RE: Jag: we got it wrong
Discussion
300bhp/ton said:
You sure on that? As I thought the X-Type was actually Jaguars best selling model.
Ok there were silly projections that the X-Type didn't meet, but weren't those projections aimed at selling double what Mercedes and Audi managed in the same sector. Missing such an unachievable target isn't surprising.
X Types projections, while ambitious (and clearly unachievable in the end) were certainly nothing like double Merc/BMW no's....Ok there were silly projections that the X-Type didn't meet, but weren't those projections aimed at selling double what Mercedes and Audi managed in the same sector. Missing such an unachievable target isn't surprising.
j333evo said:
RoverP6B said:
Umm, when were GM and Fiat ever involved together?
Chrysler is NOT German owned. It's owned by Fiat.
GM I believe bought shares in FIAT to share technical information and development costs. For example GM 1.9 Diesel engines as used in Vauxhall/Opel and when still manufacturing SAAB are Alfa/FIAT units.Chrysler is NOT German owned. It's owned by Fiat.
The Grande Punto shares chassis with the Corsa hence it having a PCD of 4x100mm on the wheels which is GM rather than FIAT's normal 4x98mm as the most obvious example of sharing parts.
The Alfa 159/Brera chassis was designed with SAAB/GM and many times has been stated as the reason why those cars have a heavy 1800kgs? Kerb weight which makes them incredibly strong. A quote I remember reading was if Euro NCAP went to 6 stars they would achieve it. Of course the weight blunted performance and economy.
GM with the fall in sales, credit crunch etc etc had to buy its way out of the deal with FIAT handing back shares and paying them 2billion Euros or something crazy in the process to disolve any future deals, and yet still source engines from them. FIAT won big time on that deal.
VladD said:
RoverP6B said:
VladD said:
I think there must be some irony in claiming the X-Type wasn't styled very well now that we have the hugely bland XF. Being in mind that I own an S-Type, when I first showed my wife an XF and asked her who she thought made it, she said she wasn't sure, but thought it must be Japanese. At least when you look at the X-Type you know it's a Jag without having to check the badge. Jaguar have swapped character and brand recogintion for mass sales. Fair enough, but I miss proper looking Jags.
Really? The XF looks far more like a proper Jag to me than the overgrown Mitsuoka Viewt S-type.Evo said:
What's important is that Jaguar finally managed to ditch the aged and un-successful "retro styling" approach to their design and launched a fresh faced "XF"
It proves Jaguar has the ability to take some of the BMW / Audi / Mercedes sector with very good results.
Now all they have to do is miniaturise it a little into a nice 3 series / A4 / C Class size car.
How hard can it be................................
There is another side to that argument in that there are still plenty of current classic Jaguar owners who see the modern XF/XJ coupe/saloon,as opposed to the good old fashioned three box XJ type style,as a retrograde idea similar to the mistake which Leyland made in replacing the Rover P6 and Triumph 2.5 ranges with the pig ugly by comparison Rover SD1.The same comparison applies today when an old classic style Jaguar is parked next to any of the modern day similarly coupe/saloon styled Audi etc etc and Jag saloons.In addition to that issue is the arguable case as to wether the small saloon sector is the right place for Jaguar to even want to be involved with when the company decided (rightly) to get out of that sector from at least the end of the 1960's to just concentrate on making the XJ saloon range. It proves Jaguar has the ability to take some of the BMW / Audi / Mercedes sector with very good results.
Now all they have to do is miniaturise it a little into a nice 3 series / A4 / C Class size car.
How hard can it be................................
tadaah said:
X Types projections, while ambitious (and clearly unachievable in the end) were certainly nothing like double Merc/BMW no's....
Not double BMW. I can't find the the article I read previously. Wiki however states the Jag target was 100,000 units a year. Audi were at 40,000 and Merc 60,000 or something. Not sure if this was just the US though.cerb4.5lee said:
It is funny because I thought of the XF when reading this article & the XF's original lights look hideous they are better now though & I once asked my mrs what she thought of the XF & she said its just a Mondeo in a fancy frock! It seems they just can't shake the stigma off!
