New Jaguar XK revealed, what's your oppinion?

[Frank N. O.]

I just saw the pictures on a danish site, including the new front and well.... What do you think of it? Both personal oppinion and in relation to the brand identity etc.

Frank

[chris]

I like it very much. It has hints of the old XK, but it is modern looking as well, and not a grovelling retro imitation of the past.

It's apparently VERY light as well.

[Venom800tt]

I think it looks pretty nice. It has some Aston Martin in it's styling though (which isn't bad). I don't like the chromyness of the headlights though.... It makes them look funny imo.

[chris]

I have the same opinions on the similarities to the DB9 as the designer of both, Ian Callum. (he started off the DB9, and it was finished by Henrik Fisker). I suppose XXX Angel (a user here) would know more about that - he owns or owned an Aston DB7.

Basically the Aston Martin is very formal and business like, the Jaguar is more flamboyant, more swoopy and curvaceous. I don't think there will be any cross shopping between the two.

Jag also promises to keep prices of the new one near the old one, so that'll mean while it won't be inexpensive, it won't be hugely expensive like an Aston Martin.

I do see strong competition between the new-XK and the 997 Porsche 911. If what I've heard is right, the new XK will be nearly as light as a 911 Carrera, and have at least as much power and a bit more torque as well. So it should have sizzling performance even in the base non-supercharged 4.4L V8 form.

Jaguars advanced bonded and rivetted alloy-spaceframe construction techniques are really starting to pay off, the benefits are quite obvious.

This new XK could be the most revolutionary Jaguar since the extraordinary XK-E.

[VQ]

Jaguar's advanced bonded and rivietted alloy spaceframe construction techniques aren't original, Audi has managed to do it since the A8 came out, and they generally have more gadgets and features, (the A8L weighs about the same as a Calais for example). So Jaguar doing it isn't that big a deal IMO as they copy what other people do whereas Audi was first to use a similar technique.

I don't think it works as well, wasn't the previous XK platform shared with the DB7? Or just designers? I always prefered the look of the XJ-S the previous XK looked horrible at some angles and so does this. The XJ-S also had a longer model life then the previous XK which says something too...

[chris]

The differences between Audi and Jaguar alloy construction are best defined by the figures:

Jaguar XJ8L 4.2L V8: 1639kg
Length: 5215mm
Wheelbase: 3159mm
Width: 2108mm
Height: 1455mm
Turning Circle: 12.0 metres



Audi A8L 4.2L V8: 1850kg
Length: 5181mm
Wheelbase: 3074mm
Width: 1894mm
Height: 1455mm
Turning Circle: 12.5 metres

The Audi is smaller by quite a large margin as the measurements show, yet weighs a full 211kg more. That is the benefit of Jaguars construction techniques versus Audi's less advanced methods.

The Jaguar is also very strong, despite its lightness. I think I've got the figures both claim for structural rigidity somewhere here, if I find them, I'll include them.

The other think Audi doesn't do is it doesn't "glue" and rivet its chassis together. The big Jags (XJ, new XK) are effectively built in a similar way to modern airliners, and the Lotus Elise.

[VQ]

Regardless, it still not that big a deal, it's weight, why not go by how the thing looks and handles and the Audi A8 is the best looking big car.

[Frank N. O.]

Honestly, I don't like the new XK at all. The sharp edge over the rear-wheels really makes me think Aston Martin, and the headlights like a Chevrolet Cavalier from the mid 90's, and the rear-end.... no idea but it ain't pretty. I know the rear-end of the original XK8/XKR wasn't pretty unless you're a baboon, but it was still more elegant and dignified than this.
This makes me think of Sky's version of Ride of the Valkyries where they said it was made to sound like a small band overworked to try and play the music (which the buyers didn't understand though), this is how I see the new XK, like a underskilled companies attempt at copying the XK8 and making a new version of it.

Btw, I personally don't think 1500 kg is super-light, even by todays std's.

Frank

[Remko]

Poor Ian. ;) Every car journalist in the world brings up the similarities in styling between the XK and recent Aston Martins designs, it must have driven him insane. ^_^

Just like the concept shown last year, I think it's a very handsome looking car, if a bit familiar. ;) But I suppose Jaguar isn't really in a position these days to try any 'risky' designs.
Top Gear article and photos. (http://www.topgear.com/content/news/stories/80/)

[Justin Martin]

Hmm, not fond of the front, at least not from the pics. I'll need to see it in person and in a better color to decide. The rest looks good. -^

[FeZ]

Nah I dont like that one. I never liked the XK as it looks like an Aston DB7 which I also dont like. :D

I wonder why Ford does not keep the retro craze going and release a new E-Type, some sexy roadster with an ultralong bonnet )=)

