GTP Cool Wall: 2014+ Jaguar XFR-S Sportbrake

[daan]

Exactly as I pointed out compared to a traditional wagon...well this isn't and now my point has been made again

Yeah you put a lot of thought into not saving money for a more expensive less powerful, limited production wagon that is dull looking compared to the other three.

The CTS-V is 70-72k which is far less than the 100k + these would run in the U.S. So all three of these cars (not the Jag) are probably a wiser choice in the end when deciding to buy a no longer meaningful family car turned performance car in hiding.

Since when does any of that have to do with cool?

 

[Moglet]

Shame it seems to be doing everything it can to look like an Audi...

I think the Jag looks miles better than any current Audi model, I really love the headlights and the bulging bonnet gives a nice little hint of the power. The back end looks pretty good too:

 

[AlvaroF]

A ridiculously fast wagon, that looks like that? Yep, cool for sure.

 

[Famine]

The CTS-V is 70-72k which is far less than the 100k + these would run in the U.S. So all three of these cars (not the Jag) are probably a wiser choice in the end when deciding to buy a no longer meaningful family car turned performance car in hiding.

Ride quality.

I've only ever driven one car that rode better than the XFR-S, and that was the XFR. And I've only been in one car that rode better than the XFR and that was a Rolls-Royce Wraith. The ride from a modern, hot Mercedes is just this side of "ungh... really?!" and the ride from a modern, hot Audi is just the opposite side of "It's okay, I didn't want any intervertebral discs anyway".

The Jaaaaag happens to look better than either, go nearly as quickly as either and rides like a Jaaaaag. Point-to-point it's probably no slower than the E63 or RS6, so you can get to the other end first and step out all suave and unruffled, rather than looking like you were on the receiving end of a particularly savage [redacted for PG-13].


You can't buy the CTS-V anyway. Aside from the fact you literally can't - it's not sold in the UK, but when it was it was £69k - it was built to a quality that suggests the components were dumped into a pile and whatever stuck together was shipped out as a car.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Why?

I explained that already, is there something else you want me to say? I mean if I had come in like some of the others that just say "this isn't cool", I could understand you searching for a deeper meaning to what I've said. However I actually wrote stuff so yeah....

Personally I think that all of the millions of Audis and Mercs you see on the road (many of which are cooking models with bodykits apeing the performance models) make them far more dull. I like the look of the Caddy, but I still prefer the Jag.

I'm sorry that Jag doesn't have millions of variations to its line up as like the German counter parts and thus since you see them on a sickening regular basis, seeing a Jag is just more special. I mean I see more of them than the Cadillac in just CTS range (various audi, mercedes, XFR/XKR) but that doesn't hinder me from seeing them as cool in a wagon form.

That's fine if you like the Caddy and prefer the Jag or think the others are boring due to seeing so many of it's other variations that people can afford and buy in mass. This is the part to me where it's like I say deep purple is my favorite color and you that's nice but blue is yours, I mean there really isn't further we can go than say good for each other and move on.

Choosing a high performance car based on purchase price and fuel economy figures. That's cool.

What I'm trying to say is that you're completely missing the point. Are people in the market for a 500bhp+, £70,000+ car that bothered about fuel economy, or stretching an extra few thousand quid for the car they want? Bolting a stupidly powerful engine into a practical car isn't meant to be sensible, it should be about which car makes the rudest sound and is most capable of scaring the kids in the back.

No I'm not missing the point, there was a bit more to it than what you quoted and it wasn't about fuel it was just hyperbole really since you wouldn't save gas in the other three either. Basically I'm trying to say the purpose of a family car was long tossed away in all of them for some chest beating. If that means ease or ride for taking the kids to school or a family road trip, or having fun in a sporty wagon (not super one) and still saving money on gas. Whatever the case there are tons of cars you can do this with that are sedan form and not just wagon to scare your kids if that's some how fun to do while driving.

However, I've never voted before on cars like this neither have most of you yes it's a factor but I'm surprised the crap we give those who constantly go "More Powaaa" is now the defense here. It's fine but I like to be consistent, and in being so if that I don't think it sounds the rudest and it doesn't have the most grunt thus again what is cool to me is the car that does it the best without faking or making you think you have to spend more money than you do.

