Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Jaguar Cars / December 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

X Type ..... 2L (2.1) or 2.5L ??

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Seany - 06 Dec 2005 18:58 GMT
I have asked a similar question before, along with many other questions,
whilst deciding on which car to go for next.

Now I have decided it will be an X-Type, either the sport or the SE trim
levels, but I can't decide on the engine choice.

I haven't yet test driven either model, something I obviously plan to do.
What I would like though, is actual users inputs.

Those of you with 2L models .... are you happy with the outputs?
Is the front wheel drive set up a good one?
Better with manual or Auto box?
How does economy compare to Jag's claims?

Like-wise with the 2.5L users
Was the initial outlay warranted, for the extra power and/or the AWD set-up
How is ACTUAL economy bearing up compared to Manufacturers claims
How are the manual/auto gearboxes when mated to the 2.5 engine?

ALL comments welcome, either on here or to my e mail address (beware spam
trap in address)

I know I have to test drive each, but the experiences of actual owners is an
invaluable tap of info!

TIA

Seany
peter marshall - 07 Dec 2005 00:12 GMT
>I have asked a similar question before, along with many other questions,
>whilst deciding on which car to go for next.
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>
> Seany

Hi

i've had a 2.5 SE for 2 and a half years, done 54000 miles and I love it. I
didnt test a 2.1 but did test a manual and auto 2.5. In my opinion the
manual was much quicker and more of a drivers car,,,so thats what I bought.

I do a lot of motroway driving but not what you'd call slow and I get about
26MPG (UK)...if i'm careful on the motorway I can get 30MPG...but i'm seldom
carefull :-o

for what it's worth, my car has been prettyu faultless and the faults it did
have were sorted by my dealer under warranty...heater vents lifting,
steering pump leak, roll bars (front and back) duff...

The only thing i'd doubt are jags quoted 0-60 times...unless you get it
right it's hard to launch the 2.5 quick because it can get bogged
down...that said I know it's quicker than the 2.1 and the 2.0d by quite a
bit and i can drive nearly everywhere in top gear as it's quick torquey

Pete

p.s the 2.5 did really well in the snow last xmas...i passed loads of other
cars with ease on hills etc when they were stuck and all on std tyres...I
use avons by the way...
Alan Mudd - 07 Dec 2005 15:46 GMT
We bought my wife a new 2.1 Auto this year, it's slow, but she's delighted
with it all the same.

There is a huge performance difference between the 2.1 and 2.5 (infact they
no longer make the 2.1 petrol).

Fuel consumption difference is negligible.

We're delighted, we will be replacing it with the same car when the time
comes but we'll buy the 2.5 this time.

Alan M

Signature

www.atstone.co.uk

Marble & Limestone Importers

01883 731485
07774 758770

Ainsworth Family - 07 Dec 2005 23:38 GMT
The 2.1 is underpowered for automatic transmission but OK in manual form - a
bit lighter handling than the AWD but obviously not as good in slippery
conditions.  2.5 auto is just about OK - the autobox, AWD and extra weight
bring its performance down to towards the 2.1 manual though.  2.5 manual is
quite good, although the clutch is a bit quirky.  I have a 3.0SE auto, which
is excellent, and on wet roads in particular the AWD means that it will
out-accelerate almost everything.  I've averaged 24.5 mpg over 30,000 miles
in 3 years, and I tend to use the performance (its rock steady at 135 mph,
even on bends).  You might also try the diesel engine versions.

Paul A.
paul~~at~~midcreek.com

> Now I have decided it will be an X-Type, either the sport or the SE trim
> levels, but I can't decide on the engine choice.
Seany - 10 Dec 2005 15:57 GMT
Thanks for the replies guys n gals

Kinda got my heart set on a 2.5 Sport model.
Good few around, and I'm not in a rush to buy, so will hold out for that
'right car at the right price'

I notice that the 3.0 models are fetching a little less than the 2.5
versions at the mo .... desirability??

> The 2.1 is underpowered for automatic transmission but OK in manual form -
> a bit lighter handling than the AWD but obviously not as good in slippery
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>> Now I have decided it will be an X-Type, either the sport or the SE trim
>> levels, but I can't decide on the engine choice.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.