Saw a car today I'd never seen before...

A General Discussion forum for cars and other topics, and a great place to introduce yourself if you are new to NICO!
User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 54542
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

Yeah, that's news. I'm about as neck-deep in the automotive industry (as far as new stuff) as one can be.

I subscribe to a TON of news feeds, blogs, other forums, industry periodicals, and obscure publications, so by the time most new cars hit the market, I'm like, *yawn*.... but this one slipped past me.

Sitting in traffic, and this slides up alongside... Wow.

2013 Jaguar XJ Ultimate.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image


User avatar
IBCoupe
Posts: 7534
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:51 am
Car: '08 Nissan Altima Coupe 3.5SE
'19 Infiniti QX50 FWD
'17 BMW 330e iPerformance
Location: Orange County, CA

Post

That's like sitting in a jet plane. Only a much nicer jet plane than they'll ever let me near.

User avatar
MinisterofDOOM
Moderator
Posts: 30928
Joined: Wed May 19, 2004 5:51 pm
Car: 1962 Corvair Monza
1961 Corvair Lakewood
1974 Unimog 404
1997 Pathfinder XE
2005 Lincoln LS8
Former:
1995 Q45t
1993 Maxima GXE
1995 Ranger XL 2.3
1984 Coupe DeVille
Location: The middle of nowhere.

Post

YES! YES!

The XJ does things to my empty soul that VERY VERY VERY few cars manage to do.

The long-wheelbase model looks even more elegant since the added length perfects the proportions and lines.

The XJ does EVERYTHING so right. It's gorgeous outside. It's gorgeous outside. It's a blast to drive (according to everyone lucky enough to drive one). It's lightweight and handles amazingly well for its size. It seats adults in comfort. It invites you into the driver seat.

It's a luxury car for people who want to drive, not to be driven.

The ONLY thing I'm not sold on are the black c-pillars. They work on dark cars, but on lighter ones, like the one Greg posted, they're a little jarring.

I absolutely LOVE the nose. The sculpting of the sheetmetal is MARVELOUS. The headlights, hood, grille, fenders...everything comes together in a magnificently graceful yet aggressive bit of automotive artwork. The panel gaps are tiny, and placed JUST RIGHT to make the whole thing work. Any lesser automaker would have botched where the hood, grille, and headlight come together. But on the XJ there's only perfection.

Image

I want an XJL Supersport (I don't need the ultimate's luxo extras) more than I've ever wanted any Ferrari. It's the kind of car you can drive every day, anywhere, and not feel out of place, while STILL being a s***-unhinged rocketship that wants to make you smile AND a gorgeous work of art that brings a tear to the eye.

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 54542
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

I'm sure the occupants thought I was a loon, they had the windows down and were clearly enjoying our perfect AZ December weather... I just wanted to get a better look at it, and hopefully hear it accelerate from a light. No chance. I guessed "Jag" based on the side profile, but had to look it up when I got home.

Gorgeous design, and distinctive (which is worth something IMO).

User avatar
Dattebayo
Posts: 33288
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2002 10:04 am
Car: 2004 Nissan Frontier Desert Runner
Location: NE DC

Post

The front end kinda looks like "serious cat", and the rear is still too high (like all modern cars). I'm surprised everyone loves it so much?

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 54542
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

I'm sure they could lower the decklid for you short people, but I'm pretty certain it wouldn't pass 2013 FVMSS standards.

User avatar
Dattebayo
Posts: 33288
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2002 10:04 am
Car: 2004 Nissan Frontier Desert Runner
Location: NE DC

Post

AZhitman wrote:I'm sure they could lower the decklid for you short people, but I'm pretty certain it wouldn't pass 2013 FVMSS standards.
Yeah, 6 feet is short. All my friends are like 6'7" and drag a leg behind them. I still wonder why the rears need to be so high in order to pass standards like that, however... It makes seeing out the back a chore.

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 54542
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

I spent some time reading the Federal standards... seems there's a requirement for certain such vehicles which mandates rear cameras for cars which don't meet certain rearward field-of-vision criteria.

Wild guess, but I'd assume the Jag has quite the rearview monitor.

User avatar
Jesda
Posts: 39644
Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 1:50 pm
Location: STL, DTW
Contact:

Post

Jaguar traditionalists (and I) have complained about the car's rising height, but otherwise, its magnificent. With the extended wheelbase on the XJL the tall roof and sills look more proportional like MoD said above.

User avatar
Bubba1
Moderator
Posts: 16082
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:42 pm
Car: 2003 Nissan 350z
2024 Honda HR-V
2008 Toyota Corolla S
2001 Toyota Avalon XLS

Post

The Big Butt rear is a common styling trend these days. You guys touched on some of the reasons, but adding trunk space was not mentioned, which is expected for a plus sized luxury sedan. It's a beautiful design for such a big beast, certainly more pleasing to the eye than anything currently being made in Germany.

User avatar
SoCal-S13
Posts: 804
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:14 pm
Car: 1984 Z31 50th Anniversary Edition VG30ET
Location: Glendora CA

Post

Image

User avatar
krash
Posts: 4836
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 10:43 am
Car: 1993 Nissan 240sx Convertible
Location: Memphis, TN
Contact:

Post

I was never a total fan of the looks, especially the rear. But I've driven a few of them (2011ish), they are indeed very nice. I never gota chance to romp on them or anything, but cruising around isn't boring because of all the awesome that you're immersed in when you sit in the drivers seat.

