BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 73 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,982 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
This Jag does look a lot like a DB9. I can imagine a lot of DB9 customers being pretty cheesed off by these pictures.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
Finally manufacturers are realising that we like BIG wheels, maybe if more people did this we could put some of these ridiculous after market wheel companies out of business,

Anyone else think there's hints of the Nissan 350Z?(the recent nissan sports car?)

Ho hum.

DMC
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
It looks like Jaguar has copied the XK8, DB7 and DB9 (more DB7 than DB9). The front seem to have some XKR details, but also looks a bit American.

I prefer the DB9, but before I can make up my mind I have to see the final product.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
I'm getting a bit cheesed off at Ford and Volkswagen's attempts to ruin the luxury brands they own.

The launch of the X-type and S-Type did absolutely nothing for Jaguar, they look pathetic, and they close down Brown's Lane too! This car looks OK, but is too similar to the Aston to have any Jaguar individuality - a la the E type.

They are making Aston Martin too mass market - with the new Vantage due out costing not much more than the Jaguar XK8, and will have a Jaguar V8. This is the cheapest Aston ever, and will be produced in huge numbers. Also, the sourcing of Ford and Jaguar switchgear and engine parts diminishes the hand crafted nature of the marque. Jaguar AJ16 in the DB7 and 2 Ford Duratecs welded together to make the V12 - I mean come on!

Land Rover also seems to be heading towards the lifestyle market, rather than creating the ultimate off roaders as they once did. Still the best - but I would like to see the diluted version of the marque in 10 years.

What is happening with Bentley? They used to be wonderful idiosynchratic luxury cars that cost an absolute fortune, and were meticulously hand crafted. Now they cost half their previous price (not much more than an S600), bringing down the exclusivity, and share lots of VW parts, and, worse of all, will soon be finished abroad.

My favourite memory of Bentley is recently, when they launched the Arnage with the 4.4 BMW V8 with turbos. Such was the back-lash from the owners, they got the old 6.75 litre unit out, gave it Cosworth to get it past the emission tests, and then put it back in the car. This wouldn't happen now under VW's ownership!

Rant over! Have a good weekend!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,982 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Jaguar,

You've hit the nail on the head.

The likes of Aston Martin and Bentley had a good reputation. Forged by the fact that no matter how much money you had you still had to wait ages to get one because everything was built by hand, by guys who loved and breathed the cars they worked on. Long before the days of machines replacing man and hand tools. Now these large companies only see Aston and Bentley as pure money making machines. Make the car as cheaply as possible stick a respected badge on it and sell it for a profit. A lot of the older Bentley owners will notice that a little of what makes a Bentley has been lost in the new cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,170 Posts
Im sorry i reallly dont like that Jag...

Too fussy, with scoops and slats it just wouldnt need

all the best
adam
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
518 Posts
Jaguar said:
I'm getting a bit cheesed off at Ford and Volkswagen's attempts to ruin the luxury brands they own.

The launch of the X-type and S-Type did absolutely nothing for Jaguar, they look pathetic, and they close down Brown's Lane too! This car looks OK, but is too similar to the Aston to have any Jaguar individuality - a la the E type.

They are making Aston Martin too mass market - with the new Vantage due out costing not much more than the Jaguar XK8, and will have a Jaguar V8. This is the cheapest Aston ever, and will be produced in huge numbers. Also, the sourcing of Ford and Jaguar switchgear and engine parts diminishes the hand crafted nature of the marque. Jaguar AJ16 in the DB7 and 2 Ford Duratecs welded together to make the V12 - I mean come on!

Land Rover also seems to be heading towards the lifestyle market, rather than creating the ultimate off roaders as they once did. Still the best - but I would like to see the diluted version of the marque in 10 years.

What is happening with Bentley? They used to be wonderful idiosynchratic luxury cars that cost an absolute fortune, and were meticulously hand crafted. Now they cost half their previous price (not much more than an S600), bringing down the exclusivity, and share lots of VW parts, and, worse of all, will soon be finished abroad.

My favourite memory of Bentley is recently, when they launched the Arnage with the 4.4 BMW V8 with turbos. Such was the back-lash from the owners, they got the old 6.75 litre unit out, gave it Cosworth to get it past the emission tests, and then put it back in the car. This wouldn't happen now under VW's ownership!

Rant over! Have a good weekend!
As if BMW hasn't ruined Rolls-Royce?

