Find Reviews by Make:
29 Comments on “Better?...”
Read all comments
Latest Car Reviews view all
Latest Product Reviews view all
Recent Comments
- Lou_BC: @Carlson Fan – My ’68 has 2.75:1 rear end. It buries the speedo needle. It came stock with the...
- theflyersfan: Inside the Chicago Loop and up Lakeshore Drive rivals any great city in the world. The beauty of the...
- A Scientist: When I was a teenager in the mid 90’s you could have one of these rolling s-boxes for a case of...
- Mike Beranek: You should expand your knowledge base, clearly it’s insufficient. The race isn’t in...
- Mike Beranek: ^^THIS^^ Chicago is FOX’s whipping boy because it makes Illinois a progressive bastion in the...
Car Reviews By Make view all
New Car Research
Who We Are
- Tim Healey
Managing Editor - Matt Posky
News and Social Media Contributor - Timothy Cain
Sales Analyst - Murilee Martin
Junkyard Finds Author - Matthew Guy
Contributor - Chris Tonn
Contributor
- Adam Tonge
- Bozi Tatarevic
- Corey Lewis
- Jo Borras
- Mark Baruth
- Ronnie Schreiber
Something about this car looks cheapo and the dildonic gearshift doesn’t help.
Much.
That’s got to be the fastest Monte Carlo SS that GM has ever produced!
But, headlights aside, I have to admit the XF is growing on me.
RF — you left out the part about 510 horsepower and 460 lb-ft of torque.
http://tinyurl.com/8mgayn
Hot, hot, hot, hot. I hope Jaguar’s more-moneyed clientele think the same, though it’s a pity all the profits will go to India.
You can keep your Cadillacs, BMW’s, Mercedes-Benzes, Audis and Lexuses.
I’m sticking with Jaguar. That is a gorgeous car and a possible replacement for my X-Type.
KnightRT,
I have no problem with India picking up the profits, as long as UK people are building these cars, I’m happy. I support UK companies. I buy Shell and BP petrol, buy GSK and PZ Cussons products and have a UK mobile phone provider.
RX,
Jaguars have far superior interiors to any other luxury car. It’s what Jaguars are famous for (that and their ride quality). My X-Type is beautiful!
KnightRT: “though it’s a pity all the profits will go to India.”
Wow, I’ve never seen the words “Jaguar” and “profit” in the same sentence without some mention of a snowball’s odds of survival in Hades.
Anyhow, it’s a beautiful car.
Yeah! Better!
Still feels a bit to Lexus GS-like (though THAT car came from the Kensington concept built on an XJ’s chassis). And I don’t like the chrome surrounds on the air dam. What good is an air dam that is so porous anyway?
The iPod gear selector thing can’t be great in an emergency as we’re all pretty much neurologically wired for something moving generally fore and aft on a console – I’d suspect.
KnightRT :
Hot, hot, hot, hot. I hope Jaguar’s more-moneyed clientele think the same, though it’s a pity all the profits will go to India.
Ha Ha Ha ! What Profits?
I love it!
The XF has got to be the most gorgeous car in that segment. The XF-R just amplifies the car’s aggressive look.
I think it would be an awesome design if they just fixed the headlights, the grill, and lowered the beltline.
KatiePuckrik, you must have been lucky. My friend had an X type and the thing spent 50% of its leased life in the shop. It was an unbelievable piece of crap, and this is coming from a guy who drives a Chrysler!
Is there a follow up shot to that first pic? The one in which the Jag appears to be in oversteer on the wrong side of the dotted just a few feet from a guard rail. I mean c’mon… you know no production Jag has been driven with that sort of gusto since the MKII was raced in BTCC.
I thought I was looking at a Chinese Buick until I read the comments. It’s an attractive car but not very distinctive, especially for a Jag.
You’re toying with us, right?
That is the new LaCrosse.
Right?
Oh, no. It can’t be the LaX.
The grill on the LaX doesn’t look like the car was sucking a prune.
Kinda makes you nostalgic for tail fins. At least, there was a day when sedan weren’t all the same, the identical, no difference, exactly the same.
SherbornSean :
January 9th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Wow, I’ve never seen the words “Jaguar” and “profit” in the same sentence without some mention of a snowball’s odds of survival in Hades.
I lol’d at that one!
RX :
January 9th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
Something about this car looks cheapo and the dildonic gearshift doesn’t help.
Have you looked at a BMW shifter lately? The best description I saw for it was “Martian Phallus”
I wonder if it would get as much love if it was a Buick Wildcat.
My first thought: “Boy Buick has gotten their act together. But that hood- a total ripoff from Jaguar!”
Not good for Jaguar when your styling cues are ripped from a Buick Insignia.
Someday I hope to be this good when using Adobe Photoshop.
The car is actually parked in all the pictures (if not an actual layer from a different picture) and the Gaussian blur is added in. Note how there is no body roll – especially in the sideways pictures.
Still, pretty good pictures.
The designers must have been at an all-nighter after a party when they did this. They meant to rip off the front of a Subaru Legacy 3.0R but designed it up-side down and they ripped off the Lincoln MKS rear but watched “The Transporter 3” before hand and had to pull the tailights apart to make it more Audi-ish.
But yes, its fast. And it looks good. But its still as much a Ford as saturn is an Opel, no matter where its made.
I thought it was a Buick, too.
Nice Buick, Jag.
“Nice Buick, Jag.”
Funny how things change. First Jag I ever had anything to do with was a Mark VII sedan that my friend’s father had. Great styling, lovely-smelling leather seats, wood instrument panel. (This was the car that they forgot to design in a gas tank, so it had a little one in each rear wheel arch with all the associated plumbing and switches for two tanks.) Anyway to get to the point, he traded it for a new (57, I know I’m dating myself here) 220S sedan, complaining that it drove too much like a Buick.
I see a black and a silver XF in the Loop on a regular basis, and they are just absolutely gorgeous in person. They look incredibly sleek going down the road. Pictures do not do the XF justice.
I thought it was the new LaCrosse too. Oops.
Doesn’t look anything like my old XJ-S V12, which might not be a bad thing. Shame about the nose on this new rig though – just doesn’t seem Jag enough to me.
I like it, have liked it since launch, but the myriad of fiddly electronics terrify me. When mainstream luxury brands struggle to make an electronics laden car last more than 5 years, the thought of a high-tech Jag is simply a horrifying prospect. I hope the Indians can inject some much needed reliability, ala Ford takeover in the 80s.
The XF has true gravitas in the metal. Pics don’t do it justice.
This car is beautiful and I can’t understand the comparisons with Buick. You could compare this car’s design DNA with the 2006 XK and, to some extent, to the Aston Martin DB9. But it’s a sedan, in a lower price range. It was designed by the same head designer (Ian Callum), and, while worse then their original concept (particularly the headlights), it’s still very attractive. I’ve seen at least 5 on the road (including one _white_ XF, which is surprisingly striking), and they do not look like any other sedans rolling around here in NorCal.
It is stubby and looks like a Pontiac G6 to me… Not terrible, but not low slung enough and sleek.
I’d consider getting one, maybe if they ever fix the headlights.
Wait, this is a Jaguar? I wondered why a Buick was shown with the tail out. Makes more sense now. But seriously, for those of us who don’t frequent the news or this site as often as they’d like…how about a hint of the make? It’s not in the JPG rollovers, nor is the marque distinguishable from the photographs. With squinting, it looked like the Cadillac emblem almost. I was lost without reading the comments for folks to tell me what it is.