By Justin Berkowitz
March 7, 2008 -
Last month, U.S. Jag dealers sold just over a thousand new cars, despite cut-rate financing. While the entire U.S. car market is going South, Jaguar's stuffy image is sending the venerable marque Hades-wise in a supersonic hand basket. The new XF midrange sedan is supposed to reverse these declining fortunes by burying memories of the bulbous, fusty, pudenda-fronted S-Type (not to mention the execrable X-Type). I grabbed an XF fresh off the transporter to see if Jag’s lobbing snowballs in Hell.
Let’s get this out of the way: the new XF’s design is a pale shadow of the C-XF concept’s drop dead gorgeous sheetmetal. We’re talking supermodel versus neighborhood bartender. The XF’s front end is a particularly boring transmogrification; it's a little weird and the snout’s portal smacks of Volvo’s blandest. The central bonnet creases are a particularly classless affectation. In fact, you could say the XF is nothing more than a Volvo in a slutty dress.
The back end almost saves the day; it looks like an Aston Martin. It's fantastic. But Ian Callum gets no props for designing the same car over (DB9) and over (V8 Vantage) and over (Jag XK coupe) and over (XF sedan). If Jaguar was going to show a scintilla of individuality, well, they could have hidden the door handles in the B- and C-pillars.
As for the XF’s interior, we've all seen the boring press pictures included here. The company’s PR photographer should be fired for not doing justice to this four-wheeled shrine to automotive luxury.
The XF’s interior’s fit, finish and materials are the best I’ve ever seen in a production car, without exception. If you're the type of person that appreciates exquisite detailing of a fine watch, you can do nothing but marvel at the XF’s cabin. The wood trim in my optionless "Luxury" trim model could have been fashioned by a bespoke furniture maker. The matte finish is both unique and stunning.
The XF’s attention to detail dusts the usual standard bearer Audi. The vents rotate into view when you start the car up (royalty payment to V
olkswagen’s ill-fated Phaeton?). They boast aluminum inserts to move their direction, with the word "Jaguar" elegantly stamped on their surface. We're talking about slivers of material the size of long grain rice. The same beautifully finished metal sits at the bottom of the cupholders. Every surface is sensuous to the touch. For once, a Jag/Ford product feels… finished.
Okay, so the exterior is lame, the interior is otherworldly. How does it drive? In a word: Yes. Yes as in the new XF drives as well as you'd hope any Jaguar would.
Jaguar wanted to build a luxury-sports car in keeping with its distinguished brand heritage– a tradition of which Larry the Law Firm Partner neither knows nor cares. What Larry does care about: beating the crap out of Bob’s Benz E350. And with this car, Larry’s good to go.
Jag’s 4.2 liter V8– a carry-over from the last generation S-Type– is the XF’s standard-fit powerplant. “But it only makes 300 horsepower! Lots of V6 engines do that!" Quit your bitching brand defilers, lest you taste the business end of my tassled loafers pushing you into an Acura RL. Even with "only" 300 horsepower underfoot, the entry-level XF accelerates from zero to sixty miles per hour in about six seconds. Besides, the Jaguar XF driving experience is fleet footed. The six speed auto is slicker than snot on a doorknob. The suspension feels buttoned down, with just enough feedback to keep it fun without being abusive.
There are downsides. While the XF is light on its toes, changing direction with confidence-inspiring predictability and hoon-compatible ease, it doesn’t have everlasting grip. Canst thou squeal like a porcine? The XF’s tires can. And the sport sedan’s steering is far too light for a car with genuine performance aspirations. But overall, driving the XF is like piloting a BMW without the e-Nanny hovering over your shoulder.
So much of this car is so right - the interior, the suspension, the engine and the transmission. Killer depreciation aside, the $50k asking price for a fully loaded V8 XF makes a mockery of the similarly-priced, stripped-out 535i. Unlike the Bimmer, Lexus or Audi equivalents, driving the XF makes you feel special.
It’s too bad that the mid-size Jag’s exterior went from a quaint retro curiosity to an OMG concept car to a quintessentially boring sedan. If Jag had found a way to keep the CX-F’s drama, they would have had a huge hit on their hands. As it stands now, all they have is a bit of time to kill before Ford sells Jaguar or, let’s face it, pulls the plug. Even as a swan song, the XF lacks the looks it needs to fly.
