The Jaguar S-Type wins points for being possibly the most unique car in its class. But is it for you?

Along with a number of other cars in this class, I test drove the S-type with my father when he was looking for a new car. Though he decided it was not among his finalists, I found it a worthy contender. It just depends on what you want.

Update: More recently I test drove the updated for 2003 S-Type in high-performance R form. That review can be found here. The most significant update for 2003: a center console with much more storage space. Gone to make this possible: the manual parking brake.

Other cars in this class go for a more masculine aesthetic of sharp creases, broad shoulders, and firm interiors. In contrast, the Jag has a certain feminine softness and curviness to it. If you're looking for a softer, warmer blend of luxury in a car that still performs with the best of them, this is probably your car.

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. The S-Type, whatever its faults, is the real thing.

First, the styling. Where the XJ sedan is low and sleek, this car 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. And this will only continue. In this context, the more expensive XJ now looks very dated.

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 current 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 pallette) 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 wheels. They should open up that wheel well a bit, or stuff a larger wheel in it. The 17" wheel option helps quite a bit.

The interior is clearly Jaguar. The leather and wood are very nice. With a few exceptions, notably the window buttons and some of the other Ford-sourced switchgear (shared by the Lincoln LS), the materials are first rate. The Jag costs about $10k more than the Lincoln LS, with which it shares a chassis. The interior seems to be where most of the additional money was spent. My father disliked the light-colored wood that covers much of the interior, but I found it appealing and in character with the car. This car has a lighter, softer feel to it, and the lighter-colored wood fits with this.

The seats are very comfortable. After sitting on the ultra-firm BMW and Audi seats, it was nice to sink into these. They are very soft, yet supportive. You sink into them just the right amount, but no more. "Fits like a glove" comes to mind. Four-way lumbar supports only add to the comfort.

The front seat did not feel quite as closed in as it did in the Lincoln LS. Either the A-pillar is not raked as much, or the driving position is subtly different, for I didn’t mind the A-pillar nearly as much as when I drove the LS. Maybe it’s just more in character for a Jaguar to feel like it has been fitted around you.

The rear seat is a bit tight, tighter than the Lincoln. The roof dips down more than in the LS, significantly compromising headroom. At 5'9", I barely fit back there.

As in the LS, interior storage space is nearly nonexistent. This may be the largest negative of these siblings. If you need to store a lot of stuff inside the car, you will not be happy with this one. The trunk is also small, especially in the vertical dimension. The styling is again the culprit.

Performance is quite good. The eight moves the car nicely. This engine makes a high-pitched, mechanical sound, quite pleasant, very unlike a burbly American eight such as the one in a Seville or Continental. Though not the quickest eight out there, it is easily quick enough for 90% of all potential buyers. The transmission shifts smoothly. I found the J-gate easier to use than other manumatic setups, but would probably still leave the thing in D.

As with the LS, handling is very good. The body structure is very tight and solid. You feel this solidity in every move the car makes. The Jag turns in quickly and confidently. The chassis always feels balanced. The ride is not as smooth as I expected from a Jag, but is probably as good as can be expected with such fine handling. (The car I drove had the optional handling package. The standard set-up probably handles a little less sharply but rides better.) Road noise is another matter. I felt there was too much of this, especially when sitting in the rear seat.

In short, buy this car if you like the looks. It is comfortable, and performs credibly. Otherwise, other cars are probably better performers, more commodious, or cost less money.

Reliability

People often email me asking about the reliability of the cars and trucks they are considering. Existing sources of reliability information just aren't helpful enough.

In response, my website, truedelta.com, will more clearly identify what difference it will make if you buy an S-Type rather than something else by providing "times in the shop" and "days in the shop" stats (among others). Those who help provide the data--which will require just a few minutes a year--will earn free access to the site's reliability information. To encourage participation, this access will otherwise cost $24.95.

For the details, and to sign up, visit www.truedelta.com.