[VQ]

http://www.sniffpetrol.com/issue062.html read the third article down.....
There was excitement at Jaguar this week with the news that top designer Ian Callum has finally designed a saloon car. Callum, whose work includes the Aston Martin DB7 coupe, the Aston Martin DB9 coupe and the Jaguar ALC concept coupe, had reportedly been struggling to translate his favoured design themes of a long thrusting bonnet, bold rear haunches and an elegant tapering tail onto a saloon body style, until now. "What he's done is very clever," said one insider. "Basically he's taken the same old design that he's been doing for the past few years and he's sort of drawn some back doors on it". A Jaguar source later denied that the reason for Callum's delay in creating a saloon design was because someone had lost the key to the photocopier room. http://www.sniffpetrol.com/Jag4door.jpg

[chris]

I really do feel sorry for them. Maybe the foul smelling vapours affected their humour too - gone down the toilet big time.

[VQ]

It is a weak joke, but it was done ages ago, thought it was appropriate.

Also Chris, does the Jag XJ8L have a CD figure of .27 like the Audi A8L does? What the Audi loses in weight, it makes up for in it's aerodynamic effieciency and it's lovely W12 motor....

[Remko]

Nah I dont like that one. I never liked the XK as it looks like an Aston DB7 which I also dont like. :D
You must be the first person I've met who doesn't like the DB7. :? This makes me curious of what you think is a good-looking car... :look:

About this new model, the sharp edges and details like the front-splitter do take some of the Jaguar-ness away; Jaguars were almost always smooth and curved. (except maybe the XJ40 saloon from the 1980's).

Maybe, like Citroën, Jaguar's first priority is making profit again, and then there'll be room for more daring designs... ;)

[Justin Martin]

What the Audi loses in weight, it makes up for in it's aerodynamic effieciency
...and then it looses it back again due to the mechanical inefficiency of its AWD drivetrain. Here's some quick calculations that I made of how much power is required to drive at a steady speed:

(the numbers in parenthesis include drivetrain losses)

Power needed @ 50km/h
XJ8 = 4.5kw (5.4kw)
A8 = 4.8kw (6.4kw)

Power needed @ 100km/h
XJ8 = 15kw (18kw)
A8 = 15kw (19kw)

Power needed @ 150km/h
XJ8 = 39kw (46kw)
A8 = 37kw (46kw)

Power needed @ 200km/h
XJ8 = 82kw (96kw)
A8 = 76kw (95kw)

Power needed @ 250km/h
XJ8 = 151kw (177kw)
A8 = 137kw (171kw)

I'm guessing the Jag is probably around a 17% loss, typical for an efficient automatic rwd car. As for the Audi, i've never heard a solid, reliable number, but most of the estimates i've heard for AWD Audis are well over 25%. So i'm being cautious and assuming a 25% loss on it.

Notice that you have to be going 200km/h for the Audi to have any advantage at all, and even at 250km/h, the advantage is small.

Part of that is also because the Audi's better drag coefficient (0.27 vs. 0.32) is partially offset by its larger frontal area (2.17 vs. 2.08) and higher tire drag. The higher tire drag is due to it being substantially heavier.


Don't get me wrong, I love Audi's, but Jaguar really pulled a coup with the new XJ. -^

[chris]

The other thing of course is weight itself, that has a impact on performance.

Not only will Audi's suffer through their AWD, but through sheer weight itself. Weight is always the enemy of high performance.

[VQ]

It's aluxury high speed car, not a high performance supercar, there isn't an RS8 badge on it, but I thought the XJ8L HAD AWD on it?

[chris]

XJ8's are traditional rear-drive, as is XK.

Those Jags are pretty surprising, the big ones how they handle. The lightness gives them surprising handling abilities. Normally you expect something so big to be really heavy, but an XJ6 weighing within 5kg of a small sports-car like a 911 Turbo (1540kg versus 1545 for the XJ6) is very surprising.

Probably not for nothing that engineers from rival car makers were so sceptical and incredulous when Jaguar announced the details for the new XJ for the first time. I know Benz refused to believe it could possibly be so light for that size of car.

[VQ]

It's only the X that comes in AWD? I thought the XJ could ahve it optioned.

[FeZ]

You must be the first person I've met who doesn't like the DB7. :? This makes me curious of what you think is a good-looking car... :look:


Of the modern ones I prefer the Vanquish and DB9 over the DB7.

My favorite Aston Martin is the Lagonda.

Best classic Aston the Zagato DB4GT, I even like that one better than the Ferrari 250 GTO.

Oh and the 80s-90s V8 Coupes I also liked even the strangely shaped Zagatos ^_^

I have been told many times that I have a "strange" taste ;)