Actually, I think they stole that Ford front end from their time with Aston Martin.

 

I have to disagree. I have a 2002 XK8 and love it. And I have a 2010 XF. It's every bit a jaguar. It's just that it finally caught up with the times. The interior has a good bit of wood in it and the details are very well finished. As for the seats, I think they, too, fit the more modern, fresh feel jaguar has taken. I like the firm seats and the leather is about the same as my former seats in my XK8 before I recovered them. I did, against everyone's advice, add a leaper from Sdesign in Germany, now adamesh sells them. I also had all the chrome blacked as well as the leaper. I can be stopped beside any new BMW or MERC and they always turn their heads!!
Before I bought my XF I had a 2006 XJ-L. It was beautiful but if I heard one more time it was an old mans car, nice but dated, I was going to drive it off a cliff!! I certainly don't hear that anymore with my XF!

 

Also this. Let's not forget where Porsche might be today, and what the 911 would be today, if it were not for the Cayenne. Or even the Boxster for that matter. And the Panamera now! Serious revenue inflow + empowered R&D = being allowed to perfect your core competence.

 

To keep it in perspective, Ferrari only reluctantly began selling street cars as a means to fund their racing team. Hard core Ferrari fans were appalled.

 

You guys know that we have a subforum dedicated to the CX17 CX17 - Jaguar Forums - Jaguar Enthusiasts Forum ??

 

I'm so tired if all this wailing and gnashing of teeth over the new direction jaguar has taken and it attempt to compete with its main competitors, BMW and MERC. Those companies have such success because they have extensive ranges of vehicles and keep revenue flowing because of that.
Early on, While ford owned Jaguar, the popular looks was retro inspire cars, just modernized and they probably encouraged Jaguar to do the same. Face it. Every car designed under the ford era is simply a rehash of something that jaguar had success with in the past. The first XK100 was a sad attempt to cash in on the XKE. It could have been a true stunner if not for the rear end and the damn gold club requirement. But it was still a retro XKE. Same with the S type and X type. Nothing new there in the style dept. just a rehash of a 66 S type and a shrunken XJ. And the poor old XJ line. Damn thing couldn't get a new suit until Ian Callum got his hands on it. (After his being required to attempt a final facelift on the aging body) That body style was soooooo worn out. Hardly a person under 40 even glanced at jaguar EXCEPT for th XK!
I owned all of those models as well (because that's all they offered) but not a day went by with any of them that I wasn't told they were dated, unless the comment came from someone 50 or over. And now the situation is reversed. It's the older people that tell me to my face they hate the new XF I drive and and the under 50 set literally salivate. To each his own and I love all the jaguar models, old and new, and look forward to jaguar FINALLY putting some real fear in BMW and MERC shoes! (Btw, I'm 49 so I'm not bashing 50 year olds!!lol)

 

I agree with you guys, it's disgusting what's happening. It seems as if they think that if they put the Jaguar logo on a new model it automatically makes it a Jag. WRONG! Jaguar is a look and not just a logo with a leaping animal at the top.

 

Well, my point, all along, has been that Jaguar, as a company, cannot simply ignore the SUV market segment, particularly since the main competitors of Jaguar have all produced vehicles for that very lucrative segment.

The problem then is, when presented with the engineering task to produce a vehicle that fits those requirements, it represents a completely new design style than Jaguar has ever had before. I mean, there is only so much that you can do to build a four door SUV and try to maintain the traditional Jaguar style, which has never had such a vehicle before.

I, as much as anyone else, loves and respects the "traditional" Jaguar look, that our cars exhibit, but at the same time, I realize that to compete in today's marketplace, they had to design an SUV that was what the thirty to forty year old professional person looking for an SUV would be attracted to.

It is a new era guys, be happy that we have the last gasp of the old traditional Jaguars ever produced. That is what will cement our cars as classics for all time.

 

I like both old and new designs, except for the S-type. What get's me now is the car itself. I had an oportunity to drive dad's new acquisition, a silver XF supercharged. While it drives great, looks great, goes like stink, and oh my god that engine, the car gave me a german feeling to it, which was odd. I know there's nothing german about it, but somehow there is.

 

This is sad but true. Where I live, many households have only SUVs (a class in which I include crossovers) or SUVs and a pickup truck. This has led to a situation where there are households with four and five SUVs (typically a Suburban for Dad, ML or Q5 for mom, various lesser models for the kids). The pickup is generally an extra vehicle for work duty (I confess to one of those myself).

Anyway, I had hoped that "Jaguar Land Rover" as an auto company would mean that Land Rover would pick up the SUV end of the deal to let Jaguar do what it does best. And that together they'd have the synergy to make it economically practical. Apparently not.

 

hmm - well i don't like the baby jags - i like the big saloons and of course the XK's /XF's - i don't mind the SUV as u guys call them, it looks pretty good, time marches on. I already class our XK's as a classic car - course it is! If it ain't a V8 - it ain't a Jaguar - (my new motto)