Since when does any of that have to do with cool?

Since what does what have to do with cool? The subjective concept that a car that a car being more expensive then others in its range while offering less? Or the idea of looks as a factor? Or both? Or the fact that it's an over hyped up piece to go fast and for husbands or whatever to pretend it is a family car to their spouse? You'll have to be a bit less vague and pin point one. Since pretty much all of them are what I've used to define cars at one point or another during the call wall.

Ride quality.

I've only ever driven one car that rode better than the XFR-S, and that was the XFR. And I've only been in one car that rode better than the XFR and that was a Rolls-Royce Wraith. The ride from a modern, hot Mercedes is just this side of "ungh... really?!" and the ride from a modern, hot Audi is just the opposite side of "It's okay, I didn't want any intervertebral discs anyway".

The Jaaaaag happens to look better than either, go nearly as quickly as either and rides like a Jaaaaag. Point-to-point it's probably no slower than the E63 or RS6, so you can get to the other end first and step out all suave and unruffled, rather than looking like you were on the receiving end of a particularly savage [redacted for PG-13].


You can't buy the CTS-V anyway. Aside from the fact you literally can't - it's not sold in the UK, but when it was it was £79k - it was built to a quality that suggests the components were dumped into a pile and whatever stuck together was shipped out as a car.

I know you can't buy the CTS-V in the UK and probably all of Europe, just like you can't buy the Avant here in the US. That isn't the point really that I'm trying to make and if so the many of us for various cool walls shouldn't get to vote based on regional exclusivity. The CTS-V that I got to ride around in felt great and surprisingly the last person that tried to convince me that otherwise was from the UK. So yes, I think there is slight bit of bias for the Jag make among you guys. Does this mean you wont say bad things when needed, no. However, I feel there are times when it's being compared to others that you'd pick it as your lesser of evils due to region.

Even if that isn't the case and you are a hundred percent sincere, it's one of those times where I'd have to actually ride in each one myself just to see. Beyond that, you're never going to sell me on the looks of the Jag, I think they're trumped up by many who argue in favorite of it. That's fine. I still think the other three look better than that.

As for the speed factor I'm sure a small point to point shows there is hardly much difference between them all, thing is if you plan to buy an expensive super wagon why not buy one that is cheaper with more power and potentially better quality?

 

[daan]

Since what does what have to do with cool? The subjective concept that a car that a car being more expensive then others in its range while offering less? Or the idea of looks as a factor? Or both? Or the fact that it's an over hyped up piece to go fast and for husbands or whatever to pretend it is a family car to their spouse? You'll have to be a bit less vague and pin point one. Since pretty much all of them are what I've used to define cars at one point or another during the call wall.

It is a big, fast Jag, and big, fast Jags are cool.

For the cool wall, price is irrelevant. For the cool wall, a car's competition is also irrelevant. For the cool wall, how good (or bad) it is as a car is also irrelevant.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

It is a big, fast Jag, and big, fast Jags are cool.

For the cool wall, price is irrelevant. For the cool wall, a car's competition is also irrelevant. For the cool wall, how good (or bad) it is as a car is also irrelevant.

For you sure. For anyone else that decides or thinks that's what factors in as cool for them then no.

 

[homeforsummer]

Cool. Fast wagon that isn't German.

 

[Ingram]

I'm sorry that Jag doesn't have millions of variations to its line up as like the German counter parts

Don't be - it just makes them nicer and more interesting to me.

However, I've never voted before on cars like this neither have most of you yes it's a factor but I'm surprised the crap we give those who constantly go "More Powaaa" is now the defense here. It's fine but I like to be consistent, and in being so if that I don't think it sounds the rudest and it doesn't have the most grunt thus again what is cool to me is the car that does it the best without faking or making you think you have to spend more money than you do.

I give crap to people who say "More Powaaa" about a small sports car or classic hot hatch where power really isn't the defining factor. It's not a relevant point here, because adding more power would not make this car any cooler, in the same way that having slightly fewer bhp than one or two rivals makes it any less cool.

For you sure. For anyone else that decides or thinks that's what factors in as cool for them then no.

When is discussing price about anything ever cool? Depending on the value, you either sound like a skinflint or an arrogant bellend.

 

[Famine]

I know you can't buy the CTS-V in the UK and probably all of Europe, just like you can't buy the Avant here in the US.

You used to be able to, through Bauer Millett in Manchester. They cost £69,880.

That isn't the point really that I'm trying to make and if so the many of us for various cool walls shouldn't get to vote based on regional exclusivity.

I wasn't dropping them off the comparo for reasons of region, but for reasons of build and ride quality. Comparative reviews of the CTS-V SportWagon and other hot estates by UK outlets float around from 2009ish.

The CTS-V that I got to ride around in felt great and surprisingly the last person that tried to convince me that otherwise was from the UK. So yes, I think there is slight bit of bias for the Jag make among you guys. Does this mean you wont say bad things when needed, no. However, I feel there are times when it's being compared to others that you'd pick it as your lesser of evils due to region.

Even if that isn't the case and you are a hundred percent sincere, it's one of those times where I'd have to actually ride in each one myself just to see. Beyond that, you're never going to sell me on the looks of the Jag, I think they're trumped up by many who argue in favorite of it. That's fine. I still think the other three look better than that.

Unfortunately, UK roads are appalling - m'colleague @homeforsummer found the Fiesta ST perfectly acceptable in France, I drove it for 40 minutes in the UK and it literally (by which I mean literally) gave me whiplash.

Fortunately, this gives us a better comparative base for ride quality As I said, the XFR rides better than the XFR-S - they tightened up the -S for a bit more sportiness, because it has 50hp more and while it doesn't ruin it, the experience is less refined for very little performance benefit. But the XFR-S is still the fourth best ride I've ever experienced*, behind the XJ6, XFR and Wraith.

The Germans are heading down the sporty = hard route, though to be fair aside from the S-Class, Mercedes have been doing it for years. Audi S and RS models are awful.

As for the speed factor I'm sure a small point to point shows there is hardly much difference between them all, thing is if you plan to buy an expensive super wagon why not buy one that is cheaper with more power and potentially better quality?

Jaguar is persistently at the top of reliability and quality charts, so neither the E nor 6 have that over it. And one thing Audi has never got right yet is interior aesthetics - the RS6 is boring (but less boring than it was) and quickly ends up markedly more expensive than the XFR-S if you tick any boxes to make it less boring. The only interior shot of the RS6 they dare to use for press purposes in the UK has nine grand of interior options


When it comes to modern cool though, Jaaaaaag beats Mercedes and Audi. Audi's brand has been diluted by the hordes of absolute choppers who drive them, while Mercedes' was destroyed by 00s reliability, the trophy wife's SLK and CLK, the Elk Test, splitting off top end cars to the Maybach brand, the gobblers who drive the M/ML, the existence of the B-Class and R-Class - it goes on and on and on...


*Stop it...

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Don't be - it just makes them nicer and more interesting to me.

Which is fine, I don't need limited views to get excited you do.

I give crap to people who say "More Powaaa" about a small sports car or classic hot hatch where power really isn't the defining factor. It's not a relevant point here, because adding more power would not make this car any cooler, in the same way that having slightly fewer bhp than one or two rivals makes it any less cool.

Sure it does, because as you've said this is the concept behind these, being brutish cars in the sheep clothing of a subtle family wagon (well not subtle these days in looks).

When is discussing price about anything ever cool? Depending on the value, you either sound like a skinflint or an arrogant bellend.

Saving money has always been cool to me and I've used it in other cool walls as a justification without issue. Sorry that I'm bucking the Jaguar but I really, really, really don't see the appeal. I like Jaguar, but that doesn't mean I find it cool. I tend to see what Jaguar does compared to the rest of the world as a more expensive weaker method and due to a lush history justifying why they can.

You used to be able to, through Bauer Millett in Manchester. They cost £69,880.I wasn't dropping them off the comparo for reasons of region, but for reasons of build and ride quality. Comparative reviews of the CTS-V SportWagon and other hot estates by UK outlets float around from 2009ish.Unfortunately, UK roads are appalling - m'colleague @homeforsummer found the Fiesta ST perfectly acceptable in France, I drove it for 40 minutes in the UK and it literally (by which I mean literally) gave me whiplash.

