Jaguar XF 2.2D drives 1312km on a single tank

Article
Gallery

By Brett Davis | June 29th, 2011

A new Jaguar XF 2.2D sedan has just been driven from the company’s headquarters in Birmingham, UK, across to Munich in Germany on a single tank of diesel. This makes it the most fuel efficient Jaguar sedan in the company’s history.

Using its standard 2.2-litre turbo-diesel four-cylinder engine, Jaguar claims the new XF 2.2D was able to cover the journey on one 64-litre tank of diesel. The overall trip was 1312km, which means the big Jag sipped fuel at an average rate of 4.9L/100km.

The XF wasn’t driven by Jaguar either, it was steered by independent test driver, David Madgwick, and his navigator, Alexander Madgwick. After final checks, the XF had its fuel cap sealed at Jaguar’s Castle Bromwich plant and the pair were sent on their way.

Upon arrival in Munich, the drivers were met by Jaguar XF Chief Programme Engineer, Andy Whyman. Mr Whyman recently said,

“The entire development team is very proud of what the new XF 2.2 has achieved – this not only proves the efficiency of the new model but underlines that performance and economy can be combined.”

It’s not a bad effort, considering the XF 2.2D offers 142kW of power and 450Nm of torque. The Jag is also able to accelerate from 0-100km/h in 8.5 seconds.

The Jaguar XF 2.2D isn’t on sale yet, but reports suggest the car will be in international showrooms by September this year.

FrugalOne

*****PRIMO!*****

While it looks good, a Peugeot did 1800km+ on a standard tank full of DIEsel, i believe the tank was SMALLER than the Jag

At the end of the day ALL that counts is the $/km

ie Price of the fuel/km travelled

NOTHING touches LPG

Flying High

Sure the Pug might have doen that. But it does not look as good as a Jag now does it? And in the Jaguar market, $/km is not really relvant. Because apart from LPG cost you were referring to, you need to look at overall $ including things like cost of parts and service and depreciation to find out how much it really cost you. Then there is the feel good factor about driving a nice car which is less tangible.
http://electric-vehicles-cars-bikes.blogspot.com/ Paul

EVs kill LPG for cost @ $0.01/ km.

LPG is approx equal to Ethanol for energy IN-efficiency. It all comes down to the energy density of the fuel, petrol and especially diesel are much more energy dense fuels.

Carl

Try doing over 1,000K’s in an EV mate!!! it will take you over a week of charging! LOL

http://www.nsmg.com.au Wil-son

its half the size knuckle head!!!

A

That’s what I was thinking! The Jaguar weighs about a ton more that a 308!

FrugalOne

@ ^ A ^

“That’s what I was thinking! The Jaguar weighs about a ton more that a 308!”

We are comparing to the almost SAME SIZED 406HDi Peugeot, its but 200kg more, that “1 ton more” is a load of rubbish”

The Jag looks pretty ordinary compared to the Peugeot range 2348km from a just 5l larger tank

GET YOU FACTS RIGHT, F/0 is ALWAYS 100% correct!

FrugalOne

Looks like i short changed Peugeot!, sorry P, the SIMILAR sized 406HDi did 2348km!, as in 1036km MORE

They drove it at normal speeds [actually in a speedy time, so no turtle slowness] from Melb. Vic. to Rockhampton QLD.

The fuel tank in the 406 was 5l bigger, but that dies not make 1036km.

The 406HDi is only ~200kg heavier, around same size, AND no doubt more roomier inside thanks to FWD v’s RWD

john

Great effort jaguar. On another note the XF finally looks how it should have from the beginning! Fabulous looking car before with its Aston Martinish rear end, now has a front end to go with it!

Roadtard

Agree, but what have they done on the side there?

Crummydore

Yeah… that does look a little odd!

Still, if I could afford one it would look quite good in my car port.
Michael

I love the car, but that chromed side just looks wrong IMO. Jaguar seem to have a knack for topping the perfect design with something that looks wrong or odd.

Alexander

4.9l/100km isn’t really THAT spectacular, I’d assume a lot of the journey would be on the highway, a new-gen Audi A6 2.0tdi gets 5.0l/100km on the combined cycle, and the BMW 520d gets just a bit more, both would eclipse this on a highway journey…

nickdl

Yes but neither would do it in as much style or enjoyment as the XF.

Fiz

That’s really on par with the new Peugeot 508 GT 2.2 HDi which is 4.4l on the highway and 5.7l/100km combined.

Either way it is noce to see economy being a feature of a car like this. Good on em.
HJP

That’s impressive considering the size of the car. Diesel technologies are becoming more advanced and more people buying diesel.
CarFanatic

Nothing Touches LPG? So the Commodore Dual Fuel rated at 13.4 is more economical $/km that this Jaguar that did 4.9?

