RE: New Jaguar XF - official
Discussion
I really like it. As with the XJ and X-type before it, it goes to show that big car styling features work better on larger cars. I like the new XE but the new XF has more flow and better (larger) proportions that give it more grace than the XE.
Whether the Diesel engines produce 180bhp or 181 bhp and 103 G/km or 105g/km of CO2 really doesn't both me. I will leave that up to company car drivers who actually care about these things (and who are worried about comparing stats with their colleagues).
If you want to see what the car looks like in a dark hue, there is a video of Ian Callum using a dark blue XF to talk through the exterior design. It really suits the shape of the car.
The only thing I am not too sure about is the interior. I don't think it is bad full stop, but I am not convinced that it is as nice as the previous model. Still, all black rarely does an interior any favours so I will wait to see the more interesting colour options next week.
I do hope that as with the XE, the UK marketing department see the sense to release the lower powered petrol models in the UK as well as the rest of the world.
Whether the Diesel engines produce 180bhp or 181 bhp and 103 G/km or 105g/km of CO2 really doesn't both me. I will leave that up to company car drivers who actually care about these things (and who are worried about comparing stats with their colleagues).
If you want to see what the car looks like in a dark hue, there is a video of Ian Callum using a dark blue XF to talk through the exterior design. It really suits the shape of the car.
The only thing I am not too sure about is the interior. I don't think it is bad full stop, but I am not convinced that it is as nice as the previous model. Still, all black rarely does an interior any favours so I will wait to see the more interesting colour options next week.
I do hope that as with the XE, the UK marketing department see the sense to release the lower powered petrol models in the UK as well as the rest of the world.
zeppelin101 said:
MJ85 said:
The base diesel was already much slower than the BMW equivalent in the XE, let alone in this, heavier, XF. Not too impressive.
"Jaguar claims the manual 163hp diesel is 80kg lighter than "its closest competitor." For reference a 520d manual has a 1,695kg kerbweight."Note the word "lighter".
Cotic said:
MJ85 said:
The base diesel was already much slower than the BMW equivalent in the XE, let alone in this, heavier, XF. Not too impressive.
No it isn't.http://www.whatcar.com/Review/EditionCompare?newOr...
It doesn't look like a new car, rather a mildly face-lifted version of the previous, both inside and out. To me, it's an amorphic, anonymous shape which could easily be Korean/Japanese, very little 'style' at all, indeed just like a larger XE.
Again like the XE, it's an opportunity lost - in a class where image matters hugely, this falls down, and I suspect unfortunately that sales won't be impacted in any great way as a result.
Again like the XE, it's an opportunity lost - in a class where image matters hugely, this falls down, and I suspect unfortunately that sales won't be impacted in any great way as a result.
had ham said:
It doesn't look like a new car, rather a mildly face-lifted version of the previous, both inside and out. To me, it's an amorphic, anonymous shape which could easily be Korean/Japanese, very little 'style' at all, indeed just like a larger XE.
Again like the XE, it's an opportunity lost - in a class where image matters hugely, this falls down, and I suspect unfortunately that sales won't be impacted in any great way as a result.
The same could be said for all its competitors. Every new Audi and BMW that has been launched over the past 5 or 10 years has been moaned about on here as being "lazy design, just a tweaked version of the old one" and "dull dull dull, it looks like a **insert random Korean brand**". Those making these comments miss the point that the new version is supposed to look like a tweaked interpretation of the new version, and that by and large every car looks pretty similar now because they're all designed to the same criteria.Again like the XE, it's an opportunity lost - in a class where image matters hugely, this falls down, and I suspect unfortunately that sales won't be impacted in any great way as a result.
The first XF was a notable success for Jaguar, and really kick-started their current boom. On that basis, they'd be completely and utterly bonkers to not aim to replicate that product in some obvious ways, wouldn't they? Meanwhile, it's got to be a certain size, fit a certain number of people and bags, perform to a certain level of efficiency and conform to Jaguar's wider visual identity - so they were never going to wheel out something that is completely astonishing in terms of looks. And finally, on the sales point, although they are doing very well at the moment, compared to BMW, Audi and Merc, for the foreseeable future Jaguar are only ever going to be a challenger brand, or a product that is chosen as much for what it isn't as for what it is. So no, I'd not expect it to suddenly become the World's no.1 selling car in its category, but equally it wouldn't be a surprise to see it gain market share. I'm not sure what image Audi, Mercedes or BMW have that is so especially desirable compared to the image Jaguar have. Beyond the stereotypes that really only exist among PHers, I think most people simply think of an Audi, a BMW, a Merc or a Jag as being very similar "nice slightly posh cars". The looks of the cars don't really count for a lot in that regard - as evidenced by BMW still being perceived as desirable despite many of their recent models being quite divisive in looks. The XF looks handsome, contemporary, slightly sporty and I think most people would agree while not a stunner, is quite good looking. Everything else after that is pretty much branding and your own interpretation. On that count, I don't think Jaguar will be worried.
Edited by forzaminardi on Thursday 26th March 07:55
Hmmmnnn. Do you really think the existing BMW 5 looks like the previous version? Did that previous version (the 'Bangle 5') not differ massively from it's forebear, and indeed increase sales significantly in comparison too?
The Jag XF is very much an also-ran in the sales stakes in that class - and I wouldn't think sales fluctuating between 30 and 50K units per year (5 series over 10 times the higher of those two numbers) could be classified as a 'notable success'.
If you always do, what you always did, you'll always get, what you always got.
Interested to see you round off your comments with 'The XF looks handsome, contemporary, slightly sporty and I think most people would agree while not a stunner, is quite good looking. Everything else after that is pretty much branding and your own interpretation. On that count, I don't think Jaguar will be worried.' I'm intrigued as to why you think your opinion counts and others don't - I'd say the most common view on this thread is that it's boring and very derivative. Worrying so many think that, no? And as an existing 6GC owner looking for a new car in the M5/E63 class, I would have thought I'm just the sort they're after.
The Jag XF is very much an also-ran in the sales stakes in that class - and I wouldn't think sales fluctuating between 30 and 50K units per year (5 series over 10 times the higher of those two numbers) could be classified as a 'notable success'.
If you always do, what you always did, you'll always get, what you always got.
Interested to see you round off your comments with 'The XF looks handsome, contemporary, slightly sporty and I think most people would agree while not a stunner, is quite good looking. Everything else after that is pretty much branding and your own interpretation. On that count, I don't think Jaguar will be worried.' I'm intrigued as to why you think your opinion counts and others don't - I'd say the most common view on this thread is that it's boring and very derivative. Worrying so many think that, no? And as an existing 6GC owner looking for a new car in the M5/E63 class, I would have thought I'm just the sort they're after.
had ham said:
Worrying so many think that, no?
No. The number on here that think this is a missed opportunity (inluding me) is tiny compared to the market Jaguar are appealing to, consider how many of us commentators are actually in a position to buy/lease one... it's insignificant.That said I broadly agree with you. However BMW and AUDI et al are everwhere, more common than Fords and Vauxhalls... as much a reason to avoid than to choose IMO.
BMW specifically have appeared o have made ginat leaps from model geneation to model generation, but for each generation they photocopy up and down.
Mercedes too.
Audi....well VAG design is even more considered and evelotionary so their changes from generation are les obvious and they STILL photocopy that.
Is that not what Jag have done here?
This XF, quite noticably different from the last....yet a enlarged version of a family member?
Given Jaguar's ambitions I think they sail the right course, re-boot their presence, back it up with engineering and performance quality, harvest the media and public attention and then more 'steady as she goes' as each piece of their puzzle is put in place...
had ham said:
Hmmmnnn. Do you really think the existing BMW 5 looks like the previous version? Did that previous version (the 'Bangle 5') not differ massively from it's forebear, and indeed increase sales significantly in comparison too?
The Jag XF is very much an also-ran in the sales stakes in that class - and I wouldn't think sales fluctuating between 30 and 50K units per year (5 series over 10 times the higher of those two numbers) could be classified as a 'notable success'.
If you always do, what you always did, you'll always get, what you always got.
Interested to see you round off your comments with 'The XF looks handsome, contemporary, slightly sporty and I think most people would agree while not a stunner, is quite good looking. Everything else after that is pretty much branding and your own interpretation. On that count, I don't think Jaguar will be worried.' I'm intrigued as to why you think your opinion counts and others don't - I'd say the most common view on this thread is that it's boring and very derivative. Worrying so many think that, no? And as an existing 6GC owner looking for a new car in the M5/E63 class, I would have thought I'm just the sort they're after.
