RE: Jaguar XK8
Discussion
bi9_jk said:
You know what it needs - on the front the jaguar badge needs to be up at the base of the bonnet where it was in the old car just to break the front a little - cos it looks like somebodys stole the badge.
Ahhhhhh, but putting the badge up there would remove somebodies knee cap should they be fortunate to be hit buy one! :d
G
dinkel said:
Nice one Gram 
Are the pics of the red Jag yours?
Why do I think this car is a classicbecause most competition is bland?
Hi dinkel,
Yep, I took the ones of the red coupe and the interior/boot shots of the black coupe at the lunch halt on the press drive. Having to share cars and stick to set route meant there wasn't really scope to do much photography, hence other photos being Jag press items.
While some people here seem to think it looks bland, Jag's test route took us past a school at closing time and the XK got plenty of 'Like your car mate' comments from the kids. So who says Jags are just for the middle aged?
a8hex said:
They are using the E-type for inspiration, if you look a t the grille on that you will see its down there too on the E
But it's called an XK so it should have the badge at the top, above the radiator - that's where XK's put their badges
Ken
Good point well made, I have always thought jag shouldn't have called it an XK, but here is a pic form Jag showing the XK evolution, interesting that they use the E-Type......................
G
Was the E-type not also known as the XKE?
With regards to the new car's looks, I think it's fantastic.
It wasn't until this article came up that I really took the opportunity to properly look at the car. That accelerating curve forming the side windows, more dynamic than the old car and nicely echoing the E-type. The stance is much improved, and the whole side profile of the car is much more resolved than previously with those tight rear haunches. That rear window is pure E-Type too, and looks great.
It seems quite colour sensitive, not sure if red really suits it. Looked great in a photo I think Triple7 posted up on another thread, Quartz I think was the colour.
I was a fan of the current XK8, thought it was an attractive car (odd front lights aside) overshadowed by the fact that it looked similar too, but not as nice as a DB7 (although the XK was technically superior).
With regards to the new car's looks, I think it's fantastic.
It wasn't until this article came up that I really took the opportunity to properly look at the car. That accelerating curve forming the side windows, more dynamic than the old car and nicely echoing the E-type. The stance is much improved, and the whole side profile of the car is much more resolved than previously with those tight rear haunches. That rear window is pure E-Type too, and looks great.
It seems quite colour sensitive, not sure if red really suits it. Looked great in a photo I think Triple7 posted up on another thread, Quartz I think was the colour.
I was a fan of the current XK8, thought it was an attractive car (odd front lights aside) overshadowed by the fact that it looked similar too, but not as nice as a DB7 (although the XK was technically superior).
paul_pot said:
Was the E-type not also known as the XKE?
Yup.
I'd have the Jag over the DB7 6pot . . .
It looks bigger with a gall next to it.
>> Edited by dinkel on Thursday 6th April 15:43
triple7 said:
They are using the E-type for inspiration, if you look a t the grille on that you will see its down there too on the E
But it's called an XK so it should have the badge at the top, above the radiator - that's where XK's put their badges
Ken
Good point well made, I have always thought jag shouldn't have called it an XK, but here is a pic form Jag showing the XK evolution, interesting that they use the E-Type......................
G
Interesting choice of cars they use.
D-Type / XKSS (altough I'm not sure about the bonnet vent near the right wing)
XJ13 (surely the most beautiful car of all time
) Then an E-Type
Then the XK8 mk1
Then the new XK8
Shouldn't the E-Type and the XJ13 be the otherway around.
And yes I did know that in the US the E-Type was the XKE, but I choose to leave out that data point since it didn't fit my hypothesis
Had mine for two weeks. Besides a bit of wind noise and a rattle from the seat belt it has been fantastic. Not had one negative comment from anyone who has been it it yet. I have to confess i have a soft spot for Jaguar - this is my fourth but I cannor believe how good this car is. I had an early 6 series - at this stage of ownership it had been back to the dealer 3 times for various issues including a new steering rack ! Well done Jaguar - I was expecting some major early car issues - so far so good.
Cant wait for the R.
Cant wait for the R.
I saw one of these for the first time yesterday in Canterbury. I wasn't blown away but I do think its an attractive car.
My dad is about to change his car (currently a merc s class diesel....
). Need to persuade him that he needs one of these in his life - or more to the point, his hooligan son needs one.....
My dad is about to change his car (currently a merc s class diesel....
). Need to persuade him that he needs one of these in his life - or more to the point, his hooligan son needs one.....
If it didn’t have a badge and I had to guess I would guess it was an uber Hyundai 
and not a Jaguar. On the other hand the F-type looked a lot like a modernised E-type, the shape of the body is better reflected than this.
Can some one explain to me how the gearbox is “better” than a standard slush ‘box with a manual overdrive?
Also is the aluminium construction worth it? I mean it’s not any lighter than the BMW 6-series or Porsche 911 Carerra S (which are I believe it’s main rivals in the U.S. market). Also is the chassis really a genuine monocoque or is it just glued/welded/riveted together like many other cars?
I’m predicting PHers will hold out for two things:
1. A manual gearbox.
2. More power.
No doubt in later models they will find ways to reduce the weights as well which should make it a very PH sort of car.
Edit: Although if any one from Jaguar is reading we want the F-type
.
>> Edited by speedy_thrills on Monday 10th April 07:15
and not a Jaguar. On the other hand the F-type looked a lot like a modernised E-type, the shape of the body is better reflected than this. Can some one explain to me how the gearbox is “better” than a standard slush ‘box with a manual overdrive?
Also is the aluminium construction worth it? I mean it’s not any lighter than the BMW 6-series or Porsche 911 Carerra S (which are I believe it’s main rivals in the U.S. market). Also is the chassis really a genuine monocoque or is it just glued/welded/riveted together like many other cars?
I’m predicting PHers will hold out for two things:
1. A manual gearbox.
2. More power.
No doubt in later models they will find ways to reduce the weights as well which should make it a very PH sort of car.
Edit: Although if any one from Jaguar is reading we want the F-type
. >> Edited by speedy_thrills on Monday 10th April 07:15
speedy_thrills said:
Can some one explain to me how the gearbox is “better” than a standard slush ‘box with a manual overdrive?
Apart from the fact it changes gears quicker, the paddles are far better suited to enthusiastic driving than simply moving the lever another notch in the gate. Not as satisfying as a proper manual change, but the sequential paddle shift means you can use it hard without worrying about 'wrong slotting' it in the gate.
speedy_thrills said:
Also is the aluminium construction worth it? I mean it’s not any lighter than the BMW 6-series or Porsche 911 Carerra S (which are I believe it’s main rivals in the U.S. market). Also is the chassis really a genuine monocoque or is it just glued/welded/riveted together like many other cars?
Don't know where you got your figures, but the XK is both a lot lighter and a lot stiffer than the Beemer. Not sure about the Porker. And yes, it is glued/rivetted together, though why do you think that stops it being a genuine monocoque? Aluminium race car monocoques are rivetted.
grahambell said:My source: http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/compar
Is the aluminium construction worth it? I mean it’s not any lighter than the BMW 6-series or Porsche 911 Carerra S (which are I believe it’s main rivals in the U.S. market). Also is the chassis really a genuine monocoque or is it just glued/welded/riveted together like many other cars?
Don't know where you got your figures, but the XK is both a lot lighter and a lot stiffer than the Beemer. Not sure about the Porker. And yes, it is glued/rivetted together, though why do you think that stops it being a genuine monocoque? Aluminium race car monocoques are rivetted.
Not sure about stiffness, if any one can find figures they would be welcome.
Gassing Station | Jaguar | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff