I've always considered it a reasonably safe car, and I'm sure I read somewhere that it was one of the safest of it's era. What do you guys think?

How does it compare to the XJ40 and X308?

Does anyone have the X300's crash test videos, or any other interesting info?

 

I saw.an x300 crash test video. Didnt look safe atall... basically front bumper nearly come out the rear of tje car.

 

Here it is.

 

Yeah, I saw that one, but it's an XJ40, and it looks a bit 'off' to me.

 

The X308 was rated one of the safest cars in a collision by the insurance companies operating in the UK.

Since the UK has many more Jaguars operating on the roads, perhaps their crash statistics are more widely available.

 

I'm curious about body structure, XJ40 vs X300 vs X308.

I'm pretty sure that x300 and X308 are virtually identical beneath the skin. (Er....for that matter, even the skin is virtually identical)

Not so sure about the XJ40, though. There's certainly a family relationship....but is it a cousin or a twin brother?

Cheers
DD

 

I'd like to see clone crash tests of all three, and also an S3 for good measure. I wonder if the S3's tank-like construction would compensate for it's lack of modern 'strategic crumple' at all? Probably not.

EDIT: There are some pretty useless split-second clips of X300 crash testing in the promo vid, 5:05 blink and you'll miss it:

 

I don't currently own an X300 but have also researched its safety as far as a potential purchase, wasn't able to find a whole lot. Here are actual real life crash photos FWIW:
Jaguar XJR Crashes, Wrecks, Pictures

Do you think the car's weight and size would put it at an advantage over a better safety-engineered but lighter cars? I've read anecdotal stories of modern-day Civics wrecking older Crown Victorias but still, laws of physics should stand for something.

 

The type of crash is going to be the deciding factor and that is pretty hard to predict.

Most crash tests show the vehicle hitting a worst case: a reinforced concrete wall. And it that scenario, the wall usually wins.

In a vehicle/vehicle crash it's going to be a matter of how the vehicles hit. low speed rear-end, I think most XJ's would survive against economy boxes and light SUV's (unless equipped with a heavy duty bumper).

Flip side, if an XJ rear-ends an econobox, most times the econo box will get the worst of it (hope the econobox had a trunk)

in a nose to nose case, the econobox would probably crumple the most, but could still total the XJ for a number of reasons - like the insurance company thinks replacing the bumper, hood and fenders is too expensive. It's sickening what will total a good car these days.

I think most of those crash photos show that it takes a lot to destroy an XJ: namely A drunk driver, very high speed, or a truck. The impact with the Porsche looks like it only got the fender bumper and a couple headlights. (and 911 family is surprisingly stout.)

The biggest downside for the XJ that I see is that it is so low that almost anything that's not a sports car is going to climb up over the hood and hit the cabin at the windshield.

I too would be interested in knowing about the X40-X30x structural differences. Most of what I've been able to find indicates that they are all VERY similar under the body panels.

As always, YMMV.

 

According to the few bits of information out there including the new model introduction brochures, it would be:

XJ40 cousin
X300 fraternal twin

The X308 is said to have some tweaks to make the body stiffer. But, it isn't said whether the stiffness contributes to crash safety to any material degree. Most of the safety systems are about the same. eg. collapsing propellor shaft, breakaway engine mounts.

 

I agree. My 2010 Prius had some undercarriage and front fascia damage over the weekend from some unsecured road construction "safety" equipment. The contractor has agreed to pay for the damage, rental, and a day or 2's lost wages to get to all sorted out.

In all, he'll pay around $7,000 for a car that "blue books" at between $11,000 and $14,000. If it were my car insurance paying, I wonder if they'd total it.

 

On a related note, since the Jaguar crash test data is so scarce, do you think it would be valid to reference the safety of "sister" models? For example, to use Lincoln LS crash test ratings (mostly Good) to evaluate the S-Type, or is that kind of comparison irrelevant safety-wise? I know XJ does not have an equivalent Ford platform, so this mostly applies to S-type and X-type.

 

Regarding the X300 being low, try popping the hood and take a look at the reinforcement structures. They are placed way higher than on your average car. So it seems to me that Jaguar did their best to compensate for the X300 being so low.

Read somewhere that the only car of this vintage with lower reported incidents with human damage, was the Mercedes S, also known as The Tank :-) But even that wasn't indestructable, as Princess Di can confirm :-/