Viable with the six?
Written: Dec 15 '03 (Updated Jun 17 '05)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: Distinctive styling, ride, handling, front seats
Cons: Marginal rear headroom, some interior materials could be better
The Bottom Line: If you like the styling and cozy interior, the S-Type is good enough and reasonably priced. If you don't care for the styling, there are better choices.
|
|
|
| mkaresh's Full Review: 2004 Jaguar S-Type |
Last year I drove and reviewed the 390-horsepower supercharged S-Type R. Recently I had a chance to sample the other end of the line, the 3.0-liter V6 base car. For my Ph.D. convocation my parents flew into Chicago. My mother had reserved a midsize rental car, and they were offered an Oldsmobile Alero. While standing at the rental desk, however, my father spotted a red Jaguar S-Type, and decided he’d rather rent that car (for about three times as much money).
I drove the car twice, once before it snowed and once after, which gave me an excellent opportunity to evaluate the car’s all-weather handling. I had also never driven the S-Type with the V6. This is fundamentally the same engine used in the Ford Taurus, Ford Escape, Mazda 6, Mazda MPV, and Jaguar X-Type, but with Jaguar’s own variable-valve-timing cylinder heads. In 200 horsepower form this engine has not been known for thrilling performance in the 3300-pound Taurus. Even modified to produce 235 horsepower (at a lofty 6800 RPM), intuitively it’s not nearly enough engine for a 3800-pound luxury sedan. So I’d always assumed the 294-horsepower 4.2-liter V8 was well worth the extra $3,500 or so it costs even after adjusting for equipment. But had I assumed wrongly?
For my reviews of the S-Type in V8 and supercharged V8 forms, see the links following this review.
Jaguar S-Type Reliability
Want better reliability information? Want to really know what difference it will make if you buy a Jaguar S-Type rather than something else? It's coming in the form of "times in the shop" and "days in the shop" stats. To gain access to such information you have a choice: sign up to help provide the data now or pay $24.95 later. For the details, visit my website, www.truedelta.com.
Styling
There was some question whether this car would be a real Jag. It was the first Jag to be developed from scratch following Ford's acquisition of the company. The basic platform is actually shared with the Lincoln LS, which further heightened the fears of Jag aficionados. They need not have worried. As I learned when I first reviewed the S-Type 4.0 a few years ago, it might have its faults but it is the real thing.
Other cars in this class go for a more masculine aesthetic of sharp creases, broad shoulders, and firm interiors. In contrast, Jaguars have a certain feminine softness and curviness to them. The S-Type shares this character with the larger XJ, but takes it even further. Where the XJ sedan is low and sleek (though considerably less so following the 2004 redesign), the S-Type is taller and rounder. This is in line with styling trends of the late '90s. While the general styling trend through the '70s was "longer, lower, wider," in the late '90s cars in general became more compact (longer wheelbase combined with a shorter length) and taller. Especially taller.
Ironically, the very proportions that make the S-Type look up-to-date follow from the designers' attempts to make it resemble a car designed over 40 years ago. The basic proportions of the car and especially the front end intentionally resemble the classic Jaguar Mk II sedan (sold 1959-67). The Mk II was replaced by the Series III, which the last of its kind 2003 XJ still strongly resembles. The S-Type is a great example of how the past is becoming the future in automotive design.
The front end is easily the most distinctive aspect of the S-Type. No other car looks remotely like it, with an upright oval grille flanked by two pairs of round lights (as on the Mk II). You should avoid silvery colors (which compose about half the palette) to accentuate the lights and grille.
The one problem area in the exterior styling is the area over the rear wheel. There's more metal here than would be ideal, because the car is quite tall. As a result, the car looks a touch portly, especially with the standard 16-inch wheels fitted to the car I drove. They should open up that wheel well a bit, or stuff a larger wheel in it. The 17-inch wheels standard on the 4.2 and optional (with the sport package) on the 3.0 help quite a bit, both due to their larger size and less prissy styling. The dark trim that attends the R (but no longer the Sport Package) and darker paint colors also reduce the apparent pudginess of the car. The medium red on the car I drove is not a good choice, at least not with the standard wheels and standard chrome trim.
The interior is clearly Jaguar. The enveloping, cozy feeling cabin is full of leather and wood. Definitely appreciated is the leather on the door armrests and center console—too often these are firm vinyl even in luxury sedans. Originally the S-Type’s wood was of a light shade that I liked but my father did not. Most people must have been on my father’s side, for this wood is gone. Recent standard S-Types have conventional medium brown wood, while the R and S-Types with the Sport Package have the more mod gray-stained timber.
