MM Retro Write-Up: 2001-2011 Jaguar X-Type























IN A NUTSHELL: Classic Jaguar on the surface, Not-so-Classic Ford under the skin.


While also known over the years for classic sports cars like the XK120 and XKE models (and the D-Type in Grand Prix racing), Jaguar also held a reputation for slick, beautifully-styled, but, unfortunately, not-so-well-built sedans. The standard Jaguar joke is that “I drove my Jag Coast-to-Coast, and it only caught fire once”….a sop to the notoriously unreliable British cork-gaskets and Lucas electrical system, plus the typical spotty quality-control in British auto-plants.

However, for those who were willing to tolerate frequent trips to the repair shop, and a vehicle perhaps less than ideally-screwed together, Jaguar sedans, especially for the price, were near the ultimate in eye-friendly styling, rich woods (including Burled Walnut) on the dash/console/door-panels, equally rich Connally Leather, and real metallic chrome…no plastic stuff. Unlike some competing brands, there was no denying a Jaguar body and interior. What you saw was what you got, although today, for the poor cows, there are also some excellent leather-substitutes…IMO the Lexus NuLuxe is the best one.

Jaguar, today, under the ownership of India’s Tata Motors, is also no longer the Jaguar of old in body and interior styling/materials….they essentially forgot their heritage (or, perhaps the bean-counters won out with cost-cutting) and essentially produce Teutonic-style vehicles. Tata acquired Jaguar and Land Rover when Ford essentially said “Ta-Ta” to both companies (pun intended), and sold them off in 2008 to control costs and help them avoid the bankruptcies/reorganizations that both GM and Chrysler went through a year or so later.

But, when Jaguar was under Ford’s ownership, one of the more interesting products, at least IMO, to come from that union was the X-Type sedan and wagon, which was derived from Ford’s CD132 platform, which also produced the compact Euro-market Ford Mondeo and the Ford Contour/Mercury Mystique in the U.S. I liked both of them, and thought they were quite well-built, with solid body sheet metal, decent if somewhat plain-looking interior materials, and a tank-solid Thunk to the door-closings. They also offered a beautiful light pinkish-orange Coral paint color. One of my neighbors has a Contour SVT (the sport-oriented version) some 25 years old and still running….he drives it regularly. I even considered buying the slightly upmarket Mercury Mystique version, although, at the time, I liked the plastic-bodied Saturn S-Class sedans even more.

So, since Ford had good success with both the widely-successful Euro-Mondeo and the American-market Contour/Mystique, the planners figured they would try a Jaguar-inspired version…which went on, of course, to become the X-Type. The X-Type would use the Mondeo chassis/platform, and, in the U.S., a choice of non-turbo 2.5L or 3.0L V6 engines and 5-speed manual or 5-speed automatic transmissions…as I recall, most of the ones sold in the U.S. had the 3.0L and automatic, although a smaller 2.1L V6 became available later. AWD was standard in U.S. versions (unusual for a sedan that size, unless it was a Subaru Legacy), although FWD became available later with the smaller engine, which was too weak for the extra weight/drag of AWD. Turbocharged four-cylinder diesel versions were available overseas, but not in the U.S. The body styling would use the traditional Jaguar flared-fenders, formal roofline, split-front grille, chrome leaping-cat hood ornament, and roundish four separate headlights. In other words, it would look more or less like a smaller version of the mid-size Jaguar S-Type, which shared platforms with the highly-rated Lincoln LS. Inside, the X-Type would have the typical Jaguar wood and leather, although, perhaps because of its lower price (then the lowest-price Jaguar available in the U.S.), the Walnut-wood strips were left off the door panels. I really liked the package…except for the odd and gimmicky J-shaped shift-lever pattern, which I was not a fan of in other Jaguars either. Those used to Jaguar’s opulent full-size XJ sedan interiors might not have been that impressed, but the X-Class made its Contour and Mystique brothers look almost military-stark inside by comparison. Also quite unusual for the period, both 4-door sedan and 5-door wagon versions were marketed in the U.S…….wagons were still popular in Europe, but, in the U.S., the exploding minivan/crossover/SUV market had generally made them obsolete.

