See this news release. I guess it was inevitable. Get ready for SUVs.

Jaguar to launch mass market range in 2015: sources: Thomson Reuters Business News - MSN Money

 

I am fine with an entry level sedan to compete with C Class and 3 series. However, why build an SUV when sister company Land Rover arguably makes the world's best SUV's already... It will dilute the brand in my opinion.

 

Agreed. Jag SUV is a bad idea. It's going to be hard to compete entry level. One model below the XF is all the marque can handle. That model should be geared towards young crowd that may want to mod the car and eventually take them to the track.

 

Some people are brand loyal. I have only bought Jaguars for the last 25 years so if I was in the market for an SUV it would more than likely also be a Jaguar. I would think it is quite a small market though!

 

took the words out of my mouth.

 

A lot of folks on this forum are too young to remember that Jaguar was a "value priced" car up through the 70s. By that I mean you got a lot for the money in unique combinations of ride, performance and beauty. My first Jag was a 2 year old E Type in 1974 and nothing in the market equaled it for the money.

As time went on the relative value of Jags to other bands suffered due to cost control and an unfortunate tendency to include a fresh mechanical/design blunder with each new model.

Maybe Jag could benefit from a "value priced" line of cars now they seem to have their QC, engineering and design in harmony.

 

Unless you buy the high end models forget it. TATA are looking for a return on the initial investment and just like Ford did they also will lessen the value and quality of the brand by putting low end junk on the road . And make it up in the service and repair side of the business.

 

the only downers i can see are the followings:

- labor price similar for low end car and high end cars
- to work well they need to sell a bunch of low end ones, therefor it is much less time to service high end cars
I hope it won't hurt too much the range of luxury cars jaguar has always built. it does not seems like the service for those is at the top level yet. Maybe better to do it with a totally different infra structure, not to over booked dealership already busy. Like a brand jumelle "Urban jaguar" , or jaguar that"

 

It is history repeating itself.

Ford did this after they bought Jag. Ford has always made their money on volume sales. Ford trucks are outstanding...they excel at making trucks. Their cars absolutely suck mechanically and electrically. They have tried to improve recently but are still just cheap cars.

But Ford wanted to try and make some money from all the Billions they sunk into Jag, Land Rover, and Aston.

They introduced the S Type, and the X Type. I believe they even put out an R version of each of these. They were cheap cars, cheaply made; in other words, typical Ford style cars.

Ford's infusion of capital was the best thing they did while owning Jaguar. In the beginning Jaguar borrowed Ford electronics and some mechanics. Eventually Jaguar became self sufficient and Ford started using Jag designs and parts. I remember reading a WSJ article that stated that Ford spent over $12 Billion during the 10+ years they owned Jag. They sold Jag for a little over $2 Billion to Tata.

Tata has started using some Jag parts as well I believe on some of their cars they produce. But I can't fault them for wanting a return on their investment.

 

What I want to see is Jaguar produce a small, lightweight roadster. Like a Miata or something like that. Still manage to somehow fit a powerful engine in there, and have some luxurious interior materials, but otherwise still be a lightweight small car. And it must be available with a stick! Similar to a Boxster.

 

For all you pious types that are looking down your noses at 'lesser' models like the X- or S-types and at the years that Ford owned the marque, please remember that if that had not happened, there'd be no new Jaguars to choose from at all.

 

Yes yes yes!

 

If it's going to make the company profitable than I say go for it. Mercedes just launched there cheaper model (CLA) earlier this year for the firt time in the US which is less expensive than the C Class. Critics were concerned it will delute the luxury brand but these lesser models (A, B, CLA) has been selling well in Europe for awhile now. Cadillac is going that route with the ATS also.

 

Not to mention the BMW 1-Series!

 

BMW and Mercedes can make a less expensive product of higher quality than Jaguar or the Italians, IMO.

A direct competitor would be a tough call unless it has something unique about it.

 

My apologies if I offended you...I certainly am not a Pious type.

But what you say is not exactly accurate. Ford was not the only suitor for Jag back then, and who knows that if some other corporate entity had bought them they may be even bigger and better. Just as well, Ford or anyone else could have killed the Marque. That did not happen and Jag is where it is today due to Ford's checkbook.

As I stated in my post, Ford's infusion of cash - as well as the new $2.5 Billion Pound factory they paid for - has been (one of) the best thing to happen to Jag in its history.

 

Without a doubt. Ford did great things for Jaguar. Who knows, Jaguar may've been moved out of UK if someone else was behind the helm.

 

Saved me from starting a new thread.

The baby Jaguar XF is only 18 months away according to these guys.... Baby Jaguar 18 months away | Autocar

Jaguar’s lightweight baby saloon is just 18 months from the showroom, Autocar can reveal.
The car caught here on test in Germany is still at an early stage, wearing an oversized fake body, but the mule gives significant clues about the concept behind what could be the most important Jaguar yet.

According to Autocar sources, the baby Jaguar —possibly badged Q-type — will be unveiled in the second half of next year. Production won’t be far behind, because Jaguar Land Rover is already progressing with a new bodyshop at Solihull to build this car and what’s expected to be a compact SUV sister model.
The new bodyshop is directly alongside the facility that already builds the new Range Rover and Range Rover Sport, which, like the Jaguar, are built from aluminium.

The Q-type will compete directly with BMW’s 3-series and is based on JLR’s new Premium Lightweight Architecture.
Judging by these pictures, the new car will have very short overhangs, a low bonnet and an engine set well back behind the front wheels. Clearly, the aim for this compact, lightweight machine is ultimate handling.

Although this mule appears to be an XF wearing an XJ nose and headlamps, close examination gives strong clues to the size and packaging of the underlying structure.
The mule has very low wing tops, which are close to the tops of the wheels. Despite the fake XJ nose, it’s clear that the front overhang is very short.

The close-up of the rear gives away just how short the rear overhang of the production car is likely to be. Even though the mule’s tail is shorter than an XF’s, the exhaust pipes don’t quite clear the bumper skin.
Under the bonnet is Jaguar Land Rover’s new home-grown four-cylinder engine, sometimes dubbed i54, which is the name of the engine factory where it will be built.

It’s now becoming clear that the baby Jaguar is no half-hearted stab at giving the mighty BMW 3-series a run for its money. Autocar understands that the new Jaguar project has seen very few corners cut. It will be the only all-aluminium car in the segment. The no-compromise package of ultra-short overhangs, wide tracks and 50/50 weight distribution show how Jaguar hopes to outflank a 3-series that is showing all the signs of middle-age spread.

The project’s profitability will be touch and go, certainly for the first-generation model. But Jaguar has a clear, almost unique chance to get into a segment that is expected to grow as buyers globally continue to downsize from executive cars.

As with the F-type, Jaguar seems determined to build a pretty hard-edged, sporting car. Although this could finally break down Jaguar’s ‘country club’ image, the company needs to be careful that it doesn’t alienate an audience that is likely to be over 40 years old.

 

Much truth in this, but let's not forget that although the name survived the X and S-type cars did little for its reputation. Years ago I test drove an S-Type and although the car had a wonderful feel and ride, the 3 litre variant was underpowered and the fit and finish were dodgy in many places. I reluctantly had to admit that it was the nicest looking RWD Ford Taurus your money could buy, but a proper Jag? Not so much.

 

I've driven S-Types and know people that have them. They seem to be a proper Jaguar; especially if you have the V8. My wife's car is basically a S-Type with a different body (Ford Thunderbird), and it's a pretty good and reliable vehicle.The Ford V8 (3.9L) which is very similar to the Jaguar 4.0L V8 is a better engine with none of the nikasil, water pump, tensioner problems that plagued Jaguar until they brought out the 4.2L.