|
Far prettier than the two series one E-types I saw today and I hope they make and succeed with it, they certainly deserve to do so.
|
Gorgeous !
Wonder if they'll do an estate version?
:-))
|
|
with a built in cycle rack !
|
Looks quite nice in a derivative, 'poor man's Maserati' sort of way. Seems to me to be the sort of thing Jaguar should be doing, at last. I like the XJ and XF too.
Am I alone in thinking the E-type (and to some extent the Mk1 and 2 saloons) put a curse on the firm? The XJS was damned from the day it appeared because it didn't have that early '60s Dan Dare/streamlined bathtub on wheels look, that was right for about 1961-1965, and every Jaguar sports car since has had to have something of the E-type about it, no matter how inappropriate.
And we all know how the company lost a decade with the 'retro-modern' S and X-types.
Incidentally, no Jaguar I have owned or had anything to do with has ever, ever, been a J****g.
|
|
I agree Mike - the XJS has stood the test of time, and in fact looks a lot better than it ever did. As mentioned elsewhere I saw one sharing a car-park with two E-types - the latter were "interesting" because of their rarity and condition, the XJS was far more attractive for aesthetic reasons - the E-types are bulbous, gawky and over-tall teetering on thin tyres - in fact they look dreadfully dated and downright ugly.
|
I'm not biased, of course...
I didn't buy an E-type years ago - when I could have - because all I liked about it was the back door on the coupe!
|
No, not much. Samey samey Aston innit?
Maserati coupé may not be quite as quick or reliable - I wouldn't know - but it's far better looking.
The XJS is an ungainly beast, but at least it's distinctive. I never liked the E Type's looks really.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Thu 8 Sep 11 at 15:38
|
>> Gorgeous !
>> Wonder if they'll do an estate version?
Are we back to this again! uk.autoblog.com/2011/09/06/jaguar-morris-world-s-most-ridiculous-hybrid/
|
Have to admit when I first saw pictures of the CX16 I thought it was a facelifted Nissan 350Z. Not been impressed by the styling of any Jag from the last 25 years or so, there always seems to be some kind of built in wrongness, whether it's the overly large wheel openings, the overly long overhangs (XK) or the Hyundainess (XF). I personally think the nicest looking Jag ever was the XJ12 Coupe which I would love to own if I had the means to keep it in Super Plus.
I think the name Jaguar generates expectations that the products are going to be in some way massively better than the competition. Then there is disappointment when this turns out not to be the case. At least that was the case with me when I tried an XF.
|
|
Yep an XJ12C would do me fine as well...!
|
I kicked the tyres on a beautifully restored XJ12C a while back. I think I mentioned it on here. Uprated with Bosch fuel injection, Behr air conditioning and fully galvanised and in better nick than when it left the factory. Half considered trying to persuade my boss I could run it as a company car replacement for my 530d but then thought better of it.
Back to the OP. I find these days I'm generally left a bit cold by these look a like concept cars. Maybe it's an age thing.
|
>> Have to admit when I first saw pictures of the CX16 I thought it was
>> a facelifted Nissan 350Z.
Me too, particularly the front half.
|
|
I want one. Just the one please.
|
You know, I look through the portfolio of cars that Jaguar has made in the last 60 odd years, and with the possible exception of the Mk ten and 420G, I see a continual procession of gorgeous and desirable shapes and curves.
I doubt there is another company that has had such a rich stream of scrumptiousness. .
|
>> I doubt there is another company that has had such a rich stream of scrumptiousness.
>>
Agreed. Lovely cars. (Whilst accepting that beauty is very subjective).
I prefer Ferraris though. Also very handsome cars but even more chance of pulling.
|
Agreed maybe adding the oddly styled e-types to the fail list
|
;-))
I've always rather liked the lines of the Mk10/420G. The trouble was, you rarely saw one in its right context. Like many other big cars of the period it doesn't look anything like as Brobdingnagian these days. But still too big for the average garage, which is why not too many have survived or been restored.
My friend, a Mk2 owner, once gave a lift to a Jaguar delivery driver carrying trade plates - as you did in those days - who said he had been delivering a 'wobblebelly' (ie, Mk10).
|
>> I've always rather liked the lines of the Mk10/420G.
+1
A lot of the Jag stuff appeals to me (amongst other reasons) because it's a bit different to most other things.
|
>> I think the name Jaguar generates expectations that the products are going to be in
>> some way massively better than the competition. Then there is disappointment when this turns out
>> not to be the case. At least that was the case with me when I
>> tried an XF.
I think in terms of ability, the XF has the edge on the Germans, or at least is so close you're splitting hairs. What lets it down, at least as far as the two owners I know, is the age old reliability issue.
Both owners I know have had a myriad of stupid faults with their cars which are mostly silly quality related issues rather than major reliability woes. Fuel tanks clonking on their mounts due to perished rubbers, steering column creaks where the column sometimes chafes on its surround, interior rattles, the odd electrical gremlin, wind noise from poorly fitted doors. The kind of things frankly you wouldn't accept on a £15k car, never mind a £35k+ one.
Both owners love the car's performance (both 3.0 D "non-S" models), interiors and driving experience, but neither are satisfied with the durability or build quality.
These are both well driven, money-no-object serviced 2009 cars with less than 40,000 miles on the clock.
|
Some of those problems seem to be more related to poor PDI - certainly mis-aligned doors.
In the recent AutoExpress survey, the XF came sixth for 'Build Quality' - the highest placed non-Japanese car. LR Discovery 3 was seventh.
|
i drove a friends xf 3.0petrol today and the fit and finish was excellent.
i drove a new xj supersport last week and it was sublime and better than some cars at double the price
|
>> i drove a friends xf 3.0petrol today and the fit and finish was excellent.
>> i drove a new xj supersport last week and it was sublime and better than
>> some cars at double the price
At £91k pounds, it needs to be as there is not much you can buy at twice the price.
|
i think jaguar have finally got some cars that people really want.
the xj in long wheelbase is for me in a year or two when down to 20k.
|
Got somewhere to park it?
More seriously, you know we'd like to read some impressions from driving one.
|
Got somewhere to park it?
More seriously, you know we'd like to read some impressions from driving one.
I've only got on street parking but lots of space as live in a small hamlet.
i have 2cars on my front already but i own a few more that are on permanent loan to family members. I'm very attached to my one owner 190e 1991 reg. mint condition and serviced by me every six months, its loaned to my sister because i don't use it but don't want to sell it either.
i have a 04 c5 estate that my brother uses as a station car and taking his huge dogs to the woods at weekends.
an xj-r that my dad uses and loves, very fast and comfortable but very thirsty. i dont pay the runnings costs of the cars on loan but i like them all so much that i cant bare to part with them.
i was going to buy a used xf last week but i saw a very handsome xj-l 5.0v8 but a little too pricey for me so i borrowed a friends to see if i liked it and im completely hooked now so will wait until a smaller engined xj comes up for £25k and i'll buy it, might have to wait awhile but cant part with 50k for a used jaguar xj and it must be the extended wheel bsae version as it just looks so much better than the shorter one.
|
Jaguar - Do we like the new Jaaag? - R.P.
