Go Back   Jaguar Forums - Jaguar Enthusiasts Forum > General Jaguar Forums > Off Topic
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?
Search

Off Topic A place for you car junkies to boldly post off topic. ALMOST anything goes. Fun, laughs and good times here.

Welcome to Jaguar Forums!
Welcome to JaguarForums.com.

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Jaguar Forums community today!


Reply
 
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 07-06-2011, 12:55 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: California
Posts: 532
Thanked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Default Diffrence Between X & S Types?

I have an X Type, my buddy has an S Type. I think I've read that the X Type is the entry model, and that the S Type is a "step up". However, the only difference I can see between the two models is the grill.

Am I missing something?
__________________
Silver 2003 X Type 3.0
Northern California
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-06-2011, 03:12 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 427
Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
Default

I don't believe the X-type has a V8 model, does it? Much less a supercharged V8 like my STR. I think the S-type is also a little bit bigger.

I found this site which lists a comparison of the two. There are several features you get on the S-type that the X does not have.
Jaguar S-Type vs. Jaguar X-Type car comparison, compare auto pricing, specs, and features
__________________
2003 S-type R (carnival red)
Unofficial Jag Site
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-06-2011, 03:41 PM
Thermo's Avatar
Veteran member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Great Mills, MD
Posts: 8,306
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1,725 Times in 1,486 Posts
Default

Dumb, the X-TYpe is based almost in whole on a Ford Modeo where the X-Type is a half breed of a Lincoln LS and a true Jag. So, really, if you talk with Jag purists, they consider the S-Type a true Jag, but the X-TYpe as a red headed step child. The S-Type has more of the creature comforts found in all Jags where the X-Type never had the option of them or were only included if added as an option. So, mechanically, there is a lot of difference between the two. But, for impressibility, they both work.
__________________
Chris "Thermo" Coleman and K'Re Ann, the 03 X
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Thermo For This Useful Post:
Dumb/Luck (07-06-2011)
  #4  
Old 07-06-2011, 03:52 PM
Michael Star's Avatar
Untitled

 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Bowling Green, KY
Posts: 2,312
Thanked 233 Times in 209 Posts
Default

I always like the x-types because it was the only model that got awd.
__________________
Facebook Group
https://www.facebook.com/groups/137130099778806/
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-06-2011, 04:03 PM
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Arlington, VA USA
Posts: 5,224
Thanked 318 Times in 274 Posts
Default

It's already been said that they are completely different platforms, but more generically the S-Type is RWD, isn't it? The X_Type is AWD.

I am REALLY not trying to knock anyone here, but if I may speak openly, I feel like the X-Type has the worst reputation and least panache of all modern Jaguars--maybe all Jaguars, mostly because it is based almost completely on a Ford Mondeo. If you look at the competition the Germans were putting out when the X-Type was still being produced, it is pretty clear to me that the X-Type was outclassed in almost every way. The proof is in the pudding, as the X-Type did not sell well. Then again, you could say that about a lot of Jags.

There are still plenty of reasons you'd buy an X-Type, though. They have AWD, are sometimes found with a manual transmission, have pseudo-classic British flair and a (used) price that doesn't break the bank.

I can't wait to see what the new baby Jag that is going to come out in the next few years will look like!
__________________
--Alan
'07 Jaguar XKR Convertible, ebony on charcoal
'83 Jaguar XJ6, Racing Green on tan***sold
'06 Jaguar XJ8 Vanden Plas, black on black***sold

The Jaguar, while hunting, doesn't roar...
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to amcdonal86 For This Useful Post:
Dumb/Luck (07-06-2011)
  #6  
Old 07-06-2011, 11:42 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: California
Posts: 532
Thanked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amcdonal86 View Post
It's already been said that they are completely different platforms, but more generically the S-Type is RWD, isn't it? The X_Type is AWD.

