Jaguar XJS for Sale
1990 jaguar xjs classic convertible v12 low miles very clean(US $14,990.00)
1989 jaguar xjs v12 low miles(US $12,900.00)
Jaguar xjs convertible low miles very clean
1988 jaguar xjs low milleage needs paint
1996 jaguar xjs convertible 350 v8 conversion(US $24,500.00)
1995 jaguar xjs v12 2+2 convertible
Auto blog
The diesel premium in our Jaguar XE quickly pays for itself
Thu, May 25 2017Our long-term 2017 Jaguar XE 20d AWD recently returned from a 2,000-mile road trip. My wife and I took a few days to visit her family in Auburn, Alabama, and it was the first real chance anyone has had to stretch the Jaguar's legs outside of Michigan. It was also a good opportunity to see what sort of fuel economy I could wring out of the XE's 2.0-liter turbocharged diesel. The diesel engine was the main reason I chose it over our equally lovely long-term 2017 Audi A4. For me, chasing fuel economy is a great way to stay focused on the road. The XE 20d AWD is rated at 30 city/40 highway and 34 combined. The drive to and from Auburn is almost entirely highway, so I knew matching the highway rating would be easy enough. The XE has a 14.8 gallon tank, so I was looking at a minimum of 600 miles per tank and four fills for the trip, counting the initial pre-departure fill. I had two main concerns: first, this was a new route, so I didn't know how available diesel would be along I-75; second, crossing the Appalachian Mountains was going to severely cut into my overall average. The first worry turned out to be a nonissue, especially as we went further south. Not once was I forced to go from station to station looking for a lone green-handled pump. People in the South love their Cummins, Powerstroke, and Duramax-powered trucks, meaning diesel pumps were plentiful. Rolling up in a Jaguar does garner attention, though. An older gentleman even asked if I knew that I was putting diesel in the car. It seems he didn't have much faith in my reading comprehension skills. The mountains were more of a problem. There was literally no getting around them, but were west of the highest parts, so it could have been worse. The indicated fuel economy dropped by 4 mpg on the way up, from 47 mpg to 43. Still, I managed more than 650 miles from a tank, though I was starting to push my luck. We filled up for the short final leg. By the time we rolled into Auburn, the display indicated 44 mpg – pretty damn good, I'd say. It held there for the entire trip. Calculating the actual mileage revealed the computer was generous by 2 mpg, but that's par for the course. Few automakers display precise numbers. The relative ease of getting this sort of fuel economy was complemented by the price of diesel. At each one of my four stops, diesel cost less than premium, the required fuel in all of the XE's gasoline engines. According to AAA, the same is true nationwide.
Jaguar C-X75 production run canceled
Tue, 11 Dec 2012"We feel we could make the car work, but looking at the global austerity measures in place now, it seems the wrong time to launch an 800,000-pound to 1 million-pound supercar."
Those words are from Jaguar Global Brand Director Adrian Hallmark, and as true as they may be, it still stings a little bit. After all, we've been looking forward to the Jaguar C-X75 ever since word came from Jolly Olde that it was green-lit for a short production run.
Some of the cool bits and pieces the world will now be without: a powerful but relatively miserly 1.6-liter turbocharged and supercharged four-cylinder engine, two electric motors driving all four wheels and a carbon fiber chassis developed by Williams F1. Sigh.
Jaguar design boss admits X-Type was a mistake
Thu, 19 Sep 2013History has a way of repeating itself, especially in the auto industry. When Jaguar was owned by Ford, the British brand attempted to field a competitor for the BMW 3 Series, called the X-Type. Based on the bones of a Ford Mondeo, it aped the styling of Jaguar's flagship model, the XJ, while borrowing liberally from the Ford parts bin. That was 2001.
Now, in 2013, Jaguar is planning a new 3 Series challenger based on the platform previewed by the C-X17 Concept, while Ford is attempting to take the latest Mondeo upmarket. The moves have both brands recognizing where, why, and how the X-Type failed. "It didn't look mature or powerful or anything. It was just a car," Jaguar's current head of advanced design, Julian Thomson, told PistonHeads. Basing the X-Type on a front-drive car while giving it styling that was meant for a rear-driver lead to proportions that "were plainly wrong," Thomson told PH. Ford's European head of quality, Gunnar Herrmann, added that the X-Type was "a fake Jaguar, because every piece I touch is Ford."
For what it's worth, the X-Type's successor in the segment will sport rear-drive, with plenty of input from Ian Callum. Thomson described the new model, which would challenge the 3 Series as having, "Big wheels right to the ends of the car, low bonnet, short overhangs, very low cabins." Sounds good to us.























