Firm will act on the four star score given to XF by Euro NCAP, but it's happy with car's safety

Jaguar has promised to act upon the disappointing four-star score awarded to its XF saloon in the most recent round of Euro NCAP safety tests.

Euro NCAP said the XF’s surprise score was limited by its adult and child occupant protection, and in the side pole impact test it found chest protection to be “weak and the car’s seat and head restraint provided marginal whiplash protection”.

Read more on the latest Euro NCAP scores

Responding to Euro NCAP’s findings, a Jaguar spokesman said the firm was taking the issue “very seriously”. A facelift for the XF is due in 2012, and it’s highly likely the necessary revisions will be made to ensure it becomes a five star car for safety like its key rivals the Mercedes E-class and BMW 5-series.

“We’re looking at the safety results and how we can incorporate changes into future models,” the spokesman said. The spokesman also insisted the Jaguar XF “offered a high level of safety” and all of the firm’s in-house tests had recorded satisfactory results.

See all the latest Jaguar XF reviews, news and video

Our Verdict

Jaguar XF 2008-2015
The Jaguar XF is a sublime British executive saloon. It has a tremendous interior and even greater dynamics

The Jaguar XF is a sublime British executive saloon. It has a tremendous interior and even greater dynamics

Join the debate

Comments
48

25 November 2010

Whilst I know that this technically means that similar cars that got the 5 star rating are a bit safer. The XF is still a very safe car. Chiefly because in relation to many cars, its quite heavy, so as long as the car you hit is lighter, your going to come off better due to the increased momentum you have.

E.g. IN a head on crash, Im sure you would be far better of in an XF than in say a toyota IQ.

Crash tests, whilst offering a good comparison, are only really relevant when hitting stationary objects like solid trees. If its a movable object, the heavier you are, the better.

25 November 2010

So with the updates in 2012 are they also bringing out a 4-cylinder diesel and an estate model or have those developments been put on the back burner? I've lost track.

25 November 2010

Oupss!

25 November 2010

Its all relative, the EuroNcap tests are flawed, some manufacturers (mention no names (Renault)) design cars specifically to do well in these tests, Volvo who pride themselves on their safety record in the real world have said as much. However if you can get 5 stars it does help for a lot of people trying to chose a car.

25 November 2010

to be honest i think a 4 star is not bad knowing that at the time Jag was strapped for cash. Now that they have turned a £500million profit in 6 months it means they can improve on matters.

25 November 2010

[quote fhp11]Chiefly because in relation to many cars, its quite heavy, so as long as the car you hit is lighter, your going to come off better due to the increased momentum you have.[/quote] Not true if the head-on done on Fifth Gear between (if I remember correctly) a big heavy Volvo estate and a super mini weighing half as much was anything to go by. You wouldn't have wanted to be in the Volvo...

25 November 2010

[quote Lesia44][quote fhp11]Chiefly because in relation to many cars, its quite heavy, so as long as the car you hit is lighter, your going to come off better due to the increased momentum you have.[/quote] Not true if the head-on done on Fifth Gear between (if I remember correctly) a big heavy Volvo estate and a super mini weighing half as much was anything to go by. You wouldn't have wanted to be in the Volvo...[/quote]
While I won't argue that in the 5th Gear demo you would have been better off in the Renault, that was because the Volvo was 10 years older.
Given two cars of approximately the same age, I am guessing that you would always be better off in the bigger vehicle...

25 November 2010

[quote fhp11]

Chiefly because in relation to many cars, its quite heavy, so as long as the car you hit is lighter, your going to come off better due to the increased momentum you have.

E.g. IN a head on crash, Im sure you would be far better of in an XF than in say a toyota IQ.

Crash tests, whilst offering a good comparison, are only really relevant when hitting stationary objects like solid trees. If its a movable object, the heavier you are, the better.

[/quote] Same reply as to your selfish nonsense before on this subject. Yes, you're right, but yes you're also selfish in your attitude to others i.e. sod you mate if I'm alright. So let's all go and buy larger cars so that we're safer - larger = more energy = more force on impact = make cars heavier to make them safer = a continuous loop of ever heavier cars with more energy to dissipate in a crash. I'll bet you always force your way down the outside of queues and cut in at the last minute and cause the ripple effect that stops traffic too?

25 November 2010

[quote March1]I am guessing that you would always be better off in the bigger vehicle...[/quote]

Exactly: you're guessing in an arena where there is a mass of objective data showing that intuition is not infrequently misguided. Otherwise EuroNCAP's been around for so long now that frankly one is amazed and actually a bit shocked to find any manufacturer, let alone one of those clinging to the 'prestige' label (and by the same token one building relatively large cars) failing properly to address the issue of adult and child occupant safety. As for the suggestion that the car was inadequately designed and engineered because the company was a bit stretched at the time...well how does that square with all the guff about the company and its products being now the equal of Mercedes, BMW and Audi?

25 November 2010

[quote March1]I am guessing that you would always be better off in the bigger vehicle...[/quote]

Exactly: you're guessing in an arena where there is a mass of objective data showing that intuition is not infrequently misguided. Otherwise EuroNCAP's been around for so long now that frankly one is amazed and actually a bit shocked to find any manufacturer, let alone one of those clinging to the 'prestige' label (and by the same token one building relatively large cars) failing properly to address the issue of adult and child occupant safety. As for the suggestion that the car was inadequately designed and engineered because the company was a bit stretched at the time...well how does that square with all the guff about the company and its products being now the equal of Mercedes, BMW and Audi?

Pages

Add your comment

Log in or register to post comments

Find an Autocar car review

Driven this week

  • Car review
    23 September 2016
    Aston kicks off its ‘second century plan’ with an all-new turbo V12 grand tourer
  • Ford Ka+ 1.2 Ti-VCT 85
    First Drive
    22 September 2016
    A rounded, refined and well-sorted bargain supermini – once you’re used to the confusing role redefinition imposed on the once-cheeky Ka
  •  Maserati Ghibli Diesel
    First Drive
    22 September 2016
    Maserati releases another range of updates for its range best seller, the Ghibli. We've driven the diesel version, but there's little improvement on before
  • Tipo Front
    First Drive
    21 September 2016
    New Fiat Tipo offers impressive space and practicality for a reasonable price. We try the 1.6 diesel on the demanding roads of North Wales
  • Seat Ateca 1.4 TSI 150
    First Drive
    20 September 2016
    The Seat Ateca 1.4 TSI 150 makes perfect sense: it's spacious, tidy to drive for an SUV and cheap to run