Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > Mercedes-Benz Tech Information and Support > Mercedes-Benz Performance Paddock

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 04-19-2002, 11:08 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 223
I had a '95 XJ12 sedan (with all the Van den Plas luxuries, but with the V-12 and all options) -- great car. Jaguar reliability from '95 forward is actually quite good, esp if you can find a good independent to work on them (parts are expensive). The electronic problems (which really was an issue in the 70s and early 80s and in the square headlight sedans of the '88 - '94 period) have been cured. I would say that maintenance costs are comparable to those of the E-class and certainly below those of, say, the 140s.

I cannot speak to the durability of the supercharged 6 in the older XJ-Rs, but they were actually not quite as fast as my V-12 (which was faster than both the BMW 750 and the S600 due to the gearing and lighter weight). The newer XJ-Rs have the supercharged V-8 and are significantly faster than the older 6s, which may be why the older 6 cyl XJ-Rs have depreciated so.

Jaguar also significantly tilts the leasing toward 24 months, which may explain the plethora of recent models in the market. Some of the old maintenance reputational hangover probably also has resulted in price depression, making ofr good values.

The cabin is indeed relatively tight, esp in the front, due to the large center console and the wide door handles and pockets -- if you're under 6 feet tall, it's actually very comfortable. The "luxury" quality of the interior is, IMO, the best of any car, tho maybe not as durable as the M-B interiors. The dark wood in the Rs are less to my personal taste than the walnut in the other Jaguar sedans.

The R ride is stiffened up from the normal XJ andf there are wider tires, which improve the handling. The ride will feel more fluid and supple than a M-B tho not as solid or "grounded". Jaguars appreciate good roads and do not like potholes and abusive pavement.

If the price is right (i.e., someone has already taken the depreciation for you) and you can find a good mechanic, I would say go for it -- can be a lot of car for the money, distinctive and a pleasure to drive on good roads. I think that the Jaguar image and style still has a cachet, even against M-Bs. In particular, women love Jaguars (my wife also had an '86 Series III XJ-6 -- the peak of the pre-Ford styling and reliability).

__________________
'98 C43 AMG
'88 420SEL
'93 190E Limited Edition (including factory Sportline package)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
96 S500 rides rougher than a 2003 S55. Ken Griffith Tech Help 1 06-14-2004 08:53 PM
1992 - 1999 W140 change list.... I need your helps..... akry Off-Topic Discussion 5 06-13-2003 02:34 AM
S500 ? D.K. Featured Cars 6 12-03-2002 06:30 PM
An observation regarding S500 vs. BMW 745i RG5384 Off-Topic Discussion 3 11-07-2002 07:53 PM
Test Drove 1998 S500. What else do I need to know? EricSilver Tech Help 8 07-15-2002 10:00 AM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page