Rare Ca Owned 2 Owner 1992 Jaguar Coupe Xjs V12 5.3 49k Mint Clean Smooth Fast on 2040-cars

Auto blog

This or That: Mercedes S-Class 350SD vs. 2003 Jaguar XJR [w/poll]

Budget. It's a wretched word, whether you're going out to eat, shipping for a new outfit or, more relevant to today's discussion, buying a car. Massive marketing machines have convinced us, as a population, to buy the best you can afford, repercussions be damned – If you've saved up some money, spend it! All of it, on whatever it is that currently sits atop your personal Amazon wishlist, be it a Timex that takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin', a $17,000 Gold Apple Watch or a $60,000 Rolex Cosmograph Daytona. But what if the best you can afford is... say, $12,815? For that price, you can buy a brand-new 2015 Nissan Versa (including destination), assuming you're happy with zero options and a manual transmission. For that price, you'll get standard air conditioning, a CD player and... well, a warranty. Pretty sensible choice, Captain Frugal. But also ridiculously uninspired. And so that brings us to today's edition of This or That, in which two Autoblog editors pick differing sides of an argument and duke it out to see which one of us can convince you, dear reader, is better. Or at least less wrong. You be the judge. As a refresher, I'm two-and-two on these challenges, having lost the first and second editions before storming back in rounds three and four. Today, as alluded to above, we decided to throw our collective brainpower (oh lord, what have we done?) at what may be the single most difficult question currently confounding the best minds our planet has to offer: What is the best used used luxury car you can buy for the price of a 2015 Nissan Versa? Shall we meet our contenders? Allow me to introduce you to the most perfect luxury car money can buy (assuming the amount of money you're holding is equal to the amount of the cheapest new car currently sold in America, the Nissan Versa). My pick is the 1991 Mercedes-Benz S-Class. Not just any S-Class, but the legendary W126, which was produced between 1979 and 1992. And not just any W126, either, but one powered by a 3.5-liter turbodiesel engine. And with that, I send the argument to my esteemed colleague, Associate Editor Chris Bruce. Bruce: Jeremy, we had over $12,000 to budget for this challenge, and the best you can manage is a 24-year-old diesel Mercedes? I love oil-burners as much as any other auto writer with their mountains of torque and huge cruising range, but you're making this too easy on me. Also, you're really choosing a brown, diesel, German luxury sedan?

Jaguar's XF diesel isn't just fuel efficient, it's the cheapest XF available

Jaguar announced the 2017 Jaguar XF will now offer the 2.0-liter turbocharged diesel the company introduced on the XE. In addition to returning an impressive 42 miles per gallon on the highway and 31 in the city, the diesel is the cheapest XF available at $48,445. This means that picking the oil-burner will save you $3,040 over the cheapest gas V6 version, which only manages 29 mpg on the highway and 20 in the city. With 180 horsepower, the diesel is significantly down on power compared with the base V6 model. As a result, the diesel moves slower. Jaguar estimates the base V6 is good for a 5.2-second 0-60 time and the diesel should be able to do the same in 8 seconds. However, that's the only real downside. Even with the slower acceleration times, the diesel still has a very usable 317 lb-ft of torque available from 1,750-2,500 rpm. Based on our test drive of a diesel-equipped XE, the engine also breaks the old diesel stereotypes. It's both quite smooth and responsive. Unless you seriously need that straight-line performance, the Jaguar XF diesel arguably makes the most sense. It provides significant price savings and better fuel economy. The diesel XF also joins the XE and F-Pace diesels, leaving just the XJ and F-Type as the only Jaguars without compression-ignition engines. The British automaker is planning to remedy that, as a Jaguar Land Rover executive said the company plans to also add a diesel XJ variant in the US, even in the wake of the VW diesel scandal. Related Video: Related Gallery 2016 Jaguar XF: Review View 24 Photos Image Credit: Jaguar Land Rover Green Jaguar Diesel Vehicles Luxury Sedan jaguar land rover ingenium

2017 Jaguar XE: We'll miss our long-termer, but not its diesel engine

This may be automotive journalist blasphemy, but diesels aren't always a good thing. And I don't mean that from an emissions standpoint. Sometimes the diesel in question isn't a good engine, and/or is a bad fit for the cars to which they're fitted. Our long-term Jaguar XE diesel is a textbook case of both issues. The first issue becomes apparent from the moment the 2.0-liter turbodiesel four-cylinder fires up with all the clattering, tapping and ticking that can only come from a compression-ignition engine. It's far from the shaking and knocking of full-size diesel trucks of a few decades ago, but it definitely feels a generation or two behind other diesel cars. For instance, we had a diesel Chevy Cruze in the office, which was quieter and smoother than the Jaguar despite a base price roughly $10,000 less. It becomes a bit smoother and less raucous as revs increase, but the volume remains rather high, making it sound as though the engine is struggling more than it is. Though, to Jaguar's credit, the company has managed to keep virtually all engine vibrations from entering the cabin. Now, the diesel engine's voice would be less problematic if it provided some engaging performance, but, outside of the high fuel-economy numbers, there's hardly any to be found. This may seem surprising considering the Jaguar's 318 pound-feet of torque, but that torque figure lasts only briefly from 1,750 rpm to 2,500 rpm. After that, the torque rapidly falls off, and you don't see the Jag's meager 180 horsepower peak until 4,000 rpm -- not far off of the engine's roughly 5,000-rpm redline. As a result, the XE has adequate passing power and around-town shunt, but anytime you want to play with more revs, it faceplants. But at least it does nail, and even exceed, its 40-mpg highway fuel economy rating without trying. The faults of this diesel engine are then exacerbated by the fact that it's in such a smooth and fun car as the XE. It positively glides across rough city streets and highways, keeping the chassis steady and its passengers soothed. Coupled with a quiet cabin, the XE is a peaceful place to be. At least it would be if the diesel didn't rudely interrupt every time the throttle pedal is pressed. Through some sort of black magic, the XE handles about as well as it rides. The incredibly sensitive and accurate steering is superb. It feels like adjustment knobs on a high-end stereo -- weighted perfectly and fine enough to get it right where you want it.