User avatar
gwoods
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 11:57 am
Car: 2013 Infiniti M37x
1999 Nissan Altima SE limited 5spd
1992 Miata (soon to be turbo)
1965 Cj-5 with 327 v8
2012 Toyota Sequoia Limited
Location: Phoenix

Post

My XF has more trunk space and a wider backseat. In the XF 3 car seats fit in the back seat and the seatbelts line up. In the XJ/XJL the 3 car seats fit but they sit on top of the seatbelt. All the 5.0 supercharged V8's are the same motor. Jaguar gets the 470/510/550 hp rating with engine software and a 1.7lb + boost pulley. Although my XF SC rated at 470 hp puts down 448 at the wheels on a dyno.

The XJ is very light and actually faster then the XF with the same motor. The XJL is a tenth faster to 60 then an XFR.

User avatar
MinisterofDOOM
Moderator
Posts: 30928
Joined: Wed May 19, 2004 5:51 pm
Car: 1962 Corvair Monza
1961 Corvair Lakewood
1974 Unimog 404
1997 Pathfinder XE
2005 Lincoln LS8
Former:
1995 Q45t
1993 Maxima GXE
1995 Ranger XL 2.3
1984 Coupe DeVille
Location: The middle of nowhere.

Post

I agree that the beltline and decklid could come down a LOT, but for how high they are the car sure makes them look nice.

The car actually breaks a couple of my Cardinal Rules of Styling, but it does so with such finesse that it still works.

The biggest one is that the decklid is NOT level. It slants downward. This is a no-no by my book. But with the Jag's lines it still works okay. A flatter decklid could look better, but would have to be done VERY carefully or it would accentuate the already too-tall height. If the rake of the backlight was sharpened up a bit, and the c-pillars' bases brought forward just a little, you could flatten out the deck without raising it any.

This Jag is another example of the DETAILS making the WHOLE work. It's NOT the other way around, as you see on so many cheaply and lazily-styled and -manufactured cars. Admittedly it's more expensive to do the details right, but when they ARE right, I would argue that the SENSE of value they add to the car more than equals that investment. The fine stuff all works. It's stuff that most people don't notice, but the stuff I look at first. No Camry owner would even blink at half of it. But it's what makes the new Civic look like a heap of rat turds to me. And what makes this Jag stand in a class of its own.

In regards to this XJ versus its predecessors: it fixes my BIGGEST complaint from older models: the continental overhangs. The last-generation XJR was GORGEOUS, but it had about twelve feet of car behind the rear axle, and about nine feet in front. Those wheels needed to MOVE out to the corners. This new design has overhangs like a supermodel's bikini: tiny and barely noticeable. Just the way I like both.
gwoods wrote:My XF has more trunk space and a wider backseat. In the XF 3 car seats fit in the back seat and the seatbelts line up. In the XJ/XJL the 3 car seats fit but they sit on top of the seatbelt.
That is a bit odd, but with big sportluxes like this one, it's the LENGTH that really matters. Your car is designed to seat three children across in the back. The XJ is designed to seat two adults across. In fact, many cars bigger than midsize offer an option of dual benches with center console in the back, rather than a bench. Seating for 5 isn't important. Seating for four is.

User avatar
300ZXttZMAN
Posts: 6800
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 4:07 pm
Car: 1990 Nissan 300ZX TT 5spd pearl white

DD: 2008 Nissan Frontier NISMO pkg 4x4 Crew Cab
Location: Sulphur, LA 70665
Contact:

Post

Wow! That interior! :drool:

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 54542
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

I think two things are clear:

The XJ is styled for people who actually, as Chris mentioned, are CAPABLE of noting the styling nuances and the details.
The XJ is for people who would retch at the notion of having kids IN their Jag, much less strapping one (or three) car seat into one. It's a car for well-to-do, outgoing, social adults.

User avatar
gwoods
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 11:57 am
Car: 2013 Infiniti M37x
1999 Nissan Altima SE limited 5spd
1992 Miata (soon to be turbo)
1965 Cj-5 with 327 v8
2012 Toyota Sequoia Limited
Location: Phoenix

Post

Oh all three kids fit even with car seats but its easier with the XF to get them in and out. I drove S6, E63's and M56's before settling on the XF because it has the biggest backseat in a fast sedan.

I think the XJL SuperSport might be my next car, I paid wholesale for my XF and should be money ahead even as a trade when its coming off warrenty at 50k miles or July 2016. 0-60 is impressive but where the car really shines is above 60 it has so much torque. I have never driven anything that pulls so hard above 100 mph. 70-130 takes about 7 seconds.....and the larger XJL is faster

Image

I am needing to get on private property and shoot some 1st gear runs. I think I can spin the tires in 1st gear from anything below 30 mph.

User avatar
gwoods
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 11:57 am
Car: 2013 Infiniti M37x
1999 Nissan Altima SE limited 5spd
1992 Miata (soon to be turbo)
1965 Cj-5 with 327 v8
2012 Toyota Sequoia Limited
Location: Phoenix

Post

I felt kind of bad for Ford when this issue of Car & Driver came out, what with the new Boss 302 being the next review after the XJL Supercharged. This XJL is the middle level car with the rated at 470 hp version of the 305 cubic inch 5.0L supercharged V8. I say rated at because in my car I get 435hp uncorrected/448hp corrected at the wheels with this motor and its not a fluke. Many other XFSC owners have posted dynos from 420-450 hp with the car rated to produce 470hp. Anyhow, compare the Boss 302 #'s to the XJL SC hard to make a case for the BOSS except for price.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car ... f-contents

Image


Return to “General Chat”