I am REALLY not trying to knock anyone here, but if I may speak openly, I feel like the X-Type has the worst reputation and least panache of all modern Jaguars--maybe all Jaguars, mostly because it is based almost completely on a Ford Mondeo. If you look at the competition the Germans were putting out when the X-Type was still being produced, it is pretty clear to me that the X-Type was outclassed in almost every way. The proof is in the pudding, as the X-Type did not sell well. Then again, you could say that about a lot of Jags.

There are still plenty of reasons you'd buy an X-Type, though. They have AWD, are sometimes found with a manual transmission, have pseudo-classic British flair and a (used) price that doesn't break the bank.

I can't wait to see what the new baby Jag that is going to come out in the next few years will look like!
Always speak freely!

I know a little bit about the history, but saying the car is not a "pure Jag" doesn't worry me. Obviously I'm not a purist. The car is fun to drive, looks good, and people gush over the fact that it's a "Jaguar" - which seems to be a step up from the average BMW or Audi.

We are, however, looking into our next Jaguar already...
__________________
Silver 2003 X Type 3.0
Northern California
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-07-2011, 04:40 AM
Translator's Avatar
Photobucket

 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Brittany France
Posts: 12,723
Thanked 1,051 Times in 694 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dumb/Luck View Post
I have an X Type, my buddy has an S Type. I think I've read that the X Type is the entry model, and that the S Type is a "step up". However, the only difference I can see between the two models is the grill.

Am I missing something?
Simples, both cars have a badge on their rump, so you know what you are getting into.
__________________
Cheers,
Richard

Need a Manual, a TSB, or General Info' about your Jag? Check out our >> DOWNLOAD AREA <<

accuratespelling.com
website spell check service
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-07-2011, 08:11 AM
The Chris X's Avatar
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 2,473
Thanked 125 Times in 119 Posts
Default

I've owned both, like some of the other members on here. Each one has its own characteristics. The S is a little bit bigger, a good bit more refined. The X was fantastic in the snow and poor weather, handled nice and tight, and overall was a pleasing car. I fit in it better than comparable BMW's and Audi's, and liked the styling much more. It gets lambasted by the auto media, but I'm pretty sure it sold more units than any other Jaguar. I see quite a few of them still in my area. Many critics wanted to project it as something it was not, because it wore the Jaguar emblem. If only Jaguar was more aggressive with marketing and model year refreshening, it might still be out there.

If I had to pick, I'd take the S - just fits me better and feels a little better made. And of course the STR is a rocket.
__________________
03 S Type R - Mafioso Intake+K&N, Akebono pads F&R
07 SAAB 9-3 turbo - BSR Intake/Downpipe, ECU tune, Powerstop rotors and pads
07 Jeep WK 4.7 2" BDS Lift, skids, bull bar, AT3's
06 Jeep XK Commander Limited 4.7 - K&N FIPK, Mopar Skids, Cooper AT3's - planning air suspension
Ex 2002 X Type owner
Member JCOP
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-07-2011, 08:58 AM
Cambo351's Avatar
Photobucket

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,663
Thanked 904 Times in 643 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thermo View Post
the X-TYpe is based almost in whole on a Ford Modeo where the X-Type is a half breed of a Lincoln LS and a true Jag. So, really, if you talk with Jag purists, they consider the S-Type a true Jag, but the X-TYpe as a red headed step child.
Quote:
Originally Posted by amcdonal86
I am REALLY not trying to knock anyone here, but if I may speak openly, I feel like the X-Type has the worst reputation and least panache of all modern Jaguars--maybe all Jaguars, mostly because it is based almost completely on a Ford Mondeo.
Are you guys looking to start a fight?

#1 The X-Type has less than 20% shared components with the Mondeo Mk3
#2 The CD132 platform was heavily re-worked to become the X-Type (see less than 20%)
#3 Even so, the Mondeo is a best selling, award winning vehicle in Europe, not a bad place to start from.
.....The Lincoln on the other hand....
#4 The X-Type looks much more like a traditional Jag than both the XF and the X351, if you go on styling cues alone. Are they lacking panache?

