[Ancill]

Frank,

Have you tried driving other XF's to see if you experience a similar ride? As has been said earlier, this issue is very subjective but I have only positive comments to give on the ride of the XF, I was so impressed with my first one, I have replaced it after 2 years with a facelift XF.
There is one other fm that has purchased a facelift after having a pre-facelift and he is less than impressed!

 

[coneman]

I will just dive in to this one if I may. My 2.7d ride was a strange mixture of too wallowy when going fast, bouncy and bumpy on B-roads and quite harsh round town or when going slow. Most of the time, middling speeds, motorways/A-roads it was perfectly fine and these roads were its natural home. It definitely wasn't sporty. I wasn't sure whether I liked it or not.

Now I have the XFS I love it. It feels lighter and more agile, exactly how I would like a sports saloon to be. It is noticeably more 'nobbly' over ridges and bumps, but it never becomes harsh or uncomfortable. The car comes alive when you push on and even over rough B-roads steering control is easier than the 2.7 was and comfort marginally better. In fact the faster you go the better the suspension responds and the better the ride (yes, really officer!) The stabilty at speed is as good as any BMW (and IMO they are the best at that) The only time I think it verges on uncomfortable is for the first few miles when cold.

 

[Frank]

Hi Ancill: The first one I test drove was a 3.0D S and that was the one I first back-to-backed with the S4. Didn't like the Diesel either (I'm sure it is up with the best, but no way matches a good petrol IMHO) so nearly gave up on it, but the dealer who had the V8 insisted I should try it so I drove all the way up to Warrington to do so. Ride was just as bad but the engine was so much better and I weakened. Many other things better on the XF than the S4 (quieter, nicer interior, etc.), ride worse, user interface not as friendly as the Audi MMI but full Postcode on the XX a definate plus. Anyway, back to the ride quality, I've only the two XF's for experience and no reason to believe others will be magically better unless the active suspension is an improvement. A lot depends on the road conditions of course, my trip to Gent and back was fine but of course I now have the Spires treatment and a modified seat base.

 

[k44ent]

Very subjective issue! But as said previously I have owned 2 XF's both 2.2 d SE. Both with 17" wheels and both very different. I had my first XF around this time last year and as soon as the weather got cooler the ride went to pot (wasn't to good before to be honest) and the car tramlined I even had the back end step out exiting a roundabout and it's only a 2.2!. The current car is so different and on the same roads it is planted, compliant and a joy to drive. I have recently changed to 18" wheels and they have improved the ride and handling even further. I think XF's do vary a lot, my supplying dealer also confirmed this.

 

[Ancill]

Frank, I'm absolutely with you on the Diesel v Petrol, however, as my car is used for business and fuel reimbursed through the company, Diesel makes sense!
Do you find your XF better or worse at speed?
During August, I drove through Europe (France, Italy, Austria, Switzerland and Germany) 3172 miles on varying roads, in 7 days, reaching speeds on the Autobahn of 160mph, and never had an issue.
Like you I only have a sample size of 2 vehicles and a few loaners when mine was in for a service, so I can't say all XF's are faultless, I can only give a description of my experience.
Is your dissappointment in your car leading you to consider changing it?

 

[jinxy]

Having had a Pre-Facelift 3.0 DS with standard suspension, a pre-facelift XFR with Active Suspension and now a Facelift 3.0DS with Active Suspension I'll give my thoughts...My 1st XFS was a better riding car than the 335D it replaced and also Seat Exeo we had at the time. While not soft it was quite comfortable but was not luxury soft and for a sports saloon (which the XF is) felt very good. The XFR with its active suspension rode even better, soaking up more bumps and road imperfections but handling better when pushed and loosing most body roll and being noticeably stiffer when in Dynamic mode. The current XFS I find to be very simliar to the XFR in general terms, but is a lot lighter on its feet with the front end feeling much more pointy, this I am led to believe from taling to a member of the project team is due mainly to changes to the suspension setup rather than the loss of weight on the DS over the XFR. Whilst I'd never call the ride magic carpet like in any of the cars, I'd also not call it uncomfortable and is what I'd expect from a sports saloon and also find it better than the equivalent Merc E, CLS, BMW 5 and Audi 5,6,7.

 

[Accrington Stanley]

Although ride and handling are subjective there are some guidelines. Audi, BMW and Mercedes all fit rear springs with too high a rate. Unfortunately, many modern customers do not realize that this is incorrect for street use. Audi does it to disguise the fundamental flaw in the drivetrain: engine overhanging the front axle. BMW and Mercedes do it because your average German apparently prefers terminal oversteer in his road car. That is incorrect for fast driving, particularly on the street.

It is not possible for the XF to step out in any significant way unless you switch the DSC completely off. A twitch from the rear axle of a powerful rwd car is perfectly normal. To actually step out would require that the traction control was inactive or the rear tires seriously underinflated. Tire tread is irrelevant in the dry. Even a street tire will continue to grip just fine even when completely bald. Tread is only required for wet roads.

 

[jinxy]

Although ride and handling are subjective there are some guidelines. Audi, BMW and Mercedes all fit rear springs with too high a rate. Unfortunately, many modern customers do not realize that this is incorrect for street use. Audi does it to disguise the fundamental flaw in the drivetrain: engine overhanging the front axle. BMW and Mercedes do it because your average German apparently prefers terminal oversteer in his road car. That is incorrect for fast driving, particularly on the street.

It is not possible for the XF to step out in any significant way unless you switch the DSC completely off. A twitch from the rear axle of a powerful rwd car is perfectly normal. To actually step out would require that the traction control was inactive or the rear tires seriously underinflated. Tire tread is irrelevant in the dry. Even a street tire will continue to grip just fine even when completely bald. Tread is only required for wet roads.

I'd dispute the statement about the rear end stepping out being only possible with under inflated rears or the TC/DSC being off. The XFR did on a couple of occasions do a hell of a lot more than twitch.

 

[k44ent]

The back end definitely stepped out on my 2.2 exiting a roundabout, it was damp and I nearly took out two cars on the inside lane and the tyres were the correct pressure BUT the car never felt right and I don't remember an TC/DSC light come on. Current car is planted, never had it step out but never really tried to be honest. My previous BMW F10 520d SE felt softer than my XF, lovely ride on the motorway but didn't corner very flat. If you sat on the back bumper the rear would move down, the XF stays pretty solid.

 

[Accrington Stanley]

Interesting variety of experiences with what is supposed to be the same suspension, more or less.

XFR is a different cat altogether with enormous torque.

My 4.2 petrol absolutely cannot step out with the DSC operating, even in winter with very low traction available.

With TRAC selected the rear will step out slightly on wet or snowy roads.

Only with DSC switched off and a monstrously over enthusiastic nailing of the gas pedal in a sharp turn could bring the tail out and the car instantly corrected with no sign of the dreaded tank slapper.

On snow with DSC off the tail of the car can be held at any desired angle indefinitely, provided one selects and holds the appropriate gear using Sport paddle.

I am unable to figure out how the 2.2 or 3.0 diesel could be so different although I do also drive turbo cars and I know the change in delivered torque can come in with a bang, especially if the automatic is allowed to control the gear selection. My chipped Audi S4 with aftermarket suspension (much higher rear spring rate than standard) is truly a handful with the ASC (Audi's traction control) switched off, even though it is a manual shift. On dry road I would not attempt to drive it hard with ASC off, on the street.

 

[wilf]

I think Frank, that this must stand as proof that there was/is something wrong with that XF.

The motoring press has stated, many times, that the ride in Audi S and RS cars is far too firm for English roads. I have never seen an equivalent comment on the XF, in fact it usually gains plaudits for combining comfort with handling.

Bit of spilled diesel on that road maybe?

 

[TheStig]

I think the problem with the 3.0, especially the S, is that it has nearly the same torque as the XFR, but delivered at very low rpm. Even driving gently with very low rpm, the torque peak will likely be encountered. This momentarily overcomes the DSC & TC, enough to get quite a slide going before the electronics can resume control of the situation.

 

[wilf]

Of course, subjectivity also plays a part. One man's "unsafe step out" is another's "twitch", if you see what I mean.

 

[jinxy]

I think the problem with the 3.0, especially the S, is that it has nearly the same torque as the XFR, but delivered at very low rpm. Even driving gently with very low rpm, the torque peak will likely be encountered. This momentarily overcomes the DSC & TC, enough to get quite a slide going before the electronics can resume control of the situation.

You are right with that assumption as the current XFS seems to be harder for the electronics to catch and seems to be subject to a lot more wheel spin than the older model, the XFR could out run the electronics very very easily and it took me a few days to recalibrate my right foot to stop me powersliding out of most junctions...

 

[Frank]

Ok, long thread guys but I hope the last from me on the subject as I'm sure I'm sounding like a stuck record!

Sorry, I was very tired last night and should have mentioned the road was not 100% dry. It had apparently rained heavily overnight in Belgium but it was midday by the time I was travelling through and the roads were perhaps “slightly moist” – very little spray if any and rarely need for the wipers. I have the 5.0 V8 (not the 4.2, not checked the power/torque difference), I did floor it aggressively at 90mph, so it kicked down to 3rd and then it let go at the back as the power took up. Was it a twitch or a step out? Don’t know for sure but felt more of a step out and I immediately thought at the time it might have unnerved the car beside/rear of me that I was just finishing to pass. I lifted immediately and I don’t think the traction control kicked in, car settings were at normal (Drive, DSC enabled, etc.). It happened twice (I’m a slow learner sometimes) so unlikely to have been a diesel spill. The “slightly moist” aspect is was prompted me saying I will take a close look at the tyres when I switch to the winters. BTW, pressures were checked and adjusted to 34psi all round just before the trip, approximately same ambient temperature and altitude.

Back to the firm ride topic of this thread. It has all been discussed before in many threads, forums, blogs, etc. so clearly there is some problem, subjective or not. I bang on and use my last S4 (current generation step) as a reference because I was able to back to back and hence remove the subjectivity. Put simply, the S4 handled well (not the same as an S-line, which is just a bodywork and badge job) with the engine finally being moved more rearwards, the V6 s/c is lighter than the V8 it replaced and drive was weighted to the rear. The active suspension did what previous Audi’s I’ve had failed to do which is to absorb the harsh bumps/ruts yet still remain a firm ride. This is really the essence of my complaint about the XF, it seems unable to provide a firm ride without threatening to shatter one’s teeth over my local roads. That is to say, before I had the Spires conversion and the seat attended to. Now it is better, I didn’t feel so bad after this trip as I did a year ago on a similar trip before the mods were done. Is it now good enough? Don’t know for sure as I do not have my S4 “reference” anymore and I recognise I’m now “tuned in” to the problem. Certainly seat comfort should not be overlooked in this discussion as that mod alone gave a worthwhile improvement.

As an engineer, I always strive to do or get the best I think is possible or available at a moment in time and of course within sensible financial bounds. As such, I do not think it unreasonable to expect a Jaguar to get a ride/handling balance at least as good as an Audi which has a list price over £10K less in similar trim/toys/power. As mentioned many times before, it is not the firmness of the ride it is the lack of finesse over the rough stuff which bugs me. The Spires treatment hasn’t turned the XF into a boat and it is still pretty stiff. I had a boot full of wine and tools and expected the front to be somewhat light. It was a bit lighter, but not by much – I don’t think the rear suspension dropped with the load by much at all!

Is your dissappointment in your car leading you to consider changing it?

Yes, but not right now. The mods make it livable with and at the end of the day, we do get used to things wherever they sit on the bad to good scale. Would I buy another XF? Only on two conditions: AWD and significantly better quality ride. I don’t consider the XF to be a sports car (I’d buy a sports car if I wanted one) as it is a big and heavy four door saloon, I consider it should be a GT car…and there is a difference!

The motoring press has stated, many times, that the ride in Audi S and RS cars is far too firm for English roads. I have never seen an equivalent comment on the XF, in fact it usually gains plaudits for combining comfort with handling.

Wilf, I've seen the opposite to this too. The RS4 with active suspension has been praised for its combination of handling and comfort. Anyway, at the end of the day I don't give a fig for what the press says, I'm just comparing the last car I owned with the XF where I was able to do back to back. My wife was even more vociferous about the XF ride!

 

[wilf]

Well Frank, the last thing we need is any excuse for our wives to become (even more) vociferous.

And you are right about how we "get used" to the specific characteristics of our daily drives - I came from an S type into the XF, and the change in driver ergonomics (scuttle seemed much higher in the XF) gave me sore muscles in my lower arm for months until I adjusted. I hope you can do so in time, too.

 

[TheStig]

I've noticed that when I'm more brutal with the throttle, the electronic intervention is more immediate. It's those occasions when I'm not going so quickly, where I get the biggest step out. I've never revisited a bend to put this theory to the test though.

 

[jinxy]

Frank, does your car have the Dynamics pack and the Sports seats on it?

 

[Ancill]

You are right with that assumption as the current XFS seems to be harder for the electronics to catch and seems to be subject to a lot more wheel spin than the older model, the XFR could out run the electronics very very easily and it took me a few days to recalibrate my right foot to stop me powersliding out of most junctions...

Jinxy, My facelift car does tend to lose traction far easier than my Pre-facelift (both cars are an XF S), I put it down to 2 reasons, the 8 speed box and the tyres on my current car are 255 section, the tyres on my last XF were 285 section.

Maybe even a 3rd could be considered, last car had Pirelli's current car has Dunlops, but that's another chapter/debate.....

 

[jinxy]

Both my XFS's had the same Dunlop Sport Maxx 255 rears and this one is definitely more prone to wheel spin.