Currently reading: Jaguar XE long-term test review: real-world fuel economy
The fuel economy in our long-term Jaguar XE isn’t great — perhaps because the XE is so much fun to drive
Darren Moss
News
3 mins read
18 April 2016

I’ve mentioned in previous reports that despite putting my best, greenest shoes on, I’ve not been able to match the combined 67.3mpg which Jaguar says our long-term XE should manage.

No surprise there, you might say, because everyone knows that most cars fail to live up to the advertised figures in the long run.

I’ve been thinking, though: by how much does the XE miss its claimed figures by in the real world? To find out, I lent our car to sister magazine What Car?’s in-house team of True MPG testers, who assess the economy of cars over a variety of real-world conditions.

Jaguar says our test car — a 2.0-litre Ingenium diesel with 178bhp — should return 55.4mpg in the city and more than 76mpg on the motorway. However, our tests returned 38.4mpg and 51.6mpg respectively. That’s an average of 33% behind what Jaguar suggests.

The bottom line is that our XE will return a real-world average of 45.0mpg. That number tallies (just) with what we’ve been able to achieve. Now, enter the BMW 320d, which on the same tests returned an average of 51.7mpg — an 18% dip on what BMW claims. The Mercedes-Benz C-Class C220 d returned 51.0mpg, 26% behind its claimed figures. The Jaguar still beats the new Audi A4 2.0 TDI, which returned 44.4mpg in the True MPG tests, 32% behind what Audi claims.

So, you’ll spend more time at the pumps in the XE than you will in the BMW and Mercedes. Having driven the other two, though, I’m inclined to say you’ll have more fun driving the Jaguar than you will its German rivals. The Jaguar feels playful, even with this relatively mid-range diesel engine.

I recently opted to drive four friends home after an evening out, and although the journey started with complaints about rear legroom, it ended with everyone saying how much they enjoyed the Jaguar. The XE can still pull its weight with considerable gusto, even with all five seats filled, while keeping everyone comfortable and unflustered.

The eight-speed automatic transmission is a real gem, delivering smooth and precise changes. It’s so good that I rarely take control myself.

Its seats are comfortable and on these cold winter mornings I’ve been loving the fact they’re heated. At £435, Jaguar’s Cold Climate Package may seem expensive, but it adds heated front seats, a heated steering wheel, and a heated windscreen. If I were to buy an XE, I’d tick this option first.

Talking of freezing, a few weeks ago we experienced a problem with the XE’s infotainment system crashing. After a trip back to Jaguar’s HQ for a laptop consultation though, the issue is sorted (if this were a customer car, it would mean a free trip to the dealer). It’s been running faultlessly ever since, but I have heard from another XE driver who discovered the same problem on his rental car.

Advertisement

Read our review

Car review

Jaguar's first attempt at a compact exec saloon is good - very good. But can the XE hold off the BMW 3 Series and Alfa Romeo Guilia to retain its crown?

Back to top

Jaguar XE R-Sport 2.0 I4 180PS

Price £34,775; Price as tested £38,210; Economy 44.4mpg; Faults Infotainment system fault; Expenses None

Read our previous Jaguar XE long-term test review here

Join the debate

Comments
22
Add a comment…
spqr 19 April 2016

Real World Economy

Interesting to see that VW/Audi is so far off their claims for fuel economy. Just like their emissions claims. However the writer states that "Jaguar still beats the new Audi A4 2.0 TDI, which returned 44.4mpg in the True MPG tests, 32% behind what Audi claims." Er... No. The Audi is within 32% of the claimed figures Jaguar is "an average of 33% behind what Jaguar suggests". Last time I looked 32% was smaller than 33%. So another example of Jaguar-biased reporting from Autocar. The only way I have found to measure "Real World Economy" is by the amount of fuel you buy dived by the miles you have travelled. So if I have just put 50 litres of fuel in the car and I set the trip meter to 0 next time I fill up I just divide the number of miles travelled by the number of gallons/litres used since the last fill up. Doing this I have found my F10 BMW 5 Series has been averaging 42mpg. It is a 2 litre petrol turbo. Really questions why you would put up with a grumbly dirty diesel at all.
jason_recliner 19 April 2016

Not just awful proportions

The sharing of the front structure across all models probably also explains why so many Jags are overweight. Clearly a sporty coupe or small sedan does not need the same reinforcement as a large 4WD wagon. Jaguar even has to insert steel structures in the rear of some models to balance out the overly hefty front end. Fail.
XLR8 19 April 2016

XE: a triumph for JLR's Press & PR team...

...that despite all the hot air about light weight, innovation, being game-changing (etc.), in the real world delivers no true benefits whatsoever.

Evidence perhaps that in isolation, you can mislead yourselves into thinking that you're delivering a step-change... only to come to market and discover your rivals remain one step ahead.

And they're able to come to market with multiple bodystyle offerings from launch...