[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
 | [Main Other Cars Bulletin Board | BBFAQ |
Prev by Date | Next by Date | Post Followup ]
Member Login / Signup - Members see fewer ads. - Latest Member Gallery Photos
Re: The July issue of Classic Motorsports... Posted by Justin VanAbrahams [Email]  (#32) [Profile/Gallery]
(more from Justin VanAbrahams) on Thu, 8 Aug 2013 22:09:41
In Reply to: Re: The July issue of Classic Motorsports..., Paul9kCSE, Wed, 7 Aug 2013 07:25:58 Members do not see ads below this line. - Help Keep This Site Online - Signup |
Compared to other cars in the driveway, the Jaguar is a bank vault. I commute frequently in a 1962 Ford Falcon. I've never seen actual crash test data, but real world safety is said to be on par with the S-class, and the '03s in particular have safety records on par with Volvo. Of course, that statement is moderated by the fact that the average driver of any of these cars probably isn't prone to getting into wrecks like, say, a Corvette or Mustang. The X308 (what I've got) is an evolution of the prior X300 which is an evolution of the late '80s XJ40. Like the original XJ, Jaguar knew it was going to have to milk the platform for a good long time, so it was built to meet every anticipated safety regulation, including the 40mph offset collision laws that never happened. In the following years, at each step of the evolution, safety was improved - inclusion of additional high strength steel, addition of a second front bulkhead, addition of more airbags, etc. Jaguar was Ford's true luxury bet, and they went to great lengths to keep the XJ competitive with Lexus, Mercedes, etc. at all levels.
Is it the safest MY2003 car on the road? Probably not. Is it as safe as a c900 (1979), 9000 (1984), NG900 (~1988 or ~1994), or 9-5 (1998)? Almost certainly. It's made of a lot of high strength steel. :)
As for the drive, well, I'm not sure how to answer that. It's kind of personal! It is nothing like a 9-5 or 9000, probably on account of an extra 800-1000lbs. It's much smaller and much lighter than an S-class, it's competition was the 5-series, E-class, Lexus GS, or Infiniti M. Honestly, I don't think it's ultimately as capable as any of them, but the point at which that becomes a problem is so far beyond the legal limits it's not worth caring about. The platform is far older than the others, and to a degree that shows (mostly over expansion joints or really wrecked pavement), but we're talking degrees of optimal - not Hyundai vs. BMW.
Really, it drives exactly like you'd expect a 4000lb 400hp car with a slushbox and 255/40-18s targeted at people with more dollars than sense should drive... It's simply way more competent than anyone has any real use for. ;) More grip and more power to be sure!
The cars I've driven that are the most direct comparison would be my old '07 CTS-V, a friend's M45, a coworker's E55 AMG, and another coworker's E39 M5. Frankly, it gives up before any of them do - save maybe the M45 - but at that point you're either well into the triple digits or there is smoke pouring out of the wheel wells. It's academic. It's a little more crashy than the E55 or M5 but not in a jarring sort of way, and it lacks gadgets those cars have but that is a positive to me as a used buyer. And, honestly, a lack of gadgets results in a reduction of buttons and like Ron Burgundy, it keeps the interior classy.
The bottom line for me is that within the limits of common roadway safety it does everything its competition does and leaves me wanting for nothing. It's quiet, comfortable, obscenely fast and leaves nothing to spare on on-ramps or interchanges. Moreover, it looks amazing every where it goes - although I still love the E39's styling, it looks like an old BMW. The Jag has classic proportions and lines that I just don't think will ever get old. It won of lot of acclaim in its day, and I'd say for good reason.
posted by 69.62.18...
, Mon, 1 Jul 2013 16:48:18, Sun, 14 Jul 2013 13:55:52, Wed, 17 Jul 2013 17:08:50, Thu, 8 Aug 2013 22:09:41 <-- Viewing This Message, Fri, 9 Aug 2013 11:31:42, Fri, 9 Aug 2013 16:00:11, Mon, 12 Aug 2013 16:59:20, Thu, 18 Jul 2013 10:48:53, Thu, 18 Jul 2013 12:07:46, Fri, 19 Jul 2013 13:24:05, Fri, 16 Aug 2013 11:16:40
, Tue, 16 Jul 2013 13:19:11, Tue, 16 Jul 2013 11:17:07, Tue, 2 Jul 2013 10:08:51
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