Fortunately, this gives us a better comparative base for ride quality As I said, the XFR rides better than the XFR-S - they tightened up the -S for a bit more sportiness, because it has 50hp more and while it doesn't ruin it, the experience is less refined for very little performance benefit. But the XFR-S is still the fourth best ride I've ever experienced*, behind the XJ6, XFR and Wraith.

The Germans are heading down the sporty = hard route, though to be fair aside from the S-Class, Mercedes have been doing it for years. Audi S and RS models are awful.Jaguar is persistently at the top of reliability and quality charts, so neither the E nor 6 have that over it. And one thing Audi has never got right yet is interior aesthetics - the RS6 is boring (but less boring than it was) and quickly ends up markedly more expensive than the XFR-S if you tick any boxes to make it less boring. The only interior shot of the RS6 they dare to use for press purposes in the UK has nine grand of interior options


When it comes to modern cool though, Jaaaaaag beats Mercedes and Audi. Audi's brand has been diluted by the hordes of absolute choppers who drive them, while Mercedes' was destroyed by 00s reliability, the trophy wife's SLK and CLK, the Elk Test, splitting off top end cars to the Maybach brand, the gobblers who drive the M/ML, the existence of the B-Class and R-Class - it goes on and on and on...


*Stop it...

I found the interior quite wonderful, but then again I also don't see the issue with American interiors all the time and feel when people complain about plastics or whatever that it comes off pompous. As for the added expense I will give you that because you're right. AT least the pdf options price packets from both indicate you being right.

For ride quality perhaps that is the issue, the areas here may be different to yours and what you find uncomfortable I wont.

As for the owner factor of cool, I'd give them all an SU. The Jaguar owners I've met either working or at car events or whatever or no less elitist and annoying as the Audi and Mercedes and country club Caddy owners. To me the Mercedes guys come off a bit less rude and the nicest Caddy owner I met was a snowbird from Saskatchewan area so in general they're all annoying and for me I have to just rule it out or I'd have given the car an SU when it's more than it's owners this time around I think.

 

[Adamgp]

Scores points for being fast, keeping it out of Seriously Uncool land.

Uncool.

 

[Ingram]

Which is fine, I don't need limited views to get excited you do.

I literally have no idea what you're talking about. Must be my darn limited views playing up again..

Sure it does, because as you've said this is the concept behind these, being brutish cars in the sheep clothing of a subtle family wagon (well not subtle these days in looks).

Powerful cars can be cool, in the same way that low powered cars can be cool, too. The major appeal of this car is that it is powerful to the point of being silly which in this instance, I - and indeed, the vast majority so far - find cool. I don't see how this changes my previous point in any way.

Saving money has always been cool to me and I've used it in other cool walls as a justification without issue. Sorry that I'm bucking the Jaguar but I really, really, really don't see the appeal. I like Jaguar, but that doesn't mean I find it cool. I tend to see what Jaguar does compared to the rest of the world as a more expensive weaker method and due to a lush history justifying why they can.

If you told someone you chose a c£70,000 Caddy over the Jag because of the purchase price, the only chance you would hear someone utter the word 'cool' is if it was quickly followed by the words 'story, bro'.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I literally have no idea what you're talking about. Must be my darn limited views playing up again..

You seemed to imply that since there are so many Mercs and Audis out there that their wagon variations are boring and that the Jaguar seems far more interesting. That's how it came off to me. I'm saying for me that doesn't make the car less or more cool.

Powerful cars can be cool, in the same way that low powered cars can be cool, too. The major appeal of this car is that it is powerful to the point of being silly which in this instance, I - and indeed, the vast majority so far - find cool. I don't see how this changes my previous point in any way.

Who says it changes your point, your original saying was that this grouping is about powerful wagons, well if your goal is to get a powerful wagon why not get the most powerful one of the lot and save money as far as carmagazine in the UK puts it. Also who cares what the vast majority think, are you going to use them to help your argument or use what you're saying. There are people who agree with me this car is uncool despite how fast or whatever else it is, why does it matter if you and I are debating what we see?

If you told someone you chose, say, the Caddy over the Jag because of the purchase price, the only chance you would hear someone utter the word 'cool' is if it was quickly followed by the words 'story, bro'.