For 2003 the S-Types interior was revised and upgraded. Most notably, the instrument panel has been redesigned, replacing the hard plastic half circle that once dominated its center with Jaguar’s traditional leather rimmed vertically-arranged stack of controls. I like stylistic risks, but only when they work. The old style didn’t work. As much as I’m no fan of the conventional, the more conventional style of the new instrument panel better fits the car. Overall, the revised interior seems of higher quality and richer ambiance than that in the 2000-2002 cars.
Sadly, a few cheap bits remain. The most notable of these are the power window buttons, the lid of the ashtray abaft them on all passenger door armrests, and the plastic that frames them. All of these are a matte black plastic that is a number of grades below the rest of the interior. Certainly these could not be all that costly to upgrade. Maybe next year when the S-Type is thoroughly revised? The plastic used in the upper door panels could stand to be softer to the touch while they’re at it.
In the past I’ve found the leather in the S-Type rich in look and feel. This time around the tan leather seemed overly slick and of a pedestrian quality unbefitting the price of the car. The seams were also wavy. Is the leather in the 4.2 and R nicer, has it been downgraded for 2004 (unlikely), or does the tan betray the quality of the material? The last is most likely. Interior materials almost always look richer in charcoal, the interior color in the R I drove.
The standard steering wheel rim is a combination of wood and leather. Although I like the look of such steering wheels, I do not like their variable texture and extreme temperatures (cold in winter, hot in summer). The Sport Package includes an all-leather wheel.
Overall, the S-Type continues to possess a very distinctive character. Nothing else within the midsize luxury sedan segment is similar. It’s one of those things you either like or you don’t.
Accommodations
I actually prefer the driver’s seat in the base S-Type to that in the R. It’s a cushier, more enveloping seat, with prominent side bolsters that hug but don’t squeeze. Both comfort and lateral support are very good. The only improvement I would suggest is a bit more definition in the seat bottom. Currently it’s a touch too hard and flat.
With a slew of seat adjustments, a steering wheel that tilts and telescopes, and adjustable pedals everyone should be able to find the perfect relationship with the primary controls. The dash and doortops are both quite high, but the view forward and immediately to the side is still fairly open. I tend to prefer an airier interior, but I must say that Jaguar’s signature package of gentleman’s club style, cozy ambiance, and relatively low driving position actually worked for me. One negative consequence: to the rear a high package shelf restricts visibility. I guess that’s what the rear obstacle detection system is for.
The rear seat is a bit tight. The roof dips down more than in the sister Lincoln LS, compromising headroom. At 5'9", I barely fit back there. With front seats most of the way back, my knees do not quite reach their backs, but my toes barely squeeze beneath them. Thankfully the cushion is fairly high, so my knees must only flop a bit to the sides for my thighs to find support. Of course, a bit higher would be appreciated.
Interior revisions for 2003 thankfully included a much larger storage compartment beneath the center armrest. From 2000 through 2002 there was little storage space to be found inside an S-Type. The new armrest/lid is also quite clever. It can slide back a few inches to reveal a pair of cupholders using the same latch that opens it entirely. The price for this new center console? The parking brake is no longer operated using a lever. Instead, it is electric, and engaged with a switch on the center console. (It disengages automatically when the car is put in gear.)
Rear seat passengers finally received Audi A6-style cupholders that extend from front edge of the seat cushion a year or two ago; better than nothing, but I vaguely remember complaints about these in the Audi.
The trunk is compact, especially in the vertical dimension. The styling is again the culprit. In regular S-Types the rear seatbacks fold down in two sections. In the R the rear seatback is fixed to improve body rigidity.
On the Road
Now we get to the key portion of this review. How well does the 3.0-liter six move 3800 pounds of luxury sedan? Surprisingly, quite well. From a dead stop the initial response to throttle tip-in is if anything too aggressive—something I’ve noticed in every S-Type and XJ I’ve driven. First gear feels very short, which gets the engine quickly into its peaky powerband. The six-speed automatic, which replaced the previous five-speed last year, helps. The extra ratio permits a shorter first gear and tighter spacing between gears. On the highway the transmission downshifts readily and the six pushes the car quickly from 50 to 70 (about the fastest I went this time around). No doubt even the regular V8 would be quicker still, but the V6 never left me wishing for more power.
I was further concerned about the sound of the V6. In the Taurus this engine sounds fairly coarse. In the Jag it sounds substantially nicer, if still short of the best. Definitely not a reason to reject the car.
