Dear JLR,

First, I love both of my F-Types. Thank you to those who made Jaguar what it once was. The design was a masterpiece of performance, style and personality. It was the crown jewel of automotive goodness.

Sadly, we've figured out through the miracle of social media that the new cats have been de-tuned of their once-glorious roar. Why was this not made known? Until the newbies at JLR listen to your customer base, and stop addressing your own wants and needs at our expense, and until you stop forcing your new logic-free, business-agnostic religious agenda down your customers' throats, I'm out.

You are entiled to your fear that your own storied products will boil the ocean, but you are not entitled to actual auto enthusiasts' money. You need to pick which one you'd like to keep.

If you think it is a hard decision to ignore Jaguar in the future, well, it's not. Your newest F-Type "R-Dynamic" (there is nothing R or Dynamic about it, my Orwellian UK friends) gets royally smoked in both performance and value by an upscale Honda Civic or a Kia Stinger. That's helpful for my Jaguar cars' struggling resale statistics, thanks.

The primary reason I bought my first and second F-Type was their irreverant exhaust note's middle finger to the church of car haters who have decided that CO2 kills green plants. Now that's gone to a hasty course change, both ignorant and disrespectful to the historic pillars of your own brand.

What's next? Wait, don't tell me... making the F-Type an EV? A high profit margin golfcart? Are you girls nuts?

You have successfully reversed a customer for life. Enjoy your political activism. Once-hallowed Jaguar is gone. God Save Steve McQueen.

 

give me strength. in one thread you are complaining that F types are illegal due to noise. Now you are complaining that Jaguar are ignoring their customers because they are producing cars to meet current and pending laws.

Please go buy a Prius and leave us in peace

 

In fairness, he's complaining about California regarding the noise, not Jaguar. You may not like him, but he is consistent.

 

Yes, consistent in concern-trolling.

 

[QUOTE=scm;2024403]In fairness, he's complaining about California regarding the noise, not Jaguar. You may not like him, but he is consistent. [/QUOTE
Yes he is consistent. He does make some good points. Must be a politician or Lawyer. He seems to have a very thick skin, good for you JIMLIGHTA

 

Such drama....must be exhausting.
CRS

 

I read it in a Jeremy Clarkson voice

 

Naw, it's fun stuff

 

I was most curious about which follow-on thread would be chosen by the site scroll-down feature to succeed this one.

 

If you read it in Apu's voice from the Simpsons, it's much more entertaining

 

Hasta la vista.

 

The time it too to write that... I can think of at least 10 better uses.

 

 

Good points? That's an interesting theory ... well, not really. He's got a poor enough grasp of science to be a politician though.

 

Looks like the "JLR dead last in initial quality" thread, at least right now.

 

​​​​​​You are too young to remember: same religious fanatics, different "science..."

 

Too young? You make too many assumptions. I remember those shows, first run.

Anyone claiming carbon dioxide kills plants is, at the very best, ignorant. Anyone claiming that carbon dioxide's *only* effect is on consumption by plants is equally ignorant, at best.

 

I've said all along, the "green" movement is 100% about the selfish comfort of human beings, lush "green" house effect on the environment be damned. It's all about you.

Thats the current sermon. Yesterday it was the polar opposite settled science, but the same religious crusade for other peoples' money.

​​​​​​I thought you agreed to give it a rest?

 

It's January, I'm going for a ride, my brown lawn needs a booster shot.

 

I didn't *agree* to anything. I think I stated you were tiresome, or words to that effect. You still are. "In Search of"? When I was a pre-teen I thought ancient astronauts and bigfoot were real. The proof isn't there. Your statements smack of psuedo-religious dogma and lack supporting evidence.