The Secret Fuel Efficiency of a 5.0 Jaguar XF

Kinja'd!!! "Wobbles the Mind" (wobblesthemind)
11/15/2018 at 02:42 • Filed to: Fuel Economy

Kinja'd!!!0 Kinja'd!!! 10
Kinja'd!!!

A 2012 Jaguar XF with the entry-level 5.0L V8 — producing 380 hp / 380 lb-ft of torque — is rated at 16 city / 23 highway . However, this XF has consistently returned 22 mpg commuting around town and often averages a fleck over 26 mpg on highways. Even when I open the car up on my monthly, 2-hour long system checks, I can still get the car to average 20 mpg.

Right out the gate, let me say that you don’t need to utilize any special techniques, modifications, or dieting progams in order to unlock these fuel economy numbers . J umping into the car and driving without ever touching a button or dial will grant you a 20- 22 mpg city return nearly as often as   manually shifting the car. All you need to do is:

Shift (automatically or manually) between 2,100 rpm to 2,500 rpm.

Have stretches of space/ time in which the car can cruise at 40 mph and up .

The more time you spend below 40 mph or cutting up above 3,000 rpm means that you need to spend exponentially more time cruising above 40 mph in order to get back to a 20-22 mpg overall average . Whether you make up the time during a single drive or over the course of 14-16 gallons of fuel is up to you. This is a case in which the numbers on paper versus practice are wildly different in your favor .

EPA rating : 16 city / 23 highway [19 avg]

The Wobs returns: 19 city / 26 highway [22 avg]

Kinja'd!!!

Two other things about the XF that aid with the efficiency :

The car will allow you to pull away from a stop in 2nd gear .

You can get into 6th gear at just below 40 mph (manual shifting is needed though).

But if you’re good with throttle control then don’t worry about response-numbing techniques. That just opens up a can of pidgeons.


DISCUSSION (10)


Kinja'd!!! V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches > Wobbles the Mind
11/15/2018 at 03:10

Kinja'd!!!1

One of my favorite things about my LS430 was it’s highway cruising capabilities. Mine was a 2005 so I had the 6 speed with double overdrive. Sitting at interstate speed (75+) the car would average 28-30 mpg. Combined with a 22.5 gallon tank, the car had a theoretical cruising range of just over 625 miles, which is pretty crazy imo. To put that into comparison that’s about 1.3  times the range of my S600. If driven properly modern V8s can be somewhat frugal 


Kinja'd!!! Flavien Vidal > Wobbles the Mind
11/15/2018 at 05:28

Kinja'd!!!1

Yeah my old manual 1995 Corvette LT1 would get 29mpg on the freeway... It was great for a 5.7L engine!


Kinja'd!!! Long_Voyager, Now With More Caravanny Goodness > Wobbles the Mind
11/15/2018 at 07:25

Kinja'd!!!1

My car is rated at 19 city /24 hwy . I’ve never averaged under 25 mpg, most tanks pulling around 28 mpg in mixed driving.


Kinja'd!!! fintail > Wobbles the Mind
11/15/2018 at 07:30

Kinja'd!!!2

You must live in a city where traffic moves. Try to get those numbers in Seattle, where average commutes for many appear to be around 15 mph.

I could get my W210 E55 AMG down to nearly 10 mpg on the commute, but beat 25 mpg in highway cruising.


Kinja'd!!! ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com > fintail
11/15/2018 at 10:53

Kinja'd!!!1

As long as you’re not commuting over the river, Albuquerque doesn’t really have traffic to speak of.


Kinja'd!!! Tapas > Wobbles the Mind
11/15/2018 at 15:26

Kinja'd!!!1

Sweet!

I get no more than 17 mpg on the highways in my E39 M5.

I drive at 70 - 80 mph on the highways through. So there’s that lol

I’ve been consistent with speed and stay in the 6th gear and the engine is at about 2900rpm . I’ve tried driving at 65-70 mph (~ 2600 rpm) instead of 80 mph, but haven’t really seen a difference in fuel economy.

I’m guessing that’s just how M5s were made? No complains through :)


Kinja'd!!! fintail > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com
11/15/2018 at 17:14

Kinja'd!!!1

Makes sense. I suppose “city” is a relative term.


Kinja'd!!! ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com > fintail
11/15/2018 at 18:16

Kinja'd!!!1

Sure. The Albuquerque metro area including the surrounding suburbs is around 900,000 people, with maybe 600,000 in the city itself . It certainly isn’t a big city, even it is slowly inching in that direction.


Kinja'd!!! fintail > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com
11/15/2018 at 18:34

Kinja'd!!!0

P opulation density kills mileage.  I suspect there’s plenty of buildable land there for those people to spread out.


Kinja'd!!! ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com > fintail
11/15/2018 at 18:44

Kinja'd!!!0

Indeed. We don’t build up, we build out. Land is one of the few things in abundance out here.