Manual shifting continues to be offered via Jaguar’s unique, much criticized “J-gate.” No simple tap up, tap down here. The shifter from D moves to the left to 5 and then forward through 4, 3, and finally 2. First cannot be manually selected. Moving the lever requires little effort, and it’s easy to push through the gear you want to the next one down. There are definite detents, but when driving a car aggressively it helps to not have to attend so much to such things. Perhaps the largest problem with this system is that there is no read out of what gear you are in among the instruments, unlike most cars with manumatics. Consequently, it is necessary to look down at the shifter until you develop a very fine sense of the location of each gear detent. The transmission reacts more quickly to shifts than an entirely conventional automatic, but not nearly as quickly as the better manumatics. My father much prefers the steering-wheel-mounted buttons on his Lexus GS.
A manual continues as a no-cost option with the 3.0 (but not the other S-Types). Strangely, it includes only five ratios, one fewer than the automatic. Before driving the 3.0 I had assumed that even with a manual it would not offer enough performance to attract the sort of driver interested in a manual in the first place. Now I’m not so sure. But I do not expect to ever test drive one, as dealers in my experience never stock them. I did experience this manual in the Lincoln LS a few years back, and while I was unimpressed with that car overall the shifter was good. The manual would likely feel more appropriate in the cozier Jag.
Even the brakes on the base S-Type have a good, firm feel to them and stop the car effortlessly. Larger front rotors are part of the Sport Package, and even more powerful Brembo calipers are standard on the R.
Then there is handling. The steering is the best part. It is quick and moderately low in effort. Feedback of what is going on where the front rubber meets the road is very good for this class of car. Lately even German luxury cars have been sacrificing feedback for a more luxurious feel. In the S-Type some kickback is present over bumps, but that tends to be the price for such feedback. In general, I found the S-Type’s steering both accurate and enjoyable, in base as well as R forms. (The R’s steering is a bit heavier.)
The suspension in the base S-Type provides a better ride/handling balance than that in the R. The former’s tuning is softer, and this lends it a more composed character over imperfect roads while still containing lean in hard turns to moderate levels. Reactions to steering inputs are quick but not too quick. You get what you expect to get. The chassis feels very balanced, with little understeer when pushed. Between the steering and suspension I found the base car very easy, even intuitive, to drive quickly. The learning curve this Jag requires is very short.
This is true even with snow on the roads. The standard traction control, stability control, and ABS interact to make even this moderately powerful rear-wheel-drive sedan behave well and safely on slick surfaces. I took the car to an empty parking lot to play with it a bit. Floor the accelerator and the car still accelerates in a slow, controlled manner. Turn the wheel and hammer the pedal, and the car oversteers a bit, but straighten the wheel and the car quickly straightens out. On the road I felt the rear end begin to slide out a few times while turning, but a touch of countersteer corrected this with a total lack of drama. I felt like an expert winter driver in this car. With stability control it seems rear-wheel-drive is truly viable even in Chicago. Winter tires would only further improve the car’s performance in these conditions. (The standard tires are all-season Continentals.)
I did not drive the S-Type with the stability control turned off. I have no doubt this would have made it much more difficult to drive with snow on the road.
The base suspension rides very smoothly and quietly even over pothole-filled Chicago streets. Even my father, who owned a Lexus LS before his current GS, was impressed. At highway speeds noise levels remain low. Engine noise can become prominent during hard acceleration, but it never becomes objectionable.
Of course, an S-Type with the Sport Package and especially an S-Type R will corner with less lean and react more quickly to steering inputs. After driving the automatic 3.0 with base suspension, I wonder how enjoyable a manual 3.0 with the Sport Package is. But for the average luxury sedan buyer the base suspension probably provides the ride-handling balance.
Pricing
The Jag my father rented appeared to have a few options: the $1,500 Premium Package (power lumbar, adjustable pedals, memory, a few other little things), $500 heated seats, and $1,100 sunroof. It did not have the $675 xenon lamps, $2,200 nav system, $2,200 adaptive cruise control, $1,600 premium sound, or $1,200 Sport Package. All but the last are “special order” items, whatever that means. As equipped, this S-Type would list for $46,995. According to Edmunds, the typical dealer discount would reduce this to about $44,200. Dealers get a $3,000 bonus for every S-Type they sell, so my feeling is that a significantly larger discount should be possible.
I’d strongly recommend spending another $1,200 for the Sport Package for the aesthetic benefits alone, but will analyze the price without this feature.
A similarly equipped BMW 530i lists for $49,895, and Edmunds suggests no discounting. The BMW is the better all-around car, but the difference in chassis composure and general refinement between the two is not large enough to be noticeable by most drivers. If the Jag’s unique character is more appealing to you, and the tighter rear seat is not an issue, you’ll also save about $4,000 going that way.