4 / 5 Stars | 2009 Jaguar XF rating summary and performance review
Subscribe to Newsletter
More Reviews57 Responses to “ 2009 Jaguar XF Review ”
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 » Show All Reverse Order
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 » Show All Reverse Order
Leave a Reply 
Back to Top
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Digg
del.icio.us
Blinklist
Furl
Netscape
Google
NewsVine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati
YahooMyWeb
Windows Live
POWERED
March 7th, 2008 at 11:49 am
A Volvo in a slutty dress? - I’d sign up for that
March 7th, 2008 at 11:51 am
I need the roads to clear around Detroit so I can take one of these for a good spin.
The exterior seems to be underwhelming everyone. Very Lexus GS to my eyes, and the Lexus has hardly set the world on fire. It didn’t help that in Detroit the two cars on the show floor were both in a boring pale blue with the base 18-inch wheels. They took a blander than it ought to have been exterior and dressed it down as much as possible. With both of the easily visible cars.
With Jags, everyone wonders about reliability. TrueDelta hasn’t been able to provide results for any Jag yet because there’s such a small owner pool to draw from.
Maybe the XF will sell well enough that we can get a decent sample together. Know anyone who buys one? Send them here:
http://www.truedelta.com/reliability.php
March 7th, 2008 at 11:58 am
Thank you for taking them to task for the exterior. People were *STILL* yammering on about its greatness in current form, but it’s not the body to save Jaguar. The C-XF was. If it was handsome and understated, it would make sense as a Jag, but it’s neither handsome nor understated, and if you’re shedding those attributes from Jag of all brands, at least have the balls to really go for it.
March 7th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
How can you say with a straight face that a fairly old, underpowered V-8 is preferable to bang-up-to-date V-6, even as an option? This is supposed to be a modern car, yes? Well, V-8 only thinking is distinctly retro in the worst way possible. And to use the Acura RL as a counterpoint? Ridiculous. That’s V-6 only, thanks to the suits in Japan, so that’s not even a decent comparison.
I agree that the production version doesn’t hold a candle to the concept, though. Too bad backseat passengers need to keep their heads on.
March 7th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
It pains me to agree, but the XF is something of a disappointment after the stunning C-XF concept. And that’s the opinion of a Briton (or Brit, as you guys call us).
I don’t think the interior could really be any better, but the frontal treatment is bland compared with what could have been. It’s not like the concept was that outlandish anyway - it could easily have made production. Even if they’d just kept the sleeker headlamps it would have been better.
I’m not sure what the sales are like in the US, but the UK media is reporting 3,000 advance orders. That’s a huge jump over the S-type. I hope it means Jaguar can find a buyer that sees the value in the brand, unlike poor Rover and MG.
March 7th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
CarShark,
Underpowered and 300hp used in the same sentence. Give me a break.
March 7th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Wow, the car seems much more impressive than I thought it would.
While I agree with you description of the exterior, the idea of a Swedish beauty in a slutty dress (instead of a turtleneck) gets me really, really excited.
March 7th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
Wouldn’t the branding guru’s say this car is off the brand message? I would think that a Jag would need beautiful sheet metal above all else. The nose on this car doesn’t even look like a Jag. I would say Jag buyers are more brand conscious than most people.
BMW will sell more (even if their new style isn’t all that BMW looking either). Jaguar has a rep for low reliability with long times in the shop. Even with BMW’s mediocre reliability, the reputation is much better. This car is not a break out car for them IMO.
March 7th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
I can’t wait to see this car in person - I’m going to try to swing by the Jaguar dealer today. My parents own a 2003 [bulbous, fusty, pudenda-fronted] S-Type, and putting looks aside, I am always amazed how well that car drives. Jags in general are underrated. I wish them luck.
March 7th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
While the Concept XF was supermodel gorgeous the production version is her attractive sister. It lost a fair amount on the front end but it’s still an attractive car; much better than a 5 series for similar or less money (and I like the styling of the 5 series a lot unlike many). The fact that it is not stellar can be good in a way too. Means it will get a little less attention and should depreciate normally making it relatively affordable in 2-3 years for you middle/upper-middle class car buyer. Why get that loaded Accord when you can have a 2 yr old XF?