MY 05 XJR was otalled in an accident last week, i'm looking for a replacement, and drove an 09 xf sc. the 10s are out of budget, and I love the newer electronics over even the last of the xjr's but want to know about anything I should be concerned about on the 09's I know 2010 and up got the 5.0 motor, but from a cost basis it's out of reach.

What should be concerns?

 

I suggest driving a 2010 5.0 NA I think it would be a better choice then the 4.2 XFSC. The 5.0 is an amazing motor and I think the 5.0 NA is faster than the 4.2 supercharged.

 

No, it's not faster but close to it.

 

ive driven a 2011 na and it's ok. i like a unique car and the na just doesnt do it for me,

 

I know the 0-60 2009 vs 2010 supercharged is .7 seconds thats a pretty decent gap. You could always do the pulley and tune and probably get that back.

If you can't swing a 2010 5.0 sc go for it I think the wheels and the displacement were the only changes from 09-10.

 

thats a decent gap but not a dealbreaker. it should be faster then my 05 xjr an other known xf issues i should be looking into

 

fuel door, waterpump, seat movement, fuel filler hose to the tank, differential housing on the pinion side, electric fan and sun roof.

As much as I LOVE my car I would not own it if it wasn't covered by warranty and plan to either extend the warranty or sell it before 50k miles or July 2016 when it goes off warranty.

 

the ones im looking at all have balance of factory and select edition attached so that helps warrenty wise

 

0-60 numbers are all over the place. You can't really quote them as fact. Some list the 09 SC at 4.9sec and others have said > 6sec. That doesn't even make sense. There is a art to launching these cars. All I know is I've driven the 5.0L NA (on multiple occasions for quite a bit of time) and I'll happily take my SC 4.2. Plus, if you are ever thinking about modifying the car there are a decent amount of mods for the SC 4.2L to bump up power since the engine has been around so long. Pop a pulley on and you just saved yourself >$10k compared to the 2010+ SC cars.

FirehawkMike, note that the SC cars have almost every option. In my opinion you'd never regret getting the SC 4.2L. Find one with a 100k warranty under 50k and you should have very little to worry about for quite some time.

 

FirehawkMike,

Here are some performance numbers from Car and Driver for all three cars. Hope this helps. I've found through my own evaluation that C&D's numbers are pretty accurate.

http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...percharged.pdf

http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...guar-xf-50.pdf

2010 Jaguar XF Supercharged Road Test – Review – Car and Driver

 

Lots of good info in those PDF's. Thanks for the links!

 

Interesting that the XF 5.0 NA was limited to 126 mph? My XFSC isn't limited by anything but my nerves and space?

My 2007 G35 did 0-60 in 5.2 before I modified it and 13.6 @104mph so a NA or 4.2 would have been a step down in performance.

 

I bought my 09 XF SC with 65k on it with no warranty last Dec, it is my daily driver, zero issues thus far. It had all the usual upgrades, improvements done to it, ie shifter, fuel door. I changed out all the fluids and installed new air filters, been a great car with no signs of trouble.

 

Your XF SC is governor limited to 155 mph. Perhaps you were just imagining you were going faster...

Multiple reviews have noted the 'limiter' on the XF appears to be just a manufacturer's fiction... perhaps to get around regulations somewhere... in any case it certainly isn't a reality.

Cheers,

- Will

 

I would love to go to the Texas Mile and find out exactly how fast it goes

 

I have gotten my 4.2 NA to 195 km/h or 121 mph before it governed. It just wouldnt go anymore (sort of sad because my 2003 Tiburon would govern at 225 but only had it as fast as 210). I took a S/C out and had it going 220 kmh or 137 mph before I thought I should slow down haha. One of the main reasons I didn't want to go with the NA because I like to drive fast but didn't want to spend the extra $10K for another second haha. Thats why I was going to get the tune so I could get it faster than that but again dont know if $1K is worth another 20 km/h all the 2 times I would ever go that fast...

There is my ramble!

 

It's a tire issue. They could go as high as 130 mph with H rated tires but T rated would require a limit of 120 mph. 200 km hr indicated, which is about 195 km/hr actual speed.

It is a true limiter as with your foot firmly planted the car will do 120 mph all day, up and down hills and round corners. I call it Italian cruise control.

 

HA! Been there and know exactly what you mean! I really just wish it didn't have the limiter. I would be interested to see how fast either the NA or the S/C would go with the limiter's removed.

 

allegedly, the sc will go off the speedometer and has Y rated 186+ tires