I doubt it, but if that's the immaturity level that you surround yourself with and then decide to use it as a comical defense...okay.

 

[Cano]

-wagon
-Jaguar
-freaking fast
-that blue
-wagon
-wagon


Sub zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzero.

 

[homeforsummer]

I doubt it, but if that's the immaturity level that you surround yourself with and then decide to use it as a comical defense...okay.

Are you seriously suggesting that telling someone you bought one car over another because it's cheaper (all other things being equal) is considered "cool"?

Try saying this sentence next time you're going out to dinner with a lady friend and see how far the "cheaper = cooler" ethos gets you: "Hey darling, I know we were planning to eat at your favourite restaurant tonight but I figured McDonalds does salad too, and it's cheaper. That's cool with you, right?"

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Are you seriously suggesting that telling someone you bought one car over another because it's cheaper (all other things being equal) is considered "cool"?

Try saying this sentence next time you're going out to dinner with a lady friend and see how far the "cheaper = cooler" ethos gets you: "Hey darling, I know we were planning to eat at your favourite restaurant tonight but I figured McDonalds does salad too, and it's cheaper. That's cool with you, right?"

I'm married thanks...

Also I don't see how Cadillac is McD's but okay.

 

[homeforsummer]

I'm married thanks...

Also I don't see how Cadillac is McD's but okay.

Good for you? And it isn't. It was an illustrative example, irrespective of the two cars being discussed and the marital status of the members of this forum. My point was that something being cheaper doesn't automatically make it cooler.

Still, that much would have been obvious if you had attempted to understand I was trying to say rather than being needlessly argumentative every time anyone questions your posts.

 

[MoLiEG]

Not sure about this one... it's not your typical Jaguar...

But in the end, I think it's Cool 👍

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Good for you? And it isn't. It was an illustrative example, irrespective of the two cars being discussed and the marital status of the members of this forum. My point was that something being cheaper doesn't automatically make it cooler.

Where do I say it gets an auto cool? It's my damn criteria that I'm basing it off of and using it to contest the idea that another member thinks spending more money on this car means the person purchasing took hours of time to make such a wise purchase.

EDIT:
Wasn't looking for your approval on me being married either, your post came off sounding as if I'm some young guy that wouldn't understand unless I tried it in the method you used.

Still, that much would have been obvious if you had attempted to understand I was trying to say rather than being needlessly argumentative every time anyone questions your posts.

If I'm needlessly argumentative then why keep quoting me? And actually I make many attempts to understand (Agree to a degree is what you really seem to mean) you can go look over many post in recent where I do this. Your example made no sense to me on an apples to oranges level. I don't have to live with the purchase of a burger that is approved by a date or not, if I had the ability to buy a super wagon though I would have to live with it for some time and and if I save 30k to 10k in doing so that's pretty cool.

Also I'll ask you if you have an issue with how I post pm me and I'll be more than happy to square that away to prevent any future issues.

 

[Wolfe]

I think @LMSCorvetteGT2's point is that overpaying for "fancy" goods (like a luxo-rocket-wagon) is uncool, like spending $100 on an artfully arranged itty bitty portion of a dish with a name you can't pronounce, as opposed to spending even as much as $40 on a premium steak. Just for example, not an analogy here.

To me, paying less isn't exactly cool, but paying more than necessary can be uncool.

 

[Famine]

I think @LMSCorvetteGT2's point is that overpaying for "fancy" goods (like a luxo-rocket-wagon) is uncool, like spending $100 on an artfully arranged itty bitty portion of a dish with a name you can't pronounce, as opposed to spending even as much as $40 on a premium steak. Just for example, not an analogy here.

To me, paying less isn't exactly cool, but paying more than necessary can be uncool.

And @homeforsummer's point is that spending $40 on premium steak isn't necessarily less cool than paying $35 for steak.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

And @homeforsummer's point is that spending $40 on premium steak isn't necessarily less cool than paying $35 for steak.

And for me as I stated from the get go is, if it isn't to him that's fine but if your going to try and sway me with your subjective idea as if it holds more validity to mine...then it's an issue.

If the two taste no different from one another or even slightly then saving the 5 dollars you would have spent for something else is pretty cool to me. I got to enjoy something good and not spend nearly as much as I could have and I didn't lose out either.

