Yet another Honda Traitor

[chaqui74]

its a FORD undercover . Honda has a better value and quality . have fun and enjoy ur new car.

[accord-boy]

nice!

[p0tempkin]

Congrats, your Jag made an exclusive list this year: http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/auto...cars-to-avoid/

[Peniole]

Originally Posted by chaqui74

its a FORD undercover . Honda has a better value and quality . have fun and enjoy ur new car.

Ford no longer owns Jaguar. Value; 40.7K for a 300hp 310tq 4.2L V8 RWD with a standard equipment list a mile long? Quality; beats the snot out of my Accord when it comes to quality of materials/fit and finish/quietness if that's what you meant.

Originally Posted by accord-boy

nice!

Thank you

Originally Posted by p0tempkin

Congrats, your Jag made an exclusive list this year: http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/auto...cars-to-avoid/

Thanks for the congrats newbie and welcome to the forum. Green isn't a particularly nice colour but seriously...

"To determine the worst clunkers on the road, we paired Vincentric's five-year repair-cost data for 2009 models with reliability ratings from Consumer Reports and based our results on the combination of those scores. The reliability ratings were based on 1.4 million vehicles owned or leased by CR subscribers and covered the model years 2000 to 2009. The higher the cost of repair, and the lower the reliability rating, the worse the vehicle. To break ties, we also looked at vehicles' overall rating from Consumer Reports, which evaluates reliability, owner satisfaction, accident avoidance, crash protection with side airbags, crash protection without side airbags and fuel efficiency."

Seen it, not exactly scientific given the fact that it's new for the US in 09, UK and europe for 08. So where are the numbers they're basng the reliability data part of their calculation on pre 2009? Very small pool they're looking into here in the US, especially a first year run that for any manufacturer is plagued with issues let alone a brand new model line. For more reliable data look at long term road tests and european data where the car has been around for longer. If you want to look up prior reliability look at the s-type which they obviously didn't do in that study even though the same engine and a lot of other systems are carried over (http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Re...TYPE&trimid=-1). JD brand reliability for 09 http://www.jdpower.com/autos/ratings...e-#page-anchor look who's in second place. You can make numbers say whatever you want them to say with the right statistical analysis.

Although, I do hope this dubious honour will make the car even more exclusive. By all means please avoid it yourself

[Trip]

Originally Posted by chaqui74

its a FORD undercover . Honda has a better value and quality . have fun and enjoy ur new car.

My Mazda 6 has "FoMoCo" stamped on quite of few bits and pieces and I have to say the quality has been outstanding. And considering my '09 6 is a first year production model, I'm even more impressed with it.

There haven't been any issues mechanical or otherwise. The interior is *rock* solid - not so much as a jiggle, wiggle, or creak from anything in the interior. The brakes have been absolutely silent and to boot have performed much better than any Honda I've owned. The interior materials - particularly the leather - has been holding up much better, too. It wasn't long before I noticed heavy creases in my coupe's leather. At nearly 13K miles the leather in my 6 is soft, comfortable, and still looks like new. And the drivetrain continues to be reliable, efficient, and fun to beat on.

As for the value, with an MSRP of nearly $32K for an Accord, IMO there are better cars out there for the money. I even lucked out with additional factory incentives and paid not much more than what a Civic costs and got a vehicle with tech not available on the Accord: HIDs, blind spot monitoring, BT audio, auto dim side mirrors, and more.

[Osiris_x11]

Originally Posted by Peniole

Value; 40.7K for a 300hp 310tq 4.2L V8 RWD with a standard equipment list a mile long?

You paid "$40.7k" for your brand-new XK-F? Man, that's an awesome deal!

Everyone that I've seen at the dealership stickered for ~$55k+ (most were near/over ~$60k+).

I keep tabs on all/most late-model Jaguars, as I'm a keen British automobile enthusiast. The XJ-platform did extensive QA/QC overhauling & it was reflected in initial quality & short-term reliability/dependability. From all that I've heard & read of the XK-F, there are some initial issues here-&-there (AutoWeek & Automobile magazines in-house reviews for their test-vehicles). Obviously, a 3-year retro-analysis will offer most insight, and that's at least a year or so away. Regardless of any potential shortcomings, it's a stylish & well performing platform in terms of features, comfort, and overall presence.

[rafael73]

Originally Posted by Peniole

Ford no longer owns Jaguar. Value; 40.7K for a 300hp 310tq 4.2L V8 RWD with a standard equipment list a mile long? Quality; beats the snot out of my Accord when it comes to quality of materials/fit and finish/quietness if that's what you meant.

I will consider an Acura RL. Got better quality and best resell value

Couple of Specs:

Engine type - Aluminum alloy V-6 engine Valve train Variable valve Timing and lift Electronic Control (VTEC®) for intake and exhaust valves, 4 valves per cylinder, with a belt-driven single overhead camshaft
Displacement (liters) - 3.7
Compression ratio - 11.2:1
Horsepower @ rpm (SAE net) - 300 @ 6300
Torque lbs-ft @ rpm - 271 @ 5000
Redline - 6800 rpm
Fuel Injection - PGM-FI multi-point injection
Throttle control - Drive-by-Wire™ Throttle system
Engine block - Cast aluminum alloy with aluminum cylinder liners
Cylinder head - Cast aluminum alloy; 4-valves-per-cylinder; pent-roof combustion chamber design
EPA Estimated Fuel Mileage (city / highway) - 16 / 22 mpg
Required fuel - Premium unleaded 91 octane
Tune-up interval 100K +/- miles no no scheduled tune-ups

My :2cents

[Peniole]

Originally Posted by Osiris_x11

You paid "$40.7k" for your brand-new XK-F? Man, that's an awesome deal!

Everyone that I've seen at the dealership stickered for ~$55k+ (most were near/over ~$60k+).

I keep tabs on all/most late-model Jaguars, as I'm a keen British automobile enthusiast. The XJ-platform did extensive QA/QC overhauling & it was reflected in initial quality & short-term reliability/dependability. From all that I've heard & read of the XK-F, there are some initial issues here-&-there (AutoWeek & Automobile magazines in-house reviews for their test-vehicles). Obviously, a 3-year retro-analysis will offer most insight, and that's at least a year or so away. Regardless of any potential shortcomings, it's a stylish & well performing platform in terms of features, comfort, and overall presence.

You meant XF. Or maybe you did mean XK-F as it is the same engine and suspension bits as the XK. You're right the MSRP for the XF is between 51-60K from the models I saw. I got this almost 12K off. It's the base model, the only extras on it are 19"s instead of the standard 18", a cold climate package, and NAV. Not a lot of movement on jags in the state and the dealer was discounting heavily. I was originally shopping for an E class for my Dad, made an appointment with the salesguy, he was late. So I was walking around the lot and saw the XF (same parent company for the two dealerships). I couldn't pass up the deal, of course after I went home and did my research.

Now is the time to buy from the luxury car segment if you were planning on a purchase soon. The segment is bleeding as they didn't qualify for the clunkers program, and they way the economy is not a lot of people are even looking. You'll find most of them willing to seriously negotiate, whereas before they wouldn't budge.

You're right about initial issues. Mostly software, fuel cap, and some D-ring on the rear seatbelts. Although one serious one was contaminated rear diffs. I made sure to pick one out that was a later production model and well outside the trouble VIN range. I didn't have any worries on the engine, it's been around for "donkey's years" to quote top gear's review, and is well sorted out. The transmission is a ZF, same one used in a list a mile long of really expensive cars including the Quattroporte, a couple of bentleys, and a variant is being used in the new Hyundai genesis. It's been around for a while and has been rock solid so far. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZF_6HP26_transmission

[Peniole]

Originally Posted by rafael73

I will consider an Acura RL. Got better quality and best resell value

Couple of Specs:

Engine type - Aluminum alloy V-6 engine Valve train Variable valve Timing and lift Electronic Control (VTEC®) for intake and exhaust valves, 4 valves per cylinder, with a belt-driven single overhead camshaft
Displacement (liters) - 3.7
Compression ratio - 11.2:1
Horsepower @ rpm (SAE net) - 300 @ 6300
Torque lbs-ft @ rpm - 271 @ 5000
Redline - 6800 rpm
Fuel Injection - PGM-FI multi-point injection
Throttle control - Drive-by-Wire™ Throttle system
Engine block - Cast aluminum alloy with aluminum cylinder liners
Cylinder head - Cast aluminum alloy; 4-valves-per-cylinder; pent-roof combustion chamber design
EPA Estimated Fuel Mileage (city / highway) - 16 / 22 mpg
Required fuel - Premium unleaded 91 octane
Tune-up interval 100K +/- miles no no scheduled tune-ups

My :2cents

Here's the engine specs, you judge

Engine type - High pressure die-cast aluminum alloy V-8 engine with dual overhead cam/chain driven with continuously-variable cam timing/phasing. It sounded a lot like VTEC from the technical description "A hydraulic actuator on each inlet camshaft is operated by a pair of electronically switched oil-pressure control valves, activated by the engine control module - which contains maps of engine speeds and loads." Two cam lobes with different angle of duration and lifts that change between 2800 -4800 RPM depending on load. Sound familliar?
Displacement (liters) - 4.2
Compression ratio - 11.0:1
Horsepower @ rpm (SAE net) - 300 @ 6000
Torque lbs-ft @ rpm - 310 @ 4100 (86% available at 2000RPM, that's 267 3000RPM's earlier)
Redline - 6200-6800 rpm (drive/sport)
Fuel Injection - port multi-point injection
Throttle control - Drive-by-Wire
Engine block - Aluminum alloy with cast in iron cylinder liners, it was originally developed for Nikasil liners but they reacted badly to high sulfur content fuels in both this engine and some of BMW's so they changed their liners to cast iron.
Cylinder head - Cast aluminum alloy; 4-valves-per-cylinder; pentroof combustion chamber design.
EPA Estimated Fuel Mileage (city / highway) - 16 / 25 mpg
Required fuel - Premium unleaded 91 octane
Tune-up interval no scheduled tune-ups for the life of the engine according to the manual and other technical specs I pulled up "direct-acting aluminum bucket tappets need no adjustment for the life of the engine", just replace the spark plugs at 100K.


So no belt to replace, no tuneup, better highway fuel efficiency, and a wider torque band. Both have almost the same curb weight within 80 pounds 4083 RL, 4018 XF. 0-60 7.2 RL, 6.1 XF. Yes it will take a bigger depreciation hit, but the price I paid for it will offset that difference and then some.

Here's another piece of data that you might find interesting just in case you want to bring up the SH-AWD on the RL. Inside line skid pad lateral G testing 09 RL 0.82 G, XF 0.82-0.87 G depending on the curb weight of 4018-4200 and rim size 18-20".