The S type was the closest to a small saloon range that Jaguar needed to get which itself was based on a ( better rwd ) Ford platform like the X type to save non existent development money needed for a totally new design.The biggest mistake in that case wasn't the Ford platform but in not offering a manual box option in the S type R.On looks alone, I think that it's passable.
As a car belonging to a marque for discerning buyers 4wd or FWD or even the mere hint of a FWD in the range is utterly inexcusable.
But what really killed the X-type was Ford's attitude to Jaguar. There was reputedly zero UK content in the design. Not even run past the Jaguar management. Even the Halewood production line was designed in the US, so I'm told. Not a great start if you're trying to get Jaguar UK staff to believe in the product.
As a car belonging to a marque for discerning buyers 4wd or FWD or even the mere hint of a FWD in the range is utterly inexcusable.
But what really killed the X-type was Ford's attitude to Jaguar. There was reputedly zero UK content in the design. Not even run past the Jaguar management. Even the Halewood production line was designed in the US, so I'm told. Not a great start if you're trying to get Jaguar UK staff to believe in the product.
I had a 2.0 diesel saloon - it was a brilliant car. Perhaps having a Sport badge was optimistic but it did mean the interior trim was on another level, with leccy everything, piano black trim panels, and full leather sports seats. Veeeeery different to the average velour carpeted, wooden dash trimmed, and crappy DFS reject style seats you find in a minicab X-Type.
I even liked the styling - but I quite like the current 1 series too so hey ho.
I had all the posh mondeo abuse when I owned it, but two mondeo driving mates had to admit - it was way nicer than their cars. Quieter too, which isn't bad considering they had the same tractor engine.
I think with their scathing remarks that Jag's people are perhaps over-compensating for the crap way they launched the X-Type.
Had they entertained the notion of small engines in a small car and gone for the Mondeo/Vectra/Laguna market from the outset it probably would have been a roaring success, but trying to insist it was still a Jaaaag and only offering 6 cylinder petrol engines with a similarly premium price which put it in line with the A4 and 330 was arrogant and destined for failure, because while it was good, it wasn't THAT good.
I even liked the styling - but I quite like the current 1 series too so hey ho.
I had all the posh mondeo abuse when I owned it, but two mondeo driving mates had to admit - it was way nicer than their cars. Quieter too, which isn't bad considering they had the same tractor engine.
I think with their scathing remarks that Jag's people are perhaps over-compensating for the crap way they launched the X-Type.
Had they entertained the notion of small engines in a small car and gone for the Mondeo/Vectra/Laguna market from the outset it probably would have been a roaring success, but trying to insist it was still a Jaaaag and only offering 6 cylinder petrol engines with a similarly premium price which put it in line with the A4 and 330 was arrogant and destined for failure, because while it was good, it wasn't THAT good.
300bhp/ton said:
Mr2Mike said:
MadDog1962 said:
Quite a lot of people thought the X type looked nice, and still do. It's really no more Ford than the S type was,
The X type used a modified Mondeo floorpan and Mondeo suspension as well as many other trivial parts like switchgear. Which Ford shares all these parts with the S-Type?Edited by 300bhp/ton on Wednesday 18th September 11:58
I've had 2 X-Types and basically quite like them for what they are. They're not as nice as the S-Type to be in (which, I'm sorry to whoever said it lacked waft-factor, rides far better than any German equivalent), but the interior is a nicer place to be than the contemporary Germans too (very high spec A4 possibly excepted - base model A4s are horrible though).
AWD X-Types are torque bias in favour of the rear wheels (61% for whoever said it was the other way around). They are well balanced and will oversteer on the throttle if really provoked but are generally well planted.
Wider track and shorter wheelbase than the Mondeo. Same wishbones and uprights but different damper design.
