Bring sexy back? ...or Gaguar?

August 27, 2007 12:35 PM

Press embargo be damned, pictures of the 2009 Jaguar XF are popping up on the Internet. Perhaps the final design has strayed too far from the original concept. Hopefully there are better designers in India.
posted by punkfloyd (58 comments total)

Such angst over a car design.
posted by smackfu at 12:37 PM on August 27, 2007

Gaguar.
posted by autodidact at 12:39 PM on August 27, 2007 [2 favorites]

Previous thread on the embargo thing.
posted by ninjew at 12:43 PM on August 27, 2007

Were the aiming for a "luxury Taurus" look?
posted by spaltavian at 12:51 PM on August 27, 2007 [2 favorites]

Is it just me, or do some of those shots make this fancy new jaguar look like a Sebring with a faulty body-kit tacked on?
posted by eurasian at 12:52 PM on August 27, 2007

blandish.
posted by R. Mutt at 12:52 PM on August 27, 2007

Robocop wouldn't be seen dead in one of those...
posted by WinnipegDragon at 12:53 PM on August 27, 2007

Max Fischer: What do you call getting a handjob from Mrs. Calloway in the back of her Jaguar?
Magnus Buchan: A fucking lie.
Max Fischer: You think I got kicked out because of just the aquarium? Nah, it was the handjob. And you know what else? It was worth it.
posted by NationalKato at 12:56 PM on August 27, 2007

Were the aiming for a "luxury Taurus" look?

That's just bull.
posted by srboisvert at 12:56 PM on August 27, 2007

Looks like a Lexus humped a Mustang, to me.
posted by mrbill at 12:56 PM on August 27, 2007

Robocop would"t even bleed for one of these.

But that's just because I'm her secret sockpuppet.
posted by Sk4n at 12:56 PM on August 27, 2007

Seems like all cars are starting to look the same: like a turd, tapered at both ends.
posted by Eekacat at 12:57 PM on August 27, 2007

Jaguargh! Although it does appear to have a low coefficient of draguar.

(FPP needs taguar. Flaguar as not the best of the interblaguar.)
posted by Krrrlson at 12:58 PM on August 27, 2007 [3 favorites]

Sorry Robo - I've just had a bottle and a half of Meursault and am feeling rather fine right now.

Good night all.
posted by Sk4n at 12:59 PM on August 27, 2007

faguar
posted by cellphone at 12:59 PM on August 27, 2007

Don't make me feel uncool by liking it.
posted by Keith Talent at 12:59 PM on August 27, 2007

Maserati - lite
posted by four panels at 1:00 PM on August 27, 2007

Don't make me feel uncool by liking it.

It's alright, kid. You got talent.
posted by NationalKato at 1:01 PM on August 27, 2007

So much of car styling simply tries to appeal to a very dumb sense of sexualized aesthetics which then creates its own dumb feedback loop.

While focus groups and customer feedback are very important for evaluating the useability of products and how well things work, I've always suspected that letting the consumer drive aesthetic issues is moving into dangerous territory.

A familiar example might be the audience tests studios use for films -- a good film gets dumbed down to a mindless fairy tale because it's got a sad ending. (I know at least a couple of people that aren't interested in a movie unless it has a happy ending.)

This car does look like a mish mash of several popular cars already on the market -- it's a well executed exercise in design compromise between a boatload of features, but it's nothing that really moves car design culture ahead. A lot of people working on this are going to look back at it in 6 months and just shrug their shoulders and go, 'meh'.

Creative types are supposed to be the experts at what they do. You wouldn't trust an artist do an engineer's job of building a major bridge any more than you would trust an engineer to create art significant to the culture. This is not to say creative types operate in a vacuum.

too much typing this is not an essay. i stop now.
posted by Extopalopaketle at 1:01 PM on August 27, 2007 [2 favorites]

So what, someone looked at the concept and said "I like the concept, but it needs to be blander".
posted by delmoi at 1:02 PM on August 27, 2007

Granted it does kinda look like a Quattroporte in the front, and an Aston in the back. But then isn't that the way forward? Nothing revolutionary, just solid derivitive theft of other brands DNA? Got to give Ford credit for swiping their look from two very nice brands, rather than say swiping the styling from a Bangled BMW and bland Lexus?

And for the record, that'd be the best looking Lexus made, if it were a Lexus.
posted by Keith Talent at 1:03 PM on August 27, 2007

Is this something that requires too much money and foolishness to understand?

And "press embargo"? Do those quaint things still exist in this age of manufactured "leaks" and outright begging to get coverage?

Somewhere, someone or something is being used as a tool. It might be me, it might be you, it might be MetaFilter.

Be careful which tasks you choose to accomplish.
posted by loquacious at 1:04 PM on August 27, 2007 [1 favorite]

I just threw up a bit.
posted by dominik at 1:05 PM on August 27, 2007

ah... this is what I was thinking of...

Homer Simpson-designed Car.
posted by Extopalopaketle at 1:07 PM on August 27, 2007

"It's a great looking Lexus, though."

I would have said it's not a bad looking Altima, except Nissan isn't going to make Altimas that look like that anymore.
posted by Dipsomaniac at 1:07 PM on August 27, 2007

The car they didn't build: the XK 180 concept car.
posted by Termite at 1:10 PM on August 27, 2007

What a boring car.
posted by Artw at 1:11 PM on August 27, 2007

You mean a new car that is neither unique nor carrying any new features such as a hybrid drive or other technological innovations? Must be an American car. This was cool 5 years ago. Now if I am not getting a car designed for sport (e.g., BMW, Porsche), I want a hybrid drive. I want automatic parallel parking. Hello American car designers. Stick your nose out there and be innovative, being a constant industry laggard, even in luxury markets, will get you nowhere.

The only people this is new too is my 60 year old aunt whose current 8 year old Jaguar doesn't have anything digital. This is not a market that any car company should be targeting.
posted by geoff. at 1:11 PM on August 27, 2007

You mean a new car that is neither unique nor carrying any new features such as a hybrid drive or other technological innovations?

You'd buy a hybrid from Jaguar? Seriously? I'd let them go through three or four iterations before rushing to buy a British electrical hybrid.
posted by Keith Talent at 1:14 PM on August 27, 2007 [2 favorites]

I will continue to spend 1/10th as much in order to get from Point A to Point B.
posted by aerotive at 1:15 PM on August 27, 2007

4-door Hyundai Tiburon?
posted by blue_beetle at 1:16 PM on August 27, 2007

From the roofline and the way the front end is reminiscent of the current Audi line, I'd have guessed it was the new VW Passat.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 1:23 PM on August 27, 2007

> I'd let them go through three or four iterations before rushing to buy a British electrical hybrid.

"Here's a thought experiment. Imagine you are an astronaut, strapped in your capsule awaiting launch. Just as the countdown reaches T minus 3 seconds you notice a small plaque on your instrument panel reading 'Electrics by Lucas.'"
- Gordon Jennings (motorcycle writer, in a review of a Triumph)

posted by jfuller at 1:23 PM on August 27, 2007 [3 favorites]

Is it just me, or do some of those shots make this fancy new jaguar look like a Sebring with a faulty body-kit tacked on?

No, it's not just you.

Mehguar.

I'll continue to lust after a Tesla, thanks.
posted by Zinger at 1:30 PM on August 27, 2007

It's remarkably true to the concept without looking anywhere near as good as the concept.

That is exactly what I thought, TWF
posted by vorpal bunny at 1:34 PM on August 27, 2007

But is, nevertheless, a beautiful car.

No, no it's not. It's Detroit once again fucking up.
posted by Mick at 1:36 PM on August 27, 2007

Looks more like a Ford than a Jaguar.
posted by unmake at 1:37 PM on August 27, 2007

There have been an awful lot of mash-up cars recently but I'd never have thought that a Jaguar's front end would have me thinking "Buick? Subaru?" I've seen the interior, though, on a 1964 Pontiac GTO.

There isn't a single original line on the car. The only cool thing is the pretty green illumination on the large instruments.
posted by jet_silver at 1:42 PM on August 27, 2007

Now if I am not getting a car designed for sport (e.g., BMW, Porsche), I want a hybrid drive. I want automatic parallel parking.

You have very different ideas about "sports" in relation to driving. I think of it more as the maximum power hooked up to the minimum amount of functionality. I realize that's changed for the better over the years, but cars that park themselves are not for designed for enthusiasts. They're designed for people who are afraid of cars.
posted by yerfatma at 1:54 PM on August 27, 2007

So the back end is a BMW, the front end is a Volvo/Aston Martin mashup, and overall it's forgettable?

Gee, I'm glad I don't spend that kind of money on cars. I'd be disappointed.
posted by davejay at 2:11 PM on August 27, 2007

That vaporware car will never satisfy your lust.

I know a guy. It's not vaporware. You'll be surprised. If I'm wrong, I will regret writing this.
posted by davejay at 2:12 PM on August 27, 2007

yerfatma, I think you missed the not in geoff.'s sentence.
posted by MrMoonPie at 2:15 PM on August 27, 2007

One more: if you go back and forth between the concept and the actual model, you'll see firsthand how small design "corrections" -- a little smoother here, a little more rounded here, clean this up a bit -- can convert a nose that says "I'm a wolf on the hunt, outa my way" to one that says "I'm a dog that will do anything you say, just feed me and don't beat me."
posted by davejay at 2:15 PM on August 27, 2007

Gaguar, jaguargh, mehguar... blahguar?
posted by anthill at 2:27 PM on August 27, 2007

I don't like it because it's grey!
posted by soundofsuburbia at 2:46 PM on August 27, 2007

You have very different ideas about "sports" in relation to driving. I think of it more as the maximum power hooked up to the minimum amount of functionality. I realize that's changed for the better over the years, but cars that park themselves are not for designed for enthusiasts. They're designed for people who are afraid of cars.