 

[sparkytooth]

Dat blue.

Cool.

 

[Famine]

And @homeforsummer's point is that spending $40 on premium steak isn't necessarily less cool than paying $35 for steak.

And for me as I stated from the get go is, if it isn't to him that's fine but if your going to try and sway me with your subjective idea as if it holds more validity to mine...then it's an issue.

If the two taste no different from one another or even slightly then saving the 5 dollars you would have spent for something else is pretty cool to me. I got to enjoy something good and not spend nearly as much as I could have and I didn't lose out either.

Point being that they do - it's nearly as good for nearly as much...

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Point being that they do - it's nearly as good for nearly as much...

Or even slightly as I say as well. You know you're not getting the best but it's quite close to the point that it's still good and you're not missing out in the end. Also you say they do and since I've never rode in a XFR-S wagon and probably wont since they're quite limited even in the U.S. I can only say that the cars I have rode in CTS-V and E class mercs aren't quite good in ride quality. So unless the car massages my butt in all the right places during the car ride or something inane it's hard for me to see how exactly the Jag is that much greater other than perhaps your potential preference to it.

 

[homeforsummer]

but if your going to try and sway me with your subjective idea as if it holds more validity to mine...then it's an issue.

Nobody is trying to sway you. You're free to believe whatever you like. People are just explaining why they hold their own subjective ideas, and their opinion on why judging a car's coolness on price seems misguided.

And I've found a much better option than taking your posting style to PM: It's called the ignore button. Unfortunately, I unclicked it to see why people were having phantom discussions. More fool me.

To me, paying less isn't exactly cool, but paying more than necessary can be uncool.

That entirely depends whether one considers the Jag's price to be "more than necessary".

Given that it is a different car from a CTS-V, or a C63, or an RS4, "more than necessary" could be said to be based on little more than whim. Paying more for a car that is a great deal more exclusive than the others may be appealing to some. Paying more for the badge alone may be appealing to some.

People arguably pay "more than necessary" every time a Ferrari 250 GTO comes up for auction given that it's essentially a collection of old metal, plastic and leather arranged into a nice shape, but cars are emotive objects and spending a little extra is entirely justified if a certain car pulls at the heart strings.

If someone chooses to spend more on the Jag because it's a Jag (I've not even checked to see if it is more expensive - that's how little I give a toss about its price - but I expect this subject wouldn't have come up if it wasn't) rather than spending less on a perhaps more "obvious" choice, fair play to them. Since no car in this class is exactly afforable for average Joe, someone spending an extra $5k or $10k (or whatever) here and there makes absolutely zero difference to whether I see the car as cool or not.

If, on the other hand, a CTS-V or an RS4 was twenty grand and you could buy one instead of a Camry, that would definitely add to its coolness.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Nobody is trying to sway you. You're free to believe whatever you like. People are just explaining why they hold their own subjective ideas, and their opinion on why judging a car's coolness on price seems misguided.

And I've found a much better option than taking your posting style to PM: It's called the ignore button. Unfortunately, I unclicked it to see why people were having phantom discussions. More fool me.

Good for you

 

[Stotty]

Pointless car, made even worse by looking like it's crashed in to Halfords front window and all the tacky **** they sell has stuck to it.

M5/E63/XFR... pointless. A 2 tonne family car with no traction, rubbish MPG, ruined ride, rubbish range and a tacky body kit. Should have bought a proper sports car.

Seriously uncool.

An S Diesel would be cool.

 

[homeforsummer]

M5/E63/XFR... pointless. A 2 tonne family car with no traction, rubbish MPG, ruined ride, rubbish range and a tacky body kit. Should have bought a proper sports car.

Now tell us how you really feel

That said, the XFR's ride is far from ruined. All the XFs are pretty good in that regard at the moment.

And I made the mistake of driving the S Diesel after I drove the R. The S is a lovely car in isolation but driving a grumbling diesel (one which isn't remotely as economical as the German lot) after driving that amazing supercharged V8, the diesel felt about as uncool as it's possible for a car to get. I've driven lots of good diesels, and lots of diesels that make their petrol equivalents redundant... but diesel is not a cool fuel.