The following is from from Wagner, Rob L. "Classic Cars" page 89:

"The Rolls-Royce was not a particularly stylish car, reflecting the image of a conservative, well-mannered Englishman. And Rolls-Royce management disaproved of ostentatious designs by zealous coach builders."

The grille of the new Phantom is clearly ostentatious.



The book is available at the following link:

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/bo...567992862&itm=1

Jaguar has three factories and made around 125,000 cars last year. That is not efficient. The X-Type needs to go but the S-Type has potential because the next one might get the new XJ's aluminum chassis.

Jaguars and Astons have always had a "British" look to them. The Jaguar Advanced Lightweight Coupe is a concept but it shows what the next XK might look like. It has a longer wheelbase than the current XK with the wheels pushed out to the corners like the E-Type. It also has a centrally-mounted exhaust and a hatchback design, which gives it much more cargo capacity than the current XK, like the E-Type. The hatchback tails off like the current XK with an integrate spoiler unlike the Aston Martin Vanquish and DB9 which both have "flat" trunks.

The next XK will have to comply with new European safety pedestrian regulations. Here is what Henrik Fisker, who was Aston Martin's Director of Design until last December, thinks about the new regulations...

The following is from a three part interview with Henrik Fisker and motorsportscenter.com:

http://www.motorsportscenter.com/article_491.shtml


http://www.motorsportscenter.com/article_492.shtml


http://www.motorsportscenter.com/article_493.shtml

motorsportscenter.com: "Does the V8 Vantage adhere to the new European safety law regarding pedestrians?

Henrik Fisker: The Vantage actually comes out before that law takes effect. Just to give a comment on that - and this is just purely my opinion, not reflecting on Ford Motor Company - but there is a problem today, in my opinion, where you have too many government officials that don't understand the car industry but are making up laws, with good intent, but they end up really lingering the progress of even safety. You are only looking at one aspect; when you force only one aspect on a car, like pedestrian safety, you force the company to spend all their time and resources on that aspect, where if you look at it in a more holistic way - like, for instance, what Volvo has done for years; they have always had an eye on safety. Where does it make the most sense to improve safety? Volvo is the one that came out with a lot of [safety improvements] first, not from government regulations at all. That would be, for me, the better way to do it.

This pedestrian safety restriction, I think, is a waste of opportunity. And it's going to cost a lot of money, and it is money that will be paid for, in the end, by the consumers.

I think there are more innovative ways to deal with [safety]. Maybe some of that will come out; there will be some adjustment - that's my prediction. Unfortunately, we will spend a lot of money in the next few years, but then somebody will realize that maybe that was not the bet ideas, and then there will be some new ideas coming up."

As it is now, the Jaguar Advanced Lightweight Coupe is far more gorgeous than the new BMW 6 series and the Mercedes-Benz CLK. The next XK will weigh HUNDREDS of pounds less than the current one. Jaguar's XJ flagship, the Super V8, weighs over 800 pounds less than the BMW 760Li!!!




(the link also shows an XK8 but they say it is an XKR)

http://fast-autos.net/features/05naias/jaguar/index.html

The upcoming AMV8 will cost a lot more than the next XK. It is expected to cost over $100,000 while the current XK8 is $70,000. The next "base" XK won't be over $80,000.

Aston Martin too mass market? They have plans to make 5,000 cars per year in a few years. That may or may not be "mass market" or "huge numbers" but you won't see one on every corner. They are still built by hand and take many hours to build. Aston Martin used to be run by people who loved cars, but they never really made a profit. Until now. Ulrich Bez, Aston Martin's CEO, worked with Porsche on the iconic 993.

Will the upcoming Aston AMV8 really be the most affordable Aston ever made in today's money? Do you have facts to support this?

Chris Porritt, Aston Martin's vehicle engineering manager and AMV8, said the following in the March 2005 issue of "Motor Trend" :

"It's [the AMV8's 4.3 V-8] not just an off-the-shelf Jaguar engine with a snappier exhaust, you know," says Porritt. "It has a unique block, heads, pistons, rods, and cams. And, of course, it's dry-sumped so we can mount it lower in the chassis for better weight distribution."

As years went by, V-8-powered Aston Martins became more like GT cars than sports cars. The new AMV8 is a return to form.

