i was thinking in getting a s-type for a winter car.. then i changed my mind.. so the x-types are looking real nice as a winter vehicle.. i want a 3.0 sport... but i see that they have 2.5 sports too... now my question is...are the 2.5's under powered?

 

A lot of folk will tell you 'yes' the 2.5 is underpowered... I have a 2.5 auto and have not found it wanting in the power department. Clearly there is a power difference, but I've been happy with mine.

One thing though... I was under the impression that in the US only the 3.0l was available.

Mike

 

When searching for my 2004 x-type 3.0, I found that both the 2.5 and 3.0 were available here in the U.S.

 

I too have a 2.5 auto.

Can't compare it to the 3.0, as I haven't driven that yet, but the 2.5 (to me) doesn't feel underpowered at all. However, if you could by similar spec'ed vehicles, one being a 2.5 and the other a 3.0, I'd go for the 3.0.
Reason for this is that the fuel consumption is almost identical (from what I've read), but you get more power with the 3.0.

It's basically up to you.
But if you could get a high spec'ed 2.5 for the price of a entry level 3.0, I wouldn't hesitate and take the 2.5.

Remember, there's always a more powerful car than yours, it all just depends on what your happy with...

 

Not too much difference in performance between a 2.5 manual and 3.0 auto. In the US with relatively cheap fuel (UK currently over $7/US gallon) I'd opt for the 3.0 engine.

 

To me it makes no difference, the car isn't built for performance and your not hot rodding it around town, so get the one that is a better deal. I found a 02 2.5 auto with 30k miles on it and didn't hesitate to buy it because its practically brand new still.

 

Having driven both a 2.5 and 3.0 manual with similar miles, etc. I would and did opt for the 2.5 over the 3.0 as it is a much better sounding motor and likes to rev more. It has plenty of power provided you're in the band. Not real torquey down low but it comes on around 2000-2500 rpm. The 3.0 just sounds thrashy compared to the 2.5. I might be wrong but wouldn't bother with the sport as by now the shocks and struts are probably on their way out on all but the lowest of miles. Might as well just convert to upgraded springs and shocks on the nicest one you can find. Sure if a sport pops up in your price range go for it but simply buy the nicest you can find/afford. I honestly don't think there is much difference between the sports and non sports aside from springs and shocks.

 

k so im leaning towards a 3.0.. they got some good deals on 2.5s here but i dont want to get the short end of the stick.. are they any problems that i might get from the x-types...?... i know i have read some of the post and is the tranny the biggest problem?

 

Other than wear and tear the X Types are pretty reliable. There have been numerous complaints about the auto box (much more common option in the US) but many owners have also had no problems with their own auto equipped cars. If the auto does fail however you're looking at a very large bill!

 

In my opinion, the problems with auto boxes all come down to one thing:
Jaguars "never service this" policy.

If you can find a car with relatively low miles, and service it frequently enough, you're unlikely to run into problems.

However, if you've bought a car with relatively high miles, you can be pretty sure that the oil has never been changed in the transmission (or rear diff and transfer case), so this will be a risk you're taking...

 

thanks everyone!!! this is some good info!!!.. so low miles as in around 20 to 30 thousand?.. how low??

 

I would say anywhere under 50-60.000 miles is good.
However, miles aren't miles, if you know what I mean.
Better to have a car with 50.000 highway miles, than one with 40.000 town miles.

 

My personal rule of thumb for a used car (all other things being relatively equal) as far as mileage and age go is get the newest lowest mile car that your budget allows. I'd probably take lower miles over a year or maybe two newer in most cases. Less time behind the wheel is less time for the prior owner to F it up.

If you can get the service history of the car (perhaps call your local dealer with the VIN and ask them to look it up for you, they very well may) then you'll be ahead of the game. Carfax is squat.

 

Iv never driven a 3.0, but I just recently bought my second 2.5 Manual! Its a great car, and I cant vouch for how the auto feels, but the 5speed manual is def not under powered. iTS NO 3.0. But it will get up and go! Try and get a 5speed!

 

I too have a 2.5 manual (here in the US) and the performance is fine for this type of car. It's not as quick as my 350z, but thats not the type of car it is.

It's great for the winter and is running perfect(ish) at 97000 miles.

 

yea i have a 2.5, and coming from driving my parent 02, and 09 impala, which had a 3.4 and 3.5 it feels much less torqueyyyy, i love it, might be a bit underpowered even though i havnt drivent he 3.0, but you would be surprised at what it can keep up with.

For my purposes, it is a great car, and my purposes are getting me around, in some style and safety, the awd system on these cars is amazing, but i have an 02 2.5 version...

 

I have the 3.0, and it is a blast. Just get a K&N intake and a Borla exhaust on it...there IS a hell of a difference. gas mileage is about the same..Just as an aside...got a friend in your town...Roger Cavanaugh...Know him? Don Epstein

 

For what it's worth I have a 3.0 manual Sport and to me it's night and day between it and a 3.0 auto. I also have a K&N air filter and the Borla mufflers. Can't say it helped performance noticably, but I think it sounds really nice, although I thought the stock mufflers didn't sound bad once you would floor it.

Whatever you choose it sounds like overall you would want at least a 2004 or newer as by then most of the early teething problems got worked out. Also, in 2005 I think it was they went to two cupholders instead of one. Could be a big deal to some. The steering wheel controls changed a bit in 2005 as well. They also started offering the alcantara/carbon fiber interior package that year in the Sport versions if you like that over the wood.

Before you buy I would also recommend knowing just what features the car has and teh various option packages available. There are so many things on these cars that are not necessarily standard items as you might assume. Sunroofs and heated seats are the first things that come to mind. And despite the steering wheel icons and buttons on the dash, the car you look at might not (probably not) have the voice activation, although I think that became standard starting in 2006. My point is make sure you compare apples to apples when are looking and don't just compare years and miles only.

Hope you get in the fraternity soon and maybe I'll see you on the roads between Neenah and Milwaukee. Good luck in your search.

 

I didn't bother reading everyone else's replies so apologies for beating a dead horse if I am but... The 2.5 is completely gutless. I drove one around the block before I bought my car and got out laughing at the fact that Jaguar put such a rubbish engine in it. If you buy an X type, get a 3.0. Otherwise you will be sorely disappointed, even if it is only a winter beater.

 

I'll bet ya my pink vs. yours I can put my 2.5 around a track of your choosing as fast as you can put a 3.0. The 3.0 sounds like a well Taurus, the 2.5 is simply a sweet engine which requires one to know how to drive and comprehend the concept of a powerband. That said it can be run just as quick as a 3.0. You just need to drive smarter.