Please convince me that buying this car is a bad idea

>>16691256
you might look good in it

>>16691256
https://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/jaguar-x-type-dud-of-the-decade/?_r=0

>>16691256
http://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/x-type-x400-14/contemplating-x-type-good-car-51007/

It's a front wheel drive Ford that only geriatrics could love. There are plenty of better depreciated luxury sedans out there.

>>16691256
http://www.carscoops.com/2013/09/jaguar-admits-wrong-approach-was-taken.html

>>16691256
http://content.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1658545_1658544_1658539,00.html

its an indian car.

75% of the time a nigger is at wheel.

File: 1485294050612.png (7KB, 112x112px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 112x112px

is that really all you guys have on this

that it's a cheap, somewhat reliable euro-ford underneath (which only autists know)? And that Jaguar snobs didn't buy it for that reason and it failed from a sales perspective?

I keep reading "the engine is actually pretty reliable" and shit and I never had a car I would truly call comfy before. this looks like I could finally live all my corporate fantasies out

>>16691335
>is the fact that the car was a complete flop and universally regarded as garbage all you have?!
Seems like you made up your mind, why make a thread looking for advice?

>>16691356
So just because the average richfag can't sleep at night knowing that his beautifull looking and comfortable car has Ford written somewhere on the underpinnings means I shouldn't buy it?

>>16691256
Only thing i can think about is that the parts are expensive and somewhat rare to find, same with repairs.

>>16691373
Your premise is a tiny part of why people don't like the car.
> And that Jaguar snobs didn't buy it for that reason and it failed from a sales perspective?
Jaguar snobs, and everybody else didn't buy it because it was terrible. Your logic makes no sense, "people didn't buy it because people didn't buy it."

While the Ford parts do add some reliability you still have a lot of Jaguar, electronics, window regulators, seats, instrumentation, a few of those things go bad and the price of the parts will be close to the value of the car. Lots of people think they are getting some screaming deal on depreciated luxury cars but the market always will level at the right value for the most part (dreamers and people that haven't learned their lesson prop up the low end). A $2500 Jaguar is going to be a shitty car overall, that's why it doesn't sell for more.

>>16691256
Get an xj instead.

>>16691256
>buying this car
>bad idea
Have you ever noticed how NO ONE EVER phrases a toyota question like this?

If it was about a Toyota, the OP text would read something like "hey /o/ What is the most reliable, affordable, comfortable car I can buy for $1000" with a Toyota Corolla or Camry as the OP. You know what I'm saying?

>>16691420
You see, that second paragraph actually makes sense to me. But then again, it's not like it has a known weak spot or anything, it's just that those parts may fail ina more likely manner than compared to a Toyota Corolla or something. And that parts are spensif.

But I've read loads of magazine reviews and similar about the car. None of them described it as half as terrible as you do.

>>16691501
/o/ is full of threads just like mine, only with an AW11. Two enthusiast cars from very different sides of the spectrum. I myself have only owned japanese cars (three).