Well, I didn't believe the 1320 times posted for a stock 35T XE so I went to the track wit ha F-Type buddy and behold I find I was right, this car is a dud. Even though the XE is 250+ lbs lighter than the equal F-Type it just can't push faster.

Below are the pics of online data I found and my factual data I collected, I know there is some differences to be expected but not this far off.

First I had a 1/2 tank of 93 fuel, weather was a cool 50 degrees and it didn't matter if I had TRAC on or off, be in Dynamic, normal or even snow mode. The car went the same thing all the time.

I you look close at the slips, in no order you can see even though the car went faster each run it still governed itself after the 330' mark just like my stock XFR did. This car is being held back big time and will see massive gains from a simple re flash alone. I also checked the onboard logger and my ODB logger and the car never shows 100% TPS and the boost bleeds off up top just like we already know since this is a detuned F-Type.

Everyone got their personal best times on this day so I think the air and the track prep was spot on, just the XE was lacking on my part. Eve n my F-Type pal on here Jay was blasting low 10's all day long even if he added more NOS or even took some out, his F-Type just hit its ceiling and the ZF trans is protecting itself with the TQ management as we know already.

I was hoping to be on par with the other posted 12.8@107 35T's but I only got a consistent 13.4@104 in my AWD. I am unsure if/how those RWD 35T's can go faster since I see all the wheel spin they get o the track so I thought I would at least be on par with those but I guess not this time. I def don't have the unicorn out of the litter, more like the Pegasus lol.

Now Im off to a baseline stock Dyno to also compare for when I go back to the track and the dunk after a tune is in place.

The link to full size photos and thumbnails below to all things revenant from this track day, I hope this helps others with a baseline of what to expect in future searches on here:

https://postimg.org/gallery/xf43e2k6/
















upload pic

 

Here is a link to my run I took on my phone, poor mustang

 

Great job taking XE on the track!

13.4 / 13.5 is what I have seen in most road test for XE - S (RWD) except Car and Driver one which did 13.1 which is very fast.

Motorweek tested RWD 35T couple of weeks ago and got 13.5 @105 I believe. It did 0-60 in 4.9seconds which is surprising due to wheelspin. I assume AWD 35T should do even better 0-60 but lose some time at the top end. 1/4 times seem very similar between RWD and AWD.

I am sure at higher speeds RWD will pull harder. In my experience so far, I have beaten G37, Impreza WRX STI and B7 Audi S4 (V8) from around 50-60 to 100+ mph.

I need to get a new helmet and hit New Hampshire Dragway before it snows to test my car out. Since I have a stripper model, I'd like to think I will do low 13s but that might be too much of a wishful thinking.

Good job again!

 

Would love to see the difference after you had an ECU tune and pulls upgrade.
CRS

 

I just ordered the tune so we shall see what another 76BHP nets me. Then I will go back and add the crank pulley and see wha that 37BHP additional adds.

 

Looking forward to reading your end results!

 

My tuner (Jags at ECU Tuning Group) said it takes about 80 to 100 miles after the tune for the ECU to "learn" the new parameters. I really felt the difference after the tune and 80 miles or so. I remember certain choice four letter words like "Holy S*#T!" coming out of my mouth during spirited acceleration
CRS

 

I always thought that adapts is reset after any flash is done and it should give the full power on the first drive? The 80 mile or so thing is for adapters to fully learn your driving style and the ODB2 readiness codes to be ready for emissions?

Same goes for when we dyno tune, we run it, look at the log and make changes and flash it again and retry without any driving to do o the GTR's and 997's at least with stock ECU's.

 

Howdy Bigcat09

You probably know this already, but others might not. 4 wheel drive version of the XE is AWESOME and preferred if you drive in rain or snow (and really really good otherwise, not FWD biased ! ).

However it adds +/- 200 Lbs or so to vehicle weight...the main detracting variable comparing two identical cars save RWD. In dry conditions with 19's, the RWD will run faster at stock HP than the 4WD version. There is also quite a difference in the handling, a RWD will always excel in burnouts and drifting...your car sticks better in wet. Drivers preference, really.

However, your 4WD will be better suited for the more power you'd get after your tune, I'd venture to say once we get above 400Hp it'd be a wash between the two, and above that the extra two wheels of friction with an AWD would actually aid you in launch times due to tire spin on the RWD...(with street, not track, rubber). Otherwise put the right wide wheels with slicks on just the rear of the RWD, and it would be the RWD winning every time, all other factors being equal.

A big factor is AWD will have more parasitic power between the flywheel to the tires than the 2WD, never mind the extra weight. So, buy a car with more weight and less power to the wheels, the results are predictable.

A recent car article on the XE recommended buyers consider the RWD over the AWD, save inclimate weather, for the above reasons. I'll see if I can find it and post it here.

Here are the Car and Driver test results/ runs on the 1/4 and 0-60 for the RWD 3.5. 13.1 sec 1/4, stock, on 19's. (Euro edition, not speed limited at 120MPH like the US versions, more like 155MPH).

I'm looking at the Paramount Performance tune really closely in the near future, +100HP or more with two pulleys and the tune.

