http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2007...of-the-decade/


What a terrible article. It's an entry level luxury car that has its place but the dud of the decade?? Compared to all the other true crap out there? That is absurd. This may be a repost since it's from 2007 but now that the decade has closed I wonder how this author still feels about it.

 

The husband and I were just down to our favorite wholesale lot looking for cars for our teenagers, and there was an X and an S side by side in the lot, hubs asked our salesfriend what the difference in the two were-- and he said "The X is a nice little car, looks like a Jag and but it rides more like a Buick."
If I could afford to insure teenagers in it- the price was right enough ($11,000 sticker) with only about 50,000 miles.

 

I know I've read this article before. It made me really mad, I don't understand why some people just don't like the X-Type. Is it they don't like Jaguar and the x-type was a culprit to make fun of or what. Their are way crappier cars out there by far!

 

I think you hit the nail on the head Jaggy. IMO as long as there's a leaper on the hood it's all good.

 

As a machine the car is OK.
For value, it is good as a used car.

The real issue is how it was sold as a new car. The dealers (marketing too) never put the cars into the hands of who it was designed for.
The manual transmission, sport package etc... was there to attract young, male, enthusiastic buyers, but the dealers refused to put them on the lot. Dealers pushed them as a wife's car, or poor man's Jag.

Sadly, the awd, back road prowess was never sold as a benefit to most buyers....

So I agree it was a dud that way... a shame is a better word maybe. Waste of perfectly good engineering.

 

There are two issues here...the X Type as car and what Ford/Jaguar did with it. We can't do anything about the later so let's look at the former. As a car the X Type (2.5 manual) is one of the best cars I've owned (including 5 other Jaguars). I live in Canada and it handles the snow and cold very well and has been trouble free. It has strong links to traditional Jaguar design and doesn't look like a rolling video game.

My only real concern is that the car's are falling into weak hands (as GoKittyGo's first post above contemplates). So we'll see more "it's broken and I hate it posts" because weak hands usually mean abuse and poor maintenance .

 

Personally I think this is the reason it was a dud. Personal bias and favoritism aside, I would agree with the author. As a brand new vehicle the X-Type was far from being what a Jaguar should be. Even though it is the entry level model, the interior fit and finish and material quality was far from what you'd expect in a Jaguar. As a brand new vehicle, it wasn't really worth the name and the price tag that followed. The only true benefit it offered compared to the competitors was AWD. Along with a confused identity (tried too hard to be sporty and luxurious and it just didn't work) Jag was relying mostly on their name to sell this car.

Now with all that said, as a used vehicle, a properly cared for X-Type is a great car for the money.

 

I read the article myself and still bought my X afterward.

I will say I like the conceptual drawings I have seen from Tata for the "New" X-type

 

I think Jaguar was fighting a losing battle with the X from day one. Early issues with the transmission, rust, transfer cases were hard to overcome. You don't have a second chance to make a first impression. Bad reputation gets out there, and most of it was justified, and takes a life of it's own.

Poor marketing. Can anyone ever recall seeing a commercial or advertisement for the X in all the years it was for sale?

Lack of development. Other than some cosmetic changes to the interior did anythng ever change on the look/performance of the X the whole model run? Transfer cases changed in 2004, but most might say that wasn't necessarily an improvement. I'm sure there were a number of internal things were quietly done to improve reliability (vacuum hoses, omt rings, dash vents, two cupholders, etc.). Same engines and horsepower ratings for 8 years while everyone else was offering better performance and fuel economy was inexcusable. You would be hard pressed to tell a 2002 from a 2008 X.

Because of what I mentioned above resale values tanked, and Jags are notorious for that as it is. In my case, that was a blessing. I was looking for something sporty that had awd because of where I live in the winter. First time I saw an X with the carbon fiber/alcantara/Aruba wheels sport package I wanted one. Did my homework and found exactly the one I wanted for a song back in mid-2008 when the economy was at it's lowest. Been incredibly reliable to this point. I love mine. As long as it was taken care of I can't think of anything that is a better bang for the buck. Too bad it all turned out the way it did as I still think it was a killer idea, but poor execution. Jaguar got what they deserved.

 

It was still a sub-30k luxury brand car though. It was cheap even compared to a BMW 3 and Mercedes C. The problem was the channel didn't want to sell them because they hadn't the capacity or desire to sell a low margin car, the public was confused becuase it was so much cheaper than normal buy-in for a Jaguar, the low-end market assumed these cars all had reliability issues because "they knew a guy with an XJ6 that was nothing but problems." The BMW and Merc had something going for them - good reputation and history of selling lower end cars, Jaguar didn't. I wasn't visiting dealers in 2005, but my guess is that they would have tried really hard to upsell to an S-Type and belittled low end buyers not willing to go be upsold. At least that is the impression I get when I go to a dealership to buy parts and park my X-Type in the holy parking lot of my local dealership.

 

I thought that the New York Times had already aced that award.

 

Between my wife and me, we had a 2007 C280 4 Matic and x type. Both bought new, within 3 months of each other. The x has better fit and finish and offered way more for the price. Leather was optional on the C as was a host of other features on the x. I am not sure you know what you're talking about!