Let’s do the sums huh?

13.4x 62.9 = 8.42 cents per Kilometre
4.9x 145.9 = 7.15 cents per kilometre.

Both these Fuel prices are from one of my local petrol stations.

Hmmm I can see how LPG can’t be touched, I wouldn’t touch a fuel that cost me 18% more per kilometre.

bangel

Correct , and taxi gas engine will not have the life of diesel, nor the power .

FrugalOne

“Correct , and taxi gas engine will not have the life of diesel, nor the power

WRONG, AGAIN!

So you have not seen Falcon taxis for sale on carsales with 850,000km?

LPG does not dilute or dirty the oil, its also higher octane so runs cleaner

Karl

You’re comparing COMBINED consumption with HIGHWAY consumption.

Commodores extra urban consumption is 10.3 therefore,
10.3x 62.9 = $6.48

They also don’t leave a trail of particle matter behind.

Bangle, my brother is a mechanic and has seen *many* LPG falcons that have made the odometer go all the way around on the original engine.
My car is LPG, and I can assure you that the engine oil stays significantly cleaner(than petrol).
Engine life only becomes a problem if the valve seats aren’t designed for the fuel.
If you think LPG engines make less power then diesels, I suggest you learn the difference between power and torque.
FrugalOne

@ CarFanatic
“Nothing Touches LPG?”

CORRECT!

Its important to compare THE SAME SIZED and SAME VEHICLE that has similar power/torque and cyclinders

Lets do the math with a Ford Territory, ULP, DIEsel and LPG:

Done my own [REAL WORLD] math here, and you need to do 93,390km in the DIEsel before you can make up the extra $3250 you paid for the DIEsel v’s the ULP versions [Same 2WD versions]
RWD ULP $39,990+ DIEsel $43240+ [So extra $3250] ORC will cost more in the DIEsel too.
ULP 10.6L/100km DIEsel 8.2L/100km [So the DIEsel uses 2.4L per 100km less]
Lets say that ULP and DIEsel fuel is the same cost of $1.45/L
100km ULP $15.37 100km DIEsel $11.89
So you “*save*” $3.48 per 100km in the DIEsel
BUT you paid $3250 more for the DIEsel, div. by $3.48 = 93,390km to save
Thats more than 6 years for the average punter.
FAIL
THE fuel they should of used is LPG, they have the best system coming out for the Falcon but not the Territory.
$3250 would have paid for a injected factory system [AND $1500 back form Gillard]
Territory LPG will use 12.5L/100km @ $0.55 = $6.87 per 100km
Thats nearly HALF the running cost of the DIEsel
Ford AUS have stuffed it up, AGAIN

sam

Frugal- Yes, Quick – may be not.. 0 to 100 in 8.4 seconds for a car with 450NM and 142 KW is not quick, 320 d with 135kw and 380NM can do that 1 second quicker.

Acfsambo

That’s probably down to gearing

Aussie bender

Weight – Jags tend to be on the heavy side.

Aussie bender

The 320D Wagon is 8.3 seconds – I don’t believe the sedan would be much faster – where did you get 1 second faster from? Perhas you are thinking of the 120D or 123D?
Peter

I think if you were worried about speed, you’d take the 3 litre TT diesel jag, 0 – 100 in 6.2, but of course the economy isnt as good, also the jag is much bigger than the bimmer, around the 5 series size, and as has been pointed out, quite heavy (the XF is steel with an aluminium roof, XJ aluminium)

CarFanatic

But Sam, the Jaguar is 325 kilos heavier! 23% more weight is obviously going to affect it’s 0-100 over and above the Bimmer.

DWS1

And about 100% better looking than a 320d, but that is just a personal opinion from looking at the photos above.

CarFanatic

The sedan 320 does it in 7.6 apparently.
Ritchie

The excellent German autobahn network takes some credit for that, bypassing all the cities. Be interested to know their average speed.
CarFanatic

Hold on Frugal you toss pot. I compared a 1700 kg Commodore LPG to a 1700 kg Jaguar Diesel. Similar sized cars, I can easily you a dozen other examples with similar outcomes. You found one and one only.

And real world? BS, you’d never get 10.6 in the real world with a ULP Territory. The Diesel Territory has proven it can easily do it’s claimed.

That and the fact it’s a ten year old Diesel engine and thus ten years behind in technology and economy.

Now find better examples and I might actually conceded Clown Boy.
FrugalOne

This compares and priced like a BMW 520D, why are you guys compare to a 320D?

This is a pretty car, but be smart and buy the BMW 520D instead