You can't seriously argue that the S-Type is a "better" Jag than the X-Type, they're both as bad as each other!
__________________
2005 XJR, Black with Cranberry Leather 13.25 @ 105.45, 340.7RWHP
2008 LR2 HSE, all Black 3.2L, family wagon, work in progress
2001 S-Type, 3.0L Sport Mystery Project
2005 X-Type all Black 3.0L with lots of retrofits and toys...Sold...

Last edited by Cambo351; 07-07-2011 at 09:01 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-07-2011, 09:07 AM
Greenhornet's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 288
Thanked 10 Times in 10 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to Greenhornet
Default Type x

I agree 100% with "Chris X" on his opinions on the X-Type.Dispite all the Negative Opinions by others, on the X-Type, I had absolutely No complaints or problems with my X-Type, and found the AWD awsome, I would have no problem buying another one again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Chris X View Post
I've owned both, like some of the other members on here. Each one has its own characteristics. The S is a little bit bigger, a good bit more refined. The X was fantastic in the snow and poor weather, handled nice and tight, and overall was a pleasing car. I fit in it better than comparable BMW's and Audi's, and liked the styling much more. It gets lambasted by the auto media, but I'm pretty sure it sold more units than any other Jaguar. I see quite a few of them still in my area. Many critics wanted to project it as something it was not, because it wore the Jaguar emblem. If only Jaguar was more aggressive with marketing and model year refreshening, it might still be out there.

If I had to pick, I'd take the S - just fits me better and feels a little better made. And of course the STR is a rocket.
__________________
2003 3.0 X-Type.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Greenhornet For This Useful Post:
The Chris X (07-07-2011)
  #11  
Old 07-07-2011, 09:52 AM
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Arlington, VA USA
Posts: 5,224
Thanked 318 Times in 274 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cambo351 View Post
You can't seriously argue that the S-Type is a "better" Jag than the X-Type, they're both as bad as each other!
Haha. Exactly why I like neither of them!
__________________
--Alan
'07 Jaguar XKR Convertible, ebony on charcoal
'83 Jaguar XJ6, Racing Green on tan***sold
'06 Jaguar XJ8 Vanden Plas, black on black***sold

The Jaguar, while hunting, doesn't roar...
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-07-2011, 11:51 AM
The Chris X's Avatar
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 2,473
Thanked 125 Times in 119 Posts
Default

Alan - I cordially invite you to come up and take a spin in my STR. I believe I can change your mind.
__________________
03 S Type R - Mafioso Intake+K&N, Akebono pads F&R
07 SAAB 9-3 turbo - BSR Intake/Downpipe, ECU tune, Powerstop rotors and pads
07 Jeep WK 4.7 2" BDS Lift, skids, bull bar, AT3's
06 Jeep XK Commander Limited 4.7 - K&N FIPK, Mopar Skids, Cooper AT3's - planning air suspension
Ex 2002 X Type owner
Member JCOP
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-07-2011, 11:51 PM
Count Iblis's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 220
Thanked 49 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cambo351 View Post
Are you guys looking to start a fight?

#1 The X-Type has less than 20% shared components with the Mondeo Mk3
#2 The CD132 platform was heavily re-worked to become the X-Type (see less than 20%)
#3 Even so, the Mondeo is a best selling, award winning vehicle in Europe, not a bad place to start from.
.....The Lincoln on the other hand....
#4 The X-Type looks much more like a traditional Jag than both the XF and the X351, if you go on styling cues alone. Are they lacking panache?

