|
I've no doubt it will end up in the top end of the VED rates and be described as a planet killer by the tree huggers. I doubt you will pick one up for less then £35 grand in the UK so this is really a car for the rest of the world and not Brits in the depth of recession and looking forward to even more tax increases . Trouble is, the rest of the world has been stung by Jag, Land Rover in the past and ended up with poorly engineered vehicles, laden with un fixable faults.
|
|
Correction... I see you will not pick one up in the Uk for less than £80 grand... well, you won't be able to move for them.!
|
UK on-the-road prices:
XJ 3.0 V6 Diesel Luxury £52,500 LWB £55,500
XJ 3.0 V6 Diesel Premium Luxury £55,900 LWB £58,900
XJ 3.0 V6 Diesel Portfolio £62,900 LWB £65,900
XJ 5.0 n/a V8 Petrol Premium Luxury £62,900 LWB £65,900
XJ 5.0 n/a V8 Petrol Portfolio £69,900 LWB £72,900
XJ 5.0 s/c V8 Petrol Supersport £85,000 LWB £88,000
I think Mr X is being unnecessarily negative here. Jags (and Land Rovers too) are now vastly improved vehicles. And anyway, we're pulling out of recession, aren't we? Won't be quick, won't be easy. But if we talk ourselves down we're dead and we might as well hand the keys of the country to the Chinese.
The first thing Cameron needs to do is get a new XJ instead of that Lexus GS he was seen getting into yesterday. And the first thing Mandleson needs to do is let Jaguar have some of the money it needs. (But he can't do that, because Brown won't let him.)
HJ
Edited by Honestjohn on 10/07/2009 at 09:53
|
The second thing he will need to do is make sure they don't throw it in to the highest VED rate (£450 ) whilst shouting ' planet killers '.
By the way, do you remember the launch of the very first Freelander Mr HJ ?. List price of £13,000 for the entry model. Lasted about a year before the cheapest one you could buy started at £15,000...... They all ways seem to start with attractive prices .
Edited by Mr X on 10/07/2009 at 10:08
|
As for VED rates... the 3.0 V6 diesel (probably 90% of sales) knocks out 184g/km, which puts it in band I and therefore £200 per annum next year.
That seems very low to me for a huge car, equipped with a V6 engine and an autobox.
I reckon it will be a roaring success for Jag, can't wait to see it around.
|
|
|
|
The front and side are superb, but the C-pillar is a mess, and as for those rear lights - some cheap American or Japanese reject. No that's it, the big Lancia with the unpronouncable name.
A very brave change from the past that almost works. I'm sure it will be superb to drive, though.
|
|
Are Daimler going to do a version?
|
|
|
but the C-pillar is a mess >>
I see that on another car magazine website they have photoshopped the picture to make the black trim next to the rear screen body coloured. Looks so much better.
There's the first mod for the lucky XJ buyers, then!
|
|
|
|
The first thing Cameron needs to do is get a new XJ instead of that Lexus GS he was seen getting into yesterday. >>
I agree, but saving the planet in a Lexus is surely more important than saving UK jobs in a Jag ;-)
|
|
|
The first thing Cameron needs to do is get a new XJ instead of that Lexus GS he was seen getting into yesterday. And the first thing Mandleson needs to do is let Jaguar have some of the money it needs. (But he can't do that because Brown won't let him.)
That's our money you're talking about, HJ -- not Gordon Brown's or Mandelson's.
Why exactly should ordinary taxpayers be stomping up to subsidise a product which costs 2.5 and 4 times the average wage in this country?
There are plenty of fundamentally-healthy small businesses in this country struggling to survive as their credit lines suddenly evaporate. I'd far prefer to see my taxes used to help those small businesses through this recession, rather than throwing yet more money at the big businesses which make the most noise.
|
Why exactly should ordinary taxpayers be stomping up to subsidise a product which costs 2.5
Because we also need jobs in this country!
|
>> Why exactly should ordinary taxpayers be stomping up to subsidise a product which costs 2.5 Because we also need jobs in this country!
Indeed. But jobs are being lost up and down the country in small businesses which are being driven to the wall by the credit squeeze. A small business going under doesn't make headlines, but it's jobs lost like any other, and those small businesses aren't exporting their profits the way that foreign-owned outfits like Jaguar have to do.
Public money for Jaguar rather than for small businesses is a way of bolstering the foreign-bound profits of a business whose customers (at £50k to £80k a throw) are the least-badly affected by the recession. The money can be much better used elsewhere, rather than by subsidising toys for the financiers whose antics got us all into this mess in the first place.
|
NowWheels - small businesses thrive on the back of big business.
Every £1 spent by a large company to a local small company results in at least a further £3 being spent in the local economy.
Lose the big boys and the small boys suffer - that's exactly why small business are failing all over the Country.
|
|
|
>>Public money for Jaguar rather than for small businesses is a way of bolstering the foreign-bound profits of a business whose customers (at £50k to £80k a throw) are the least-badly affected by the recession. The money can be much better used elsewhere rather than by subsidising toys for the financiers whose antics got us all into this mess in the first place.
