Wow, I didn't know we Jaguar owners were hated so much just for loving our cars! I'm 18 and I bought an XJ6 here in Canada as my first car. I like it because it looks good and feel good, but I LOVE it because it has given me nothing but dependable, Reliable, inexpensive motoring! Jaguars are fine automobiles and they are suited for a particular person. I understand why somebody wouldn't love my old 1990 XJ6, because I don't particularly fancy their Chevrolet Cavaliers! We all have tastes.
the rover 75 is a fantastic car deffinetly the later one i love ours its great and yes the jag is faster but i think the rover is nicer looking inside and out and comfyier
I had a 75 cdt 2years ago. Brilliant car,but underpowered with that 2liter diesel engine. Smooth ride,great quality,massive safe car. Now I have an S-type 3.0 automatic. Well.. such a different! Effortless driving,plenty of power,great handling,fantastic car!! However,the Rover has at least as good interior as the Jag has..
The history here is "don't buy", with engines (only the V6 sold here) failing at around 85 to 90,000 km. I did have a Rover P$ 75, one with the cyclops front lamp. That was a quality car, front suspension running in oil baths, superb fit and finish, a distinguished burble to the exhaust. The castings from the oil bath air-cleaner to the paper one, and then from that to the carbs are things of beauty.
1st. The Rover 75 isnt based on the BMW 3 series, the car was totally new and is now the basis of the new MGs (MG 6 for example). And yes the R75 did have a BMW diesel 2litre turbo, but all the others were Rover own engines (apart from the Ford V8). 2nd. The Jag S type is based on the Lincon LS, and uses Jaguar own engines apart from the 3.0 V6, which is Ford. All the other engines (eg 2.7 D) were developed with Jag and Peugeot. 3rd. I have both cars (75 2.0D + S type 2.7D) and both are great!!
You have or had both cars. Could you tell me wich one to buy? I find both of them extremely beautiful. I prefer the interior of the Jag a bit more, but not enought to make it decisive. What I look for in a car is reliability, not to expensive in repairs, comfortable in the road (i hate feeling the holes in the road), silence in the car. I hate it when I hear the motor too much. And fule economics are important too. If you could advice me , i would very much appreciate it. Have a nice day. (ps: i'm looking for a car with an automatic transmission)
I seem to recall they had a recall on their cars a short while ago! Something to do with batteries on 1.3MILLION cars. And other previous issues with them include faulty brakes, steering & so on. I did run a 730i for a while, nice but let down by plastic dash & a swing-o-meter fuel gauge on a premium car? Oh well, each to their own.
@djrowley1 Sorry to disappoint, but they were'nt...I had two Rovers a 214 and a 75 and to be honest they were fantastic cars....reliable, comfortable...all cars can have problems no matter who makes them.....and i worked in the motor trade.
I like the styling of the Rover 75 - too bad they were never brought to the US as BMW had intended. The Jag S-Type didn't sell well because it looked too much like a Ford and not enough like a Jaguar. The styling of the 75 is more original and crisp. I can still buy a new Rover 75 but now I have to go to China to do it and buy a Roewe 550.
Rover 75 is the better choice to make. The Rover 75 was based on a BMW 3 series and had trustworthy BMW 3 series engines in it including the downtuned 320d engine which was chaindriven. The S Type was just a crappy American Ford Taurus in drag, everything about it was a Taurus, the engines were all push-rod Taurus engines and the S type was never rust proofed like a Taurus. Go with the 75, you are saving money for a better car, only a fool would buy an S type.
the main difference between these two cars is that one is a Jaguar and the other is a Jag-u-aint :) I have owned both these cars and in their own way both are brilliant. In my opinion the Jag S type is the better car, but the Rover 75 is a lot more comfortable.
Hi ! i want buy a car to maximal 3000-4000 Euros ( not new one ofcourse ! ) and i like English cars , how do you think, wich one is the best between Jaguar S-type ? X-type ? Rover 75 ?
Yes I know, the conventional K series/all other series and the V8 MGZT was a V8 4.6 Ford engine. Are you sure the 2.7 was a co development with Jaguar and Peugeot? Are you sure it wasn't ZSD/AJD who also made the Transit engines in Dagenham for Mondeo 's and X-Types and engines for the London taxi co? Only I seem to recall 2.7 engines being part of AJD/ZSD in Jaguars.
