1973 Jaguar Xk on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Is the Jaguar XFR-S really worth $17k more than the XFR? [w/poll]

Adding performance to a car is rarely cheap - whether you're looking to do it yourself or rely on the factory to do it for you. In the case of the new Jaguar XFR-S, the cost differential over an already-impressive (and somewhat expensive) XFR is a stout $16,800. Auto Express recently got a hold of both cars to see whether that price pays off on the track.
For that price, Jaguar gives the XFR-S an extra 40 horsepower and 41 pound-feet of torque - for a total of 550 hp and 502 lb-ft - to go with a stiffer suspension, beefed-up differential and, of course, meaner styling. We don't want to ruin the results of the AE video, but right off the bat, the host says that you can feel the extra power of the XFR-S, but that it's not a "night-and-day difference."
Scroll down to see what happens when two high-powered Jags go head-to-head on a track. And then be sure to let us know whether or not you think the added money is worth it for the XFR-S in the completely informal poll below.

2013 Jaguar XF 3.0 Supercharged

Generally speaking, I don't get too upset about the growing need to replace displacement in modern cars. Sure, there are exceptions (don't you touch my 6.2-liter AMG V8), but honestly, the industry's new forced induction powertrains are all lovely, and their gains in fuel economy - when they actually make good on them - can make up for the ever-so-slight losses in performance or driving character.
But I'm having a hard time keeping my chin up with this Jaguar XF. For the 2013 model year, Jaguar has killed off the naturally aspirated 5.0-liter V8 and fitted a supercharged 3.0-liter V6 with an eight-speed automatic in its place (and even offers a turbocharged four-cylinder engine below that). That all sounds perfectly well and good, but a week behind the wheel of this British Racing Green sedan just left me missing that V8. And then some.
Driving Notes

Jaguar may join the FWD, small-car parade

Was it right for Chevrolet to detune the 1975 Corvette's base engine to 165 horsepower? Was Aston Martin wrong to make the Toyota iQ-based Cygnet? Is BMW crazy to be testing the new 1 Series with three-cylinder engines and front-wheel drive? It seems now, just as in the 1970s and 1980s, that emissions regulations and social considerations are driving some automakers to adopt unbefitting practices to maintain acceptance in the eyes of governments and consumers. Jaguar has jumped on the bandwagon, and is considering development of small, frugal, front-wheel-drive cars to help lower Jaguar Land Rover's average vehicle CO2 levels in light of tightening European emissions regulations, Autocar reports.
By 2020, the European Union expects the model range of every manufacturer to average 95 grams per kilometer, which is a new law passed by the European Parliament in April. Manufacturers who make more than 300,000 vehicles per year must meet these targets, and JLR is expected to be producing up to 700,000 vehicles per year by then. CO2 regulations after 2020 will only get stricter, as EU politicians already are talking about lowering CO2 levels to between 68 g/km and 78 g/km. (To put that in perspective, Autocar posits that driving a fully charged electric vehicle in Europe produces about 75 g/km when factoring in the power-generation infrastructure.)
Jaguar has some choices here, but so far they all have drawbacks. It could develop a new, compact chassis architecture for a line of compact vehicles, but the investment required for such a project could be prohibitively expensive. Jaguar has been looking into using the Land Rover Evoque platform for a small SUV, Autocar reports, but Land Rover brand manager John Edwards raises issue with such a plan, saying it may not be financially feasible.