It is sad the UK is unable to have a car industry or indeed any other industry except for Tescos
But that is the fault of Tony Blair/Gordon Brown and offers dating back to Maggie and the banking system
|
|
|
|
|
Why exactly should ordinary taxpayers be stomping up to subsidise a product which costs 2.5 and 4 times the average wage in this country?
how about jobs and trade
|
Thank you, Westpig. The new XJ is a potential rival to the S Class. I know a Chinese student whose dad would have bought one if it had been available a few months ago. Instead, he bought an S600. British workers producing a fine product in strong demand throughout the world. Now I regard that as a refreshing change symbolising a brave new Britain rather then the nasty place riddled with pseudo-socialist vilification and penalty culture that I live in.
HJ
|
if we do something well as a country...and building luxury cars is definitely in that category...then we should be supporting it, not knocking it. Get others abroad to buy our products, rather than the other way around.
if a govt grant can help with new technolgies, then so be it...think forwards
if we can produce something that other people want and pay our workers a decent wage in the process, then we can hold our heads up high in the process
i don't suppose many people who build tube trains in this country can afford to buy one, but they still build them..:-)
|
i don't suppose many people who build tube trains in this country can afford to buy one but they still build them..:-)
Do they? - I see the latest high speed trains come from Japan - how depressing!
Edited by boxsterboy on 10/07/2009 at 13:34
|
|
|
|
I saw the newspiece last night and have looked at the website.
There is one shot showing an internal view towards the front of the car. The car has a sweeping veneer which runs along each door and around the back of the dash at the base of the windscreen - beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but IMHO it looks stunning.
I look forward to seeing one in the metal.
|
|
Where have the traditional 4 headlights gone!
|
|
In the bin, along with everything else that held the old XJ back! :)
|
Well, I liked them!
I do like the XF style as well though, but the 4 headlight 'Jag' look was one of the few remaining distinctive looks that defined a car.
I've been watching Torchwood this week and have drooled over the nice black XJ the slightly creepy government bloke (frobisher?) is driven around in.
|
Ugly and soulless. End of.
William Lyons eat your heart out. :((
Why they thought they needed to change the design, I just do not know. It looks now like 1,000,000 S-class Mercedes. Ugh.
|
Why they thought they needed to change the design I just do not know.
Maybe because the old one was 40 years out of date and wasn't selling?
|
|
I rather like the posh new instrument cluster.
|
Why they thought they needed to change the design I just do not know. It looks now like 1 000 000 S-class Mercedes. Ugh.
Because the old one was dated and not selling as well as it should. Underneath the old XJ shape was a very good car. Also the old design compromised interior space.
Maybe you don't like the more modern look, but we have to admit the S-Class outsold the old XJ's by some considerable margin.
|
Nice, healthy debate.
HJ
Edited by Honestjohn on 10/07/2009 at 16:54
|
Having spent a week in Shanghai and Dalian. JLR have a great chance over there if they market it well. Saw a few jags but plenty of RR's. In Dalian, there were plenty of Disco's also and they are car crazy and buy nothing less than top spec as they need to be seen driving something swanky.
The XJ by looks alone can really stand out if they market it well out there
|
>>The XJ by looks alone can really stand out
Assuming you refer to the "new" one, only if you like bland, soulless motors.
The XK8 has style and panache, like the XJS.
|
Almost any decent Jaguar of any age or model would be a nice car to go about in, except perhaps in cramped urban back streets.
The new XJ looks pretty good to me. Even the rear - the worst aspect of both cars - seems more successful than the XF's. Its general proportions anyway in those website pics seem better than the XF's. It certainly doesn't look bland or soulless to me. A tiny bit faux-classy perhaps, but Jags were always like that (and these VW Bentleys are even worse, positively garish).
I look forward to seeing some in the flesh.
|
I see it doing the same sort of job as the old SS Jaguar Two and a Half Litre of 1936 that, with its Bentley-like radiator, had huge road presence for more sensible money than a Bentley.
HJ
Edited by Honestjohn on 10/07/2009 at 18:25
|
There may be less difference in true engineering quality now than there was then between a Bentley and a 'poor man's Bentley', HJ. Not that a poor man could maintain either of them.
That SS Jaguar was made in a 3.5 litre pushrod version too, and there was even a 1.5 I seem to remember. It continued to be made until about 1949 or so, the last version being the Mk V which had recessed headlamps and rear wheel spats. By then the twin-cam XK engine had appeared and was soon installed in the Mk VII which replaced the Mk V.
Had a friend at school in Plymouth in the early fifties whose father had a 3.5 litre, pre-Mk V Jag. Big chrome headlights... Later my Irish uncle had a succession of Mk VIIs and their descendants. But he kept them for ages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