@1ns4ne1d10t well i bought the 75 and im lovin it. My rover 75 has electric leather seats, navigation system, tv, its just a great car. But if i had the money i would buy an s type. And my brother drives a bmw 320 and its crappy. The car got LOTS of problems! I hope my 75 wont have that many problems as the 3 series from my brother!
Hi, I'm thinking about a Rover 75 2.0d to use as a daily commuter car. The one I've seen has a full history and only 52K, my commute is 60 miles in each direction with no hard driving and almost no traffic jams (I live in France). I also have a really excellent multi-marque garage just down the road. The car wouldn't be used for winter because I have a 4wd and I also have a 308CC for weekends and holidays so all the driving in the Rover would be nice and easy. I'd be grateful for any constructive ideas about what to look out for. Thanks
"its owners think that they are above class BECAUSE THEY ARE" I'm flicking through the ad trader right now and I've just spotted a 3.0L V6 S-Trash going for £2,500, FSH, full leathers, 3 owners from new and there is a 2.7 D going for £3,500 just underneath it. Some 'Posh' prices they are, Wow I could withdraw some money out right now and buy them both without so much as a ding in my bank balance. But I don't buy a car as a status symbol though I've got the cash to flash for it but no thanks...
@1ns4ne1d10t:"I've never heard of...their arse and beyond..." Part 2 "...the X Type was even heavier than a Taurus because it was RWD and a Taurus was Front." I'd love to see your source citing the X-Type being rear-wheel-driven. It was based on a modified CD132 platform, allowing for all-wheel-drive, as Jaguar nor Ford had a suitable rear-wheel-drive platform on which to base the X-Type. Jaguar could have sent the 2.5- and 3.0-litre V6 engines' power through the front wheels, but a very non-Jaguar-ish driving experience would have resulted, so 2.5- and 3.0-litre models featured a rear-biased all-wheel-drive system to try and capture a Jaguar driving experience. The X-Type (3.0 AWD) weighed 1,555kg, the Taurus (3.0-litre 'Duratec') 1,503kg. The X-Type possessing more mass due to it featuring an all-wheel-drive system.
Thats just it, the S type was from the states! The S type was just a US Ford Taurus, frame and everything pretending its a Jag. Just because its right hand drive car and wears english numberplates doesn't mean its an English car. Its about as English as our Right hand drive Chrysler Voyager which was built in Graz, Austria.
They comparing a Rover 75 with a Jaguar S type - I am not sure if that's a fair comparison? The S type is a bigger and more expensive car. Also it looks like a fairly basic Rover 75 with no leather and a 2.0 engine being compared with that Jag is 3.0 with leather - with many options as she said. I actually prefer the X type to the S type. The S type doesn't feel special enough - you can pick out the Ford switch gear and I think the Rover 75 dash is much nicer
It was a mid range Rover 75 Club with Aubergine personal line cloth interior, an odd choice for a pre production demonstrator car at the dealerships. A better comparison would have been a 2.5 V6 Connoisseur with leather interior against the S-Type Jaguar.
@1ns4ne1d10t:"I've never heard of...their arse and beyond..." Right... Part 1 "I've never heard of a 3.0 V6/3.8 V6/or a V8 SHO Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable doing 30 to the gallon so tell me how an S Type does 34 to the gallon? Thats total bullshit. The S Type was an American Ford Taurus in drag and had all the Taurus engines in it" The S-Type was based on the DEW98 platform; the Taurus on the D186. Please explain how they are the same. The 1999 Taurus featured a 3.0-litre 'Vulcan' V6, with a 3.0-litre 'Duratec' V6 as an option. The 1999 S-Type featured the 3.0-litre 'Duratec' V6 (more on that in a moment) and a 4.0-litre 'AJ26' V8. Whilst both cars feature the 'Duratec' V6, they differ in the slightest of ways. the Taurus uses roller finger followers, whereas the S-Type uses direct acting mechanical bucket tappets.