You can't seriously argue that the S-Type is a "better" Jag than the X-Type, they're both as bad as each other!
I have to agree with Mr Cambo.
People seem to bandy about that the X type is "just a Ford Mondeo". Well seeing as I was involved in the engineering of the X type, the X308, the X350 and the X200/202 I feel qualified to comment.
It being "just a Mondeo" is bollox spurted out by Clarkson and the BMW crowd and then echoed by the unthinking masses.
If the "X type is just a Mondeo"- how come the complete engine with the exception of the cylinder block was designed and developed at Whitley, Coventry? This includes the cylinder heads which have direct acting mechnical bucket tappets- NOT the FORD norm of roller finger followers. The intake manifold isn't the dual runner length IMRAC device found on the Duratec V6 either. The crankshaft is forged and the combustion chambers are shallower and faster burning than the Ford Duratec V6 also. The ports are larger. The X type is AWD and the Ford Mondeo never was. The front suspension has component similarities to the Ford Modeo Saloon but the spring rates, dampers are different and the rear system isn't shared with the mondeo saloon.
The fuel injection and engine management system is by Nippon Denso NOT EEC or P Tec Ford systems. Yes there is some switch gear commonality with Ford products, but even the X308 uses some Ford switches, but the MINDS involved in development were British and from Jaguars advanced engineering centre- NOT Dearborn.
When released Autocar said that the steering, ride and handling compromise was superior to the class benchmark the BMW 3 series of the time and it trounced the contemporary Audi- check out the May 2nd 2001 issue.

THINK and do your resserch before quoting Clarkson et al.
__________________
2000 MY Jaguar XJR
1972 Jaguar XJ6 series 1
2003 MY Dodge Ram 5.7 Hemi
1995 Porsche 911 Turbo (993)
1982 BMW E21 323i
1970 Dodge Challenger 440 cu in R/T
1993 Mercedes W124 400E
1985 BMW E24 M635CSi
1964 MCI MC5 Greyhound Bus-RV conversion
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Count Iblis For This Useful Post:
Aonsaithya (06-29-2012), Cambo351 (07-08-2011), Jerry the Jaguar (07-07-2011)
  #14  
Old 07-08-2011, 12:04 AM
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Arlington, VA USA
Posts: 5,224
Thanked 318 Times in 274 Posts
Default

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/2716952/This-car-is-absolutely-categorically-not-a-Ford-Mondeo.html

SO, the first front-wheel-drive Jaguar shuffles cautiously into view to be greeted by a shriek of headlines insisting that the company has sold out and the ideology that set in stone the excellence of rear-drive has been compromised.

Worse still, the demise may have been accomplished with parts borrowed from Ford. If you believe some of what has been written, the ultimate everyday utility has simply been given an upmarket badge and whatever it was that made a Jaguar is gone for ever. Even the Jaguar people on the launch were behaving suspiciously like politicians.

"No, absolutely, categorically not," said one. "The engine in the X-type was exclusively designed in Britain. It may have been made in America, but it is British." And of the chassis: "No, absolutely not, it's not a Mondeo. Some of the hard points may be similar, but it is not a Mondeo platform." Such stern denials, of course, make you suspicious.

Added to such efforts to avoid the M-word, Jaguar launched this X-type at the same time as a more glamorous S-type at a sort of two-for-the-price-of-one event with a "you'll doubtless be wanting to concentrate on the S-type, won't you?" kind of steer. This seemed a bit odd when privately some were saying the 2.0-litre X-type was about to become Jaguar's biggest seller.

So let's get this out of the way here and now. The Jaguar X-type is based on a modified Mondeo floorpan. The rear suspension is from the Mondeo estate, the engine is derived from the Mondeo's V6, and the gearbox is from the corporate parts bin. The real point is, does it matter?

It would if there were no difference between the X-type and the Mondeo, but the fact is they look different, sound different, have completely different dynamics and a totally different ambience; much like the Audi A4 and VW Passat, which are also based on a common floorpan.
Modern saloon cars - whichever badge they wear - have to meet similar legislation, use as little fuel as possible, be as safe and quiet as possible and accommodate a similar number of people inside. All of which means they are likely to be similar in concept.
"Front engine mounted across the car, driving the front wheels through a five-speed gearbox, with front suspension via MacPherson struts and rear suspension via struts and lower links," is a description that applies to half the cars we test and if you saw the kit of parts laid on the factory floor it would be hard to tell who made them.
When assembled, the style of the body you put on top and the interior appointments become the obvious distinguishing factors and visual style is a big enough difference for most people. Happily, there is still more to it than that.
As you'd expect, there's more to creating a front-drive X-type than removing the hardware that drives the rear wheels of the four-wheel-drive model. According to Jaguar's chief test driver, Mike Cross, how you specify the remaining parts and how you attach them to the chassis will make a huge difference to the way the car feels.
Like how much you spend on the power steering system, how you design the geometry of the suspension and where you position the roll centres, the quality and specification of the dampers, the way the bushes are arranged in the suspension and how stiff they are, and so on. The combination of all these things will determine how the car feels from the driving seat.
"If you take the Mondeo, their chief wanted a pointy car, one that was very authoritative at the front end," says Cross, "whereas we want a car that has a more mature feel. For that, we needed to lift the roll centre at the rear, which makes the car respond to the wheel in a different way. We think that is part of, er, 'Jaguarness'." He looks almost embarrassed at the concept.
But it was nevertheless the most literate explanation so far of what makes a Jaguar, explained in engineering terms rather than the aspirational twaddle you get from the marketing people. From behind the wheel, it translates into a car that appears to sweep along, steering from some point in the middle, rather than the racer's preference, which is total authority at the front tyres, to be used to cram the car into the bend at ever higher rates.
To that, you add an extraordinarily sweet 2.1-litre V6, created by reducing the stroke of the 2.5-litre engine, and a tastefully smart interior finished in white leather and walnut veneer, and you have something very different from the majority of the herd. It also feels bigger than it is, but retains a surprising agility that I suspect is what Cross meant when he talked of a mature feel. If that much is "Jaguarness", then it's a pleasant blend.
The X-type in 2.1-litre form (despite being referred to as a 2.0) is no rocket ship, however. Removal of the all-wheel-drive hardware has saved more than 200lb, but although the X-type is no heavier than the competition, the 148lb ft torque peak looks modest against a 3,200lb kerb weight. On the other hand, putting a large amount of urge through the front wheels would definitely bring problems of the downmarket variety, so maybe it's just as well.
The gearchange on the Sport model I tried was on the clunky side of adequate, but it is very easy to drive the car smoothly, which only adds to the sense of refinement. And if you do decide to be a hooligan in the boardroom and really press on, the X-type seems to sharpen up in response.
Ultimately, it will nose wide under power, as front-drive cars do, but big wheels and tyres ensure that it's not an issue at legal speeds. Meanwhile, the ride remains supple. Complaints on such brief acquaintance were few and amounted to a soggier brake pedal than I'd expected and the fact that the dials and switchgear looked rather downmarket in the leather and walnut surroundings.
Jaguar engineers didn't have any choice but to make the X-type front-wheel drive because the transverse engine that came with the Mondeo architecture meant the weight distribution would have been too much of a compromise had they tried to power the back wheels. So, yes, in that respect they were compromised by the Ford hardware.
But the important thing is that they knew what they wanted. They had a clear understanding of how the car should feel and because they are engineers, they had an idea how they might achieve it.
If that is the culture that makes a Jaguar, then it remains intact, whichever end of the car is doing the driving. In addition, it is done in a style that remains their own and is clearly recognisable. The time to worry will be when the people who know what that style is decide to move on.

__________________
--Alan
'07 Jaguar XKR Convertible, ebony on charcoal
'83 Jaguar XJ6, Racing Green on tan***sold
'06 Jaguar XJ8 Vanden Plas, black on black***sold

The Jaguar, while hunting, doesn't roar...