I agree that some Ford switchgear in the Vanquish is one of the car's flaws, but its interior has been improved since its launch.

The following is from astonmartins.com:

"The Vanquish S interior has some differences from the original car. The central etched glass and backlit starter button is straight from the DB9. The centre console is now covered in leather instead of being painted."

Few new production cars have an interior better than the DB9's interior



Did you know that the DB9 will get a manual transmission?

The following is from autoexpress.co.uk

"There's been a shift in attitude at Aston Martin - the DB9 is to get an all-new manual gearbox. The move comes as a result of demand from traditionalist customers, who want this transmission instead of the sequential automatic with dash-mounted buttons.The conventional six-speed version will join the DB9 line-up towards the middle of next year, and is expected to cost around £3,000 less than the current model."

Yes the DB7 had a supercharged Jaguar I-6, but it is no longer in production. It helped Aston Martin expand into new markets. Aston Martin's V-12 isn't just two Ford V-6s stuck together. The new Vanquish S...

from astonmartins.com:

"has been enhanced with new cylinder heads with fully machined inlet ports and combustion chambers to improve airflow, revised engine mapping and new fuel injectors. The result of the reworking has moved the output to 520 bhp (from 460) with a very useful 425 lb ft of tourque (up from 400)."

If only all cars sounded like the DB9 in the following link:

http://www.pistonheads.tv/video.asp?id=190&nr=1

Land Rover still makes the Defender which they should bring here to the USA.

http://www.landrover.com/gb/en/Vehicles/Defender/Defender_overview.htm?route=__link__Thumbnail_4

The following is from landrover.com:

"The all-new Land Rover LR3 has been subjected to a development and testing plan, covering over 4,000,000 miles on five continents."

Did you know that Volvo has helped Aston Martin and Land Rover with the safety of their automobiles? Is that too much "dilution" for you?

The new LR3 is available with a heavy-duty package which includes an active locking rear differential and a full-size spare tire and alloy wheel. It is also available with a raised air intake (G4 specific) and a WARN® winch.

Land Rover no longer has the ultimate poor quality and reliability of ten years ago. The Range Rover will be revised for the 2006 model year. The 2006 Range Rover Sport, which will use the new LR3's chassis, may or may not dilute Land Rover, but it still has off road ability.

Bentley should make a car like the following car:

http://fast-autos.net/bentley/bentleydrophead.html

I don't care for the new Continental Flying Spur at all. I don't understand why it won't use the Audi A8's aluminum chassis.

The turbocharged BMW V-8 used in the 1998 Bentley Arnage had just 350 hp and 440 lb-ft of torque to move a car which weighed two-and-a-half tons. A big Bentley simply needs more power than that which is why the "base" Arnage now has 400 hp and a massive 616 lb-ft of torque.

p.s. Remember, Jaguar's V-8 is not a Ford V-8.

http://www.jagweb.com/aj6eng/v8_performance.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Thanks for your detailed response!

Firstly, of course I am not disappointed that Aston are returning to racing - some of the exploits of the team in the 50s make great reading (see Mon Ami Mate which details Peter Collins and Mike Hawthorne's lifes). I just hope they make a better job of it than Ford did with the Jaguar F1 team.

Whilst there is no doubt that the reliability and safety of the marques have been improved, I feel all this has been done at the expense of the cars' souls.

I have owned a few Jaguars (thus my user name) but I will not have another new one, as I feel the specialness of the car has gone. I did test drive a new XJR with a view to buy it, and it did drive great, but the styling is a pastiche of the XJ theme. The move towards American markets began when the staright six was replaced with the V8. Whilst I could live with a V8 XJR, the whole "feel" of the car seemed to be cheapened somewhat.

This was the same for the DB7. Whilst it was, and still is, undoubtedly a beautiful car, there was too much Jaguar and Ford about it for it to be a real Aston. It did sell bucketloads, but at what expense to the Aston marque?

In the 60s, the DBs sold for more than double what the E-type cost, and in 1990 a new Virage went for £135,000 THEN - much more than the new Vantage will go for now.

The use of the name "Vantage" to sell the cheapest standard car again shows little regard for the marque. Vantage has always been used as the name for a high performance variant of a model, rather than a separate model line.

In terms of Rolls Royce, I actually respect what BMW is doing with them. I was initially quite shocked at pics of the Phantom, but when you actually see it in the flesh it looks very imposing, just as a Rolls should, especially in black. Plus the price and limited production numbers retain the exclusivity. In terms of styling, it may not be to everyone's taste, but not every Rolls has - see the Carmargue.