The x failed to meet expectations yet sold more than all other jags combined. The biggest problem it had was an image one. Most people believed it was a Ford rebadge like the Caddy Cimmeron. Yet the x only shared 18% components with a Mondeo. Plus people in the US thought the Mondeo was the Ford Fusion. The Mondeo platform used in the x never made it to the US.

Sloppy journalism and bad media image did in the x type and Ford/jag never countered with an effective marketing campaign. When u got the x type in 2007. It had more power and better acceleration than the C class or 330i. Yet, the x type was supposed to be under powered with poor acceleration. Luckily I actually drove these cars before buying.

I recently sold my C280 and still have the x type!

 

The problem was they put an AWD system into their least expensive car. Is there any other brand that sells their only AWD model cheaper than anything else they sell? I can't think of one. An entry level car should NOT be AWD unless it's an option. You put AWD into a more expensive vehicle where you can afford to beef it up and still make a profit. That said, I would never have bought the X new, it just didn't make sense for me. But then again, I wasn't really a Jag fan until I picked up the X used.

 

I've been involved the German luxury car world for quite some time now. I am a moderator for one of the two largest Mercedes forums in the world - I think I know what I'm talking about.

The "failure" of the X-Type was a mix of poor marketing, advertising, as well as being a poor product itself. Jaguar limited itself by having such a narrow product range and lack of competitive updates (electronically, cosmetically, and mechanically). Sure you had the sedan and the wagon, but at least in the US, you only had the option between the 2.5/3.0 V6 coupled with the same 5-speed automatic/manual throughout the entire lifecycle with minimal updates. Only 350,000 will have been produced by the end of its life.

Throughout it's entire lifecycle the C-Class gave you the 1.8 I4, 2.5/3.0/3.5 V6, 2.6/3.2/3.2supercharged V6, and the 5.4L V8. All along with the 6-speed manual, 5- and 7-speed automatic all standard with RWD with the option of AWD on select engines. The W203 sold over 400,000 in the US alone.

The 3-Series gave you the 2.5/2.8 I6 and 2.5/3.0/3.2 I6 all with 5- or 6-speed manuals, automatics, and semi-automatic transmissions. Again with RWD standard and AWD on select trims. In 2002 alone, the E46 sold more than 560,000 units worldwide. The X-Type only managed an annual best of 50,000.

The X-Type just was not a competitive vehicle. The facts and figures speak for themselves.

 

Thanks aluni2230 for an accurate assessment of the X here on the board. Unfortunately there are a ton of people who do think it's a rebadged Ford.

 

I read through almost all of the comments on that article when we were shopping for a car. That article probably did more to convince me to buy an X-Type than any other piece of research, lol.

Same here! I've always liked Jags but was never a huge fan. For the price, a used X-Type is a brilliant, normal, everyday cruising car, and this is coming from a guy who's had an E46 M3. I prefer it over anything in its class, be it the normal (non-race) 3 series, C class, or A4. The X-Type has turned me into a Jaguar fan; now that I know what Jags are about, I'd like to get a black-on-black 2004+ XK-R Coupe some day - I've always thought those were one of the most beautiful cars on the road. It's a shame you couldn't get them with a manual transmission.

 

I'm sorry, I have to agree with Aluni regarding the interior as well. This is opinion - we all think we know what we're talking about. I feel that, with the GPS option, the interior of the X-Type is superior to every one one of its competitors. As a former E46 M3 owner, yes, the M3 interior was better built (very beefy), but it still did not carry the air of opulence that the X-Type cabin provides. Not to mention that the normal grey trim in the M3 started to peel, forcing me to replace all of the panels with solid aluminum ones, while absolutely NOTHING in my X-Type is peeling (yet! lol). Normal 3 series cars seemed to have inferior interiors to the M3, or maybe their owners did not take care of them as well.

My spouse and I must have test-drove almost 50 different cars before settling on the X-Type, and I am a very astute observer. To me, the X simply has a better interior, even with the slightly cheesy, outdated LCD screen on models without GPS. Beautiful car, and an almost obscenely great value used.

 

Point being? I wrote as someone who owned both a C280 4 magic and the x type, both of which I bought new in 2007. I was referring to the image problem of the x type and the fact that most people discounted it up front - not after driving it.

Mercedes sells more than jag for ALL models, not just the C v. X. Again, not sure what point you're making.....should the XF also be considered a worst car as well because the E class or 5 series sells 10x more than the XF?

I agree. Jaguar should have released an X Type R.

 

Funny you mention the standard LCD on the x type. When I bought the x type, the center console was the one thing that made me go back and forth. I preferred the one on the 330 the best among the competitors. But the overall styling inside and out and the drivability of the x type won me over at the time....on hind sight I should have added the navi just for the aesthetics

I decided to get the ACM + 18 inch rims and the Alpine Stereo upgrade instead of the navi ( to stay within budget). The audio on the x type was also the best among it's competitors and audio was very important for me.

Also based on my experience, the exterior paint quality of the X was also superior to the C. The paint on my C had little specs from road debris hitting it and the chrome started peeling from my cup holder. The X paint is still perfect. Not one paint chip or peeling - inside or out.

 

X Type may not be all trouble free car but still I am strictly against the article , I have seen worse cars than that . Mercedes's first version of 7 speed tranny used in CLS models and other fleet , endless electronical problems with the W220 S Class .
Those are from a brand that's from pinnacle of the engineering .
I believe new X Types will be hard sheel to break and have a better sales record .