Vital Stats

Turbo 2.0L I4
240 HP / 251 LB-FT
8-Speed Auto
0-60 Time:
7.5 Seconds
Top Speed:
121 MPH (limited)
Rear-Wheel Drive
Curb Weight:
3,660 LBS
17.7 CU-FT
19 City / 30 HWY
Base Price:
As Tested Price:
Jaguar is moving to modernize its XF engine lineup – once the exclusive territory of V8 mills – with a range including a turbo four, a supercharged six and supercharged V8s of various potencies. Personally, I'll miss the combination of this smooth looking and driving XF sedan, and the lazy power of the naturally aspirated 5.0-liter engine, even if the super six has earned some praise in other applications.

The truth is that the four, six, eight lineup for the XF makes a lot of sense, and this 2.0T version of the sedan is far better than I expected it to be. In fact, there's a legitimate argument to be made for it as the XF that works the best for the largest group of customers. Here's why:

Driving Notes
  • For starters, the 2.0-liter turbocharged engine is nothing like an actual drawback for the XF. Had I not known the joys of the 5.0-liter V8 in this car – if Jag had launched with the 2.0T as the base engine – I'd never label this as "the slow one." 240 horsepower and 251 pound-feet of torque are solidly competitive with turbo fours in BMW's 5 Series and Audi's A6, and the Jaguar feels just about as quick to get moving as that pair. I mostly didn't like the XF 2.0T when it came to initial acceleration, where the motor needs to get spinning to 4,000 rpm or so before you get any real thrust. Higher-speed passing is a bit less stressed, though still not particularly quick.
  • Jaguar gives you a new eight-speed automatic transmission with which to modulate the power of the new 2.0T engine, too. There are manual and sport modes to go along with the default settings, but neither with hold the gear if you are taken with the spirit of wild adventure, and hit the redline. I found the standard shift logic to be, frankly, a bit jumpy around town. Some of my driving style comes in to play here, but the trans seemed almost overly eager to kick down, even if I wasn't mashing the throttle. Slow and fast acceleration are both accommodated well, but the middle speeds caused some mental hiccups in the software. Of course, this was all easily remedied; I simply used the paddle shifters when I wanted to be aggressive.
  • Ride and handling were pretty smooth and stress-free, if not terrifically athletic. I've always thought that, for its size and class, the larger Jaguar XJ has always differentiated itself in a sporting way more than the XF. Middle-weight steering is pretty numb and slow to bring the nose around, in the unlikely event that you find yourself in a hard corner. You won't – I had to work myself up to it – as the engine does little to enliven one to seek out fast stretches of road. On the plus side, with the removal of V8, the XF has become almost Lexus-like in terms of quiet at speed. It's a characteristic that fits well with overall character of this 2.0 car, even if it makes the Jag a bit less enthusiastic than its German competitors.
  • Here's something you do get with the XF that you won't get with the Bimmer or the Audi: noticed. The slinky XF sedan shape has been around long enough, that I forget that loads have people have never seen one. I drove some friends through downtown Ann Arbor, MI, during the University of Michigan's graduation weekend; no fewer than three passersby stopped to tell me what a nice car the XF was. I've never had that kind of response to an E-Class or 5er, for what it's worth.
  • Let's talk price. The XF 2.0T starts at a class-competitive $46,975 (before delivery and destination). That's about a thousand less than a 528i, and a few thousand more than an A6 2.0T with Quattro. Now, my test car was optioned up to – make sure you're sitting down for this – $68,175. The biggest chunk of that $20k-odd glut of options is taken up by the $10,150 "20" Sport Portfolio Pack," which bestows the XF with a luscious set of wheels and a truly palatial interior. Music lovers might also be tempted by the $2,300 Meridian sound system, which I enjoyed listening to a great deal.
  • Jaguar has set up an interesting lineup for the new XF, when I consider what's good and bad about the tweaked lineup. For starters, no matter how you spend your money, you're getting a car that's both beautiful and rather unique on the road. Optioning up the thing will be expensive, as it the case for most of the luxury class, but you can now really choose your poison if you've fallen in love with the XF. Should you want a powerful, sports-like sedan, lay off the options list and make sure you've got one of the forced-induction Vs under the hood – the V6 supercharged starts just over $50k. If you just like the deeply luxurious feel of the high-spec XF, don't sweat getting this perfectly adequate turbo-four engine, and enjoy the hell out of your big wheels, soft leather seats and banging audio system.

I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.

    • 1 Second Ago
      • 2 Years Ago
      This is one gorgeous car. Although if I would consider buying one, theres no way I would even consider the 4. The fuel consumption data for the 4 is 19/30, and the 6 is 17/28. Why would anyone want a 4 to potentially gain 2 mpgs? I can bet that there is absolutely no difference in consumption in real-world driving. The only difference is on paper. Here is once again a case where an engine is only present to improve mpgs for CAFE on paper. No advantage at all for the consumer. People get all excited with the eco-hype, they dont realize that they are forfeiting a much better driving experience with the larger engine and are gaining no real mpg advantage.
        • 2 Years Ago
        I understand your point transam, but I think you failed to recognize that there's a $3k premium for the V6. The i4T pricing also enters Jaguar into a new, competitive entry price range - something they were never able to do with an all V8 line-up.
          • 2 Years Ago
          I get where you're going but if you're spending $47k on the 4 and can't swing the extra $3k to move to the 6, you probably can't really afford that $47k in the first place.
        • 2 Years Ago
        And sacrificing long term durability.
      • 2 Years Ago
      I can't believe that this 5 year old design is still so appealing to me, although, if I had money for a Jag, I would never go for a 4 cylinder one.
      • 2 Years Ago
      Folks, no big mystery here, Not only is this an easy JAG CAFE play along, but also allows Jaguar to Advertise a Brand New XF for $46.9K. It looks good on the Auto page in the newspapers. Gets folks coming into the Dealer for that "fully loaded" XF for under $50K ... wink wink. Same trick the Big Three have been playing for decades. Advertising Base vehicles that have No Options and the smallest engine ... Just for Marketing purposes, simple as that.
      Big Red Barn
      • 2 Years Ago
      Rented a nearly new XF 2.2 diesel station wagon during my business trip to Germany a few weeks ago. The car made German heads turn: design is very attractive. However, handling/suspension need a bit more attention in order to get the Germans, and the car nearly broke down thanks to strange engine troubles in the middle of the autobahn! Beyond that major problem, the car attracted plenty of looks from Germany.
      • 2 Years Ago
      I wish we got the wagon here in the US.
      • 2 Years Ago
      If I were in the market for something like this, it'd be the XF or the CTS, with the standard-issue Germans not even on the radar.
      • 2 Years Ago
      I have no complaints with the blown six.. Honestly short of a Porsche flat 6, BMW naturally aspirated six or an NSX that thing in the F Type S has to be the most absolutely epic noise I have ever heard from 6 cylinders..
        • 2 Years Ago
        And yet so many people are willing to give up that experience for the sake of an elusive mpg advantage. Jaguar is diluting their own brand with this one.
      • 2 Years Ago
      70K for a 4 banger? No F-ing way. And another thing, this car screams Kia Optima to me. Except the Optima is better looking. Get the Optima 2.0T fully optioned and you get 95% of what this Jag gives you for half the price. There\'s just no way this makes sense.
        • 2 Years Ago
        I would never pay 70k for a 4-cylinder luxury sedan. A 4-cyclinder engine is cheaper to make, and Jaguar should pass on the savings to the customers. This looks more like a 40K car.
          • 2 Years Ago
          \"Jaguar should pass on the savings to the customers.\" And I should start a unicorn ranch in Afghanistan.
        • 2 Years Ago
        wow. wrong. Actually drive this Jag and the Kia back to back, then come back and say the same statement...So so wrong...
        • 2 Years Ago
        Then get a supercharged V6, or an SCV8 like mine. Ohhhhh, that's riiiight, you can't afford those. Well then I'm sure your local Kia dealer will be more than happy to help you.
        • 2 Years Ago
        \"70K for a 4 banger?\" Get used to it. The industry as a whole is dabbling in engine downsizing, so the price point you might consider acceptable for a particular cylinder count is in turn moving upward. After all, it wasn\'t too long ago that the Optima would\'ve been considered ridiculous for daring to cross $30K with a four cylinder and no premium branding.
      • 2 Years Ago
      The 5.0 na v8 was a gem. This CAFE special has no place in a luxury car which is supposed to feel unstressed at all times but especially off idle. Now the only way to get a real engine is to get the supercharger with its rockhard nurburgerkingring suspension. Oh well, hopefully there will be some ultra low mileage pre-owneds still sitting around a year or two when i'm in the market
      Charles Adrian Happy
      • 2 Years Ago
      In this price class , it needs a v/8. Lesser cars which are less than half the price which have turbo fours have more power . I don't subcribe to the notion of paying more for the Cache of the name
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Charles Adrian Happy
        Despite the fact that it's comparably priced to its equivalent competitors (also with turbo 4s), as stated in the article?
      • 2 Years Ago
      Just an ok car now, still very pretty though. The engine, forget about it at this price. No way. Don't care what the mileage is, a 4-cylinder has no place in a luxury/sport sedan for 68K. A 4-cylinder will never have the refinement of a good 6 even if it makes great power. 68K for this is a joke. M
      • 2 Years Ago
      Let me guess: the same 2.0L T from the Evoque? If so, Ford's Mazda derived 2.0L EcoBoost is now in Jag... I think I'd rather they'd buy a mill from BMW.
    • Load More Comments
    2015 Jaguar XF
    MSRP: $50,175 - $99,000
    2014 Jaguar XF
    MSRP: $46,975 - $99,000
    2013 Jaguar XF
    MSRP: $46,975 - $99,000
    2012 Jaguar XF
    MSRP: $53,000 - $82,000
    2011 Jaguar XF
    MSRP: $52,500 - $79,600