I have a hefty dislike for Audi, so I will refrain from commenting on your suggestion that Bentley should have used an A8 chassis :hihi:

In summary, I feel that Ford is using its Premium Auto Group marques as mere luxury brands, which will appeal to thise who must have a certain thing (i.e. Louis Vuitton), rather than purists who appreciate the cars for what they are. This may bring in more cash, but it is a sad day.

EDIT And yes - Land Rover should bring the Defender to the US. It would sell extremely well, as it is an icon, without them having to give it a "lifestyle" makeover.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
518 Posts
Jaguar said:
Thanks for your detailed response!

Firstly, of course I am not disappointed that Aston are returning to racing - some of the exploits of the team in the 50s make great reading (see Mon Ami Mate which details Peter Collins and Mike Hawthorne's lifes). I just hope they make a better job of it than Ford did with the Jaguar F1 team.

Whilst there is no doubt that the reliability and safety of the marques have been improved, I feel all this has been done at the expense of the cars' souls.

I have owned a few Jaguars (thus my user name) but I will not have another new one, as I feel the specialness of the car has gone. I did test drive a new XJR with a view to buy it, and it did drive great, but the styling is a pastiche of the XJ theme. The move towards American markets began when the staright six was replaced with the V8. Whilst I could live with a V8 XJR, the whole "feel" of the car seemed to be cheapened somewhat.

This was the same for the DB7. Whilst it was, and still is, undoubtedly a beautiful car, there was too much Jaguar and Ford about it for it to be a real Aston. It did sell bucketloads, but at what expense to the Aston marque?

In the 60s, the DBs sold for more than double what the E-type cost, and in 1990 a new Virage went for £135,000 THEN - much more than the new Vantage will go for now.

The use of the name "Vantage" to sell the cheapest standard car again shows little regard for the marque. Vantage has always been used as the name for a high performance variant of a model, rather than a separate model line.

In terms of Rolls Royce, I actually respect what BMW is doing with them. I was initially quite shocked at pics of the Phantom, but when you actually see it in the flesh it looks very imposing, just as a Rolls should, especially in black. Plus the price and limited production numbers retain the exclusivity. In terms of styling, it may not be to everyone's taste, but not every Rolls has - see the Carmargue.

I have a hefty dislike for Audi, so I will refrain from commenting on your suggestion that Bentley should have used an A8 chassis :hihi:

In summary, I feel that Ford is using its Premium Auto Group marques as mere luxury brands, which will appeal to thise who must have a certain thing (i.e. Louis Vuitton), rather than purists who appreciate the cars for what they are. This may bring in more cash, but it is a sad day.

EDIT And yes - Land Rover should bring the Defender to the US. It would sell extremely well, as it is an icon, without them having to give it a "lifestyle" makeover.
I will make this a numbered reply to make it easier.

# 1. Rocketsports Racing used a 4.5 650 hp Jaguar V-8 in the Trans-Am Series last year and easily beat the competition. They will return this year. I hope Jaguar returns to sports car racing with the next XK. Here is the 4.5 Jaguar V-8 which has 650 hp, 425 lb-ft of torque and a 9,000 rpm redline. It is based on the production 4.2 294 hp Jagur V-8 which is shown directly below:





The race car...













# 2. Jaguar should build the F-Type as the XK300 (V-8-powered Jaguar)

http://www.fast-autos.net/jaguar/jaguarftype.html

Tell Jaguar what you think of the F-Type at the following link:

http://jag-lovers.org/fcomment.php3

# 3. The new aluminum XJ is a fantastic car. Jaguar's I-6 and V-12 WOULD NOT have been able to meet new European and American emissions. They were sadly at the end of the road. The new XJ's aluminum chassis is 40 % lighter and 60 % stiffer than the previous XJ's steel chassis. Brembo brakes are standard on both the XJR and Super V8 unlike the previous XJ.





# 4. The following is a list of things which would improve the XJ:

- offer a sport package for all models (XJR already has a modified suspension)

- offer a standard limited-slip differential for the XJR and Super V8

- offer the more luxurious leather from the Vanden Plas, Sovereign, and Super V8 for the XJR

- offer birch bark cherry wood trim like this



# 5. I agree about the DB7, but "bucketloads" is NOT 9,000 cars. Around half of all Aston Martin ever built are DB7s, but if you think that is a crying shame, then I'm not sure what to say. The last time I saw a DB7 was around two years ago. Could you perhaps look at the glass half full just for a little bit?