They are replacing a little terminal cover to take precaution. There is a vid on here to do it yourself takes 30 seconds. Yes every dog has its day. And the terrible Toyota gas pedal that was killing people. Seen alot of fire potential issues in a lot of cars that were never addressed. Jags have has plenty of recalls as well. No offence just don't trust that Tata motors :)
What Volvo started with the 140 series in 1966 followed by 240 in 75 740 in 84 940 i n 91 and even 850 in 92 is Some of the most reliable and failproof cars that has ever been built. Now all they produce is rubbish. Thansk to ford. And btw, the dutchmade "Volvos" aint real volvos. They started out as various DAF designs.
reliability well. Swedens 3rd nmost commion car is the 25-17yo Volvo 740 I think that says it Btw Rover 75 of the last models is a very nice sight to behold.
I've never heard of a 3.0 V6/3.8 V6/or a V8 SHO Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable doing 30 to the gallon so tell me how an S Type does 34 to the gallon? Thats total bullshit. The S Type was an American Ford Taurus in drag and had all the Taurus engines in it and the X Type was even heavier than a Taurus because it was RWD and a Taurus was Front. Some people like to talk right out of their arse and beyond...
you can't compare these cars. the rover 75 is much much much cheaper. i like the jaguar more than the rover but i don't have the money for a jaguar. so im thinking of buying a rover 75.
It was American thats why it had an American dash and looked American, it was just a deathtrap Ford Taurus pretending to be a Jag when it wasn't. Being built in Birmingham doesn't make it a British car when the engine and frame are from a Ford over in the United Stinks of America. The Rover is the better choice, much cheaper and BMW based...
I don't own a Corsa so don't even go there with the assumptions sweetheart. It used to be a prestigious car until Ford got hold of it and Top gear hated the S-Type and X-Type so that says a lot. Jaguars are what? £3,000 or less these days? The steep depreciation shows you what turd buckets they were and £3,000 is not exactly a price a tramp/chav couldn't afford. *Sigh* If only Jag owners were above class... Most are driven by low paid workmen as a runabout on some building site or the docks
I'd rather have a Rover 75 which shares everything with a BMW then a Jag S type that was an American Ford Taurus in disguise. Thing is most people that own an S type are deluded and think they are high class driving around in a luxuary Jag. No you aren't, you are driving round a piece of American rubbish with a push rod V6 engine that came out of a Mercury Sable. Hate to burst your bubble but its not a Jag HAH!
No it doesn't, it shares the frame from a Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable. The S type Jag is a Ford Taurus in drag you might want to check the truth before you delude yourself any further with your own fiction. Jags aren't even rust proofed and don't have any rust proofing measures erm... Ford. A lot of the Rover 75 was based on a BMW and unfortunately you still get parts for Rovers out of X parts, Europarts and much more! Oh I'm really sorry to burst your deluded bubble with a bang by the way.
Too right the S-Type wouldn't be "For the likes of me" because I wouldn't be seen carried dead in a value-save Rolls Royce knock-off that is also an ungalvanized rot box pretending to be a highly prestigious car when it isn't. Owned by people who think they are above the class because they have a bit of leather and mahogany inside their car and it makes them go mad with snobbery. Any old council housed trashbag can buy ten Jags for a penny they aren't worth anything to be snobby about.
![[UNCUT] ย้อนฟัง 2 บิ๊กตำรวจปะทะกัน "บิ๊กโจ๊ก VS รองแต้ม" ฟ้องเรียก 10 ล้าน!! I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vNpTtVjdcBo/mqdefault.jpg)
I have my rover 75 v6 4 years and am keeping it, great car.
The Rover 75 is the best British car
Wow, I didn't know we Jaguar owners were hated so much just for loving our cars! I'm 18 and I bought an XJ6 here in Canada as my first car. I like it because it looks good and feel good, but I LOVE it because it has given me nothing but dependable, Reliable, inexpensive motoring! Jaguars are fine automobiles and they are suited for a particular person. I understand why somebody wouldn't love my old 1990 XJ6, because I don't particularly fancy their Chevrolet Cavaliers! We all have tastes.
As far as looks is concerned I prefer Rover but in dark colors
the rover 75 is a fantastic car deffinetly the later one i love ours its great and yes the jag is faster but i think the rover is nicer looking inside and out and comfyier
The rover 75s interior looks lush. The S-Type's? not so much
I'm not a vicar or a boring person a rover is not a jaguar it's not a BMW it's a rover it is what it is lovely
Rover forever
My S Type is a wonderful car - love it to bits
I had a 75 cdt 2years ago. Brilliant car,but underpowered with that 2liter diesel engine. Smooth ride,great quality,massive safe car. Now I have an S-type 3.0 automatic. Well.. such a different! Effortless driving,plenty of power,great handling,fantastic car!! However,the Rover has at least as good interior as the Jag has..
