|
In Reply to: [X] "Buh-Bye" to my Jaguar X-type posted by Jon on May 19, 2002 at 04:57:40:
Interested in why you picked the Lexus. Rep for quality?
The ES300 does not actually have a more powerful engine than the X-Type 3.0:
ES300 - 210 HP, 0-60 in 8.2 sec
X-Type 3.0 - 231 HP, 0-60 in 7.9 sec
Some more cars for reference:
BMW 330xi - 225 HP, 0-60 in 7.5 sec
Lexus IS300 - 215 HP, 0-60 in 7.4 sec
Audi A4 Quattro - 220 HP, 0-60 in 7.0 sec
BMW 330i - 225 HP, 0-60 in 7.0 sec
Audi S4 (Quattro) - 250 HP, 0-60 in 6.5 sec
Acura TL Type-S - 260 HP, 0-60 in 6.3 sec
Infiniti G35 - 260 HP, ?
All figures for cars with automatic transmission. Except as noted below, the 0-60 times are from Motor Trend, some as reported online by Autosite The Audi S4 & the BMW's are the Manufacturer's claims (MT tested those with the manual tranny and got 0-60 in 5.5 sec for the S4, 6.1 sec for the 330i and 5.8 sec for the 330xi - auto usually increases 0-60 times by 0.5 or more). Magazine tests of the BMW 3er tend to report better times than BMW claims (those of of the X-Type tend to be worse than manufacturer claims). MT hasn't tested the G35, but Car & Driver got 0-60 in 6.2 and got the same for the Acura so I'd assume it would come out near the Acura in anybody's test.
For the AWD fans, the S4 is not all that much more expensive (i.e. not like the step up from a BMW 330i to an M3). With the equipment level I used for comparison, MSRP plus destination charge for an X-Type 3.0 would be $41,495, the S4 $42,545, so I'd call the S4 a viable alternative. However, AWD tends to hurt acceleration - I think there is more power loss between engine & wheels plus in weighs more. MT getting a faster time for the 330xi than the 330i is wierd (BMW claims to opposite).