# 6. Using the Vantage name is not the end of the world. The following is a video of the upcoming V8-powered Aston Martin at the 'Ring:

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/video_gallery/video.php?id=51813

# 7. What is your point about the price of Astons? Was every Aston Martin made in the 1950s more expensive than the 1957 Jaguar XKSS?

# 8. Note the following from

http://www.europeancarweb.com/features/0211ec_aston/

"The first thing you need to know about Aston Martin is that it is a miracle the company still exists. Since its founding in 1914 by Robert Bamford and Lionel Martin, the company has gone through more than half a dozen owners, an overall win at Le Mans (1959 with Shelby and Salvadori) and nearly icon status thanks to its involvement with the James Bond movies. The reason the company changed hands so many times is it has never made a consistent profit and has drained more than one of its rich owner's reserves in the struggle to stay in business. And yet the company has survived, all the while creating some of the most charismatic and quintessentially British pre-war and post-war sports cars."

# 9. The following is a DIRECT QUOTE from from Wagner, Rob L. "Classic Cars" page 89:

"The Rolls-Royce was not a particularly stylish car, reflecting the image of a conservative, well-mannered Englishman. And Rolls-Royce management disaproved of ostentatious designs by zealous coach builders."

The grille of the new Phantom is beyond vulgar. I saw two at the 2004 L.A. Auto Show. One had at least 24 inch wheels which made it even more tasteless.



# 10. BMW cheapened the new Rolls-Royce Phantom. It doesn't even have a real Rolls-Royce engine.

# 11. BMW has cheapened the new MINI Cooper. The new Mini doesn't even have a British engine. The new MINI convertible is a joke. Where is the tight chassis and cargo capacity with the convertible?

# 14. BMW cheapened the new M5. The last time the M5 was hand-built was 1995. Only the engine of the E60 M5 is built by hand. Here is a video of what makes the E34 M5 so much more special than E60 M5:

http://bmwe34m5.com/faqs/?theme=1&level=4&question_id_select=404&chapitre_id_select=59&document_id_select=3

# 15. BMW sold out and made an SUV. The X3 with its nasty plastic bumpers isn't even made at a BMW factory!

# 16. Ford using PAG as "mere luxury brands?" Um, right. The X-Type NEEDS to be dropped and was/is a bad idea. How is Aston Martin being used today, the year 2005, as a "mere luxury brand?" Please explain. Do you know ANYTHING about the millions of dollars invested in the aluminum XJ to make it a better car for customers and Jaguar? Would a purist object to an aluminum chassis?

# 17. What did you think of that three part interview with Henrik Fisker? What did you think about what he had to say about the new European pedestrian bumper regulations?

# 18. How is Land Rover heading towards the lifestyle market?

"Whilst there is no doubt that the reliability and safety of the marques have been improved, I feel all this has been done at the expense of the cars' souls."

# 19. How has Volvo's help with the safety of the Aston Martin DB9 and Land Rover LR3 come at the expense of the cars' souls?



# 20. If the Continental Flying Spur used the Audi A8's aluminum chassis, it would be the lesser of two evils (lighter weight non-Bentley chassis vs. heavy non-Bentley chassis).


I'll leave you with the following article (it says Jaguar will have an XK by 2010, but that isn't true because it will go on sale next year):

http://subscribers.wardsauto.com/microsites/newsarticle.asp?newsarticleid=2728595&siteid=26&magazineid=1004&instanceid=5121&pageid=824&srid=10088

p.s. Have you driven the new Aston Martin DB9 and/or the new Land Rover LR3? If so, what did you think of the car(s) in every aspect?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Thanks again for the detailed reply!

There is a detail about the development of the Jaguar XJ40 that sums up the change in times and mood. Whilst it was being developed in the 1970s, Jaguar was owned by British Leyland. To save costs, BL decided that it should have the Rover V8 in it (notice the theme with sharing engines?). However, Jaguar was dead set against the idea, so designed the engine bay specifically so the Rover V8 would not fit. That is why it took so long for the V12 version to come out, as some radical surgery had to be done.