3.0 performance was half a second to 60mph slower than the then current XK8 - a point which I read concerned Jaguar at the time.
Styling and perception are of course subjective. Technically it really wasn't and isn't a bad car at all - even when compared to the German alternatives.
XJ Flyer said:
cerb4.5lee said:
It is funny because I thought of the XF when reading this article & the XF's original lights look hideous they are better now though & I once asked my mrs what she thought of the XF & she said its just a Mondeo in a fancy frock! It seems they just can't shake the stigma off!
The S type was the closest to a small saloon range that Jaguar needed to get which itself was based on a ( better rwd ) Ford platform like the X type to save non existent development money needed for a totally new design.The biggest mistake in that case wasn't the Ford platform but in not offering a manual box option in the S type R.When I get older though maybe an Auto will interest me i am still only 40 so possibly in time i will appreciate a slush box.
It worries me that Jaguar executives think they got it wrong when in fact the X Type was a damn fine car. Although I never owned one it has always been an appealing car, albeit not with the same youthful image as a 3 Series BMW. Buying a Jaguar came with certain expectations.
What possibly went wrong was the marketing. and the lack of confidence from the Jaguar management in entering a lower sector than the one to which they were accustomed.
I don't recall the pricing, which was pretty competitive, but the press made a thing about it sharing Ford mechanicals. This really wasn't a bad thing as the Mondeo Mk 3 was also a good car - hampered only by its lack of status. Where Jaguar went wrong was in not shouting from the rooftops that they had an ALL WHEEL DRIVE executive saloon. Most middle management and senior sales reps wouldn't be allowed to have a Subaru, but a Jaguar X would be perfect instead of spending every winter trapped at the bottom of a snow-covered hill in his BMW3/5:Audi A4: Merc C class etc. Sure, it was there in the small print, but this could have been one of the main reasons for buying the Jaguar.
Then when they eventually got round to fitting a diesel for the Corporate buyer, it was front wheel drive only, there was no automatic and no leather in the basic offering.
And finally, the estate car was very late in the day.
Looking through Auto Trader today, there are too many manuals, too many without leather and too many petrols compared with diesel, for the mass corporate market they were trying to win over from the Germans.
No good blaming the car - it was the Jaguar Marketing Execs who got it wrong.
What possibly went wrong was the marketing. and the lack of confidence from the Jaguar management in entering a lower sector than the one to which they were accustomed.
I don't recall the pricing, which was pretty competitive, but the press made a thing about it sharing Ford mechanicals. This really wasn't a bad thing as the Mondeo Mk 3 was also a good car - hampered only by its lack of status. Where Jaguar went wrong was in not shouting from the rooftops that they had an ALL WHEEL DRIVE executive saloon. Most middle management and senior sales reps wouldn't be allowed to have a Subaru, but a Jaguar X would be perfect instead of spending every winter trapped at the bottom of a snow-covered hill in his BMW3/5:Audi A4: Merc C class etc. Sure, it was there in the small print, but this could have been one of the main reasons for buying the Jaguar.
Then when they eventually got round to fitting a diesel for the Corporate buyer, it was front wheel drive only, there was no automatic and no leather in the basic offering.
And finally, the estate car was very late in the day.
Looking through Auto Trader today, there are too many manuals, too many without leather and too many petrols compared with diesel, for the mass corporate market they were trying to win over from the Germans.
No good blaming the car - it was the Jaguar Marketing Execs who got it wrong.
XJ Flyer said:
Evo said:
What's important is that Jaguar finally managed to ditch the aged and un-successful "retro styling" approach to their design and launched a fresh faced "XF"
It proves Jaguar has the ability to take some of the BMW / Audi / Mercedes sector with very good results.
Now all they have to do is miniaturise it a little into a nice 3 series / A4 / C Class size car.
How hard can it be................................
