xkr / m comparison

[mad4slalom]

any one owned a 4 litre jag xkr v8 supercharged prior to, or after their z4m, and if so your thoughts on how they compare, drove my mates one today, 2001 50,000 miler, very smoothe and lovely comfortable seats , made the m feel very harsh by comparison. i know its probably aimed at a slightly older GT driver , and would be lovely to drive on a long run,didnt feel quite as fast as the m but certainly easier to drive , being auto. anyone ?

 

[JayEmm]

The Jag is possibly faster than the M in a straight line, but wouldn't see which way it went in the corners.

They are totally different cars, they genuinely feel a decade apart. The interior is miles better on the Z4, the Jag is very, very outdated. The jag's controls are all soft and wallowy - it is definitely a GT car not a sports car.

 

[Daffy]

If it were me, I'd take a BMW 650i if I were looking for comfort and speed with a V8. If you're looking for a BMW holiday - Audi S5

 

[mad4slalom]

The Jag is possibly faster than the M in a straight line, but wouldn't see which way it went in the corners.

They are totally different cars, they genuinely feel a decade apart. The interior is miles better on the Z4, the Jag is very, very outdated. The jag's controls are all soft and wallowy - it is definitely a GT car not a sports car.

my thoughts too, i can feel the a39 bridge test coming on :evil:

 

[Z4M-2006]

The 2006 on XK 4.2 was as quick as the earlier XKR...

Worth a drive if your thinking of changing..

 

[buzyg]

Used to be an XKR out on our local PH runs. The ///M used to be all over it. Quicker sharper more responsive in every area, as a sports car no contest. It had class though and sounded awesome . Traded for a Modded Evo 320, and now he has the laugh, when it's wet and greasy, but I still have the biggest smile.

 

[JayEmm]

I can also second the recommendation for a BMW 645/650i. Superior to the old Jag in every way - more than a match for the new Jag too.

 

[Mad Professor]

I came out of an XKr prior to my Caterham, HPC evo and now Z4MR .
I am indeed an old man and always fancied a fast Jag
I had a MY 2000 Black X100 XKR conv 4.0 with 60 k miles ,with SS exhaust which sounded great
The lump of torque was simply brutal much more than the M which isn't exactly shabby either
But it was the way it delivered the wave of useable torque which was impressive and very smooth with the Merc torque converter . It felt like a big car cf M and in country roads the ride was rather firm and Crosby on the 20 inch Alloys . The grip was however impressive .
I would say if the jag felt like a heavy Cromby coat then in comparison the M feels like a sharp Boss suit - I have a crombie which weighs a ton .
The boot in the jag is huge ,I used to get two sets of golf bats and a trolley and other stuff in no problem . The wood is also nice to have and feels expensive .I mean this was a 70 k once upon a time and I recall seeing one on a stand at LHR in 2000 and thinking I want one of those one day ,in the same vain as I look at an F type now .
But it was always a grand occasion when I took the Jag out on a sunny day and it always got admiring looks and smiles ,which I don't get with BMW - the latter seems to looks of disdain . My wife ,mother and MOL and all my other female friends adored the car .
As a car for being seen in and not attracting any jealousy the Jag is unbeatable and it was cheap to insure and reliable .
I would have another one for sure and having tested the newer Ali bodied MY 2006 X150 ,albeit a 4.2 NA coupe ,it felt altogether stiffer and more composed .I Also drove a 5.0 Na conv which felt very taught although that was a MY2012 and I can't see why anyone would want the R version of that .
10 k buys you a decent X100 XKR conv which has to be a great bang buck IMHO .

 

[Mad Professor]

The 2006 on XK 4.2 was as quick as the earlier XKR...

Worth a drive if your thinking of changing..

I've driven both 4.2 NA x150 and my x100 4.0 XKr back to back ,and there is no comparison in terms of grunt ,just check out the numbers for power and torque ,night and day ,and that's how it felt to me . I mean the NA 4,2 isn't exactly slow but it's just not in the same league .The R is also a lot stiffer . If you're talking the 5,0 NA vs 4,0 R then that's more of a similar comparison ,again I've done both back to back and both felt equally quick . So the R you drove must have had a duff supercharger if it felt the same as the 4,2 .Its like comparing an M vs 3,0 Zed ,there both rapid but the M is something else .

 

[Z4M-2006]

Yea... Looking at the specs there is half a second to 60 and a couple of seconds in it too 100mph..... So not massively far out..

Think the alloy body on the X150 helps make the best out of its power..

 

[Mad Professor]

Check the specs for torque cf 4,2 NA and 4,0 R and like I said that's why the latter feels brutal
I mean if I had the spare cash and space I would have kept the R and the Caterham as my ideal pair of sports cars .
I think the M falls nicely in between actually as a kind of compromise .

 

[Z4M-2006]

Oh yea... Anything that's not NA has torque figures through the roof.. I was driving an S type R today that I had in for service and brakes, just a great car for not a lot of cash.

I like the XK's in all their forms.. Underrated cars.

 

[springerspan]

I owned a Jag XK 2006 model, and a Jaguar XKRS 2008. Bought the 2006 car from new, and the XKRS 2008 from Swain and Jones in Farnham. Great dealers for unusual spec'd Jags and still a family dealership unusually. The XKRS was like a different car to drive. Much more responsive all around. BUT, and here's the big BUT, the reliability was shocking. Brakes being replaced, cat converter went after 25,000 miles, That was the final straw. The car was still under extended warranty thankfully. At £1,000 a year that was a godsend. Would not own any XK without this. I also ending up craving for a manual box, and maybe slightly less power and size. So here I am now, looking for a Z4 coupe ..... !

 

[springerspan]

oh - and I forgot to mention Jaguar spent 5 months trying to diagnose why the battery kept discharging itself. Went through 3 batteries in 2 years..........

 

[Mad Professor]

Reply suprised to hear about reliability issues with the x150 model as thats not what the survey data would have you believe ,maybe you just got a duff outlier . I thought the auto box was really nice actually .

 

[springerspan]

The XK 2006 was good reliability, but not nearly as good a drive as the 2008 XKRS.
I had both for 4 years.
The XKRS was in the garage 4 times each year for irregular problems.
It was the first year of the XKRS with I think the best body work, and the production run was less than 250 globally.
When the Cat converter went it was time to pick up and push on.

 

[mad4slalom]

i was amazed at how he could insure it for a third of the price i pay for the M, also , you may be right re the supercharger, it certainly has a very rattly sc shaft bearing which is being rebuilt/ replaced,

 

[Fast3000]

Sort of considered an XK during the hunt for the M....still like them but a little old skool even in current shape format. I still wouldn't discount them personally as you can still carry two small children in relative comfort in the back! Our neighbor got a 2006 XKR (420bhp version) when I got the M. Soooo glad I got the M!

 

[cj10jeeper]

I would have thought the better comparison would be between the ///M and the F type. More modern, 2 seater, more sport focussed, etc. than the XK that's an old skool Jag tourer, albeit with a powerful engine.

 

[Mad Professor]

The x150 conv even the NA 4,2 are still fetching good money as I was looking for one before I bought the M a while back .Couldnt find a decent low mile example for less than 20k which is out of my budget and at that kind of money they clearly have a fair way to go until they bottom out wrt deprecation .The x150 feels a lot stiffer than the older x100 model although I prefer the old school looks of the x100 .