A similarly equipped Mercedes E320 is even pricier at $50,610. For front and rear parking sensors—the Jag and BMW have rear sensors standard—add another grand. Edmunds suggests no discounting. It’s not worth such a high price.
A similarly equipped Audi A6 3.0 (front-drive with CVT) lists for $39,090, and the typical discount reduces this to about $37,700, much less than other European alternatives. The Audi has a very nice interior with a roomy rear seat, but does not handle as well as the others here, with more understeer, more lean in turns, and a generally sloppier feel.
Note: the above prices do not include metallic paint, which the German brands usually charge about $500 for.
A Lexus GS 300 is the most comparable Japanese sedan. Equipped like the Jag it lists for $41,450. The typical discount reduces this to about $39,500. Especially given the difference in price anyone shopping one of the Europeans should also check out the GS. That said, anyone infatuated with the Jag’s style will likely find the GS aesthetically unappealing.
The new-for-2004 Acura TL is much more stylish than the car it replaced. Even with xenon headlamps and a premium sound system standard, it lists for only $33,195. It sells for sticker right now. An Infiniti G35, which unlike the TL is rear-drive and thus feels more balanced in turns, is even less after a moderate discount. However, as good as they are, both of these Japanese sedans—especially the Infiniti—possess the refinement and general feel of a lower class of car. Hence the industry term “near-luxury” for the segment.
A pair of American alternatives fall between the TL and S-Type in stature. The Cadillac CTS lists for $40,940, and tends to cost about $39,300 after the typical discount. The Cadillac performs, handles, and rides well. Its main weaknesses are fewer amenities than the others (no telescoping wheel, no rear obstacle detection) and substandard interior materials. Its exterior and interior styling are diametrically opposed to the Jag’s in character and appeal to an even narrower portion of buyers.
The Lincoln LS’s styling is much more conventional. The LS’s interior following upgrades for 2003 feels significantly richer inside than the Cadillac. Given the disappointing leather, door panels, and window switches in the Jag, the cousins are not far apart in this area. Equipped like the above cars, but with cooled as well as heated seats and a premium sound system, the Lincoln lists for $40,500. After the typical hefty dealer discount and a $2,500 rebate it will cost about $34,800. The Lincoln might be hard to love given its overly conventional, derivative styling, and it is perhaps the slowest car in the group, but it is clearly a bargain relative to its Jaguar cousin and even the Cadillac CTS, much less the BMW and Benz.
This analysis has compared the prices of V6 sedans. Many of the above are also available with V8s. With the Jag the two additional cylinders cost about $3,500 after adjusting for differences in standard equipment. This is less than other European brands charge, but more than Lincoln charges, further widening the spread in prices.
Overall, the Jag is significantly less expensive than the BMW and Mercedes, but significantly more expensive than the others. It is reasonably priced for those attracted to its styling, overpriced for those who are not.
Last Words
The S-Type 3.0 performed better than I expected it to. I now see the six as a valid engine for this car. I also learned that the S-Type rides and handles very well even without the Sport Package. Its front seat is comfortable, but its rear seat is marginal. The cabin is cozy, which will appeal to some but not to others. I personally prefer a lower instrument panel and more glass, yet find myself admiring the Jag's highly distinctive styling and character in an age when even BMW strives to appeal to the average consumer.
As good as the S-Type is, the BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac, and Lincoln are not far off in most areas. They all provide more than adequate acceleration, agile handling, a smooth and quiet ride, comfortable front seats, and marginal rear seats (with the Jag’s more marginal than the others). Hardcore enthusiasts will notice and care about the differences between these cars, and will likely opt for the BMW if they have the cash (though the Jag also rides and handles better than the average), but for most drivers the key differences will be aesthetic.
What it all comes down to is this: If the distinctive styling, unique character, and relatively tight interior of the Jag appeal to you, and you have the cash, then by all means buy it. It’s a good enough car for the price. But if these aspects do not appeal to you, your money is best spent elsewhere.
To learn more about my reliability research and sign up to participate in it, visit www.truedelta.com.
Links to my reviews of related vehicles:
Acura TL
Audi A6
BMW 5-Series
Cadillac CTS
Ford Taurus
Infiniti G35
Jaguar S-Type (2000 V8)
Jaguar S-Type R (2003 R)
Jaguar XJ8
Lexus GS
Lincoln LS
Mercedes E-Class
Recommended:
Yes
Amount Paid (US$): 46,995
|
|
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.