I have to disagree. Even with the different design direction, the X351 is instantly recognized as a Jaguar.

 

Really?
Although way too obese compared to the xj40/x300/x308, I can appreciate the x350 in its own way.
Nothing else comes close to its individual design, and mixing up with any BMW, Benz or any other of that period is impossible.
Then, the x351 is just a blown up previous Audi 100 .

 

I agree but the big problem is that a lot of current models look too similar to X351 from the front. Check this list out:


Ford Fusion




2017 Lincoln MKZ & 2017 Lincoln Continental




Hyundai Genesis




Kia K900


They all feature big chromey grill followed by swept headlights & curved to match hood. BTW, they all look this bc of aerodynamics. The industry has caught on to Jaguar's idea. It is time for Jaguar to deliver a fresher design.

 

As they say, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". I own an X358 and I love the styling more than any other Jaguar. But i'll be trading up to an X351 since i'm a loyalist when I comes to my cars.

 

Maybe because i've been reading Car Magazines since the age of 12, I instantly recognize car makes and models, I would confuse NONE of those cars with and XJ, XF, or XE.

But i'm sure that Jaguar has something new up it's sleeve with the next XJ!!

Let's all hope so!

 

..... Maybe a headlining that dosn't fall to bits after a few years !

 

I don't think they'll build another full size saloon...

I am hoping for another large coupe to replace the XK but I am not holding my breath.

 

I think a lot of the talk of the design 'all looking the same' we have the government and safety requirements for.


The leaper is gone because 'it is a pedestrian hazard'. The British X150's have a release to raise the front end incase of a pedestrian collision. The low slung deck on the x308 which I love would dive under a pickup truck if I were to get rearended. The beltline has been raised on vehicles to perform in side impacts (especially with high SUV's). All these new crash requirements (or shaming from the IIHS's crazy tests they have) are forcing the engineers into a box. The more requirements you throw at the engineers, the less creative they can get.


All that being said. I hate it, because I love the look of the x308. I walk out to the company parking lot, and there is nothing like it.

 

Every time I see a new version of the XJ8, I am compelled to park my 1999 X308 next to it and take pictures on my iPhone.

 

Is this actual fact, or are you throwing conjecture based on what you think you know?

 

I've always thought the X350 looked like an X308 that let itself go.

-Mike

 

When I bought my 2001 XJR there was a 2004 XJR sitting right next to it at the dealer. Same colors too.

Not a hard choice to make, the 308 has beautiful lines, the 350 looks stuffed like the start of all the "McDonuts" that are out there now.

Buddy of mine has a newer XK8, we saw a new XJ in the parking lot the other day, all he said was "have they lost their minds, it looks like everything else on the road today."

But there is also a new 700 series BMW in our neighborhood that I regularly mistake for a Toyota.
Alden

 

I actually think it has a lot more to do with manufacturers looking for the same large market.
That market requires a lot more uniform, less outstanding design to appeal to the numbers.
And very unfortunate, they are probably right, as most small and unique car builders have disappeared over the last 40 years ...

 

To me the X350 looks like the X308's buff son. The long wheelbase only though...the SWB does indeed look fat.

 

I won't say I have sat and conversed with Ian on the matter, but I know of several examples from engineers in Detroit in regards to these issues. SUV/Trucks were required to lower their headlight levels (cost Ford an out of cycle retool on F-Series). I also know door handles on a few models got moved to meet side impact.

Also, some googling backs up the government angle, though not necessarily the specifics I was saying:

Taking the Hit: How Pedestrian-Protection Regs Make Cars Fatter - Feature - Car and Driver

https://www.motorists.org/blog/safet...car-less-safe/

down at the end here too http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cult...dummy-feature/

 

I've always thought the X350 looked like an X308 that let itself go.

-Mike

Excellent analogy. the X350 still is an excellent looking car and still looks like a Jaguar should, but not a svelte or streamlined as the X308. Maybe like a wife who is still good looking but not quite as hot as 20 years ago.

 

I don't think many people choose a car because it blends in. Maybe a few people, those with warrants out for their arrest, don't particularly want to attract attention. Current design rather must being dictated by safety regulations, fuel economy and more practical consumer demands. Safety regs are discussed above. Fuel economy is impacted by drag and aerodynamically speaking, there IS one ideal shape, the closer they are to that ideal, the better the mileage. And simple functionality like the shape of nearly every car's trunk lid today is to make loading luggage and groceries easier.

The cost of complying with all the regulations has made it very expensive to develop a car and bring it to market. They have to crash test a bunch of them just to prove safety. They have to be able to spread that development cost over a lot of unit sales. I figure that's what's forced the small manufacturers out.

I think another factor in "sameness" is the cost itself and from different angles. From the manufacturers viewpoint, it costs less to make a whole bunch of one body style than to make a few of a bunch of body styles. And from the buyers perspective, cars have gotten much more expensive as a percentage of income. The upper-middle class used to could afford to have multiple vehicles, perhaps a sedan for the family and a sports car for the weekend or a truck to pull the boat. Today few people can afford more than one vehicle so they choose one that serves most if not all of their "needs" with their "desires" relegated to much lower priority. I think these factors are why most everything now is only available in 4-door form.

I bought an old x308 for the smooth ride, but I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I've had a back seat passenger in four years. I had targeted "personal luxury" cars like the Buick Riviera and Lincoln MkVIII and to me, its sad they don't make hardly anything in that class anymore. The x308 was about the only 4-door car I considered "cool". If Jaguar made the new XJ in a 2-door, I'd probably have to seriously consider it even if it were ugly, albeit after a few years of depreciation.

I don't know what I'm going to replace the x308 with, but I WAS planning to buy a new or at least much newer car this year. I'm stuck because nothing appeals to me except a few sporty cars like the new Mustang however I really ought to buy something with a smoother ride for everyday use and road trips. I hate being in the situation of needing one thing and wanting another but obviously I'm not the only one. Maybe I'll remodel the kitchen instead.

 

I can identify with you in a major way, Phil.
I too have a Jaguar 2000 XJ8 4.0 LWB (1 of only 148 ever built, apparently) and a burning resentment towards the X350/X358.
The engineering in the X350 is an order of magnitude better than the steel cars but, they look like so much like middle age that I cant bring myself to change.
I will stick with my low tech, high style 4 door sports car.
I still think I'm too young for a limo.
WS

 

X358 and newer Jags in photos missing leaping Jaguar. Same Mercedes error code when they removed the "Radiator" grill look. Could be a Hyundai !

 

About fricken' time. Especially Ford pickups & suv's.

Being blinded from behind in traffic is not fun.