2005 Jaguar S Type R vs 545
10-15-2004, 01:45 AM
#12
Senior Members
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 9,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jimbo' date='Oct 14 2004, 11:13 PM
Jaguars are for people who want to look good. 545 is for people who want to drive good.
[snapback]45046[/snapback]
12-08-2005, 03:36 PM
#14
Contributors
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2006 Alpine White 550i
If it helps any, my previous car was a used 1999 XJR. I can tell you i love the 550 100x better. The steering is tons more confident, and the speed of the 550 now surpasses the best times I had in that Jag. The interior of my 550 is also more intuitive, I am sincerely growing on that i-drive.
My only caveat is that I haven't given a chance to Jaguar ever since they came out with their new XJRs. But I'm too happy in my BMW.
My only caveat is that I haven't given a chance to Jaguar ever since they came out with their new XJRs. But I'm too happy in my BMW.
12-08-2005, 04:23 PM
#15
Senior Members
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't be so quick to write-off the Jag S-Type R.
The interior fit/finish is hands down better than the E60. Period.
The handling characteristics of the S-Type R is different than the E60, not necessarily better or worse. Jag's CAT system, which is a different variant on BMW's ARS and the electronically adjustable dampening systems found on the Vette (i.e., the F55 system) and MBs. works very well. Makes the car handle confidently and aggressively while still maintaining a plush ride that won't rattle your fillings or dentures (as the case may be
).
The two biggest drawbacks for me with the Jag is the (1) no manual gearbox and (2) supercharged engine.
If you can overlook those two points (or just don't care), the S-Type R is a real nice alternative.
The interior fit/finish is hands down better than the E60. Period.
The handling characteristics of the S-Type R is different than the E60, not necessarily better or worse. Jag's CAT system, which is a different variant on BMW's ARS and the electronically adjustable dampening systems found on the Vette (i.e., the F55 system) and MBs. works very well. Makes the car handle confidently and aggressively while still maintaining a plush ride that won't rattle your fillings or dentures (as the case may be
).The two biggest drawbacks for me with the Jag is the (1) no manual gearbox and (2) supercharged engine.
If you can overlook those two points (or just don't care), the S-Type R is a real nice alternative.
12-08-2005, 04:32 PM
#16
Members
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Francisco, Califonia
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2004 545i SMG, Dinan Flywheel, M Sport Kit Blk, Blk.
Originally Posted by ipse dixit' post='208919' date='Dec 8 2005, 05:23 PM
I wouldn't be so quick to write-off the Jag S-Type R.
The interior fit/finish is hands down better than the E60. Period.
The handling characteristics of the S-Type R is different than the E60, not necessarily better or worse. Jag's CAT system, which is a different variant on BMW's ARS and the electronically adjustable dampening systems found on the Vette (i.e., the F55 system) and MBs. works very well. Makes the car handle confidently and aggressively while still maintaining a plush ride that won't rattle your fillings or dentures (as the case may be ).
The two biggest drawbacks for me with the Jag is the (1) no manual gearbox and (2) supercharged engine.
If you can overlook those two points (or just don't care), the S-Type R is a real nice alternative.
The interior fit/finish is hands down better than the E60. Period.
The handling characteristics of the S-Type R is different than the E60, not necessarily better or worse. Jag's CAT system, which is a different variant on BMW's ARS and the electronically adjustable dampening systems found on the Vette (i.e., the F55 system) and MBs. works very well. Makes the car handle confidently and aggressively while still maintaining a plush ride that won't rattle your fillings or dentures (as the case may be
).The two biggest drawbacks for me with the Jag is the (1) no manual gearbox and (2) supercharged engine.
If you can overlook those two points (or just don't care), the S-Type R is a real nice alternative.
the R's have completely updated interiors, unbelieveable seats, brembos, huge rotors and a 6 speed auto that is unreal.
The car smokes my 545i, in every category. I've even put in a new dinan flywheel, eisenmann exhaust, and reduced my weight with radenenergie r10 -
no competition, I don't even think that the mt or c/d track results of 5.2 (0-60) times are correct. It feels definitely faster as I am able to destroy m3's all over the bay area. The handling is also pretty good, with the cats suspension, feels different than the e60.
And you can pick up a s type r for $50,000 brand new
12-09-2005, 09:03 AM
#17
Senior Members
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: S. California
Posts: 1,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 545i; Manual Shifter
I always thought the S-type was a more luxurious looking car compared to the e60. However, I've seen some of the S-type R's with blacked out grills and sporty (non-chrome) wheels. Makes the car look more like a sport-sedan. It has an aggressive look in my opinion. However, I'm not too keen on the interior. Don't like all the buttons on the dash and I'm sure my right hand would automatically search endlessly for an iDrive knob without me even knowing.
12-09-2005, 09:27 AM
#18
Senior Members
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: North of Boston, Ma
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by heezy545i' post='44901' date='Oct 14 2004, 04:49 PM
Keep in mind that you are in an e60 forum so opinions may be slanted.
I've always thought the S type Jag was a good looking car and although others may complain about the interior, I'd argue that the S type has better materials throughout.
With 390hp, it may take the 545 in straightline performance, but that's where I think it would end. The 545 is a superior handling car and rewards the driver with each drive.
If you just want a fast car just to cruise in however, the Jag may be your car. I do believe I'd take an e500, A6 or even a lexus in front of it though.
I've always thought the S type Jag was a good looking car and although others may complain about the interior, I'd argue that the S type has better materials throughout.
With 390hp, it may take the 545 in straightline performance, but that's where I think it would end. The 545 is a superior handling car and rewards the driver with each drive.
If you just want a fast car just to cruise in however, the Jag may be your car. I do believe I'd take an e500, A6 or even a lexus in front of it though.
12-13-2005, 12:36 PM
#19
Members
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gpt' post='209213' date='Dec 9 2005, 01:27 PM
As someone that switched from a BMW E39 to an E500 just 5 mos ago and now back to a 530, you may want to re-think the E500. It's an old mans car that drives smoother than a BMW but that's where it ends. Handling is not even close and from a technology standpoint, MB has to be at least 3 years behind. And to top it all off, MB is cheaping out whereever they can. No more scheduled maintenance coverage. You pay for everything. God, I'm glad to dump that pig.
12-14-2005, 01:58 PM
#20
Members
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon USA
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2004 545i
My mom has an S-type R, I have a 545i. Her Jag is CONSTANTLY in the shop. Hers handles & looks much more luxury than sport (but will most likely go quicker than mine in a straight line). Her back seats are more cramped. Her service dept is nowhere near the quality of mine. She's owned Jags for a long time, but after seeing my BMW she'll probably be switching brands.