I like the look of the Jag interior more, but must admit, the 75 feels better quality... less noise, feels like crafted from one single piece.
My grandfather had a Rover 75 but now he has a Jeep Grand Cherokee 4.7l V8
The history here is "don't buy", with engines (only the V6 sold here) failing at around 85 to 90,000 km. I did have a Rover P$ 75, one with the cyclops front lamp. That was a quality car, front suspension running in oil baths, superb fit and finish, a distinguished burble to the exhaust. The castings from the oil bath air-cleaner to the paper one, and then from that to the carbs are things of beauty.
i just bought a jag in the same colour 1999 auto, 100k miles with full service history for 420 quid, alot of car for little money.
Bring back the Rover!!! Just make new P5B's please!
1st. The Rover 75 isnt based on the BMW 3 series, the car was totally new and is now the basis of the new MGs (MG 6 for example). And yes the R75 did have a BMW diesel 2litre turbo, but all the others were Rover own engines (apart from the Ford V8). 2nd. The Jag S type is based on the Lincon LS, and uses Jaguar own engines apart from the 3.0 V6, which is Ford. All the other engines (eg 2.7 D) were developed with Jag and Peugeot. 3rd. I have both cars (75 2.0D + S type 2.7D) and both are great!!
You have or had both cars. Could you tell me wich one to buy? I find both of them extremely beautiful. I prefer the interior of the Jag a bit more, but not enought to make it decisive. What I look for in a car is reliability, not to expensive in repairs, comfortable in the road (i hate feeling the holes in the road), silence in the car. I hate it when I hear the motor too much. And fule economics are important too. If you could advice me , i would very much appreciate it. Have a nice day. (ps: i'm looking for a car with an automatic transmission)
I drive my jaguar like a Bentley
I seem to recall they had a recall on their cars a short while ago! Something to do with batteries on 1.3MILLION cars. And other previous issues with them include faulty brakes, steering & so on. I did run a 730i for a while, nice but let down by plastic dash & a swing-o-meter fuel gauge on a premium car? Oh well, each to their own.
Me too, like dark Metallic Maroon so the silver bits stand out.
80's are still alive
@djrowley1 Sorry to disappoint, but they were'nt...I had two Rovers a 214 and a 75 and to be honest they were fantastic cars....reliable, comfortable...all cars can have problems no matter who makes them.....and i worked in the motor trade.
I like the styling of the Rover 75 - too bad they were never brought to the US as BMW had intended. The Jag S-Type didn't sell well because it looked too much like a Ford and not enough like a Jaguar. The styling of the 75 is more original and crisp. I can still buy a new Rover 75 but now I have to go to China to do it and buy a Roewe 550.
I have just picked a full service history v6 auto so smooth
Rover 75 is the better choice to make. The Rover 75 was based on a BMW 3 series and had trustworthy BMW 3 series engines in it including the downtuned 320d engine which was chaindriven. The S Type was just a crappy American Ford Taurus in drag, everything about it was a Taurus, the engines were all push-rod Taurus engines and the S type was never rust proofed like a Taurus. Go with the 75, you are saving money for a better car, only a fool would buy an S type.
the 1999-2008 Jaguar S-Type was assembled in
Birmingham, West Midlands, England
Taiwan
the main difference between these two cars is that one is a Jaguar and the other is a Jag-u-aint :) I have owned both these cars and in their own way both are brilliant. In my opinion the Jag S type is the better car, but the Rover 75 is a lot more comfortable.
Hi ! i want buy a car to maximal 3000-4000 Euros ( not new one ofcourse ! ) and i like English cars , how do you think, wich one is the best between Jaguar S-type ? X-type ? Rover 75 ?
@arospeed169 they were both made in Birmingham
Yes I know, the conventional K series/all other series and the V8 MGZT was a V8 4.6 Ford engine. Are you sure the 2.7 was a co development with Jaguar and Peugeot? Are you sure it wasn't ZSD/AJD who also made the Transit engines in Dagenham for Mondeo 's and X-Types and engines for the London taxi co? Only I seem to recall 2.7 engines being part of AJD/ZSD in Jaguars.
Jag is the victor out side but rover wins for most of the interior
Agreed mine packed up with 90k, which was a shame coz I loved the drive
@1ns4ne1d10t well i bought the 75 and im lovin it. My rover 75 has electric leather seats, navigation system, tv, its just a great car. But if i had the money i would buy an s type. And my brother drives a bmw 320 and its crappy. The car got LOTS of problems! I hope my 75 wont have that many problems as the 3 series from my brother!
Hi,
I'm thinking about a Rover 75 2.0d to use as a daily commuter car. The one I've seen has a full history and only 52K, my commute is 60 miles in each direction with no hard driving and almost no traffic jams (I live in France). I also have a really excellent multi-marque garage just down the road. The car wouldn't be used for winter because I have a 4wd and I also have a 308CC for weekends and holidays so all the driving in the Rover would be nice and easy. I'd be grateful for any constructive ideas about what to look out for. Thanks
cool
I was rather keen on the MG version of the Rover 75.
@1ns4ne1d10t:"I've never heard of...their arse and beyond..."
Part 4
Note: I responded just to your comment; I haven't read Michael Mac's.
Yes, Rover and Quality in the same sentence, wtf.
"its owners think that they are above class BECAUSE THEY ARE" I'm flicking through the ad trader right now and I've just spotted a 3.0L V6 S-Trash going for £2,500, FSH, full leathers, 3 owners from new and there is a 2.7 D going for £3,500 just underneath it. Some 'Posh' prices they are, Wow I could withdraw some money out right now and buy them both without so much as a ding in my bank balance. But I don't buy a car as a status symbol though I've got the cash to flash for it but no thanks...
You can buy them both for 1000 pounds toghether...
@1ns4ne1d10t:"I've never heard of...their arse and beyond..."
Part 2
"...the X Type was even heavier than a Taurus because it was RWD and a Taurus was Front."
I'd love to see your source citing the X-Type being rear-wheel-driven. It was based on a modified CD132 platform, allowing for all-wheel-drive, as Jaguar nor Ford had a suitable rear-wheel-drive platform on which to base the X-Type. Jaguar could have sent the 2.5- and 3.0-litre V6 engines' power through the front wheels, but a very non-Jaguar-ish driving experience would have resulted, so 2.5- and 3.0-litre models featured a rear-biased all-wheel-drive system to try and capture a Jaguar driving experience.
The X-Type (3.0 AWD) weighed 1,555kg, the Taurus (3.0-litre 'Duratec') 1,503kg. The X-Type possessing more mass due to it featuring an all-wheel-drive system.
@RoadCone411 You must drive a Honda?
Thats just it, the S type was from the states! The S type was just a US Ford Taurus, frame and everything pretending its a Jag. Just because its right hand drive car and wears english numberplates doesn't mean its an English car. Its about as English as our Right hand drive Chrysler Voyager which was built in Graz, Austria.
Sewing machine smooth - not sure but think he is trying to be complimentary?!
did they ever sell Rovers in America???
Yes under the Sterling 800 marque from 1987-91.
@pakiboy103 Rover 75 is not a bad car at all!
They comparing a Rover 75 with a Jaguar S type - I am not sure if that's a fair comparison? The S type is a bigger and more expensive car. Also it looks like a fairly basic Rover 75 with no leather and a 2.0 engine being compared with that Jag is 3.0 with leather - with many options as she said.
I actually prefer the X type to the S type. The S type doesn't feel special enough - you can pick out the Ford switch gear and I think the Rover 75 dash is much nicer
It was a mid range Rover 75 Club with Aubergine personal line cloth interior, an odd choice for a pre production demonstrator car at the dealerships. A better comparison would have been a 2.5 V6 Connoisseur with leather interior against the S-Type Jaguar.
Quality, they gotta be kidding
Well , my 75 is 22 now and rustfree and rocksolid .
How's the Volvo ?
@1ns4ne1d10t:"I've never heard of...their arse and beyond..."
Right...
Part 1
"I've never heard of a 3.0 V6/3.8 V6/or a V8 SHO Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable doing 30 to the gallon so tell me how an S Type does 34 to the gallon? Thats total bullshit. The S Type was an American Ford Taurus in drag and had all the Taurus engines in it"
The S-Type was based on the DEW98 platform; the Taurus on the D186. Please explain how they are the same.
The 1999 Taurus featured a 3.0-litre 'Vulcan' V6, with a 3.0-litre 'Duratec' V6 as an option. The 1999 S-Type featured the 3.0-litre 'Duratec' V6 (more on that in a moment) and a 4.0-litre 'AJ26' V8.
Whilst both cars feature the 'Duratec' V6, they differ in the slightest of ways. the Taurus uses roller finger followers, whereas the S-Type uses direct acting mechanical bucket tappets.
They are replacing a little terminal cover to take precaution. There is a vid on here to do it yourself takes 30 seconds. Yes every dog has its day. And the terrible Toyota gas pedal that was killing people. Seen alot of fire potential issues in a lot of cars that were never addressed. Jags have has plenty of recalls as well. No offence just don't trust that Tata motors :)
Like her leather coat :-)
All the plastic bits have been thrown away from the 2008 Jag !!!
What Volvo started with the 140 series in 1966 followed by 240 in 75 740 in 84 940 i n 91 and even 850 in 92 is Some of the most reliable and failproof cars that has ever been built.
Now all they produce is rubbish. Thansk to ford.
And btw, the dutchmade "Volvos" aint real volvos. They started out as various DAF designs.
reliability well. Swedens 3rd nmost commion car is the 25-17yo Volvo 740 I think that says it
Btw Rover 75 of the last models is a very nice sight to behold.
I've never heard of a 3.0 V6/3.8 V6/or a V8 SHO Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable doing 30 to the gallon so tell me how an S Type does 34 to the gallon? Thats total bullshit. The S Type was an American Ford Taurus in drag and had all the Taurus engines in it and the X Type was even heavier than a Taurus because it was RWD and a Taurus was Front. Some people like to talk right out of their arse and beyond...
Nice hair lol 0:30
you can't compare these cars. the rover 75 is much much much cheaper. i like the jaguar more than the rover but i don't have the money for a jaguar. so im thinking of buying a rover 75.
It was American thats why it had an American dash and looked American, it was just a deathtrap Ford Taurus pretending to be a Jag when it wasn't. Being built in Birmingham doesn't make it a British car when the engine and frame are from a Ford over in the United Stinks of America. The Rover is the better choice, much cheaper and BMW based...
I don't own a Corsa so don't even go there with the assumptions sweetheart. It used to be a prestigious car until Ford got hold of it and Top gear hated the S-Type and X-Type so that says a lot. Jaguars are what? £3,000 or less these days? The steep depreciation shows you what turd buckets they were and £3,000 is not exactly a price a tramp/chav couldn't afford. *Sigh* If only Jag owners were above class... Most are driven by low paid workmen as a runabout on some building site or the docks
H
I'd rather have a Rover 75 which shares everything with a BMW then a Jag S type that was an American Ford Taurus in disguise. Thing is most people that own an S type are deluded and think they are high class driving around in a luxuary Jag. No you aren't, you are driving round a piece of American rubbish with a push rod V6 engine that came out of a Mercury Sable. Hate to burst your bubble but its not a Jag HAH!
A better car "cough" BMW
No it doesn't, it shares the frame from a Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable. The S type Jag is a Ford Taurus in drag you might want to check the truth before you delude yourself any further with your own fiction. Jags aren't even rust proofed and don't have any rust proofing measures erm... Ford. A lot of the Rover 75 was based on a BMW and unfortunately you still get parts for Rovers out of X parts, Europarts and much more! Oh I'm really sorry to burst your deluded bubble with a bang by the way.
Too right the S-Type wouldn't be "For the likes of me" because I wouldn't be seen carried dead in a value-save Rolls Royce knock-off that is also an ungalvanized rot box pretending to be a highly prestigious car when it isn't. Owned by people who think they are above the class because they have a bit of leather and mahogany inside their car and it makes them go mad with snobbery. Any old council housed trashbag can buy ten Jags for a penny they aren't worth anything to be snobby about.
Pensioners cars
S type looks better and drives better
Looks worse than the 75...