For me, this sums up the spirit of the "old" Jaguar. They had their ideals and stuck to them. I wonder what those engineers would have thought about putting a diesel in the XJ?

I will respond to your excellent reply using your numbering:

1) Yes, I agree the V8 is a pure Jaguar engine, but its very introduction smacked of trying to cater for the American market where most luxury cars are V8s, and sixes are seen somewhat (wrongly) as poor relations.

2) Yes, Jaguar should build the F-type - in fact my friend put a depsoit on one 4 or so years ago when he first heard of it. It shows a return to the Jaguar ethos.

3) There is no doubting the quality of the engineering that has gone into the new XJs chassis, and it is a good car to drive. In fact, Jaguar traditionally were known for their innovations. However, as a whole, the car does not feel like a Jaguar, and it doesn't look too good either. In fact, it looks like a poor relation to the previous XJ.

That again shows the difference between the old and new Jaguar. In the past, the engineers were willing to sacrifice rear leg room and boot (trunk) space in their vision to create a beautiful car. The XJ is no longer beautiful.

It is a shame that the I6 and the V12 didn't pass emissions tests, but if they tried hard enough, they could have been made too. See re-introduction of the Bentley 6.75 litre unit (I loved that that happened).

4) I agree with all your points. Also, I think the birds eye maple veneer in the new XJ looks a little too grey in colour, compared to that in the previous one, but that is a minor point!

5) The DB7 is not that common in the US, but there are quite a lot of them in the UK. I see at least 2 every day in Edinburgh, and there are many many more in London.

This has been said before on other threads, but London really is a car-spotters paradise. If you haven't been I recommend it.

6) The new Vantage is a good car and will drive well, but it is the use of the name Vantage that is disagree with. It should have been saved for the faster variants rather than a standard model, and the cheapest one at that!

7) Ah - the XKSS - one of my true loves! You are correct, this was very expensive, but this was a road going version of the racing D-Type, so that made it much more expensive than the standard Jaguars. See also the XJ-220.

8) Yes, Aston has consistently lost itsd owners money, but, from your quote "all the while creating some of the most charismatic and quintessentially British pre-war and post-war sports cars." In Ford's quest to make maximum profits from the marque, I feel both the charisma and Britishness is being diluted.

9) I agree the grille is vulgar, but I actually like the rest of the car. It did take time to grow on me though.

10) Like Aston using the name "Vantage", I feel the use of Phantom by Rolls was incorrect. However, as the model using it is very highly priced and relatively exclusive (although not as exclusive as the old Phantoms) it seems more correct than Aston using Vantage on their cheapest tsandard model.

11) I agree with all your points here. Mini has been turned from a groundbreaking piece of design (the real Mini) into a fashion car, not dissimilar to VW's reintroduction of the Beetle. However, hats off to BMW for making it drive well though.

14) Yes, I am annoyed that the M5 is no longer hand built, and I feel the M cars became more mainstream with the introduction of the E36 M3 which is not as exclusive as former M cars. However, they have retained the "hot rod in a saloon car" philosophy, so I still repsect them. Unlike the Jaguar X Type diesel.

15) I agree, but to me (and this is a personal opinion), BMW and Mercedes have always seemed to be makers of lots of styles of vehicles. This needn't be a bad thing, as Mercedes can make vans and trucks and still retain its prestige. However, the British marques have always been different, and have concentrated on building "special" cars, rather than "general" cars, like the 316 and 190E etc.

16) Oh yes the X-type needs to be dropped. In fact I can't understand anyone buying one over a C-class or 3 series.

Yes, lots of money has been spent on the PAG cars, but I feel it is in the effort to make them more mainstream, and therefore make more money for Ford. In music it is called "selling out".

17) I agree. I recall watching a video about the designing of the new S-type, and the designers commenting that so many parts of it had to be designed in a certain way to meet regulations. It is a shame, but it still doesn;t mean that you have to create an ugly car.

18) Can you still buy a Range Rover with a hose down interior? No.

19) Because in the past these cars would have been designed with zero input from Volvo.

20) Probably - but it would have been tainted by Audi!!

Yes, I have driven the DB9. Whilst being a great car, it felt too much like being in a Mercedes or BMW, it didn't feel special enough. I also drove a 360 spider last week, and that had charisma in bucketloads. It is very hard to describe these feelings in words, but I urge you to drive these cars back to back and you will see what I mean.

