what you pick, nor criticism of your taste.

as the old saw said: 'de gustibus non disputandum' (of taste, there is no dispute)

Most of all: ENJOY what you choose. Life's too short...eat desert first.

 

I like a V8 too, which is why I have an STR. Goes well.

 

Cambo thanks for a decent well balanced post rather than some opinionated drivel.


In my own experience of driving the X202 hard, when the Teves traction control hadn't been finalised yet, I found the car handling and grip very good and the ride supreme also.


Admittedly the X308 rode better, but the S type seemed a sharper handler.


Nothing that cant be addressed I'm sure, with different springs and shocks etc.


I also found the X202 quite a bit more refined than the previous X200. It's a tribute to that platform that it soldiered on in only tweaked and optimised form in the X250.


Plums, still whining about tensioners and nicasil almost 10 years after the issues have been solved and not relevant to the post. That's ok, he MAY get over it in another 10 years...

 

Your brown nosing the Mod, slamming everyone's posts as "opinionated drivel" and getting personal with Plums arent relevant to the post either.

 

I'm not quite sure what he was getting at since the 4.0 and subsequent 4.2 engines were not unique to the S-type anyway.

 

I didn't slam everyones post . Opinions, are fine, everyone has one. Its when they're passed off as undisputable facts

 

There was nothing wrong with the S-type .... The relevant question at the time of introduction was about buyers view of the car vs the "E" class MB or the "5" series MB.

Jaguar wanted a midline model to eventually sell in the 50k per year range ... it started out OK with the numbers figured for introduction ... but never grew. People viewed it as a rebadged Lincoln -- when it was not. FORD spent the money to make Jaguar. Using the platform to sell a few more cars was a mistake.

With all the money FORD spent trying to make Jaguar great again .. they made a few stupid mistakes. Making the LS was one ... not extending the warranty on the x300 was another. They also had delays on the x350 that hurt the model range as the x308 was outclassed by 2003.

 

Agreed.
Despite all the undisputable good Ford did for Jaguar, its obvious, even to this day, that they don't understand the concept of 'brand'.
You see this with them diluting and then killing off Mercury, and then THINKING that the introduction of the Marauder and changing the Mercury logo was enough to reinvigorate the brand. Its debatable whether they understand the concept of brand today- with rebadged Fords as Lincolns on Volvo S80 platforms.


GM kind of gets brand, they're done a tremendous job with the Cadillac brand and their antics on the nurburgring. On the other hand, whats happening with the Buick brand? (solid, dependable cars that they are- they seem to be relying on China sales for profitability). The killed off Pontiac, arguably one of the strongest GM brands and they pretty much badge engineered and diluted Saab before killing them (with Saabarus etc) in a way Ford wouldn't). So it's a mixed bag.


When you have unthinking morons who spout non sense like this


- that's EXACTLY the type of buyer Ford/Jaguar should have thought of, as it represents the majority- not really thinking, snobbish, using their reptilian brain (lets face it- brand is about pre conceptions and just reacting using out lizard brains-its not rational- the best you can do is just be aware of it)


In the same way, the X type wasn't really a bad car, but in the face of similar comments to the above, the product and brand got diluted by perception.