I just drove a 2003 S-Type from Florida to Wisconsin and have a few comments.

My XJ8 is also an 03 but it has nearly 89k miles, the S-Type I drove has 26k. The "newness" of the S-Type was apparent -- everything in this car is "like new" and most everything in my XJ8 is "like a 10 year old car!"

These are my observations -- I'm biased, of course! I aslo posted it in this forum because I am simply making some personal observations based on limited exposure, and I don't want to insult any of the S-Type owners.

First, the S-Type interior is real nice! I love the wood trim and the look of the seats. This car has a wood steering wheel as well. It's truly a beautiful interior. But, the seats are not even close to as comfortable as my XJ8. The seats in the S-Type are hard and much less cushioned.

Next, the S-Type exterior has that nice "retro" look to it, but in my opinion it doesn't hold a candle to the X308 -- which is so sleek and "fast" looking. The S-Type is much more mainstream, from my point of view. Nothing really shouts "hey, look at me, I'm a Jaguar!" It does have a leaper on the hood, but I'm not too thrilled with the bug eye headlights.

The S-Type has the 3.0 6 cylinder engine. Peppy and coupled with a nicely tuned exhaust sytem, it feels like a sports car and responds nicely to your right foot, but only from a stop. When cruising on the highway, nothing compares to the roar and power of the V8 in my XJ8 (of course, you "R" owners are in another universe -- lucky you!).

The ride quality goes to the XJ8, hands down -- larger and heavier makes for a much nicer cruising vehicle. The S-Type is a bit sportier, but I like the XJ8's luxury ride.

Overall, and I know I'm not comparing apples to apples here, the XJ8 is a much nicer car all around. It has the looks of a classic Jaguar, the interior (of mine) is beautifully accented with wood and leather. The seats in the XJ8 are comfy and seem to be more adjustable than the S-Type seats.

I also noticed a few bells and whistle differences. The S-Type that I drove doesn't have the garage door opener (homelink) that I really like (got used to it when I started buying Acuras in the late 90s). The S-Type does have a couple of conveniences that I like (they both have auto on/off headlights, although mine doesn't work). The S-Type also has an auto on/off parking brake -- I like that. Wish my XJ8 had that. All in all, the S-Type seems to be a "newer" car than the XJ8.

All in all, the S-Type is a nice car but seems more like a higher end (ready for this?) Honda Accord than a Jaguar. I can understand why Jaguar decided to stop producing them.

So, those are just some of my personal observations. We (XJ8 owners) made the right choice -- drive on!!!!

 

I apologize to S-type owners in advance for my comments.

I, along with many others, have always viewed the S-type as the "poor mans Jaguar". Yes its technically a Jag but in reality its a nice Ford with a Jag badge. I never cared for the styling either. The front round grill is ugly and the lines just look all wrong. It looks like something Ford would build. Its a nice car but I think ford should not have messed with the Jaguar formula. Jaguar was never meant to be an "Every-Mans" car and that's what Ford tried to do. They built a car that more people could afford and the only thing it did was bring down the Jaguar pedigree and mug up its lineage.

I'm not a car snob by any means, I also drive a 98 Camaro and 02 Xterra, but Ford made a mistake IMO with the S-type. They cheapened the name of Jaguar. Sadly this is usually what happens when the number crunchers have more power over true car enthusiasts. Ford saw a chance to make money off the Jag name and so was born the S-type.

 

I also don't mean to insult anyone, but I agree with everything you said! LOL

 

There is a S Type near where I park and on a few occasions my X308 is beside the S Type.. IMO seeing the two side by side = biased and agreed that the older car (mine) looks more Jagy. What did they mean the "S" to stand for? It is of course personal preference (I really would like to say more but I'll just leave it there)

 

I do have to repeat, the S is responsive and peppy. Fun to drive.

 

Well. I have an XJ8 and this weekend i've bought a 2004 S-type 3.0 for my girlfriend.
I've driven a lot of Jags when i was working in JLR Russia, so i have to confirm, that the S-type is much better car than the XF. Actually it's a very nice car, even if it is not "low slung cat". Stylish, comfy, relatively fast, not very big (it's an issue if you r living in a big city). Easy and cheap to maintain. The most impressing thing in S is a trunk size - it's HUGE... But for a long trips i'd prefer an XJ8.

 

I didn't find the trunk size to be all that huge -- I normally take a lot of stuff on my trips, and it seemed like I had to lighten the load a bit to get all my stuff in the S-Type's trunk. Maybe the XJ8 trunk is wider? It sure isn't as deep as the S-Type, so it seems like I should have had a lot of extra room.

Here's another plus for the S-Type - it has a "proper" sunroof -- with glass! I would like that, and it's one of the many reasons I'm thinking about upgrading to an X350 XJ8.

 

Well, actually after reading your post, yes you very much are. I'd hate to hear what you have to say about the X-type.

I thought this discussion board was above such snobbery.

 

Yeah, it's way deeper. When you need to carry a skies or snowboard - that matters.

Talking about the cheapening of the brand - it was ford mondeo/x-type(fwd/awd with transversal engine, WTF?), who cheapened the brand, not an s-type. S-type was a real jag for all it's means.

 

Something I noticed on the S-Type that I'm driving -- there's no auto-dim rearview mirror like in my XJ8. I don't know if that was an option on the S-Type or not, but I do miss it. I also noticed something odd -- the driver's sideview mirror distorts the view, makes things look narrower to the point that cars look kind of funny in it! I guess it works fine, just makes things look odd.

 

There's no distortion in my drivers side mirror(?) and thought auto-dim mirror was standard. Mine certainly has it as well as the garage door opener you mentioned above.

How about:

heated front windscreen
headlamp washers
electric rear window sunshade/privacy screen
backup warning sensors

I know there's some stripped-down versions in the UK, but thought that all N. Am cars came well equipped. Possibly it's the 4.2L engine version only.

 

Both mine (XJ&S) have all of these options, exc. rear window sunshade.

 

I have to chime in here regarding the S-type. The S-type was based on Global Ford's DEW98 Platform. It was developed as much by Jaguar as it was by Ford.
The basic platform was supposed to become universal for several of Ford's products as well as other Ford owned divisions. Ford tried to do like GM has successfully done with Holden in Australia. (5th gen Camaro, Pontiac G8 are examples.) Based on what anyone can read concerning the platform, it was a very well designed platform, perfect for the Jaguar marquis. But Ford's expectation was to use the platform on a lot more vehicles. Unfortunately Ford considered the platform too expensive, so they didn't do proper marketing and let it die. They sold the DEW98 platform to TATA motors along with Jaguar. The XF is an S-type with an updated body. I believe that late model XJs and XKs use a derivative of the Dew98 platform, AKA a S-type, and basically the same engine/transmission.
Remember as well that the XJ series Jaguar is considered a "full size" sedan, The S-type was designed for the "mid'size" sedan market. I could make the same comments between a BMW 7 series and 5 series, or a Mercedes S class to a C class.

Also you should get a ride in a STR, rather than a V6 S-type. Significantly different feeling cars.

 

BUT a S-type handles a lot better than XF.
Also, there are very few parts from DEW98 in X350/X150, even less in X351.

 

I drove an S-Type 4.2 and really enjoyed it. It has more room than
the X308 and it has firmer suspension than the XJ8. The rear seats
also have cupholders which is a nice feature to a sedan...

The thing the X308 people mean is understandable. It is a much more
volume-oriented and financially logical car, the plastic headlamps
(as opposed to our glass) shows this. Most cars have that, including
a 7 series etc. but it shows they were more conscious of the modern
consumer, by including a glass sunroof (not metal) and an electronic
parking brake. The X308's anachronism and high-quality/unique materials
everywhere makes it stand out. The shape also defies logic, which
makes it look very different than the more aerodynamic S-Type. It is
also one of the lowest rooflines out there.

It was never axed by Jaguar. Its chassis lives on and is badged XF.
It just has a different body/int/suspension. it shared engines for a
spell.

The STR was in a tough place in the model range, the car mags
fastest 0-60 time was 5.5s and 1/4 mile in the high 13s. You would
think a car with the extra cog and 20bhp would outrun the X308
XJR. It had Brembo brakes but the stopping distances were 5ft longer.
I suspect corporate meddling was afoot. Not to say it wasn't a good
car.

Ian

 

As owner of an X308 R and having sold Jags in the late 90's including the launch of the S Type in the second part of '99 I can safely say that I have experience a full range of Jaguar products offered in that time period. Before the S-Type came on the market, the only cars we had on the showroom floor were either the full XJ range (8, 8L, R, VDP) and the XK (8 Cpe, 8Conv). If my memory serves me correct XKR appeared after the S-Type was launched. Anyway, we were very next door to a MB and Audi showrooms (Yes, this was Rusnak Pasadena) with C, E, S, SL, ML, A4, A6, A8, etc. models to offer their clients. The S-Type did its job by attracting a wider range of clients. I drove a 3.0 S-Type in 2006 for about 6 months until I got t-boned and the car totaled. Yes, the seats were not as cushy as the XJ, the wheels weren't as sporty but the shape was unmistakable Jag. I even like the X-Type as how it reflects many of the design cues from an X350. I wouldnt mind one of these days getting my hands on an X-Type wagon with manual trans. If I had a choice which car to drive in snow, the X-Type manual would be it.

It is unfair to compare the models within the Jaguar line up. The first post mentions that there were not a garage remote in the S-Type he drove. Perhaps thats because the model in question was a base 3.0. I wouldn't mind for my XJR to have a properly tilting glass sunroof or the rear shade. Yes, the XJ is a more opulently equipped model but the S-Type was never intended to follow in the XJ's footsteps.

