XK / XKR ( X150 ) 2006 - 2014

New 2010 XK Vs older XKR

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 27, 2010 | 09:04 AM
  #1  
fess's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Junior Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Default New 2010 XK Vs older XKR

There is a 35 HP difference in favor of the older XKR, other than that & the better price, any reason to consider a late model XKR over a leftover new XK?

Also any differences in the '10 vs '11 XK's

Thanks.
 
Reply
Old Oct 27, 2010 | 06:57 PM
  #2  
ed1655's Avatar
Member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 54
Likes: 1
From: Northern CA
Default

i don't know of any difference between the '10 and '11. differences that i DO know about a pre '10 xkr and post '10 xk (and not by any means a comprehensive list) are the following

- new xk has led tail lamps, old xkr does not
- new xk has a nicer interior (reverse stitching, some better color options, some more leather)
- new xk has dial transmission shifter that raises when the car starts. some like it, some prefer the old j-gate
- new xk has different front bumper treatment on the lower half
- old xkr has a supercharger, of course, hence the power advantage
- old xkr has dual "quad" exhaust, new xk just has dual single outlets
- old xkr built under ford supervision
- new xk supervised by Tata motors
- old xkr has "CAT" suspension, more tuned for spirited driving. firmer but also somewhat adaptive according to Jaguar. new xk will have stock non-R suspension... will be softer in general
 
Reply
Old Feb 9, 2011 | 11:26 AM
  #3  
quaker13's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 131
Likes: 9
From: DC
Default

bump
 
Reply
Old Feb 9, 2011 | 06:37 PM
  #4  
racerxf12004's Avatar
Senior Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 230
Likes: 122
From: Chino Hills CA
Default

Originally Posted by ed1655
- old xkr has a supercharger, of course, hence the power advantage

- old xkr built under ford supervision
- new xk supervised by Tata motors
-
All XKR's are supercharged-no mater what year.
Tata motors is just an ownership thing. I dont think the newer car is better or worse because of that....
 
Reply
Old Feb 10, 2011 | 09:49 AM
  #5  
quaker13's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 131
Likes: 9
From: DC
Default

New XK, 0-60 5.2 seconds and is slightly remodeled, more expensive
OLD XKR, 0-60 4.8 seconds but you get the infamous hood vents and R designation

my dealer recommends a new XK over the old XKR, but I think he just has ulterior motives
 
Reply
Old Feb 10, 2011 | 10:50 AM
  #6  
carelm's Avatar
Veteran Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,327
Likes: 168
From: Fairfax, VA
Default

I would think the new XKs would be more reliable in the out-years after the warranty period. Also, they have a bit more development time under their belts as well.

Mike
 
Reply
Old Feb 10, 2011 | 04:03 PM
  #7  
jallitt's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 123
Likes: 23
From: New Zealand
Default

I havent driven a 2010 but I have owned a normally aspirated 07 XK and currently drive an 08 XKR portfolio.

The 2 cars are completely different to drive and it's not just the extra horsepower. On the "R" steering is a bit tighter, suspension is stiffer (but not uncomfortable), transmission shift points are different (better), traction control interferes less, the exhaust note is "better", it goes around corners faster, and is much more "fun" to drive.

So, assuming the 2010 XK is just like the old one but with a few more HP, the older "R" would still win (in my opinion).

I think if you drove a normally aspirated 2010 XK, then test drove a supercharged 4.2 - you'd want the 4.2 (or you'd be trying to find some more cash to buy a supercharged 2010).
 
Reply
Old Feb 10, 2011 | 05:04 PM
  #8  
billmeridian's Avatar
Member
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
From: Cali
Default

2010 xk should be more refined but with the first year production of*the 5.0 engine there might be some minor growing pains there. *those times seems conservative. *i have read *some 4.2 xkr run 4.2 to 4.5 sec in 0 to 60.*
http://tinyurl.com/4acrpy9
http://tinyurl.com/4po3wvy
http://tinyurl.com/4ha7rtq*

i can not imagine what the*5.0 xkr can run with even more power.i am looking for a 4.2 xk as it is a proven engine but most likely it*is what I can afford.
 
Reply
Old Feb 10, 2011 | 05:12 PM
  #9  
billmeridian's Avatar
Member
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
From: Cali
Default

2010 xk should be more refined but with the first year production of*the 5.0 engine there might be some minor growing pains there. *those times seems conservative. *i have read *some 4.2 xkr run 4.2 to 4.5 sec in 0 to 60.*
http://tinyurl.com/4acrpy9
http://tinyurl.com/4po3wvy
http://tinyurl.com/4ha7rtq*

i can not imagine what the*5.0 xkr can run with even more power.i am looking for a 4.2 xk as it is a proven engine but most likely it*is what I can afford.
 
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2011 | 06:40 AM
  #10  
carelm's Avatar
Veteran Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,327
Likes: 168
From: Fairfax, VA
Default

Originally Posted by billmeridian
2010 xk should be more refined but with the first year production of*the 5.0 engine there might be some minor growing pains there. *those times seems conservative. *i have read *some 4.2 xkr run 4.2 to 4.5 sec in 0 to 60.*
http://tinyurl.com/4acrpy9
http://tinyurl.com/4po3wvy
http://tinyurl.com/4ha7rtq*

i can not imagine what the*5.0 xkr can run with even more power.i am looking for a 4.2 xk as it is a proven engine but most likely it*is what I can afford.
Bill,

In 2008 R&T tested an XKR and came up with 0-60 in 4.2 secs, quarter-mile in 12.6 secs. I would think a 2010 or later XKR would be able to do a sub 4.0 sec 0-60 and very low 12 or high 11 second quarter mile time.

Mike
 
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2011 | 08:36 AM
  #11  
quaker13's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 131
Likes: 9
From: DC
Default

Originally Posted by carelm
Bill,

In 2008 R&T tested an XKR and came up with 0-60 in 4.2 secs, quarter-mile in 12.6 secs. I would think a 2010 or later XKR would be able to do a sub 4.0 sec 0-60 and very low 12 or high 11 second quarter mile time.

Mike
Jesus, that's quick. I always that it was high 4's.
 
Reply
Old Feb 12, 2011 | 10:33 AM
  #12  
ddsski's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 271
Likes: 26
From: CT
Default

Go to You Tube and see the cars the new XKR destroys in those rolling drag races in Europe somewhere. Pretty impressive stuff. Look for XKR v.>>>
 
Reply
Old Dec 27, 2012 | 10:09 AM
  #13  
ds1058's Avatar
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
From: NY
Default XK/XKR 2009 or 2010

The 2 cars are completely different to drive and it's not just the extra horsepower. On the "R" steering is a bit tighter, suspension is stiffer (but not uncomfortable), transmission shift points are different (better), traction control interferes less, the exhaust note is "better", it goes around corners faster, and is much more "fun" to drive.

So, assuming the 2010 XK is just like the old one but with a few more HP, the older "R" would still win (in my opinion).

I think if you drove a normally aspirated 2010 XK, then test drove a supercharged 4.2 - you'd want the 4.2 (or you'd be trying to find some more cash to buy a supercharged 2010).[/QUOTE]
------------------------------------------------------------

I am seriously considering your advice! A 2009 XKR sounds like more fun
to drive, and is pretty enough for me. (and 100K warranty)
Do you still hold by this opinion?
 
Reply
Old Dec 27, 2012 | 10:17 AM
  #14  
mosesbotbol's Avatar
Veteran Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 6,286
Likes: 1,208
From: Boston, USA
Default

I'd go for the newer XK. I like the styling changes.
 
Reply
Old Dec 27, 2012 | 10:20 AM
  #15  
ds1058's Avatar
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
From: NY
Default

I am seriously considering your advice! A 2009 XKR sounds like more fun to drive,
and is pretty enough for me. (and 100K warranty)
Do you still hold by this opinion?
 
Reply
Old Dec 27, 2012 | 10:23 AM
  #16  
r0m8470's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 503
Likes: 44
From: Seattle
Default

The pre-model year 2010 XKR engine is basically still the same one from the X100-generation. There are some modifications but not a lot. Go talk to an independent Jag mechanic - and he/she would be able to tell you what the changes are ... but whatever they are, they're minor.

You do still get the tighter setup of a high performance model - meaning different suspension setting, steering setup etc, with the R. Oh ... the exhaust is different too.

The model year 2010-and-later XK, has the new 5.0 motor, which is a monster. This is anecdotal, my indy mechanic told me - he went to a class with other lead mechanics from various Jag dealerships to get themselves current on the AJ gen III motor - and on its normal form - it pulled (w/o blower) past 500hp. You would probably lose the seat-in-the-pants push from a blown motor though.

I drove a MY2012 XK, during the Jaguar Alive event - and for most of daily and highway cruising, that car is plenty quick, and comfortable too. (Jeremy) Clarkson would've dubbed the ride as 'cosseting' - whatever that means - sorry, English is not my native tongue.
 
Reply
Old Dec 27, 2012 | 10:30 AM
  #17  
chakka's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 111
Likes: 4
From: Maryland
Default

I have a friend that has a 2010 XKR, I have 2009 XKR Portfolio.

His car seems much quicker, but it's all relative. Mine is plenty fast for the street. I think some of it comes down to personal preference. 2009 being the last year of the 4.2l should make is pretty reliable, but i'm sure the 5.0l isn't unreliable. Positive of newer is more original warranty pending inservice date, but that's why they make extended warranties.
As mentioned above, you need to drive the 2010/2011 XK then the 2008/2009 XKR back to back. I shopped for months to find "the one" and eventually I found it. Take your time and don't settle for anything less than what you want.

I think a select edition 09' XKR with the right options could be a great deal and leave money in your pocket...as of Jan. 1, your bargain chips go up because the cars are now another year older......but either one will leave a smile on your face.

I was able to get my 2009 Portfolio(w/adaptive cruise) 39k miles with additional 3yr/36,000mile warranty(CNA Platinum) for $46,500 to give you some idea. Car has new tires & brakes as well.

Good luck and keep us all posted!
 

Last edited by chakka; Dec 27, 2012 at 10:39 AM.
Reply
Old Dec 27, 2012 | 10:35 AM
  #18  
hawaii's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 474
Likes: 99
From: Maui
Default

Cosseting means to "pamper or coddle"
 
Reply
Old Dec 27, 2012 | 02:55 PM
  #19  
aahmichael's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 428
Likes: 34
From: Pittsford, NY
Default

A car is so much more than numbers and statistics and theoretical performance, especially these cars, because they are filled with soul. You won't know about the soul of the car until you get in it and drive it. There are a lot of differences between the pre-2010 models versus 2010+ models that go way past the engine. I don't see how anyone could choose without literally experiencing the cars that you're choosing from. Not only that, what may be the right choice for one person, could easily be the wrong choice for another.
 
Reply
Old Dec 27, 2012 | 07:11 PM
  #20  
ralphwg's Avatar
Veteran Member
10 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,959
Likes: 1,240
From: Los Angeles CA
Default

aahmichael is right on the button. I traded a 2008 xk vert for 2012 xk vert. Under the skin (body) the new one (12) is light years ahead of the 08 in speed and regular handling In addition it has a sport mode as well, which gives you more power, higher shift points and better handling. To me The 12 is an all around superior vehicle than the 08. Granted I'm comparing NA to NA not an XKR to an XK. Test drive both before you buy!!
 
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:10 AM.