I need your opinion, what model is better X300 or x308, which is more reliable engines, your opinion of the gearbox. I want to know all the problems

 

I would pick up X300 everyday not any day

Reliable engines : X300 more reliable and what's even more one of the most rock solid engines ever built
Gearbox : May be X308 technology wise due to 5 speed but I ever don't think X300s are less reliable .You still have mods to choose

 

hi new member here i say x300 have a 4.o ltr done 183000 and runs and goes like a good one

 

Until mid-2001 or so (I can't remember the specifics) the V8s had problems with the Nikisil cylinder treatment. Bad news, but it can be easily argued that any earlier V8 that has survived this long will be OK.

Early V8s also had problems with chain tensioners. Updated parts are now used. Engines that haven't been updated should be updated before a failure occurs.

The six cylinder engines are generally trouble free and very durable. Some high mileage examples have problems with hydraulic chain tensioners....not as widespread as the V8 tensioner problems, though.

Transmissions are durable in either model. The supercharged XJR V8, though, has a Mercedes transmission that is very expensive to repair/replace, however.

Cheers
DD

 

The X300 is probably the most reliable car Jaguar have ever made. Has nicer interior than the X308 too...

 

I have been around cars for thirty years. Worked on Ferrari's , Lambo's to Chevy's! If I were buying a brand new daily driver it would be anything from Toyota or Honda. If I were to buy used which I just did.... It would only be the x300!! As with any car, if you can find one with low miles and been well maintained, the car should last you forever. Don't get me wrong though, higher mileage x300's are still good as well but will obviously have a shorter life span.

 

All of the posters are right, the X300 was better than the X308. However, don't forget that the youngest X300 will have been built in 1997. Apart from the engines, the X308 has completely different suspension to the X300 which was virtually the same as its predecessor XJ40. The X300 had a very short production run of 3 years, (1994-1997). US model years = add one year, so there will be fewer available to buy.

 

I agree with the others in this thread.

I did a LOT of research before buying my car last November. I would have been prepared to pay more for a newer XJ had it been worth it - price alone was not my main consideration. My car was almost exactly what I wanted - had it been a Sovereign it really would have been totally perfect! It is an August 1997-built (about 300 cars before the end of the X300 production numbers) "standard" XJ6 in dark metallic (Carnival) red with a natural (Oatmeal/Antelope) leather interior which had just 65,000 Km (about 41,000 miles) on the clock and a good service record with recognised Jaguar mechanics.

Note that, here in Australia at least, the late 1997 "standard" XJ6 models gained a number of features that had been expensive options, bringing them closer to Sovererign spec (and the last few Sovereigns were in fact called "Heritage" and had slightly different woodwork and alloys, amongst other minor changes). These enhancements included fully electric front seats (including head restraints and lumbar support), a CD player and a factory electric sunroof, all of which were options in previous years. Importantly, all X300s built from about February 1997 onwards have a proper lap/sash centre rear belt - this is the easiest way to tell a late-model car. Basically the body shell and interior was being progressively upgraded toward X308 spec. Sovereigns have some nice features like memory on the driver's seat, electric steering wheel adjustment, folding exterior mirrors, upgraded woodwork and chrome trim round the door frames but are mechanically identical.

I wanted a 4.0 as they are more torquey than the 3.2 but have about the same fuel consumption. The 4.0 six is a bit more powerful than the V8 3.2 which followed, although both the 3.2 and 4.0 V8s are allegedly a bit better on fuel. I get about 15l/100Km (about 18.0 mpg Imperial) from mine in everyday suburban/city traffic, which improves rapidly to below 12 on any sort of run out of town - I've seen under 10 on a relaxed country road trip.

I looked for some months to find exactly the right car. Buy the latest you can, but they had a short production run and changed little (though note that early twin-airbag cars - 1994/5 - had no glove box, which is a pain), so buy on condition (especially interior condition - can be very expensive to rectify faults) and - crucially - maintenance records. These were very well sorted cars with enormously tough mechanicals, and if they've been looked after they should last for decades. So far all I've replaced in 7 months has been the battery (which I knew was weak when I bought the car) and a bottom hose, and I have just had a minor service performed. I've also had the headlining, which was sagging in the rear and behind the sunvisors, replaced - a common occurence in hot countries, I believe - $450 all up. However, my car had had a thorough overhaul just before I took delivery, including new front disc rotors/pads, front suspension bushes, rear anti-roll bar, all fluids flushed and changed etc as it had been almost unused for the previous 3 years so you should anticpate some of these things needing doing if they haven't been attended to for a while. Especially check through the records for transmission fluid changes - you can't drain all the fluid in one go so it's important that it has been done regularly to ensure long gearbox life.

If you do decide on a V8, the Nikasil problem should be a thing of the past by now - it was fixed during 2000 but it didn't affect all motors, and those that were affected were probably replaced under warranty. The problem was higher sulphur fuel took the coating off the cylinder bores. BMW suffered from it too at that time (though it was less advertised ...). Fuel specs are more stringent now.

Good luck, good buying, and when you've bought ..... enjoy!

 

Hello everyone. I am thinking of buying x300 with faulty gearbox however have a question. Is it possible to replace x300 gearbox from x308, so gears would be shorter and consumption would reduce? Or its not worth it?

 

BMW had problems with the 94 and 95 M60 V8 engines, which were nikasil blocks, after 95 they had switched to a different alloy and coating process that solved the problems. Kind of sucks, if you do have a bad nikasil engie its junk, too expensive to do right, so a newer engine is the only good option.

 

Impossible? ...no, nothing is impossible, but it wouldn't be a bolt-in affair due to physical mounting/dimensional differences and of course ECU/TCU electronics and harnesses won't match up. So it effectively would be a "no" unless you are going through all the trouble for fun and didn't mind blazing a new trail.

There really wouldn't be much of an advantage anyway. Plus if I recall the non-XJR X308 "sealed for life" transmission may not be as reliable as the X300 transmissions. I believe the X308 XJR Mercedes transmission is very good however, but then again so is the 4L80E in the X300 XJR from a durability standpoint.

.

 

Hi everyone and thank you for taking time replying to me. Just spoke to jag mechanical in authorised centre. We had very short conversation and he said its not worth to it, unless I have all parts already, such as gearbox, ECU and many more bits, which I actually don't. Also that would be more complicated for mechanical in future repairs. So decided to stick to classic version of it. Thanks guys for opinions, they are really reasure me

 

Curious, did X300 ever get what he/she wanted out of this thread? We seem to have taken a turn at some point. Not trying to be a jerk just seeing if they got the opinions they wanted on the x300 vs x308.