|
97-06 Better Than The 07-Present XK8/XKR ?
Like the title says which do you prefer the best ? Im having a hard time deciding both are stunningly gorgeous.
|
I think the previous one is an instant classic, from the very moment of its inception.
The new one is no so straightforward elegant and stylish. Sure is pretty, and of course powerful. Perhaps it's more efficient. But the older one is "classic" all around. If you like classic cars, I think the previous model is the way to go. If you like pure performance, your bet is in the new one. ;) |
Originally Posted by Flying Brick
(Post 177072)
I think the previous one is an instant classic, from the very moment of its inception.
The new one is no so straightforward elegant and stylish. Sure is pretty, and of course powerful. Perhaps it's more efficient. But the older one is "classic" all around. If you like classic cars, I think the previous model is the way to go. If you like pure performance, your bet is in the new one. ;) There also are design (technical) changes. 97-99,00-02, 03, 04-05 etc. There is, of course, a enormous cost difference involved as well. |
as an XKE fan I love the 97-06 models. Perfect lines. The 07+ models are nice too but I miss the soul, especially in the inside. The lights of the 07+ models always remind me of a Nissan Z.
|
Looks like I'm in the minority... I prefer the slightly 'edgier' lines on the newer models...especially the rear end. The nose is the only thing that I find needing work...that lower valence just sticks out there and looks odd.
I would LOVE to never have to take out the boot cover ever again also. |
Originally Posted by h20boy
(Post 177162)
I would LOVE to never have to take out the boot cover ever again also.
I have said it before, the performance is the only thing I prefer about the newer model. The style and interior I prefer the earlier ones. |
I don't think which one is "better" is the right terminology. They are both good cars and they both have their faults. I still get comments on my '01 XKR and people can't believe it is not a newer car. I would much rather have the generous room in the boot than to worry about having to put the boot cover on. The new one have less than half the usable room in the boot.
|
97-06 MUCH better looking car!
|
Perhaps this poll is biased by the fact that there are more 97-06 owners??
|
I have to weigh in on this - I could have afforded either one (ahem!), but I researched, looked at, and drove - all of them. And my pick was my pick. 2002 XXR - Anthracite and Ivory! Just me - Dale D
|
Here's what I'm thinking....I'll wait a few more years and find a 2010 XKR with the 510 hp engine....hardtop....black or grey.....and I'll park it beside my 1997 XK8 Convertible in Carnival Red. I think the two will get along well.
Tony Cottrell 97 XK8 05 XJ8 L |
And their children will look like ???
|
My 2001 coupe gets a lot of stares. I imagine the new ones do too. The 97-06 models look like they're related to the XKE, while the newer models appear to be related to the Aston Martin. Both are stunners.
|
the older style looks like a proper jaguar, the classic look.
the new car has a younger feel to it, obvioulsy more modern. with that said i would have to say that i prefer the body lines on the newer style. |
Yeah when I bought mine, it was not about the money at the time either. Just the classic sexy curves of the earlyer model. 2002 XKR here. Power I can build just costs money. Sexy curves and body lines = priceless
|
It was lust at first sight with me for the 2002 XKR I bought. When at the dealers for service over the last few months, I looked at the newer ones. I prefer the lines and interior of mine but would love the added hp available in the new models.
|
We are pretty new Jag owners as we just bought our 2000 XKR Convertible (Black/BLack) in December.
We also looked at a 2007 XKR at the time but chose the earlier model and price was not an issiue. Where I have no doubt the newer car will have significant power and accessory upgrades and is still a beautiful car it does not have that timeless elegance and sexy style that the 97 - 06 models have. The earlier XK8/XKR are just gorgeous from every angle but where I still like the new ones they kind of make me think of that old Queen song about "Fat Bottomed Girls", a little large in the rear to be considered sleek and elegant and are designed for more passenger comfort and luggage room which is not why I wanted a car like that anyway. Cheers, Mark |
The 07-present XKR is nice I really like it. Its very modern It will definitely be a classic Jag once its replaced with a newer one.