 

Hi, let me chime in to this interesting discussion for two reasons. First of all, I own both cars now (STR and XJ Sport) with fairly low mileage so they still have the "newness" to them. Secondly, I actually worked at Ford in Dearborn doing development work on the S-Type and Lincoln LS, so I have a "behind the scenes" in regards to what they share/don't share, as well.

Off the bat, the XJ is the classic, heavy, old world chrome/leather/wood type of vehicle where function follows form. It is the car you expect to see a picture of when you look up the word "Jaguar". However, if the car were produced today, it would be hammered by Consumer Reports for poor engineering and ergonomics. Let's face it, it was already behind the times in 2000! Yet, even with all that, I truly love it for the way it drives, looks and transports me back to when craftsmen worked on real wood and fine leather pelts; or when plastic in cars was a rarity. I mean, even the outer window surrounds are made of real chrome (instead of plastic chrome in today's cars). In addition, it exudes a sense of sophistication and handles it very well, on par with James Bond handling his Martini glass (or ***** Galore; choose your poison) shaken, not stirred of course!

The S-Type R in my opinion, is the bridge between the old (where function still follows form but to a lesser extent than the XJ), and the modern, with more plastic, cost cutting that we have all become accustomed to (look no further than the door sill plates on both cars and compare the two..night and day difference), but also brings us the refinement of a smoother powertrain and electronic conveniences.

From a design perspective, the S-Type's first iteration did share a lot with the Lincoln, including the complete HVAC system, suspension, engine block (the heads however were unique to Jaguar) and other mechanical components. Around 2003, the S-Type started to take on more unique parts, specifically in the cockpit where the consumer would notice, so Jaguar did something about it. Still, I personally feel that the chassis (DEW98) was compromised because it had to do duty not only in a 60k+ Jaguar, but also in a Lincoln and T-Bird, so it had to remain value conscious and thus the platform potentially deprived of more expensive enhancements (just my opinion).

So with that said, I truly consider the XJ a work of art and I look for any opportunity to drive it because its fun/classy at any speed. It turns heads because it is becoming a classic body style.
The STR is a fun ride only when you tap into its 400 horses, otherwise it is sort of docile and easy driver, as are most of today's luxury cars. It too turns heads, but more for its performance aspect.

My two cents!

Best,
Frank

 

With respect to OldMike, he both got the comparison very right and very wrong. It is natural to prefer the flagship XJ8 to the S-Type. The cars were designed to attract very different drivers. Where the XJ8 was designed to showcase the brand's best features and silky smooth road manners, the S-Type was designed to give people who might otherwise shop a 5 series an option that previously didn't exist for Jaguar. I know there are people who think the design is too much like a Ford but personally I really like that Jaguar had the courage to develop a sport sedan that looked like nothing else on the road and even hinted at the vintage Mk II Jaguars. Years ago when I drove a 6 cyl. S-Type, I remember thinking that the only thing that I didn't like was the overly boosted power steering that felt too light and felt a bit isolated compared to other Jaguars I have driven. I imagine that an S-Type R solves much of what was missing in the 6 cyl. S-Type. It will never possess the same prestige quality but it still was more beautiful and distinctive than other luxury sport sedans offered by Audi, BMW and Mercedes. Is it as nice as the XJ8? No. It simply occupies a different niche and it would have been a huge error on Jaguar's part to offer a model that steals customers from its top model.

I too am a fan of the X-Type. No because it is as roomy or as refined as the S-Type or XJ8 but because it is a different and visually unique option to the Audi A4. It often is knocked as being a tarted up Ford and the transverse engine placement is not the preferred orientation but the car handles well and offers a unique ride quality that sets it apart from the A4 and 3 series IX models. For the models first AWD effort it represented the brand well. I too would not turn away the opportunity to have a 5 speed X-Type in my garage. That is the nice thing about Jaguar, there has really never been a bad Jaguar. Even the entry level model was a beautiful car in its own right. Are there things that could have been improved .... sure but they each represented a unique option compared to other makes in the space.

To be certain, I am not bashing other manufactures as I have enjoyed owning Audis and Mercedes in the past but Jaguar has always managed to offer automobiles that grab my attention and imagination.

As always, opinions will differ and everyone will have reasons why one car is the best or worst for them. I think most of the points that the original poster made were spot on except the idea of comparing the models with in the family. Personally, I like the way the S-Type looks over the Mercedes E class or the Audi A6. The others are nice if not too common.

I like driving something different.

Happy motoring!

Jason

 

I was careful to let everyone know that I wasn't comparing apples to apples, but your comparison of the S-Type to a 5 series (I assume you mean BMW?) is way off, in my opinion. The S-Type is truly not much more than a Honda Accord.

 

The idea with the "modern" S-Type was to re-incarnate the 1963 model of the same name, via a very Retro look on a simultaneously thoroughly modern automobile, was it not?



As for all this "Oooh, anything that isn't an XJ isn't a proper Jag!!" - well, I'm not going to dignify any of that with a response. The General does not brawl with non-commissioned types in the mess-hall! ;o)