Last edited by amcdonal86; 07-08-2011 at 12:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-08-2011, 12:17 AM
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Arlington, VA USA
Posts: 5,224
Thanked 318 Times in 274 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Iblis View Post
I have to agree with Mr Cambo.
People seem to bandy about that the X type is "just a Ford Mondeo". Well seeing as I was involved in the engineering of the X type, the X308, the X350 and the X200/202 I feel qualified to comment.
It being "just a Mondeo" is bollox spurted out by Clarkson and the BMW crowd and then echoed by the unthinking masses.
If the "X type is just a Mondeo"- how come the complete engine with the exception of the cylinder block was designed and developed at Whitley, Coventry? This includes the cylinder heads which have direct acting mechnical bucket tappets- NOT the FORD norm of roller finger followers. The intake manifold isn't the dual runner length IMRAC device found on the Duratec V6 either. The crankshaft is forged and the combustion chambers are shallower and faster burning than the Ford Duratec V6 also. The ports are larger. The X type is AWD and the Ford Mondeo never was. The front suspension has component similarities to the Ford Modeo Saloon but the spring rates, dampers are different and the rear system isn't shared with the mondeo saloon.
The fuel injection and engine management system is by Nippon Denso NOT EEC or P Tec Ford systems. Yes there is some switch gear commonality with Ford products, but even the X308 uses some Ford switches, but the MINDS involved in development were British and from Jaguars advanced engineering centre- NOT Dearborn.
When released Autocar said that the steering, ride and handling compromise was superior to the class benchmark the BMW 3 series of the time and it trounced the contemporary Audi- check out the May 2nd 2001 issue.

THINK and do your resserch before quoting Clarkson et al.
When people say the X-Type is just a rebadged Mondeo, they are clearly exaggerating. But it's hard to argue that the X-Type is a descendant of the Ford CDW27 platform, even if it had been spruced up with different engines, transmission/drivetrains, interiors and some suspension touches. That is the definition of platform engineering, and the X-Type unfortunately was the victim of this because of bean counters being in charge.

There is another thread in here about the S-Class and the Maybach, and how nobody bought the Maybach because it was just a "stretched out S-Class", which is probably just as true as the X-Type just being a reworked Ford Mondeo/Contour. That doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad car, but in this case, I think the X-Type was severely lacking the excellence of the 3-series, and it was way overpriced!
__________________
--Alan
'07 Jaguar XKR Convertible, ebony on charcoal
'83 Jaguar XJ6, Racing Green on tan***sold
'06 Jaguar XJ8 Vanden Plas, black on black***sold

The Jaguar, while hunting, doesn't roar...
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-08-2011, 12:19 AM
Count Iblis's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 220
Thanked 49 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Sorry, by posting an article by a journalist - nay a columnist- is this an assertion that a journalist knows more and is somehow more enlightened than the engineers who designed the vehicle itself? Espcially engineers who are hard core BMW fanatics (old school that is)
When I talk journalists- I include those scribers who hand out Wards engines awards too. They're not qualified to judge. Unless they're ride and handling experts and the ride and handling claims are backed up by good track measurement data.
No ones denying that the X type may have been somewhat different were it not on a CD132 platform, but to denounce it and compound this by quoting journalists OPINIONS in my view offers nothing.
__________________
2000 MY Jaguar XJR
1972 Jaguar XJ6 series 1
2003 MY Dodge Ram 5.7 Hemi
1995 Porsche 911 Turbo (993)
1982 BMW E21 323i
1970 Dodge Challenger 440 cu in R/T
1993 Mercedes W124 400E
1985 BMW E24 M635CSi
1964 MCI MC5 Greyhound Bus-RV conversion
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-08-2011, 12:21 AM
Count Iblis's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 220
Thanked 49 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amcdonal86 View Post
When people say the X-Type is just a rebadged Mondeo, they are clearly exaggerating. But it's hard to argue that the X-Type is a descendant of the Ford CDW27 platform, even if it had been spruced up with different engines, transmission/drivetrains, interiors and some suspension touches. That is the definition of platform engineering, and the X-Type unfortunately was the victim of this because of bean counters being in charge.