In the main, yes the current 5 series does look pretty similar to the older model. I'm mindful that your counter-argument would be to post old and new pics alongside and point out the differences - obviously there are some. But in the main, they're both large, slightly boxy BMW saloons and have a clear sense of evolution in their appearance. I admit in the BMWs case they are more immediate, but equally on a side-by-side you'd see changes between the old and new XFs. It's important to remember that Pher who know the minutae of BMW's model numbers and what spec axle grommit went into which car don't represent the general car buying public. Going further back (and we're talking almost 15 years now), the E60 'Bangle' 5 series was a pretty shocking change from its predecessor, but no more so than the change from the Jaguar S-Type to XF, and similarly represented a very deliberate break with the past that coincided with the next step in that brand's commercial growth. The Bangle BMW and switch from S-Type to XF fitted BMW and Jaguar's objectives at the time - to shake things up and revise perceptions of the brand. But Jaguar now having achieved that with the first XF and since having completely revised their image and product line up, are moving onto the next step - to consolidate and diversify. Hence, launch a new XF that develops the attributes of the previous successful model, and spin those attributes into new categories (the XE and X-Pace SUV) while benefitting from the sexiness of the F-Type halo product.The Jag XF is very much an also-ran in the sales stakes in that class - and I wouldn't think sales fluctuating between 30 and 50K units per year (5 series over 10 times the higher of those two numbers) could be classified as a 'notable success'.
If you always do, what you always did, you'll always get, what you always got.
Interested to see you round off your comments with 'The XF looks handsome, contemporary, slightly sporty and I think most people would agree while not a stunner, is quite good looking. Everything else after that is pretty much branding and your own interpretation. On that count, I don't think Jaguar will be worried.' I'm intrigued as to why you think your opinion counts and others don't - I'd say the most common view on this thread is that it's boring and very derivative. Worrying so many think that, no? And as an existing 6GC owner looking for a new car in the M5/E63 class, I would have thought I'm just the sort they're after.
When I said the XF was a notable success, I was speaking in respect of the S-type before and Jaguar's general performance, not in respect of the wider market - it was a successful product for Jaguar. As I noted, the old XF was nowhere near the market leader, and I don't think the new one will be expected to be the market leader either, simply because that would be unrealistic. While I acknowledge that "if you always do what you always did, you'll always get what you always got" is a nice-sounding principle, so is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". I'll acknowledge the BMW example isn't the best one to illustrate my argument, but Audi is - for the best part of 20 years, they have released a huge range of mildly tweaked and scaled-up and -down versions of the same thing. The PH response to another Audi launch is usually to say "looks the same as the old one" and "bet it'll understeer like a b*tch", but that's not stopped them becoming immensely successful. I'd conclude from that a sense that much as our personal opinions are valid, firstly we as PHers don't really represent the wider public, and secondly that our opinions shouldn't ignore the fact that people who successfully design, manufacture and sell cars don't achieve that success by happy coincidence.
Your last comment on my opinion is valid as I said "Most people would agree..." as if to say that it's my opinion that I was implying agreement with. However the point I was poorly making was, that looks don't really count for a huge amount in the market. The Bangle BMWs make the point - many people thought they looked awful, but many people bought them none the less, while many people thought that Alfa's 159 was beautiful but not many people bought one. Most people don't dwell on or be negatively influenced by the looks of a car, unless it's absolutely awful. What's more important is the brand image and the perceived qualities of its products. On that count its not just my opinion to say that Jaguar is regarded as a much more appealing, sexy, and relevant brand than it was 10 years ago.
With respect to being a potential buyer, this is interesting because it emphasises the fact that we've all got opinions and are entitled to them even if we may not think much of each others - I probably fit almost perfectly into Jaguar's target customer profile too. Finally, are you suggesting that you'd not consider the XF on basis of some PR images and an interesting but meaningless stunt? You'd not seek to see the car in the metal, or drive it?
had ham said:
Hmmmnnn. Do you really think the existing BMW 5 looks like the previous version? Did that previous version (the 'Bangle 5') not differ massively from it's forebear, and indeed increase sales significantly in comparison too?
The Jag XF is very much an also-ran in the sales stakes in that class - and I wouldn't think sales fluctuating between 30 and 50K units per year (5 series over 10 times the higher of those two numbers) could be classified as a 'notable success'.
If you always do, what you always did, you'll always get, what you always got.
Interested to see you round off your comments with 'The XF looks handsome, contemporary, slightly sporty and I think most people would agree while not a stunner, is quite good looking. Everything else after that is pretty much branding and your own interpretation. On that count, I don't think Jaguar will be worried.' I'm intrigued as to why you think your opinion counts and others don't - I'd say the most common view on this thread is that it's boring and very derivative. Worrying so many think that, no? And as an existing 6GC owner looking for a new car in the M5/E63 class, I would have thought I'm just the sort they're after.
Curious, as I regard all the German competitors including the 6GC as mingers.The Jag XF is very much an also-ran in the sales stakes in that class - and I wouldn't think sales fluctuating between 30 and 50K units per year (5 series over 10 times the higher of those two numbers) could be classified as a 'notable success'.
If you always do, what you always did, you'll always get, what you always got.
