Whatever that means. I was asked that question by a friend today. I said “yeah”, I think so.

for reference I have a 95 XJS conv and a 74 E type conv. that I drive regularly........I have test driven a new XF a couple of years ago 🤮,........... I have driven a new camaro, Cadillac sedan, Nissan Rouge, Hyundai Sonata, Honda CRV, between rentals and friends cars. Others I am probably forgetting.......To me, the X type is what I would call a “tossable” car. I know it’s heavy and it’s not an old 3 series, but I would certainly call it that from my Driving paradigm.....auto performance has never captivated me in the same way it seems to captivate some Youtubers , I kind of like the entire ethos and experience of a car; nor am I fascinated by technology, I am more moved by materials, aesthetic, woods and leathers. That being said, the X type seems a tight little car. The way it grips the road, corners, it’s size, etc.

would you guys describe it as “tossable”??

 

1. 
   The ultimate proof of tossability (on the street) is to dive into a corner hotter than you think you should and have the car exceed you mind's expectations, without squealing tires.
   
   
2. 
   I just think of tossable as a car that's willing to be thrown around the road and not complaining about it (in terms of chassis groaning or axles snapping, etc)
   
   
   
3. I think tossable is basically a car with a good enough suspension that it turns in very quickly, but still gives you the opportunity to change your line mid-corner, and that you can generally control between understeer, neutral drift, and oversteer with throttle and steering inputs.
   
   That rules out some of the bigger heavier cars like Mercedes and AMG sedans that post very good skidpad numbers and corner very well steady state, but aren't very nimble. I guess a good test of tossable would be how fast you can run it through a slalom as opposed to how fast it will go around a perfect circle skid

 

Ive never heard of that phrase before, but after driving my x for a while and having experience of too many vehicles to list I find the x one of the most comfortable and it out performs most of the present new cars on the road suspension wise. I dont like the new vehicles that have sport mode that makes the car very jittery in my opinion, I wouldn't throw them into a corner for fear of it losing grip. For me the x gives really good economy, good performance, and is a really comfy car, plus the badge excites the ladies if nothing else lol.

 

It is definitely tossable; once you get fed up with the rust and the constant breakdowns you can quite easily toss it in a skip..

 

I hadn't heard this term since my autocross days 30+ years ago. so I searched on "Tossable car" and found this posting back from 2004 on NASOIC. https://forums.nasioc.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=589534
Post #4. It would be nice to at least give credit to your sources for information when you copy complete statements.

Both of my X-type Estates are NOT "tossable" Suspension is too worn out, The 17" 225/45 tires still have too much sidewall flex to get good enough steering wheel feedback and steering is sloppy with age. If you have the car running the Bilstein B12 suspension and/or lowered, and all of your suspension bushings are new/stiff, then I could see the X-type being able to be tossed around on the road without issue.

 

Post #5 I'm not sure what you are saying about post #4

 

I have always heard the term around some friends, and quite frankly it seems to mean different things to different people.....my idea of “tossable” is exactly what the X type is....a car that is relatively small, grips and corners well and is reasonable responsive..... I am aware that some guys would point and laugh at me for saying this, but I drove a friends E39 BMW M5 who swears his car is the funnest, most responsive and sporty 5 ever made, and I was not that impressed, but again, I am not taking the car even remotely close to its limits, so to me , when I am going at moderate speeds (nothing crazy) in my x type thru places that have multiple sharp turns and the car grips insanely well and the steering is telling me exactly what’s happening in the front wheels, to me that’s a tossable car. Maybe an Urban Tossable car is more appropriate..:::

 

Post #4 in the attached link. Not this thread.

 

It is always nice to have differing opinions regarding the handling of our X-types. As is stated regarding both my Estates, I do not consider either of them to be as agile as a true tossable car and perhaps this is due to the condition of my suspension and/or shocks. (My STR handles far better than my X-types and it weighs at least 300 lbs more, and for its larger size, is much more agile, A lot faster, and better balanced in corners.)

When I drive my X-type through chicanes, I feel the transition front wheel dog in the corner while the AWD is trying to pull through the corner. (It is a bit better in turn transitions with DSC off, but not much better.)
If I turn too suddenly, I'll lift a wheel, then it spins free causing traction control to cut the power, leading to a much slower turn overall. My shocks aren't stiff enough, B4s, so it has more body roll than I am used to in my STR. (That's why I stated if you have the B12 suspension (B6 shocks) and/or lowered springs, the car would probably handle a lot better.
I still don't consider my STR tossable because it doesn't have LSD, and when it spins a tire it cuts back on the throttle often when I don't want it to, such that is is a lot harder to hang the rear end out in a controlled drift.

I've been in Miatas, Mini coopers, Solstices, and good old Datsun B210s that are by far a lot more tossable.

Forgot to add that I am always worried about damaging my transfer case/internals when I push the car, so mentally it is not fun knowing that I could damage the car if I push it too hard.

 

Its all relative. Compared to my Aston Vantage- probably not, compared to an Elise, no, but compared to my X308 XJR, a most resounding yes. The body feels very solid and well put together and when you throw it into a corner it doesn't roll much and remains composed. The steering is more responsive than my XJR but not as responsive as my Aston. My 993 Turbo is more tossable but my E24 M6 feels like a tank compared to the X type (and its probably about the same weight!).


My 69 E type is very tossable and responds to steering inputs with alacrity but the steering feels almost schizophrenic.

 

I was overly worried about this reading all the rubbish on forums and I had a sit down with the X type vehicle programme chief and he said that the transfer case isn't undersized or weak. The issues with it are due to lubrication NOT being under sized. Infact the X type R was to use the same transfer case.

People need to get to the root cause rather than spread mass hysteria online, and this goes for secondary chain tensioners on V8s, to Northstars.

 

There is no shortage of erroneous information based on rumors and anecdotal "facts" permeating almost any forum; the "weak" transfer case as an example. It's often hard to separate the results of poor maintenance from alleged engineering design flaws. All cars, regardless of cost, have these problems varying in severity from a minor, easily-repaired issue to ones that threaten to result in major damage and/or injury and loss of life. I'm less concerned about the problems than I am about the manufacturer's approach to fairly addressing and correcting the problem in a prompt manner at no cost to the consumer. Those that do are, unfortunately, in the minority, which is why I've only owned one new car among those listed below. By the time they get to me, the problems with a particular make and model have been well-documented and are addressed to some degree in the sale price.

As far as "tossability" goes, it's almost always somewhat of a subjective judgment. I own both an XK8 and an X-type and find that the latter can be thrown into a turn with minimal drama, more so than the XK8 which, due to weight and suspension design, leans hard and doesn't seem happy at the prospect of quickly changing direction. I enjoy them both for what they are individually, and I always look forward to driving them. In the final analysis, what else can we reasonably expect from a mode of transportation?.

 

We need to get Thermo (Chris) to chime in on this thread. He is one of the best sources regarding experience for actual durability of the transfer case.

If you type in "transfer case" in the advanced search engine, there are 20 pages where the transfer case is mentioned. For whatever reason, there are many documented problems associated with the transfer case that have been questioned/documented. They may be due to maintenance issues, leaking seals, or other problems. Perhaps the design itself is decent, but transfer case problems have occurred often enough that there is a bad reputation.
Fears are being propagated because transfer case problems have happened. (Be it bearings installed backwards by the factory, or fluid leaks that cause it to fail over time.)

Most consider the transfer case to be in the same class as a rear differential carrier assembly. One expects it to last for the life of the car with little to no maintenance. If seals fail, or other problems arise then it is considered a weak/bad design.

I know people with Ford and GM trucks that have over 300,000 miles on them and they have never touched the transfer case. (No maintenance at all.)

 

Back to Tossable: We have 2 X-type Estates, One with 95K miles and the other with 50K miles. Recently I put on 18" wheels on the 05 with 50K miles. (OEM wheels with the same offset for the17" and 18" rims, tires are all 225s wide,) Per tire comparision charts, the 18" tires are .1" taller than the 17s, but the 18" tires have a 40 profile versus the 45 profile on the 17s

There is a traffic circle I like to fly around where I get to turn 270 followed by a pretty sharp turn to the right out of the circle. (I can stay on the power gradually accelerating throughout the turn.) With the 17's I did not like how the X-type transitions out of the circle into the right turn. I feel the body roll, and a rear of the car drops down then bounces up after the hard right turn. When I put on the 18s, the car takes the turn flatter, but now when I turn out of the traffic circle the rear end drops down and the rear tires hit the fender liners. Still trying to figure out what is behind this behavior.
OTOH, my STR, goes around this corner about 10 mph faster and the car stays completely flat. (Plus the seats in my STR have higher side bolsters than the X-type, so my body isn't physically tossed around inside the car during the right turn transition.

 

Yes , I'm well aware of all the posts. I've read them thoroughly, and I know what the definition of a bad design is. One perspective is- If a car is designed and released in a market known for neglect amongst many and it fails some morons will consider it a bad design. Much like overheating a BMW alloy block 328i M52 motor will cause the head studs to pull out of the block. Some would consider it a 'bad design'- and those same people want a Buick 3.8 litre engine cast iron head and block to be the epitome of engine design. Those people are also unlikely to appreciate the idle speed smoothness of an AJV6, or how freely it revs, or its transient response, or care that that BMW makes over 70 bhp/litre as opposed to 40. Unfortunately these are the same folks who pick up the cars second hand and cant look after them (either by themselves or at a garage).

My point still stands- even MORE so- if a transfer case CAN fail through poor lubrication (poor lubrication is the ROOT CAUSE) - but it is made sure that it IS well lubricated- it doesn't stand to reason that it will fail through being fatigue failure or fracture.


Thank you

 

Wow, is your frail ego showing? My word!

 

Did the programme chief mention that the transfer case was not designed by Jaguar, but by Visteon, a spin-off/ sold off component division of Ford? This implies to me that Jaguar forwarded some sort of design specifications to Visteon that were then implemented by the outsourced company. This implies that the module test and acceptance criteria for the transfer case was also defined by Jaguar. Visteon probably did all the testing for the module and sent the results back to Jaguar. Very similar versions were used on the Mondeo, Volvos and Mazdas. (These transfer cases appear to have had similar issues on other cars and the same complaints on other forums.)
As long as the results met the specifications sent to Visteon, one could state 100% that the transfer case isn't undersized or weak.

OTOH.
If a transfer case fails due to lubrication or bearing installation issues, what does the average moron driver care what caused the failure. It failed! It will get the reputation as a weak or bad design.

Somewhere in Jaguar's wisdom, they had the case designed so that the lubricant wan't intended to be checked and there was no "service" needed to be done to the transfer case.
Then when it is discovered that the oil evaporates when the transfer case is subjected to long periods of high operating temperatures and many of the seals fail prematurely, word gets out and it is recommended that the oil be checked and/or changed. (Then one has to tilt the car to one side to empty the case, then back the other way to properly fill it with the right amount, drives moron owners crazy!)

Visteon's Powertrain division, in Wales, did so well with their designs that they were losing money all while the X-types were in production and in 2007 they lost $110 million and were sold off to Linamar.

Should add that Linamar closed the Wales plant in 2010 and transferred production elsewhere.

 

Just tossed mine away.
Well, traded it in for £700.

 

Back to Tossable: I believe that the X-type is in the similar drivetrain design specifications as these cars:
All these cars have similar HP and torque outputs across their model variations and use the same Jatco JF506E transmission. Rated to around 250 ft/lbs torque.
It would be interesting to see it these car owners believe that their cars are tossable.

2002-2003 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VII GT-A
2005-2007 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IX Wagon GT-A
Volkswagen Golf Mk4, succeeded by the Direct-Shift Gearbox (DSG) based dual clutch transmission on the Golf R32
Volkswagen Sharan Mk I
Land Rover Freelander Mk I (definately not tossable)
2000-2006 Ford Mondeo Mk III
Ford Galaxy Mk I & Mk II
1999-2006 Mazda MPV
1996-2003 Audi A3 Mk I

Suspensions will vary a lot across these vehicles. Is the X-type the best?

 

Exactly. People bought this car new in 2002, “tossed it around” (-to tie in to the theme here) and the TC goes out at 20 30, 40k miles simply because they where following the maintenance schedule as suggested by the manufacturer. Also, if the design was so sturdy, why did they change it mid-year 2004??? —-oh that’s right, they changed it because of the massive failures of the earlier design. I suppose that’s considered releasing the car into a market that “neglects” them for simply following manufacturer directions. How patently absurd.