2007 Jaguar XK Coupe Review
7 Nov, 2007
11 Comments 
With a power output of 224kW at 6000rpm and 420Nm of torque at 4100rpm, it is a slightly peaky engine. 85 per cent of torque is available from 2000rpm to 6000rpm, but it certainly pulls a lot harder from 4000rpm all the way to the redline. And gulps down the premium unleaded doing it too. I would have expected a bit better economy from a small V8, but then, buyers of a car like this are hardly worried about fuel prices.
But it’s disappointing in its acceleration. I mean, just look at it. It seems to be going a million miles an hour just standing still. Yet it still can’t crack the 6 second barrier from 0-100km/h. Poor form…
The test car came with 16-way adjustable seating, which was comfortable, supportive and allowed you to find the ideal driving position. The rear seats however… well, you have to ask, who designs these things? I don’t envision a mass of legless Jaguar interior designers (except on a Friday, down the pub) getting around.
A friend’s 12 year old son managed to contort himself into the seat, but then couldn’t fit his feet onto the floor. He had to lay across the two seats with feet on the cushion of the seat opposite (shoes off, naturally). What’s worse, is that the seatbelt goes from the centre out to the side of the car, making a medieval rack seem like a back massage. Please Jaguar, just give us more boot space or luggage space behind the seats and dispense with the ridiculous “+2″ designation.
Location: Home / Behind the Wheel / ...
Rate Post: 
(9 votes, average: 4 out of 5)
Loading ...
-
Print it:
November 7th, 2007 at 5:28 pm
I think the Jaguar XK is worth more than 3 stars here, is it because the carry over clouded bonus review points..when this shape first came to fruition nearly everyone following Jags was gob smacked, Jaguar’s shape age very well, like a fine wine, soft but not harsh, just like Range Rovers etc, did you tell those kids the Jag was worth $200,000. MAN, I would love to own that moment just for a second….
(Report)
November 7th, 2007 at 5:29 pm
anna nicole smith? easy on the eye?
seriously?
(Report)
November 7th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
Karl……..you didn’t drop round for a coffee in it!!Disappointed……..
I’m nothing like Anna Nichole to look at{except for the attributes} but would be more than willing to show my personality and substance just for a ride….please. Maybe next time! It may be the closest thing to an Aston I get !
(Report)
November 7th, 2007 at 7:06 pm
There’s a little something about it that reminds me of the Shelby Cobra hardtop.
(Report)
November 7th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
Well, what can I say. YES PLEASE!
(Report)
November 7th, 2007 at 8:23 pm
Anyone considering the XK should go straight to the XKR! Better VFM.
(Report)
November 7th, 2007 at 8:38 pm
Looks like you had a lot of fun Karl. Was there any tread left on the tyres? haha. I enjoy your reviews, keep up the good work.
(Report)
November 7th, 2007 at 10:13 pm
I must say, there is some inconsistent ratings going on at caradvice.com.au
I agree with most things but the star ratings you guys give are way out of the ball park.
How on earth can you give a plastic fantastic, run-of-the-mill, poorly built, ugly looking, gutless engined Kia Magnetis 4 stars, but only give the dorp-dead gorgeous, absolutely breathtaking Jag XK 3?
Im not being ostentatious here, just straight forward and to the point. You seemed to find strangely annoying things about the car that do not matter at all to anyone in the market for an XK bar the engine, which is an easy fix… buy the goddam XKR.
(Report)
November 7th, 2007 at 10:23 pm
Hendrik,
As you and Tony have mentioned, buy the XKR. It’s all about the package. Not just dynamics, the engine, or as you seem to call it, looks. Price is a big consideration. Even if a car looks a million dollars, not everyone is going to pay for it.
The XKR is worthy of four stars, because it comes together better as a whole. The engine, steering and suspension tweaks make the (slight) extra money spent a much better proposition.
The RS4 for example is cheaper, yet gets a better star rating (5 out of 5). It’s because it’s simply a better package. Value for money? Absolutely.
And that’s what we look for.
(Report)
November 7th, 2007 at 11:18 pm
Hendrik, if we were to rate cars based on an overall scheme, you would see a lot of 0.5 star cars, you cant compare a 200k jag to a Kia Magentis!
The Magentis is a great car for the price, and thats what you have to consider, there is no car in its class that offers the same level of standard equipment as the Kia, besides, its not poorly built, Kia back it up with a strong warranty,
As for the Jag, I agree with Karl’s rating, and your last comment, you would be foolish not to buy the XKR, hence making this car a little pointless, then again, if you are going to buy the XKR, spend the extra $30g and get the V8 Vantage!
(Report)
November 8th, 2007 at 11:50 am
Fair points Karl and Alborz, i understand the comparative star ratings in regards to cars in its class, but the XK has received fantastic reviews elsewhere, do you think you were maybe biased against the XK after testing such beauts like the Lambo and Aston Martin?
The dynamics may not be class leading but i think the XK would be more than competent on our roads when pushed.
I may be a sucker for sexy british cars but i think the XK beats the 430, 911 and R8 for looks, and those cars are nearly twice its price.
(Report)