|
Originally Posted by DaleD
(Post 177350)
I have to weigh in on this - I could have afforded either one (ahem!), but I researched, looked at, and drove - all of them. And my pick was my pick. 2002 XXR - Anthracite and Ivory! Just me - Dale D
|
The new ones look cheap to me...
|
'06XKR here. The only thing I like about the new ones is the paddle shifter...much better and faster than the "J" gate. While I'm on that subject, does anyone have any evidence as to whether or not constantly using the manual gear selector effects the longevity of the transmission?
|
The 97-06 XK is a Masterpiece.
|
I have always agreed the '98-2006 are instant classics, in the spirit of the E type. I gave my wife the choice and it was a no-brainer for her based on the interior alone. The new ones are racier with the aluminum panels and all, but the wood dash of ours made it a simple choice for her.
Upon reflection, all the true classics have one thing in common, curves. Old Ferrari's, Maserati's, Shelby Cobras, mid-year Corvettes, Jag E Types, and the '98-2006 Jags all have those curvaceous lines. |
Originally Posted by govatos
(Post 181393)
'06XKR here. The only thing I like about the new ones is the paddle shifter...much better and faster than the "J" gate. While I'm on that subject, does anyone have any evidence as to whether or not constantly using the manual gear selector effects the longevity of the transmission?
|
Both old and new style look smashing and unique compared to most other cars out there. However, when the 1996 style came out it was truly revolutionary. The 2007 style is more evolutionary. Our generation XK8/XKR still turns heads more than most other cars out there even today.
Doug |
The second generation XKs are undoubtedly beautiful cars, but to me, and I believe many others, they just don't have that classic XK Jaguar look from the XKE that I always felt that the first generation captured so well That being said, I can certainly understand that they needed to update the looks of the model after so many years of the same basic styling.
|
When I was looking for my XK8, I saw a 2010 XKR in the showroom of the local Jag dealer. What impressed me the most was that for the modest price of $96K, they throw in driving instruction by real-live race drivers on real-live race tracks. Now that's classy. However, the 510 ponies and driving lessons notwithstanding, I'm still a fan of the pre-07 styling.
|
I get excited with these kinds of Polls!
To quote and second-the-motion some of our member's posts... here is to share my side..
Flying Brick wrote: If you like pure performance, your bet is in the new one. robrtx wrote: Perhaps this poll is biased by the fact that there are more 97-06 owners?? h20boy wrote: The nose is the only thing that I find needing work...that lower valence just sticks out there and looks odd. markman wrote: 97-06 models. Perfect lines. The 07+ models are nice too but I miss the soul, especially in the inside. The lights of the 07+ models always remind me of a Nissan Z. jagxkrtoofast wrote: The 97-06 XK is a Masterpiece. DougBoost Upon reflection, all the true classics have one thing in common, curves. Old Ferrari's, Maserati's, Shelby Cobras, mid-year Corvettes, Jag E Types, and the '98-2006 Jags all have those curvaceous lines. & that the new designer Ian Callum, designer of the '07 XKs was quick to blame US/UK car regulations that hindered his ability to design what he really wanted on the XK. (http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-136839230.html) It meant he was dissatisfied with the end results.. Even the height of the '07 XK is a little higher than the '97 XK by 2.5 inches, longer by 1.2 inches and wider by 2.5 inches making the '97 model a much sleeker car. Bottom line, to each his own. Call me old fashioned ( i love wood on cars though i get fascinated by the look of a carbonfibered dash) but the '97 XKs has that perfect symmetry look to it on almost any angle. HAIL GEOFF LAWSON!!!!! |
At the risk of deviating further from the original topic of the thread, what really grabs me about the first gen besides the overall brilliance of the design is the attention to detail that goes beyond that. For example, it is a subtle point but do any others notice/appreciate the seam lines that are created between the hood and front fenders and, to a lesser extent, the trunk and rear fenders? The shape of the hood curves inward from windshield towards front grill, thus the seam creates a nice curve that mirrors the overall curve of the fenders. Compare that with the new XK where the hood line is perfectly straight and situated over the top of the fender. It must have been more work and expense to create the lines in our generation and the detailing of the seams between these various body panels is one of the subtle but beautiful features of the first gen.
Doug |
what is better
I love them both but for different reasons.The question that was asked is which is better and the answer is the 07-present.It like which is better a 65 XKE or a 2006 XKR,the XKR is better but the style of the XKE is the one I prefer.
|
I too love the classic lines of the earlier edition...and its not about the money. As a matter of fact the next Jag will be a 1969 Series 2 Coupe. For the money of a used newer Jag (probably less) I can have a re-built, made to daily drive, Jag that will be beautifull and very unique.
|
@SeismicGuy - The shape of the hood curves inward from windshield towards front grill, thus the seam creates a nice curve that mirrors the overall curve of the fenders. Compare that with the new XK where the hood line is perfectly straight and situated over the top of the fender. |
They really carried the XKE styling into the 1997 design very sucessfully. It was the first thing I thought of when I first saw it. It was the nose cowl opening that really jumped out at me, coupled with the agressive stance of the rear wheels and quarter panels that sold me. But the thing that I appreciate more and more every year is the interior. The wood, the leather, the comfort of the seats. They just don't make them like that any more.
|
I think there is a vast majority of the "old" owners here - that could be a part of the poll result (so far :-)). Who buys a new car is rarely involved in discussion forums about cheaper options of repairs - who can afford a new Jag is probably able to pay what the dealer tells him... And a few "new" owners are real fans so they join the group.
I vote for the classic. I donīt need that extra power and the look of the "old" is timeless... |
Originally Posted by mrmagnum
(Post 271920)
Great Observation Doug! I have never read or heard anyone speak about how the lines and the curves flow over the front hood. In fact, this is one of the reason why it was love at first sight for me. I just love looking at the front view with an angle of a couple of steps to the left or right..
As a (structural) engineer, I tend to notice little details like this that other people may not. For example, the first time I bought a non-American car was when I bought a 1979 Toyota Supra. I was playing around with interior air vents for the heating/ac system and noticed that tiny rubber pads had been installed on the inside surface (that you don't see) strictly to address possible rattles. The next best thing to the looks of the first gen XK8/R exterior is the interior. As much as I was sold on considering buying a used XK8/R based on the exterior looks, the first time I looked at the inside of one basically closed the deal. There was nothing else around that came close to the styling and quality of the interior, especially since I was looking at convertibles and, once inside, it was virtually impossible to realize that you were in a convertible and not a couple due to the quality of the finishes. Doug |
Had a 2000 XJR, never bought a XK8 due to conertible top stowage and ugly fenders/wheel-tire gap in rear. I love the XK, particularly the exhaust note.
|
I like both but prefer a Jaguar to look like a Jaguar not an Aston Martin.
|
I am fortunate to own one of each at least temporarily. No doubt my 99 is a beautiful looker I think it has a nicer interior if you notice as they get newer they start showing less wood trim and in my mind that is what makes the car. Overall the interior is much more elegant. Mechanically I think the 07 and newer 4.2 litre engine is more reliable especially when you consider that the earlier 4 litre engines have the cam chain tensioner issue which is very expensive to fix and if not fixed could blow the motor.
|
Originally Posted by Flying Brick
(Post 177072)
I think the previous one is an instant classic, from the very moment of its inception.
The new one is not so straightforward elegant and stylish. Sure is pretty, and of course powerful. Perhaps it's more efficient. But the older one is "classic" all around. 97-06 was love from first site. '07 on is damn sexy, but with a little more make-up on and tries too hard -- not quite the effortless natural beauty. And the wood interior... part of the experience of a Jaguar is the gorgeous wood grain interior. I don't care if carbon fibre is the IT thing, sporty, or whatever. It sometimes pays to stick to what makes you you, even if that's not in style now. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:09 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands