So will the Jaguar XF 2.2D meet 52.3mpg

JLR claiming in big adverts 52.3mpg from the 2.2D in the Jag XF, as is in the Evoque. So what's the chance of that getting any nearer... ?

The engine itself is the 2.2-litre, single turbo, four-cylinder diesel that will soon debut in the Range Rover Evoque. Only here it’s been installed in a north-south configuration for the first time, necessitating a whole host of ancillary changes, including new engine mounts, a new oil pan and different sound deadening. On that note, the 2.2 D benefits from a new twin-layer bulkhead to further reduce noise, additional sound deadening moulded around the turbocharger, alternator and starter, and all new diesel XFs feature active engine mounts too.

So what are the official figures like?
No match for Audi’s A6 2.0 TDI or BMW’s 520d unfortunately. Even with the stop/start system, the headline figures are 149g/km CO2 (both the Germans manage 129g/km) and 52.3mpg (again a little behind).

The power output is par for this class, but the torque figure is class leading, a chunky 332lb ft. That’s also 12lb ft more than the original XF 2.7 D in a car that weighs 26kg less; the 2.2 D is a few tenths slower to 62mph, but it’s nearly 15mpg better.

But the XF 2.2 has the lovely 8 speed auto box that LR are too mean to slot into the Evoque

(15-02-2012 11:32pm)PhilSkill Wrote:  JLR claiming in big adverts 52.3mpg from the 2.2D in the Jag XF, as is in the Evoque. So what's the chance of that getting any nearer... ?

The engine itself is the 2.2-litre, single turbo, four-cylinder diesel that will soon debut in the Range Rover Evoque. Only here it’s been installed in a north-south configuration for the first time, necessitating a whole host of ancillary changes, including new engine mounts, a new oil pan and different sound deadening. On that note, the 2.2 D benefits from a new twin-layer bulkhead to further reduce noise, additional sound deadening moulded around the turbocharger, alternator and starter, and all new diesel XFs feature active engine mounts too.

So what are the official figures like?
No match for Audi’s A6 2.0 TDI or BMW’s 520d unfortunately. Even with the stop/start system, the headline figures are 149g/km CO2 (both the Germans manage 129g/km) and 52.3mpg (again a little behind).

The power output is par for this class, but the torque figure is class leading, a chunky 332lb ft. That’s also 12lb ft more than the original XF 2.7 D in a car that weighs 26kg less; the 2.2 D is a few tenths slower to 62mph, but it’s nearly 15mpg better.

I have seen this car road tested against its rivals in various magazines and they got very close to the MPG Quoted, I think it was 48 or 49 mpg, think it was in the Top Gear Mag

Also all the press reports I have read say it is the best XF to have as well, which I find a bit odd as they all also rant about the XF-R

(15-02-2012 11:45pm)XFullFatTim Wrote:  Also all the press reports I have read say it is the best XF to have as well, which I find a bit odd as they all also rant about the XF-R

Have a look on the XFForum, there is a thread about the MPG of the 2.2, most of the owners are quite dissappointed and in real world use, the average is mainly upper 30's!!!

Also some discussion about the 8 speed gearbox, comments are generally neutral to adverse, the main complaints are that the box is shifting gear too often and gets into top too early giving vibrations.....

Interesting because today I read in one of the motoring magazines who have one on a long term test exactly those comments! The same gearbox is used in several other marques - all having smallish engines and they too have the same comments yet the 4.4ltr TDv8 FFRR has the same gear box and it really is fantastic, so maybe it needs a whacking great lump of torquey engine behind (or in front) of it to make it work

(16-02-2012 10:42pm)XFullFatTim Wrote:  Interesting because today I read in one of the motoring magazines who have one on a long term test exactly those comments! The same gearbox is used in several other marques - all having smallish engines and they too have the same comments yet the 4.4ltr TDv8 FFRR has the same gear box and it really is fantastic, so maybe it needs a whacking great lump of torquey engine behind (or in front) of it to make it work

As you say, maybe the 8 speeder is a step too far when mating it up to a smaller engine, all for the headline Co2 figures

According to Fleet News the reality is nearer 38mpg on their own long-term test car Fleet News 2.2XF long term test

(16-02-2012 11:18pm)Straydox Wrote:  According to Fleet News the reality is nearer 38mpg on their own long-term test car Fleet News 2.2XF long term test

Hmmm... Sounds comparable to the Evoque figures of 34-36mpg i'm getting presently. And nothing like the 52.3 advertised!

We will have to be careful about making too much fuss about the mpg because if LR have to retest the car for the official consumptions we could well find that not only is the consumption well down on the claimed figures but that emissions are also higher than claimed....................... don't want to pay any more tax than I do at the moment thank you!