Used Jaguar XE Review
Jaguar has a rich history of building luxurious saloons, but when it has tried to cater for the mass market with smaller models it generally hasn鈥檛 done so well. Indeed, before the XE arrived three years ago, the brand鈥檚 only real attempt at downsizing was the X-Type, which never sold as strongly as intended. In the X-Type era the firm was owned by Ford, but since Tata took over a decade ago Jaguar鈥檚 approach has changed, and so has the market. The cars are better than ever but, with saloons falling out of favour as buyers migrate to SUVs, the XE competes in a shrinking segment that鈥檚 dominated by some very talented contenders - so should you consider buying one? 鈥?Jaguar XE Mk1 (2015-date) - Compact exec is a fine choice as a second-hand premium family car. The first XEs were delivered in June 2015, and while there was a 335bhp supercharged 3.0-litre six-cylinder petrol edition (the XE S) topping the range, virtually all models featured an Ingenium four-cylinder 2.0-litre engine. The petrol version came in 197bhp or 237bhp forms, and the diesel was produced in 161bhp or 178bhp guises.
I have to confess to something. I'm a sucker for the old Land Rover series. I've tinkered with the guts of a Series IIA that is my senior by a decade, like an oil-covered Frankenstein stitching in the very heart of the monster. With the vast range of models and specs on offer it may be a little daunting to the first time buyer. As I was only borrowing this particular used Land Rover Defender for a few hours, I thought it prudent to avoid any off-road adventures. However travelling the back roads made it clear that the advances in technology have only served to enhance the performance of the Defender. I barely felt a jolt as I mounted the grass at the side of a single-lane country road in order to let another driver pass. And whilst I may love the classic models, one can't exactly pretend that they provide the most comfortable of rides over rougher terrain.
Land Rover were late in recognising the potential of the mid-sized sector of the four-wheel drive market. For years, the Solihull company's Range Rover and Land Rover products catered only for luxury sector and utilitarian buyers; if you simply wanted a spacious 4x4 for the family, you were out of luck. When it was launched in 1989, the Discovery changed all that. Since then, the car has consistently been one of the off-road market's strongest sellers - which means that there are plenty to choose from for the used buyer. Few will have seen any serious off road use and all are built stoutly. It has to be a recipe for a sensible buy - doesn't it? The Discovery was launched in November 1989 to universal press acclaim. The early choice was limited to the three-door bodyshell with either a 2.5-litre turbo diesel engine or a 3.5-litre V8. Over 90% of buyers then (and now) opted for diesel power - the petrol unit was prohibitively thirsty.
The efficiency arguments for and against Litster are arguably quite finely balanced. These statutory guarantees provide a basis for the exercise of employee voice which makes it possible for their interests, as stakeholders, to be factored into the bargaining process which takes place around corporate rescues. In cases where many employees are covered by a protective award, liabilities can run into tens or hundreds of millions of pounds. However, it is far from clear how far such negotiation could work in practice. In this respect, the Rover case is a highly informative example of the law currently works, and might work in future. When the sale to Alchemy was pending, six new business units were formed as subsidiary companies of the Rover Group. The shares in these companies were then purchased by BMW聮s UK holding company. Since the sale of Rover would only involve a transfer of shares and not a formal change of employer, BMW and Alchemy could argue that TUPE did not apply. If this was the case employees would retain whatever statutory and contractual rights they had when Alchemy took over, but there would no duty to consult or inform in respect of the takeover.