No I am saying the market is pretty evenly divided between luxury cars that offer all sorts of technological innovations (hybrid, auto-parking, turning your car on from your cell phone, etc.) and luxury cars which the primary emphasis is on driving. While some want both, that is an extra luxury. My point is that when people are buying in the market, the ideal consumer you want is someone who is looking to buy the car in addition to luxury. Modern cars are so well built, it is not as if a Jaguar ride is that much better than a Corolla. So where is their selling point? Why would I pick a Jaguar over other cars in the market? It certainly is neither not for innovation, reliability or the driving experience.
posted by geoff. at 2:47 PM on August 27, 2007

Of course the elephant... err... jaguar... lurking in the room is the XKE, a sexy 46 year old model with front and rear disk brakes, monocoque body, independent rear suspension and a top speed pushing 150 mph. You can get a pretty red one on Ebay (Buy It Now) for $85,900. I’m sure it’s a steal at only about $80,000 more than it cost brand new.

Or, if you want to go faster, last longer and get killed less, you could blow your $85,900 on a brand new Porsche 911, another design that first saw the light of day in the early sixties.
posted by Huplescat at 4:05 PM on August 27, 2007

Looks like a tarted up Volvo.
posted by ranchocalamari at 5:06 PM on August 27, 2007

isn't that the way forward? Nothing revolutionary, just solid derivitive theft of other brands DNA?

For Jaguar? Jaguar? Their own DNA is dripping with make-pretty-babies goodness, and they're stealing susceptible-to-bad-backs gets-a-paunch dies-young DNA?
posted by bonaldi at 5:38 PM on August 27, 2007 [1 favorite]

What an ugly downturn for Jaguar design. This design really invokes next to nothing of the great past Jaguar designs, which for the brand, has always been the key to success..or at least, not failure.

My first reaction was a Mazda bred with an Austin Martin.

Unless the car is something amazing in the interior and under the hood, this won't amount to much other than a nice guide for (if) future designs on what not to do.
posted by Atreides at 6:35 PM on August 27, 2007

That is the new Jag?

Sweet Jesus ...

Nah, the C-Type, the D-Type and the E-Type are Jaguars, this thing is a boat anchor looking for a chain
posted by Relay at 6:53 PM on August 27, 2007

The World Famous: Were the aiming for a "luxury Taurus" look?

You've never actually seen a Taurus, have you?

Once or twice during my ownership of one. I clicked the link, it's a bland, boring, fairly unattractive car that, externally, could be an attempt at "up branding" most existing larger sedans. Notice I didn't say anything about the features or what's under the hood. Would "luxury Sable" gotten your knickers in less of twist?
posted by spaltavian at 7:50 PM on August 27, 2007

Great, another car which I can't buy. Not that I'd want to.
posted by hadjiboy at 9:19 PM on August 27, 2007

When I was high school, a guy who lived a couple doors down had one of these (1966 Jaguar S-type) - same color, even - and damn, was that a beautiful car! Once in a while he let me help him wash it.

This new one is way uglier.
posted by rtha at 9:24 PM on August 27, 2007

Looks like a tarted up Volvo.

Isn't that basically what it is?

One could take the devil's advocate position that if it were, that would be a good thing. Since, you know, Jags haven't worked all that well in recent years.

(Which reminds me of what Tom Magliozzi once said: "The Jag will be in the shop most of the time, but when you're driving it -- you'll be driving a Jaguar, baby!")
posted by lodurr at 7:49 AM on August 28, 2007

... and come on, guys, this is a distinct improvement by comparison with the designs from right before the Ford buyout. They were trending in a super-ugly direction. Ford has actually improved the look, by my reckoning.

Needless to say, the look is nothing near what it once was. I hate to say it, but it might be time to put Jag out of its misery. (Says the guy who owns no stock.)

(I was always quite fond of the mid-70s J type. It just seemed like the epitomy of that particular body style. I still don't think anything tops that, for me.)
posted by lodurr at 7:53 AM on August 28, 2007

J type?
posted by punkfloyd at 8:26 AM on August 28, 2007

Probably not the right designation. I meant the 4 door sedan, which was usually "XJ" or "XJS" in the model name.

And I'll clarify that I mean it's the epitomy of 4 door (4+seat) sedans, not of all cars. There's no 4 seater that I can think of that tops it for me.
posted by lodurr at 8:35 AM on August 28, 2007