I have not had the chance to drive the LR3 yet (Discovery to us Europeans) but they did manage to make it weigh in half a tonne heavier than the Range Rover. Now - that is something the old Land Rover would do so it is not all bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
518 Posts
Jaguar said:
Thanks again for the detailed reply!

There is a detail about the development of the Jaguar XJ40 that sums up the change in times and mood. Whilst it was being developed in the 1970s, Jaguar was owned by British Leyland. To save costs, BL decided that it should have the Rover V8 in it (notice the theme with sharing engines?). However, Jaguar was dead set against the idea, so designed the engine bay specifically so the Rover V8 would not fit. That is why it took so long for the V12 version to come out, as some radical surgery had to be done.

For me, this sums up the spirit of the "old" Jaguar. They had their ideals and stuck to them. I wonder what those engineers would have thought about putting a diesel in the XJ?

I will respond to your excellent reply using your numbering:

1) Yes, I agree the V8 is a pure Jaguar engine, but its very introduction smacked of trying to cater for the American market where most luxury cars are V8s, and sixes are seen somewhat (wrongly) as poor relations.

2) Yes, Jaguar should build the F-type - in fact my friend put a depsoit on one 4 or so years ago when he first heard of it. It shows a return to the Jaguar ethos.

3) There is no doubting the quality of the engineering that has gone into the new XJs chassis, and it is a good car to drive. In fact, Jaguar traditionally were known for their innovations. However, as a whole, the car does not feel like a Jaguar, and it doesn't look too good either. In fact, it looks like a poor relation to the previous XJ.

That again shows the difference between the old and new Jaguar. In the past, the engineers were willing to sacrifice rear leg room and boot (trunk) space in their vision to create a beautiful car. The XJ is no longer beautiful.

It is a shame that the I6 and the V12 didn't pass emissions tests, but if they tried hard enough, they could have been made too. See re-introduction of the Bentley 6.75 litre unit (I loved that that happened).

4) I agree with all your points. Also, I think the birds eye maple veneer in the new XJ looks a little too grey in colour, compared to that in the previous one, but that is a minor point!

5) The DB7 is not that common in the US, but there are quite a lot of them in the UK. I see at least 2 every day in Edinburgh, and there are many many more in London.

This has been said before on other threads, but London really is a car-spotters paradise. If you haven't been I recommend it.

6) The new Vantage is a good car and will drive well, but it is the use of the name Vantage that is disagree with. It should have been saved for the faster variants rather than a standard model, and the cheapest one at that!

7) Ah - the XKSS - one of my true loves! You are correct, this was very expensive, but this was a road going version of the racing D-Type, so that made it much more expensive than the standard Jaguars. See also the XJ-220.

8) Yes, Aston has consistently lost itsd owners money, but, from your quote "all the while creating some of the most charismatic and quintessentially British pre-war and post-war sports cars." In Ford's quest to make maximum profits from the marque, I feel both the charisma and Britishness is being diluted.

9) I agree the grille is vulgar, but I actually like the rest of the car. It did take time to grow on me though.

10) Like Aston using the name "Vantage", I feel the use of Phantom by Rolls was incorrect. However, as the model using it is very highly priced and relatively exclusive (although not as exclusive as the old Phantoms) it seems more correct than Aston using Vantage on their cheapest tsandard model.

11) I agree with all your points here. Mini has been turned from a groundbreaking piece of design (the real Mini) into a fashion car, not dissimilar to VW's reintroduction of the Beetle. However, hats off to BMW for making it drive well though.

14) Yes, I am annoyed that the M5 is no longer hand built, and I feel the M cars became more mainstream with the introduction of the E36 M3 which is not as exclusive as former M cars. However, they have retained the "hot rod in a saloon car" philosophy, so I still repsect them. Unlike the Jaguar X Type diesel.

15) I agree, but to me (and this is a personal opinion), BMW and Mercedes have always seemed to be makers of lots of styles of vehicles. This needn't be a bad thing, as Mercedes can make vans and trucks and still retain its prestige. However, the British marques have always been different, and have concentrated on building "special" cars, rather than "general" cars, like the 316 and 190E etc.

16) Oh yes the X-type needs to be dropped. In fact I can't understand anyone buying one over a C-class or 3 series.

Yes, lots of money has been spent on the PAG cars, but I feel it is in the effort to make them more mainstream, and therefore make more money for Ford. In music it is called "selling out".

