Is the gearbox happier with 188BHP or 197BHP engine?
Welcome to the Jaguar XF Forum.
Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Is the gearbox happier with 188BHP or 197BHP engine?

    Hi - I'm looking to purchase my first XF (can't wait!) - probably a Premium Luxury circa 15k-16k with hopefully less than 45k-50k on the clock. I came across a year long road test where the reviewer mentioned he felt the 197 BHP 2.2L was a better choice (as opposed to the 188 BHP) as "...the engine seems to have been tuned more sympathetically with the eight-speed auto ’box, the recalitrance of which has been our biggest bugbear. The result is a more coherent drive, with less unnecessary revving or premature upchanging."

    He also commented of the 188 BHP that he drove for 11 months "...There's nothing particularly wrong with the engine or its still-sufficient performance. It's that the gearbox is constantly, annoyingly shuffling around to deliver both economy and performance, and the worst part about this is that it's too eager to drop you into eighth gear. This means that the four-pot diesel – never the most refined of engines – is often at 1500rpm or so, at which point harsh, buzzy frequencies vibrate through the car. I end up defaulting to manual mode all the time so I can avoid that scenario.

    Roadtest -

    Is this something to be genuinely concerned about and therefore is it better to be hunting down my dream XF but with the 197 BHP engine? I guess the MY2013 would also come with at least the Meridian 380W stereo too?

    I've also seen an XF with a sunroof which I'd like for the extra light into the cabin but at 6'3" I'm a little concerned about the lowered roof and head room. Any tall drivers had issues if they've had a sunroof.


  2. Remove Advertisements
    Jaguar XF Forum

  3. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    there were only 163/190/200 bhp versions of 2.2d with x250? definitely go for higher bhp as it looks like 63 is underpowered.
    .................................................. ........
    MY2012, 3.0D S Premium Luxury, Ultimate black over barley. Did I mention 20'' draco's?

  4. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Avoid the 163 and go for a 200. The box still tends to seemingly shift uneccessarily eg from 8 to 7 at 70 mph-ish but not as bad as the 163. The received wisdom is that the box is best suited to the 3.0 v6.
    2015 XF Sportbrake 2.2 (200) MY 15.5, 1972 MGB Roadster, 1984 Mercedes-Benz 280SL

  5. Remove Advertisements
    Jaguar XF Forum

  6. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Esbjerg, Denmark.
    Quote Originally Posted by klinsmani View Post
    I didn't know there was a 188BHP engine. I thought the two options were either 163 PS or 200PS. Given there is a fair difference in power between these two I can understand why the 163 would feel underpowered. However if there is such a thing as a 188BHP engine, given there is only 9BHP difference between that and the 197BHP engine I can't imagine that would make any noticeable difference. For the record mine is the 200PS engine, and at lower changing speeds it does still sometimes hunt around for the right gear, but at cruising speed or under brisk acceleration does not do this.
    The 188 bhp or 190 ps was the first version of the 2.2 l diesel introduced in the MY2012 facelift of the XF. Then came the 163 ps version, which was in a lower tax bracket in some countries. Later the 190 ps version was replaced by the 200 ps version (or 197 bhp). So the engine depends on the age of the car.
    Kind regards
    Henrik Münster, Denmark
    MY2009 XF Premium Luxury 4.2 V8 petrol, lunar gray, dove leather.
    Previous: MY2012 XF Luxury 2.2 (190 ps) diesel, azurite blue, barley leather.




Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Back to top