Your AWD would destroy the competition after a couple of pulleys and a tune!

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 11.5 sec
Zero to 110 mph: 14.2 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 4.8 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.2 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.6 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.1 sec @ 106 mph
Top speed (gov ltd, mfr's claim): 155 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 151 ft
Roadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.96 g

Special Notes on the Launch from Car and Driver track tests:

"Launching with a brake-torque technique only overwhelms the rear tires. It's quicker to just jump on the gas as you lift off the brake pedal. If the car is set to dynamic mode and you are using the paddle shifters, the XE will hold it's gear at the 6800-rpm fuel cutoff."

 

In my locale (Boston), you're very unlikely to see a RWD XE unless it was a customer ordered car. I would've bought one, but dealerships are only ordering AWD for their inventory.

 

It was exactly the same here in Austin, most on-site dealer cars were AWD or maxxed out on options. So I special ordered mine, waited four months, and it was worth the wait. I saved a bunch of money this way too, and got exactly what I wanted. Patience pays....I'm in Austin so we don't see snow much at all.

But I am jealous of AWD in the slick conditions, I used to drive the AWD S60R untill a teenager crashed into me and totaled it (that was a sad day for sure), and know first hand that AWD traction ROCKS in bad weather, so its therefore a safer car in those conditions. So each XE model has it s benefits. IMHO, they are both great.

 

BigCat09

By the way, why do you think XE V6 should run faster that F-Type V6?

F-Type V6 weights around 3500lbs while fully optioned XE 35 AWD is closer to 3800lbs.

12.8 for a stock XE V6 would be almost impossible.

 

I just read Road and Track drive review for Jaguar XE (November 24, 2016) and they managed to get 12.9 seconds @106mp/h for RWD 35T which is incredible.

This one had Pirelli P-Zero's I am assuming on 20'' wheels.

What is odd is that RWD car got same trap speed as AWD but its quarter mile time is 12.9sec with 4.5 seconds to 60.
I would assume that it should be the other way round, RWD should have higher trap speed and AWD better 0-60 time.

 

Not faster but at least match all the others in my above pic that went 12.8/12.9.
Some of the convertible F-Types seem heavier so I figured the XE would be at least closer to the F-Type 12.8 times.

Plus the OP post below yours as well, it showed they used a AWD XE with 20" wheels and got that time as well.

 

Any guess on ET/Traps with the VAP tune and then when adding the pulley? I am curious what to expect and no tracks are open yet for another month here.

 

I would speculate that with summer tires and the right temp, it should at least run high 11s @~120

 

Im not sure that is possible without more power? My XFR made 500WHP and went 11.9@120 with zero tire spin due to DR's out back.

For the XE at full weight which I think mine weighs in at 3,800 with me in it wet I think it is going to take 480HP to achieve. Maybe a RWD XE with DR's can do it with less power (465hp) but I think my fat cat can do it without more mods.

I will put my XE on my racing scales and report back the actual wet weight as the online data varies from 3,679 to 3,800 lbs.

The only other mods I plan to do is the intake and exhaust cat back since this is my commuter car and maybe a 75-100 shot later down the road when I get real bored since these motors love the N2O.

I'd be so happy to match my XFR's 11.9 time without getting crazy but I don't think it has it in it.

Off Topic: I m hoping I can find a ODB2 device that can tell the AWD to shut off by SW means just like this device called the Taser I had for my new Dodge. That thing was great as a push of a button and the AWD was disabled by SW.

 

It would be interesting to see for sure.

Stock F80 M3 does 12.2 and some have gone below 12.0 too. I know M3 has faster gearbox but on the other, it is RWD and a little down on power.

If XE had a launch control or something similar, it would definitely be 11-second car if tuned to 460hp in my opinion.

Anyways, good luck with your tunes

 

I'm pretty sure you guys are aware of this, but if you were to couple a top pulley with your tune and crank pulley, you'd be approaching 500HP.

https://www.paramount-performance.co...121112312.html

I'll probably get one of these before the crank pulley because it is easier to install and relatively inexpensive ( in comparison to the crank pulley from VAP). It should be possible for me to run around 450HP with the small pulley and the VAP tune. The small pulley runs about $370.00 USD, an easier investment for me to to justify for another 24 HP.

And later when I get another $2K I'll get the crank pulley. Then it should push around 500Hp with both.

 

The smaller upper pulley was discussed at length by Unhind and VAP when developing the tune for the F-type V6 (same engine as XE, as you know).

The consensus is that there is a very small enhancement from swapping the upper pulley to a smaller one on the V6. For hp/$ you are much better off buying the lower pulley. And its much easier to install to boot.

Personally, I'm shying away from either pulley. The upper one is hell to install (and you have to shave some mm off the SC nose - no thanks), and changing the lower one gives me some concern about vibrations/damping. Superchargers are notorious for generating these kinds of vibrational forces which can be hard on the engine crank if not damped properly. I'm sure JLR has done the math on their crank pulley but not sure how a non-OEM pulley would affect this... just my opinion. I'm gonna wait until we see how engines hold up after running these lower pulleys for ~20k miles and then decide... either way the tune alone is super safe and gives great gains.