There is another thread in here about the S-Class and the Maybach, and how nobody bought the Maybach because it was just a "stretched out S-Class", which is probably just as true as the X-Type just being a reworked Ford Mondeo/Contour. That doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad car, but in this case, I think the X-Type was severely lacking the excellence of the 3-series, and it was way overpriced!
Sorry, Im not quite sure where you got CDW27 platform from. Was that from a journalists article?
__________________
2000 MY Jaguar XJR
1972 Jaguar XJ6 series 1
2003 MY Dodge Ram 5.7 Hemi
1995 Porsche 911 Turbo (993)
1982 BMW E21 323i
1970 Dodge Challenger 440 cu in R/T
1993 Mercedes W124 400E
1985 BMW E24 M635CSi
1964 MCI MC5 Greyhound Bus-RV conversion
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-08-2011, 12:29 AM
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Arlington, VA USA
Posts: 5,224
Thanked 318 Times in 274 Posts
Default

This article kind of explains what caused the demise of both the X-Type and S-Type.

Recently Deceased: The Jaguar S-Type and Jaguar X-Type
__________________
--Alan
'07 Jaguar XKR Convertible, ebony on charcoal
'83 Jaguar XJ6, Racing Green on tan***sold
'06 Jaguar XJ8 Vanden Plas, black on black***sold

The Jaguar, while hunting, doesn't roar...
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-08-2011, 12:44 AM
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Arlington, VA USA
Posts: 5,224
Thanked 318 Times in 274 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Iblis View Post
Sorry, by posting an article by a journalist - nay a columnist- is this an assertion that a journalist knows more and is somehow more enlightened than the engineers who designed the vehicle itself? Espcially engineers who are hard core BMW fanatics (old school that is)
When I talk journalists- I include those scribers who hand out Wards engines awards too. They're not qualified to judge. Unless they're ride and handling experts and the ride and handling claims are backed up by good track measurement data.
No ones denying that the X type may have been somewhat different were it not on a CD132 platform, but to denounce it and compound this by quoting journalists OPINIONS in my view offers nothing.
In the interest of full disclosure, I changed the article in my post probably after you formulated this response in an effort to be less demeaning of the X-Type. This one features an interview with a Jaguar engineer who defends the X-Type as not just being a badge-engineered Mondeo, as you do.

The problem with platform engineering is not that it results in crappy cars. Rather the problem is that there is a VERY strong psychological connection that people will make when a car shares a platform, even if it extensively modified. Clearly Jaguar underestimated or ignored this, and the sales flop of the X-Type is the result. I mean, just look at VW and Audi. Toyota and Lexus. Honda and Acura. You will get people making the same complaints. But then again, Audi, Lexus and Acura (with few exceptions) never really pretended to be anything other than upgraded platform engineered versions of their affordably priced counterparts.

Heck, most people think ALL Jaguars under Ford's reign are just rebadged Fords--not just X-Types. It takes a lot of convincing with some people!

By the way, isn't the CD132 platform an evolution of the CDW27? I could be wrong.
__________________
--Alan
'07 Jaguar XKR Convertible, ebony on charcoal
'83 Jaguar XJ6, Racing Green on tan***sold
'06 Jaguar XJ8 Vanden Plas, black on black***sold

The Jaguar, while hunting, doesn't roar...

Last edited by amcdonal86; 07-08-2011 at 12:48 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-08-2011, 01:08 AM
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Arlington, VA USA
Posts: 5,224
Thanked 318 Times in 274 Posts
Default

I just want to apologize to everyone. I didn't mean to offend X-Type owners and lovers. It's just that I came from a place where I was extremely skeptical of Ford Jaguars and slowly came around to accepting them. Eventually I bought one and I think we can all agree that there is nothing like them on the road!

Now if I could just dislodge that chip that is permanently stuck on my shoulder...
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 01:08 AM
 
 
 
Reply



Tags
25, 30, back, difference, differernce, diffrence, emblem, jaguar, jaguare, make, models, put, stype, type, types, vandenplas, xtype



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Advertising

Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory
Our Sponsors
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:16 AM.

Copyright © 2010 Internet Brands, Inc. All rights reserved.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
JAGUAR and its logo are the registered trademarks of Jaguar Cars Limited. Jaguar Cars Limited is not affiliated with JaguarForums.com.