RE: Revealed: Jaguar F-Type
Discussion
nickfrog said:
pti said:
Stick some 21s on it and it's the concept that everyone was raving about a while back!
There's no pleasing some people.
...which clearly was not a concept as they had already tooled up for the production car, oldest trick in the book since Audi invented that marketing coup with the TT.There's no pleasing some people.
Very beautiful car nonetheless and really good news for the brand and UK jobs.
hing that it looks like another marque's car is as ridiculous as bcjb1 said:
Thanks HighwayStar, It was a bit of a rant but it just grips my sh#t when people do that.
No worries... I feel your pain. I wouldn't know the first thing about designing a car but evidently their are legions on here with all the answers and knowing exactly what the buying public wants and needs. Lol, I jest.
Been thinking that I would be a wee bit underwhelmed with this compared to the coupe concept and I am trying to figure out why.
The while car looks (to my eyes) a bit too narrow (might be the camera angle?)...certainly the photos of the test mules made it look a bit on tippy toes especially from the rear. Obviously basing this on photos and I am sure in the flesh it will be a more resolved. Its also a bit of shame that the grey car which probably sits on 19inchers imo still looks like it is on castors. My 968 has mere 17ins but it to my eyes looks better balanced.
Do like Jags though and was not a fan of the XJ until saw one live so heres hoping same applies here.
The while car looks (to my eyes) a bit too narrow (might be the camera angle?)...certainly the photos of the test mules made it look a bit on tippy toes especially from the rear. Obviously basing this on photos and I am sure in the flesh it will be a more resolved. Its also a bit of shame that the grey car which probably sits on 19inchers imo still looks like it is on castors. My 968 has mere 17ins but it to my eyes looks better balanced.
Do like Jags though and was not a fan of the XJ until saw one live so heres hoping same applies here.
I like it and would consider having one.
I do wonder whether it will take sales away from the XK, rather than expand the customer base. I know that XK is, in theory, a 2+2 and therefore supposed to cater for a different market. But the rear seats in an XK are a joke, and you can't really travel any distance with four people, even if 2 of them are kids. Why not have the same engine in a smaller, lighter car, so that you have better performance? And it will be cheaper.
I do wonder whether it will take sales away from the XK, rather than expand the customer base. I know that XK is, in theory, a 2+2 and therefore supposed to cater for a different market. But the rear seats in an XK are a joke, and you can't really travel any distance with four people, even if 2 of them are kids. Why not have the same engine in a smaller, lighter car, so that you have better performance? And it will be cheaper.
Well done finally.
I like it. Can't wait to see one in the flesh.
Can see people's comments regarding the whiff of California, 370z, S2K and maybe even AMV8. But these are all pleasing on the eye so I say well done. Let's hope they haven't cocked it up re: the back. But first impressions are promising...I'm sure in the flesh it'll be even better and the coupe looks lovely....
Now Jaguar...go get one entered into Le Mans and win it! Preferable with some Silk Cut livery or just good old BRG.
I like it. Can't wait to see one in the flesh.
Can see people's comments regarding the whiff of California, 370z, S2K and maybe even AMV8. But these are all pleasing on the eye so I say well done. Let's hope they haven't cocked it up re: the back. But first impressions are promising...I'm sure in the flesh it'll be even better and the coupe looks lovely....
Now Jaguar...go get one entered into Le Mans and win it! Preferable with some Silk Cut livery or just good old BRG.
SprintSpeciale said:
I like it and would consider having one.
I do wonder whether it will take sales away from the XK, rather than expand the customer base. I know that XK is, in theory, a 2+2 and therefore supposed to cater for a different market. But the rear seats in an XK are a joke, and you can't really travel any distance with four people, even if 2 of them are kids. Why not have the same engine in a smaller, lighter car, so that you have better performance? And it will be cheaper.
But the XK has the boot for the golf clubs... It's a big GT, the F is a proper sports car.I do wonder whether it will take sales away from the XK, rather than expand the customer base. I know that XK is, in theory, a 2+2 and therefore supposed to cater for a different market. But the rear seats in an XK are a joke, and you can't really travel any distance with four people, even if 2 of them are kids. Why not have the same engine in a smaller, lighter car, so that you have better performance? And it will be cheaper.
pti said:
pilchardthecat said:
Stupid question, but is it a 2 seater or a 2+2?
The market is screaming out for a new 2+2 that's a bit smaller/less guzzly/more nimble than the XK. ie a Jag 911.
(ok that's what I want it to be, i have no idea what the market wants)
2 seater onlyThe market is screaming out for a new 2+2 that's a bit smaller/less guzzly/more nimble than the XK. ie a Jag 911.
(ok that's what I want it to be, i have no idea what the market wants)
The 2+2 sports car seems to have died.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff