looking at two cars, a 2007 and a 2015. about same mileage. The 2015 looks better cared for. Pros and cons. I currently have a 2001 xk8 and really like it.
thanks

 

A lot happens in 8 years. And I did toy moving in that direction but mine just feels like your favorite pair of jeans.
Now I’ve looked after her since she was 2 years old and had only 30k kms with extended factory warranty. The previous owner was a nut like us. I know everything about her. And everywhere I go, even surrounded by more modern and exotic cars, (including the xkr-s) guess which car draws the crowd that stays longer!!

If I were entering into ownership today (don’t tell her) I “might” lean in a different direction:
Newer.
Who doesn’t want 5 l?
Newer.
More modern interior and exterior
Newer.
All of that updated electronic crap.
Newer.

Or not. Maybe just get another ‘07 knowing:
Classic, proper Jaguar look. Without all the bolt on plastic ***** that comes with any “sports car” driven by kids.
Dependable!
Sure, parts are getting old, so more maintenance.
Replacement parts will be harder…. didn’t anyone tell you: you’re not supposed to get into accidents.
The older lights style looks “right”. The newer looks “cheap and common”. (I’m going to hear about that one, lol!)
The antennae is cool.
Sure, 4.2 l. But to be honest, There is nothing wrong with that. Besides, most people I know can’t properly handle the 400 ponies anyways. And when I watch some with their 500 ponies.. well lets just say many don’t have the professional training nor experience that I have.

Decisions, decisions.

PS…. did you compare the number of production 575’s or 911’s to the x150?

 

XK or XKR? Have an 07 XKR. Love the car but the external antenna is ugly. Recommend 08-09 w the internal antenna if you have the option. Relatively easy to find a nice 4.2 XK and they’re less expensive. Much harder, at least up here, to find either a 4.2 or 5.0 XKR if that’s what you’re looking for.

 

If you can afford it, newer. No question.
Regardless of mileage, or care, EVERYTHING in the 07 is eight years older. The leather in the interior. The glue holding the rear window onto the convertible top (if it's a convertible). The plastic sheathing around all those wires. The bushings. The window switches, buttons, etc. And those horrid plastic coolant pipes. All of it is eight years older. And if you scroll through the posts here, most owners are dealing with the inevitable breakdown of these parts-- no fault of the car, it's just age. And with price and availability of these parts becoming an issue, I'd get the newest XK you can.

 

Since you really like your 2001 XK8, why not just keep driving it? You already know it's flaws, and it's far less complex and much cheaper to fix than the X150 (2007 - 2015).

 

Probably the same reason I went from an XK8 to an X150 XKR. I wanted to get an XKR.

 

I have owned three XKs all verts. A 2008 xk and a 2012 xk; and now a 2013xkr. despite the waterpump and plastic tube issues, if I were to do it all over again. I would go for the 5L XKR every time. Why? the suspension is more taut as is the response and basically more fun to drive, especially on back roads in the mountains.

 

Too many items on our cars that are vulnerable to age regardless of miles. Newer for sure!

 

LOL, lightweights ;-). Tell that to my Riley that on a winding road, keeps up with other 4 cylinders with 2.5X the HP and 60 years.

 

No one ever mentions the timing chain and tensioner issues with the 5.0L. I sold my 13 XKR because I never saw a definitive answer on whether JLR had solved the problem or not. It was a 2013 Special Edition. I loved it, but was afraid to take the chance. Did I mess up? Was, is, the tensioner issue a problem on the 2010 and newer? GDI issues? Just saw a 5.0L XKR mentioned on the forum today with 220k miles. First I've seen of a 5.0L with these miles.

 

I just made the decision to replace my current XKR (4.2, built 2007, slate gray with black / aluminum interior) with another one, same year, but lower mileage. Why?
My son will get the current one, which is still in perfect shape and well maintained. For ecample, all fluids were changed about a year ago only.

I will now get exactly the kind of car I wanted again: green, classic wooden veneers, fully loaded, low mileage, one prior owner only.
Disadvantages compared to the 2008 (still 4.2) models: the (I think ugly old-fashioned (not to say outdated) antenna, and the need to equip it with the AUX audio pack (standard only as of 2008).

Yes, I also considered a newer XKR 5.0. But (for me) 416 hp and the torque of the 4.2 are sufficient, whereas 510 hp or more can be a challenge under suboptimal road conditions. And I have to admit that I don’t like the little rotor pad that replaced the traditional J gate still built in the 4.2s.

Many mechanics familiar with the XK/XKR range say the X150 was one of the few cars that the manufacturer got right from the very start.
That is in line with my experience, after 3 XKR X150s and 300,000km with these cars.

At the end of the day, 4.2 versus 5.0 should be a matter of taste. If your financial resources are a decisive factor in the equation, however, I’d recommend to stay away from either of these cars. Unpleasant surprises may be unlikely but are always possible - and can be associated with horrendous costs.

Question: does this help a bit?

ah, I forgot to mention: all of them convertibles, thus far without issues.

 

Hans, glad to hear your your XKR ownership has been such a success. Agree the antenna is ugly. Just keep looking forward when driving. My mechanic (who def knows his XK's) says the 07-09 XK/R's are reasonably close to bulletproof. He rarely sees them and repairs are usually minor. Haven't driven a 5.0 yet but plan to. So far, no luck in finding a good post '12 XKR either coupe of vert. Based on conversations in here, am sure it will be fun. There are many arguments for owning a 'vert. With an XKR, get to fully hear the exhaust when driving the car the way it's meant to be driven.

 

NOT buying a type of car because it MAY eventually break something is a crazy way to live.
My old FiL would never buy a used car with A/C because it MAY break even though it was already installed. He went for decades being way too uncomfortable until his daughter (my wife) bought a temporary car for him and his wife for an extended visit. The next car he bought had A/C and he used it all the time.
I'll not buy an old hooptie 4.2 XK. The newer, the more goodies, the better. I'll make sure to change the oil. Problem averted.

 

@stevepaa inquiring minds want to know. What’d you decide?

 

nothing yet, am buying a replacement Volvo for my wife next week, then on vacation for a while, maybe in July

 

I had a 5.0 XJR, after owning a 4.2 XJR. After 6 months I sold it and bought a 2007 XKR. The 5.0s are less reliable IMO, Fuel HP pumps make a noise, waiting for the timing chain to jump not as quiet as the 4.2s. Just google JLR 5.0 Timing chains, 2014 the guides were revised so less of a problem.

Love my 4.2, the engines are bulletproof the only issue would be the valley hoses, got mine done as preventative.

 

For reliability, 100% this. I've had multiple 4.2 N/A and supercharged and never had any issues worth mentioning even to 100K miles. I've had multiple 3.0 and 5.0 litre JLRs and they've all needed constant parts replacements -water pumps, alternators, pipes, hoses and more, etc, etc...

I get that newer means, well newer, especially for trim items which all fail at some point, however they're all quite old now, even 2015s and trims still likely to fail at this point regardless how much newer.

 

Agree. I plan to do valley hoses for same reason. Anything else while it’s apart? Am going to test drive a 5.0 XKR to compare (if I can find one!)

 

The question which only you can answer is are you going to keep it for a long time? Are you mechanically minded?

The SC 4.2 has been sorted and fine tune from the factory and very robust. The SC 5.0 is newer which generally means some gremlins that needed sorting out especially the earlier batches. Yes the facelift looks more modern and updated interior etc.

Personally what put me off from the SC 5.0 was the trick E-diff (expensive if they go), early timing chain issues, stuck fuel injectors and the big one was direct fuel injection GDI. The SC5.0 stock suspension seems alot harder / jarring than the SC4.2 on the roads that I drive. The tune on the SC4.2 is plenty of power (sometime too much) for my driving style.

 

Post #13 is SO relevant again.