As I suspected would be the case, the wagon version sold quite poorly here in the U.S., and even the sedans were not all that popular. I got a chance to sample a sedan on a decent-length test-drive, and, while I liked the looks of the package, I didn’t think it drove particularly smoothly or slickly for something with the Jag nameplate. I was also somewhat unimpressed wth the general build quality (they came from a British plant), and my sample felt somewhat loose in assembly, with several squeaks/rattles/creaks in the interior and basic structure. As much as I liked the concept, I don’t think I would have bought or leased one and took it home. The competing First-Generation Lexus IS300 compact sedan (one of which I DID buy and take home) was far more solidly-built inside and out…arguably the most solidly-built new car I ever owned, though not without some minor transmission and climate-control glitches.

Consumer Reports confirmed the low reliability-rating of the Jaguar X-Type, and, although it was officially listed as in production until 2011, it was, in effect, pretty much out of production by the end of 2009.

Despite its flaws, the X-Type was actually one of the last new Jaguars (along with the last-generation XJ sedan) that appealed to me. Shortly after that, as I mentioned earlier, Jaguar began changing the style of their vehicles to a more plain and Teutonic style, and the classic wood/chrome/leather packages became a thing of the past. Except for reviews and write-ups, I lost most of my interest in the nameplate. They, in effect, tried to fix what wasn’t broken.

And, as Always……Happy Vehicle-Memories.

MM

 

Looking back. Nice car 👍

 

Yes......definitely a nice car on the surface. Too much Ford under the surface, though, and not enough Jag.

 

I'm torn, I one hand I am quite okay with the style, the AWD and wagon options are GREAT but oh lord do these suck to work on and they are always broken.

I still strongly remember a 70k mile one that was falling apart somehow, everything was leaking, three O2s were bad, struts were blown out, mounts/bushings dead, etc. It was bad.

Really sucks since an AWD wagon with a euro market diesel or even just the normal non-Jag molested 3.0 duratec is killer utility combo vehicle that is still nice inside and drives well with good MPG. It would be a nice alternative to what I use for those roles now but lord knows my Jeep breaks too much already.

This car would get shot.

 

I’ve had/have four recent JLR products, my F Type V8, an XJ, a Range Rover and my Defender and all four have been reliable. The only cars that have ever left us actually stranded were my 550i and our Lexus RX….

 

Just out of curiosity, how long did you keep those four JLR products? Not all serious problems in vehicles creep up at low mileage. JLR products, though, compared to other makes, tend to be worse than average in the reliability department.

 

generally 3 years or so, we tend to change cars around that time, longer with the F Type. None of our cars tend to get to high mileages because we’re able to spread our driving over a few vehicles. So these haven’t been high mile examples. But if you believe the old stereotypes, most Jags etc break down on the first drive home, right

 

What's ironic is that the XJ of this era (X350) was a rather reliable vehicle with the unkillable AJ 4.2 V8, and the only major issue being corrosion because of its aluminum body. Same with the S-Type and its corroding door sills. The X-Type was meant to be a budget Jag but had far more issues with its electronics and powertrains despite being based mostly on a Ford. Then again, it's not like Ford was ever a bastion of top quality.

 

Three years, with average miles driven, is often enough to give an idea of long-term reliability. By then, you are usually dealing with components that fail from extended- wear rather than just sloppy or defective assembly at the plant.



Yes, that's why I mentioned one of them in the write-up....about Jags only catching fire once on a coast-to-coast trip. But, like I said...that's an OLD stereotype. Actually, on average, their reliability improved somewhat when Ford took over in the 1990s.....although the X-Type was not really the best example of that.

 

The S-Type, though, even sharing platforms with the Lincoln LS, seemed to ride and drive more like a real Jag than the X-Type, which, as you yourself put it, despite its nice looks, drove like a budget-Jag.


From what I recall, during that period, Ford's quality, overall, though not comparable to Toyota or Lexus, was a notch above that of GM or Chrysler.