Due to some unfortunate recent circumstances, I am left to acquire a new car (pronounced Jag-yew-ah).

I currently have two options in sight due to budget and timing.

Option 1:
2009 Jaguar XKR
77k Miles
4.2L 420hp

Option 2:
2010 Jaguar XK
35k Miles
5.0L 385hp

Speed, handling, reliability, looks, and electronics are all important to me.

A few questions I had.

- Does the hp rating on the '09 XKR account for the supercharger leeching power from the engine? In which case the 420hp would be closer to 380 on a dyno?

- Are there any known reliability issues that I'm not aware of on either car?

- Should the 77k on the '09 be a deal breaker? Are there any inherent drawbacks known at 90k or 100k?

- Despite the poor reliability of 0-60 in indicating quality, I like that push you back in your seat feeling. I haven't been able to find 0-60 on the '09 XKR. Anyone have any feedback?

- In the 2010 MY engine swap, did the XK pick up any upgrades under the hood besides the 4.2>5.0 swap? Handling, gear ratio, brakes?

If you were in my position, which way would you lean?

 

2010 no question.

 

I second this. I had to make a similar choice in 2010 - a slightly used 2009 XKR or a new 2010 XK that were almost exactly the same price. Drove them both on the same day at the Jaguar dealership. Could not tell much difference in performance and since there were some upgrades to the whole 2010 XK line I went with the XK. It appeared to be the best choice, and it has turned out great over the 4 years I have owned it. Also you are dealing with cars with very different mileage The XKR has over twice the miles (77,000 VS 35,000). That is not just an insignificant difference in my opinion.

 

I'm inclined to follow suit. If the 2010 falls near the same price, then the newer capabilities and the lower miles win.

V

 

'10 XK it is, Vince.

I'll see you guys back on the road in a few weeks.

Thanks for the support. Feeling the love from the community.

 

Without a doubt, go for the 2010. You won't regret it.

 

That's the plan. I test drove one and fell in love all over again. Incredibly smooth.

 

2010-on XK/XKR best model years built by Jaguar for the XK/XKR. You will not notice the hp difference from the 2009 XKR to the 2010 XK and you could always get a simple $600 ECM tune on the 2010 XK to bring the hp up. Torque is what will put you back in the seat when you step on it and the 2010 XK may have more.

 

Agreed

 

Having had an 08 and now a 2012 in my opinion go with the 2010 xk. I think it is a superior vehicle!!

 

I know when I upgrade my XK it will be to a second gen, but in truth I will miss my shifter (I personally hate the silly pop-up wheel), and the cleaner front end ( I also dislike the gills). Other than those aesthetics I hope to enjoy 500+ HP someday in my future!
<sigh> That twisty shifting puck will sadly annoy me every day as I have to interact with it, and remember how much I like he style of the lever better.
Ah well, here is to the sacrifices I hope to make some day....

V

 

In my opinion, XKs are nice, but XKRs are just that much more special. I mean, isn't a previous generation M3 cooler than the current generation 335i, even if the performance numbers are the same, especially as time passes?

I also think people overstate the performance abilities of the 5.0 XK as compared to the 4.2 XKR. Is it really as fast as the XKR? It's still 40 horsepower down. And even if it were as fast, are you really buying this car for the numbers, or because you want something that feels truly special?

Between a 2009 XKR and 2010 XK, I'd probably pick the XKR, all other things being equal. But the 2010 you showed has much lower miles and you didn't say anything about price.

Of course, I may be biased. However, believe me, if I felt that paying extra for the 5.0 NA was worth it, I'd be the first in line trying to trade my 4.2 in!

 

You think like I think, but I've made the decision of 2010 XK. I personally (despite Vince's thinly veiled hatred) like the aesthetics of the new XKs. 385 is still a step up from 300, and I'm not sure if the supercharger's power leech is even taken into account. I like the new shifter knob (I promise I'm not trying to start a fight, Vince) and music connectivity. Prices are nearly identical. 2010 it is.

 

Yep, I think just the lower mileage would've done it for me. 70k is an awful lot of miles for a Jag, at least in terms of resale later.

Congrats on your purchase!

 

I drove a couple 4.2 XKRs. I think they are a little "peppy"-er, they snap your head back a little quicker on the get-go, but the 5.0 XK has a throaty rumble during acceleration that feels more muscular. Those are qualitative impressions, obviously, but I'm happy with mine. I like the shifting knob. Very modern.

 

Maybe when I pop down to Portland for the XK I'll test drive the '09 XKR. Maybe that's too dangerous. The miles are a serious factor. I like the modern styling upgrades of the '10. I should probably stay away from the XKR. I'm still getting a significant boost from my late XK.

 

I think the XK has smaller brakes and rotors. If you like the look of big red calipers behind 20-inch wheels, consider that, too. It's not cheap to upgrade those things.

 

Oh I'm on board with the XKR, I really do like the big calipers, but the mileage is just such a big difference. The XK I have my eye on has 34k miles. It's listed at 43k miles and the ODO when I test drove it said 34k. I cycled through it quick and didn't comment. Someone with dyslexia messed that up. So it's 77k XKR or 34k XK for ~ same price.

 

Yeah, that's a lot of miles.