17) I agree. I recall watching a video about the designing of the new S-type, and the designers commenting that so many parts of it had to be designed in a certain way to meet regulations. It is a shame, but it still doesn;t mean that you have to create an ugly car.

18) Can you still buy a Range Rover with a hose down interior? No.

19) Because in the past these cars would have been designed with zero input from Volvo.

20) Probably - but it would have been tainted by Audi!!

Yes, I have driven the DB9. Whilst being a great car, it felt too much like being in a Mercedes or BMW, it didn't feel special enough. I also drove a 360 spider last week, and that had charisma in bucketloads. It is very hard to describe these feelings in words, but I urge you to drive these cars back to back and you will see what I mean.

I have not had the chance to drive the LR3 yet (Discovery to us Europeans) but they did manage to make it weigh in half a tonne heavier than the Range Rover. Now - that is something the old Land Rover would do so it is not all bad.
The following is an email from Roger Bywater at [email protected] from this Jaguar website ( http://www.jagweb.com/aj6eng/index.html) :

"The V12 was too big and contained too much coolant to achieve the rapid warm
up required to meet modern emission standards. The AJ6/16 engine series was
the wrong shape and too bulky for modern Jaguars like the XK8 so was
replaced by the V8.

There is a popular story that the XJ40 was designed not to accept a vee
engine to prevent the Rover V8 being forced onto Jaguar, but it is a myth
really because the V12 was squeezed in - though not without a lot of
changes.

Roger Bywater."

The April, 2004 issue of "CAR" also said that the Rover V-8 could have been put in the XJ40.

1) I-6 engines aren't seen as poor relations unless they don't have much power. The 01-03 530i was given far more praise than the 01-03 540i. But the new 530i costs too much to justify 214 lb-ft of torque and 225 hp.

3) The new XJ's outer headlights are bigger than the inner headlights, like the 1968 XJ. Unlike the previous XJ

The new XJ's wheels are pushed close to the corners of the car, like the 1968 XJ. Unlike the previous XJ.

The new XJ's rear doors have a curve in them like the 1968 XJ. Unlike the previous XJ.

The 911's styling hasn't changed too much when you consider that it came out in 1960s. Same goes for the new XJ. It is just that it NEEDED more room. Period.




"In the past, the engineers were willing to sacrifice rear leg room and boot (trunk) space in their vision to create a beautiful car."

In other words, Jaguar used cared more about making a car look good than making a car look good and perform.

The Bentley V-8 is a different engine in a different and much more expensive car from a different company. Please show FACTS that the Jaguar I-6 and V-12 could have passed the emissions tests. Also, cite sources.

5) Two out of how many cars per day?

6) Since you haven't answered my earlier question about the cheapest Aston ever. Is the AMV8 the cheapest car Aston Martin has ever made? Show facts.

8) right...

9) This car won't age well.



10) Someone needs to make a Rolls-Royce look modern and classy. The Phantom's grille looks like an accordion.

15) BMW made some delivery vans, based on the Dixi, in the early 30s. In
the late 30s they made about 3500 military "jeep" like things with four
wheel drive and four wheel steering! We have one of those in the club.

They also made a few ambulances based on the 502 sedan. It looked like
a "sedan delivery".

That sounds like a lot of styles to me.


Not!

16) Jaguar is making AN ALUMINUM XJ! HOW IN THE WORLD IS THAT SELLING OUT?

17) Do you design cars?

18) Theng get a custom interior from someone else.

19) "Because in the past these cars would have been designed with zero input from Volvo."

Did Volvo engineers sneak into Aston Martin's factory and somehow sabotage the DB9?

Henrik Fisker pointed out that Volvo helped Aston Martin with the safety of the DB9.

The key concept here is SAFETY.

The Aston Martin DB9 and the Ferrari 360 Modena are two COMPLETELY different cars. GT car vs. high performance sports car. The DB9 will soon be available with a manual transmission.

If it felt like a Mercedes-Benz or a BMW, a lot of people would have found out about that. The Aston Martin DB9 does not have pointless gizmos like in a Mercedes-Benz or a BMW.

Please read this article with Henrik Fikser: http://autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=100485

p.s. What did you think about that autoexpress video of the V-8-powered Aston Martin?
 
1 - 20 of 73 Posts
Top