Interested to see you round off your comments with 'The XF looks handsome, contemporary, slightly sporty and I think most people would agree while not a stunner, is quite good looking. Everything else after that is pretty much branding and your own interpretation. On that count, I don't think Jaguar will be worried.' I'm intrigued as to why you think your opinion counts and others don't - I'd say the most common view on this thread is that it's boring and very derivative. Worrying so many think that, no? And as an existing 6GC owner looking for a new car in the M5/E63 class, I would have thought I'm just the sort they're after.
OK, thanks for that valuable contribution. I'm guessing you drive a Jag, right?6GC is one of the most svelte, stylish Beemers in recent years...
That the family resemblance trickles through the entire range proves the point that whislt fascimiles make for strong profits, as enthusiasts differentiation would be of benefit, keeping each model type 'special' in some small but important way.
That the family resemblance trickles through the entire range proves the point that whislt fascimiles make for strong profits, as enthusiasts differentiation would be of benefit, keeping each model type 'special' in some small but important way.
kambites said:
Paracetamol said:
Very Dull (badge engineered fords by any other name)
What have they got to do with Ford? This XF looks at best a facelift by a team that is clearly busy doing some great design work on other products. The new Jeep looks superb. And the interior design is going horribly the wrong way on both cars. The challenge Jaguar faces (I use XK8 2011 as an everyday car)- is that the perceived quality is not close to BMW or Mercedes- the feel of the plastic, the hollowness of the door panels ,cheap feeing plastichrome switches. Yes they are dynamically superb but this market demands more.
Callum seems to have become a globe trotting celebrity who is forcing people to like his dull designs by use of huge product launches. Feels to me like he is busy with celebrity whilst safe 'design by committee' work is going on in the back ground.
Among the criticisms offered here, two stand out: the XF is dull and looks too much like the XE; it looks like and owes its heritage to Ford (pick your model).
On looks I think it was intended to have a family resemblance to the XE and, for that matter, to the XJ. Ian Callum has stated that one objective was to make the car recognisable as a Jaguar at 200 metres; that seems to have been achieved looking at its profile, as well as its grille and rear lights. One man`s dull design is another man`s clean, simple line.
Re Ford, the car has no connection whatsoever with Ford products. It is based on Jaguar`s own aluminium b-i-w architecture. The development of this technology goes back many years - to the 1980s, long before Ford was the owner of Jaguar. Indeed it could be argued that the boot is now on the other foot, as Ford has adopted Jaguar`s aluminium technology for its new F150 pick up truck range, which just happens to be the biggest selling product in the USA. That is/was one of the boldest decisions in recent US automotive history and a ringing endorsement of Jaguar technology.
On looks I think it was intended to have a family resemblance to the XE and, for that matter, to the XJ. Ian Callum has stated that one objective was to make the car recognisable as a Jaguar at 200 metres; that seems to have been achieved looking at its profile, as well as its grille and rear lights. One man`s dull design is another man`s clean, simple line.
Re Ford, the car has no connection whatsoever with Ford products. It is based on Jaguar`s own aluminium b-i-w architecture. The development of this technology goes back many years - to the 1980s, long before Ford was the owner of Jaguar. Indeed it could be argued that the boot is now on the other foot, as Ford has adopted Jaguar`s aluminium technology for its new F150 pick up truck range, which just happens to be the biggest selling product in the USA. That is/was one of the boldest decisions in recent US automotive history and a ringing endorsement of Jaguar technology.
RyCliff said:
Looks a lot like the Mondeo from the outside to me...
Thank god,I thought I was the only one confusing the odd XF/XE stuff with Mondeos.
For me it looks like they secretly are still with Ford and doing it as Scorpio replacement.
As a huge Jaguar fan I really hope they start to build beautiful cars again one day.
Paracetamol said:
The very fact that this thread is only 4 pages long says everything about this car...dull dull dull..
It's more a reflection that British brands can only ever "miss opportunities" on Pistonheads whilst PHers fawn on about German stuff. That your brain prefers German stuff is your problem. The XE thread ran to many pages, mostly full of people who had never been near one commenting negatively on the interior or worriedly looking for some irrelevance in figures to justify their future slagging off and sticking with a 318d MSport because it is ze best. It must be. It's German.Beauty is very much in the eye of the beholder and a valid proportion of people are attracted to different things.
If you like boggle-eyed headlights, kidney grilles, random creases and slashes all over the bodywork and an iPad stuck to a plasticy dashboard then you probably prefer the German stuff.
The E39 5 series was a handsome car. The E60odd was a revolting thing and the current shape is just invisible. The current Mercs are an absolute mishmash of weird slashes, bulges and random bits which look like they've melted. The Audi A6 is the best looking of the lot of them and that's worrying because I hate the way Audi's drive and simply wouldn't want to be tarred with the Audi image brush.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff