THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
Jaguar's Genteel Tourer Goes Rough-and-Ready
By DAN NEIL



JAGUAR'S HIGH SPEED test track near Gaydon, Warwickshire, is doing what it does best, which is fly by in a decadent blur at speeds in excess of 150 miles per hour. It's a crisp, cool 11 degrees Celsius outside, with a not-inconsiderable crosswind making itself felt on the third straight. The galloping clouds are by John Constable.

Somewhat mysteriously, the company wanted me to test the new XKR-S, the final performance iteration of the XK coupe and convertible, with a 550-horsepower version of the supercharged direct-injection 5.0-liter V8 under the hood—up from the XKR's 510 hp—and an alarming oversufficiency of torque: 502 pound-feet between 2,500 and 5,500 rpm. Not surprisingly, this car goes upstairs in a big hurry, shoving the driver into the seat with not-entirely-friendly whacks at upshift. Roll out of the throttle in the mid-rpms and the engine gargles fire, a thick, guttering overrun boiling out of the active-bypass exhaust system.

I had every confidence that the XKR-S was a well-made piece of machinery, but I wasn't particularly interested in driving it. Luxury and performance car makers typically build increasingly extreme and ridiculous versions of cars that are coming to the end of their design cycle, just to keep the press going. The current-generation XK, a grand touring coupe that debuted in 2006, is, by contemporary standards large, soft and not exceedingly track-friendly. Making it faster (zero to 60 mph in 4.2 seconds, and a top speed of 186 mph) seemed pointless.

But I see now, as I'm accelerating out of a shallow banked turn around 120 mph and I feel the torque-vectoring differential sorting itself out, that I've misjudged the car. This XKR-S doesn't cheat the wind so much as throw a bottle at its head and tackle it, yob-style. The front half of the car is brutally ventilated with multiple air scoops to feed the ravenous supercharger and to cool the engine, brakes and transmission heat exchanger. A carbon-fiber front splitter, beautifully made, as well as composite rocker-panel aero trim, a functional rear diffuser (also in carbon), and a vulgar carbon-fiber deck-lid spoiler all help to evacuate air from under the big car, making it feel more stable, more trustworthy, at high speeds.

Sitting about a half-inch lower on its suspension, and shrouding outrageous 20-inch alloys and Pirelli P Zeros in the wheel wells, the XKR-S looks like what it is: a huge, privileged brat, an upper-class lad with a bad attitude and mouth like a vulcanized black bass.

Much of the sweetness and delicacy of the XK has been scourged from the XKR-S's suspension. The adaptive dampers' response ranges from flinty to flintier, and stiffer springs, lightweight aluminum knuckles, and revised rear-end geometry give the XKR-S a bright, concussive ride that would pound commuters to dust. Between the thrumming of the sport tires and the amped-up, reactive feel of the steering and throttle, the XKR-S is seriously, credibly sporty-feeling. The well-tempered clavier that is the base XK—385 hp, with an MSRP of $79,000—seems like a distant memory. And considering the XKR-S costs an additional $53,000, the more distant, the better.

One must be careful that the wind in one's hair doesn't blow one's brains out. Speed is a relatively easy parameter to increase. This XKR-S is still, after all, a 2-ton two-plus-two coupe with a big engine up front and a six-speed automatic transmission. It will never transcend the constraints of its weight and size, and it certainly isn't the dynamic equal of a Porsche 911 or Nissan GT-R. This is still a grand touring car, only a bit grander than any previous Jaguar GT. Jag notes that this car is quicker to 60 mph and has more horsepower than the storied exotic XJ220 of the early 1990s.

No other fact quite tells the XKR-S story quite as well as that. That a tuned-up version of the plush and gracious XK—really, a car with a soul painted Mary Kay pink—could be quicker than the XJ220? I drove that car back in the day, and it smote me mightily.

The XKR-S's insides likewise get a scrubbing up, with S-exclusive alloy trim and elaborate leather stitching and brocade, not to mention two of the absolutely best performance bucket seats on the market. A great seat that locks the driver in position, one with high seat bolsters and deep, supportive side bolsters, can transform the experience of a car. Frankly, if you put these seats and these tires on a four-poster bed you could make it handle.

The XKR-S nicely benchmarks the abilities of the lads and ladies in Jaguar's tuning department, the Engineered to Order group, but I have to say, I wonder why they build such a car at all. Jaguar figures it assembles about 20 to 25 of these cars per week. I suppose there's a profit margin at those volumes, but I suspect that the XKR-S is more of an internal morale builder. Many of the buyers must be captivated by the XK's long, proud lines. After all, they could buy a BMW M6, a fresher car inside and out, for about $24,000 less.

And yet, by the time all the XKR-S's composite aero parts are bolted on—reducing overall aero lift by 26%, says Jaguar—the car loses most of its smooth, elegant encapsulation, the deftness of line for which one would lust after the car in the first place. The mega wing in the back, the ostentatious scoops in the front clip, the supernumerary nostrils cut into the bonnet shut lines? The XKR-S looks like a parts catalog coming at you.

Of course, the optics become less of a problem the faster you go.

Email Dan at rumbleseat@wsj.com.

 

To me it reads like an uninformed review by someone who has made up their mind on the XK series without spending any real time driving any of them until the XKR-S. Another "expert" that "knows" how Jags are... His head has been in the sand since 2006 if that is his opinion...

 

First bad review i have read regarding Xkr-s. WSJ should focus on $, not cars!

 

I think it's a pretty fair review. Definitely all those scoops threaten to ruin the look, and it's true that it is still a GT car. There is no way to get around that!

 

I don't know what credibility, if any, the Wall Street Journal or Dan Neil have, but he's clearly only comfortable with the base XK's focus on elegance. He doesn't acknowledge the Jaguar faithful and new customers that demand a serious dose of performance to go along with that elegance in the form of the XKR. He obviously can't accept that some buyers would want to take it a step further.

We all choose our cars based on many individual factors, and those are so incredibly diverse that while accurate information is very useful, criticisms and ridicule about something as subjective as styling isn't helpful from a biased reviewer...or other Jaguar enthusiasts.

Bruce

 

Does anyone have any actual specifics about what they disagree with in the review? I have a different takeaway reading this. The reviewer didn't expect much, but was pleasantly surprised and admitted to "misjudging the car", after thinking that the car was just a way to spruce up an aging model.

Did you guys just stop after the second paragraph or what???

 

The review was fine until the end when the author stated it "it looks like a parts catalog coming at you". While some people may prefer the cleaner lines of the xk/r, no other review (there have been many) trash the looks of the xkr-s. most reviews are strongly positive regarding the aero additions to the car.

 

I wish they fitted a motorised one that pops up when needed (at certain speed), so it keeps the smooth lines when down.
It looks like an after thought add on. XK is a model coming to the end of it's run, so will be cheaper just to bolt one on.
This kind of spoiler suits a rally car but a Jaguar?

I like the aggressive front though.

 

I suppose this makes it a bad review!

Jeremy Clarkson (yes, he's done a lot of bad reviews) had similar comments as the WSJ about the XKR-S's front end:

http://www.topgear.com/uk/videos/jag...s-17-episode-4

And Jeremy Clarkson is Jaguar's biggest fan!

 

I understand why they needed to add these performance aerodynamic enhancements, but I wish they could've done it without making the front end look like a frown with large jowls. It sort of reminds me of the Cowardly Lion:

 

IMO, the XKR looks better than the XKR-S.