Re: nice article! this is a ford for wannabees imo (archive)

The man is obvfously ignorant of Jaguars and automotive history. The X-type hood is no shorter than the hood of the great MkII Jag. As for opulence, check out the interior of the great XKE. It is sad that Jaguar has relied on their Bentley of Wardour Street image for the last 30 years instead of the sports car and sports sedan image that formed the company. The X-type is more of a sports car than the XK8 and more of a sports sedan than the S or XJ no matter how many R versions of these models they make. The F type, on the other hand, should teach the X a move or two. Highlights...
"As carmakers chase the booming sales of the entry-luxury segment, they always run the risk of cheapening their good names. That's the big question for Jaguar, which launched a lower-priced car for the first time in its history."
"When I think of Jaguars, I picture sleek, sexy cars with opulent luxury inside. Even the hood ornament - the very recognizable leaper - seemed out of place lunging off the X-type's short hood. It's the equivalent of putting an elegant grandfather clock in a college dorm room. I really enjoyed this car - except for it unusually soft brakes - but Jaguar may have reached too low. The X-type would have made a nice Lincoln."

Follow Ups:

[ Follow Ups ] [ X-Type Message Board ] [ Msg. Board FAQ ]

Questions, comments, or problems, please visit the Roadfly help desk.