There is another side to that argument in that there are still plenty of current classic Jaguar owners who see the modern XF/XJ coupe/saloon,as opposed to the good old fashioned three box XJ type style,as a retrograde idea similar to the mistake which Leyland made in replacing the Rover P6 and Triumph 2.5 ranges with the pig ugly by comparison Rover SD1.The same comparison applies today when an old classic style Jaguar is parked next to any of the modern day similarly coupe/saloon styled Audi etc etc and Jag saloons.In addition to that issue is the arguable case as to wether the small saloon sector is the right place for Jaguar to even want to be involved with when the company decided (rightly) to get out of that sector from at least the end of the 1960's to just concentrate on making the XJ saloon range. It proves Jaguar has the ability to take some of the BMW / Audi / Mercedes sector with very good results.
Now all they have to do is miniaturise it a little into a nice 3 series / A4 / C Class size car.
How hard can it be................................
300bhp/ton said:
The irony being that the current and popular Jag XF is built on the Ford DEW98 platform, shared with the Ford Thunderbird and Lincoln LS and related to the Ford D2C platform used by the Ford Mustang.
i thought that was the previous generation S Type? Must be a seriously modified development of the older car and of course its all aluminium
RoverP6B said:
SD1 pig ugly?! It bore more than a passing resemblance to the Ferrari Daytona...
The problem for the designers is that what looks ok in the case of a two door sports coupe looks downright ugly when that's transferred to a four door saloon.While even in the case of a sports coupe they arguably look better when the roof and sloping back is taken away in the case of their convertible/roadster options thereby giving them the better in line bonnet and boot lines of the three box saloon style.Although,just as in the case of comparing the lines of the old Triumph 2.5 with the SD1,it's obviously all a matter of personal viewpoint but I for one certainly prefer the three box design in the case of saloons on the basis that,to my eye,just as a Daytona roadster looks better than it's fixed head coupe counterpart,as I've said,the Triumph 2.5 and Rover P6 looked better than the SD1 and the Jag XJ at least up to the X350 looked better than the XF or the new XJ and I think that issue of Jaguar not keeping to the three box saloon style will be a mistake in the long term.
Surprised that they see the X type as a failure
Jaguar are going into that segment with their own platform
Ford are going into exactly that segment with the Vignale
Jaguar "discovered" the estate car with this, wonder if the XF estate would have otherwise occurred without the X type estate
Jaguar are going into that segment with their own platform
Ford are going into exactly that segment with the Vignale
Jaguar "discovered" the estate car with this, wonder if the XF estate would have otherwise occurred without the X type estate
XJ Flyer said:
RoverP6B said:
SD1 pig ugly?! It bore more than a passing resemblance to the Ferrari Daytona...
The problem for the designers is that what looks ok in the case of a two door sports coupe looks downright ugly when that's transferred to a four door saloon. 300bhp/ton said:
Not double BMW. I can't find the the article I read previously. Wiki however states the Jag target was 100,000 units a year. Audi were at 40,000 and Merc 60,000 or something. Not sure if this was just the US though.
X Type target volume (from memory...Wiki isn't correct) was 125k WORLDWIDE.....Jag certainly weren't stupid enough to believe they could outsell Merc and Audi worldwide volumes!
Edited by tadaah on Wednesday 18th September 16:16
Dblue said:
i thought that was the previous generation S Type?
Must be a seriously modified development of the older car and of course its all aluminium
DEW98 underpinned the original S type X200. X202 (2002 MY) got rid of a fair chunk of Ford parts and its developed ever since and so the "platform" XF shares is barely like DEW98Must be a seriously modified development of the older car and of course its all aluminium
However, XF is most definitely made from steel!
Evo said:
XJ Flyer said:
RoverP6B said:
SD1 pig ugly?! It bore more than a passing resemblance to the Ferrari Daytona...
The problem for the designers is that what looks ok in the case of a two door sports coupe looks downright ugly when that's transferred to a four door saloon. Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff