Glasses projected residuals are better than the E-class.That will underwrite values for a certain amount of time so I can only conclude you are wrong.
Have you driven one or even seen one ?
adam
Glasses projected residuals are better than the E-class.That will underwrite values for a certain amount of time so I can only conclude you are wrong.
Have you driven one or even seen one ?
adam
TonyVianoAmbiente
Active Member
Residuals will be OK for the first couple of years because supply of new models will be too low to meet demand. Then demand will drop because the usual Jaguar design faults and poor quality control will become apparent, the competition will introduce new and updated models and this flashy but totally anonymous car will go the same way as most Jags before it.
Not one single Jaguar model has made any money under Ford ownership. This one won't either.
But wait - there's hope! Three years from now, in 2011, TATA will announce the Jaguar XF2, with a new engine replacing the rusty old nail in the XF, a restyle that makes it look slightly more like a Jaguar, and renewed promises of better quality control. The motoring press will all love it, and report that "this is the XF that Jaguar should have made when it was first introduced in 2008."
The trouble is, the novelty will have worn off, and not enough people will buy it. It will continue to lose money for TATA, and so the cycle continues.
You've obviously not been paying attention. Jaguar topped the prestige sector in the US JD Powers a couple of years ago and in the dealers survey they beat Lexus.
Supply and demand will have little to do with residuals with this model for the first 3 years. The projected residuals are the basis for the rates of the various finance deals. If the projected figures are over optimistic Jaguar will have to underwrite dealer PX 's to maintain values. In other words do as other manufacturers like Saab have done and create an orderly market.Mercedes on the other hand have created an unstable market by offering large discounts on certain models to shift stock and not worried about the depreciation consequences.
If you read the foreign press the XK has had good reviews beating various German models and on occasion Aston Martin.The aluminium chassis is technically very advanced and the car sells well.
BTW LR are packaged in the sale with Jaguar and they are a profitable company which is more than can be said for most of the worldwide motor industry.
adam
hawk20
MB Enthusiast
Surely, Supply and Demand will have everything to do with residuals for all who buy this car on anything other than a lease with a guaranteed residual? That's life.
TonyVianoAmbiente
Active Member
It worries me that Jaguar will have to pay out if the residuals don't meet the highly optimistic projections. This car is so anonymous that very few people will be interested in buying a used XF in three year's time at the high residual prices being quoted.
OP
OP
gary350
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2004
- Messages
- 809
- Location
- south wales
- Car
- slk 230 & slk 350 (sold) Jag XF 2.7 Premium Luxury
You seem to have the car hung drawn and quartered before it gets on the road. Your last sentence does not make any sense, if the car is selling well and residuals are good you are saying no one will buy it, rubbish
gary
saw the car in the flesh today ..
must say that the lights look like an afterthought.
the car looks sleek but it really doesn't look special .. just another modern car, nothing distinctive
thought the interior had too many different types of materials, although I did really like the light wood
must say that the lights look like an afterthought.
the car looks sleek but it really doesn't look special .. just another modern car, nothing distinctive
thought the interior had too many different types of materials, although I did really like the light wood
Catch 22 isn't it? Too quirky and no one buys it, too bland and no one wants it.
To my mind at the moment none of the manufacturers have anything to really tempt me, they've all taken the safe route.
The C Class is a nice evolution but not visually as dramatic as say the previous E Class to the current W211.
And trends always get followed, one car gets smoked tail lights they all do, massive front lights, large grills and so on.
Mike
Last edited:
TonyVianoAmbiente
Active Member
To use a quote from Car Magazine's "Good, Bad and Ugly" from the 1980s,
it's "as flash as a rat with a gold tooth".
TonyVianoAmbiente
Active Member
I wish I could remember! It was 20+ years ago .... But the phrase stuck in my mind, and I cannot think of a more apt description of the XF. The phrase is of Australian origin, and it was probably used by the Australian journalist Steve Cropley who worked on CAR magazine for many years.
EDIT: It was the 1980s Cadillac Seville!
Brand image is very important. Jaguar's mistake with the XF is that, however attractive it might be (which is about personal taste after all), it doesn't look like a Jaguar. It could be from any one of a number of brands.
Yes, it is sleek. But it could be a Ford, a Toyota, a Mazda, a Lexus, a Mitsubishi ... it looks so much like the Mondeo it is unreal.
You don't have to design a throwback to the past to make it a true Jaguar. They made a huge mistake with the S Type by aping the Mark 2 but delivering a mediocre driving experience.
But look at what Chris Bangle has achieved for BMW! Bangle has designed a whole new range of cars that look almost nothing like the previous range. But they still look like BMWs. Like them or hate them, they could only be BMWs.
The current Mercedes range owes almost nothing to the 190, the E Series or the "pagoda" sports coupes of the 1960s. But they are all identifiably Mercedes models. They could not be anything else.
That's why I am so disappointed with the XF. You would never know which brand it came from.
Last edited:
Top Gear Review.
Before I'm accused of taking this out of context I should say TG like, even love the XF in the full review, however this is the engine bit:
The XF uses the same 204bhp 2.7-litre twin-turbodiesel that works so well in the XJ, and it's just as good in the new car.
There's a hint of old-school clatter at idle, but beyond that, it's smooth, unruffled and, with 320lb ft of torque, thumpingly effective in the mid-range. The combined average fuel economy figure is 37.6mpg, and it emits 199g/km of CO2.
Good, but BMW is better. Never mind the brilliant twin-turbo 535d, the cheaper, single turbo 530 diesel is faster, lighter, more powerful and more efficient too. Damn.
Now my feeling is why on earth can't Jag produce a more modern engine - the worrying thought is money, they ran out. And the BMW engines have been around for 2-3 years now. It just frustrates.
Mike
Before I'm accused of taking this out of context I should say TG like, even love the XF in the full review, however this is the engine bit:
The XF uses the same 204bhp 2.7-litre twin-turbodiesel that works so well in the XJ, and it's just as good in the new car.
There's a hint of old-school clatter at idle, but beyond that, it's smooth, unruffled and, with 320lb ft of torque, thumpingly effective in the mid-range. The combined average fuel economy figure is 37.6mpg, and it emits 199g/km of CO2.
Good, but BMW is better. Never mind the brilliant twin-turbo 535d, the cheaper, single turbo 530 diesel is faster, lighter, more powerful and more efficient too. Damn.
Now my feeling is why on earth can't Jag produce a more modern engine - the worrying thought is money, they ran out. And the BMW engines have been around for 2-3 years now. It just frustrates.
Mike
Jaguar doesn't produce the engine it's a Ford/Peugeot unit. The comparison is unfair as the engine is smaller than the 530 D. A better comparison would be with the BMW 525D which is actually 2993cc and produces 197 BHP. In other words the Jag produces more power per cc.
adam
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2005
- Messages
- 7,612
- Location
- Cheshire, UK
- Car
- C270CDi Estate (late 2004 facelift model) - Bought 2005, Sold 2022.
That BMW engine has been around for quite a few years - the Peugeot / Ford V6 is much newer.
No doubt about it, BMW does know how to do a good engine.
Take a look at this video, which is the more cat like on the road.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNT9q1WN4fI
I don't think there are any similarities between the E39 and E60 5-series BMW's apart from the Hofmeister kink and kidney grill.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofmeister_kink
People have just become used to the radical E60 design due to various elements being widely copied by other makes.
adam
Last edited:
I'm a BMW fan but their diesels are unreliable.Turbo and swirl flap problems are commonplace. If the swirl flap is injected you need a new engine.
I expect a modified version of the Range Rover V8 diesel will be shoe horned into the XF at some point soon.
adam
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2005
- Messages
- 7,612
- Location
- Cheshire, UK
- Car
- C270CDi Estate (late 2004 facelift model) - Bought 2005, Sold 2022.
I meant good from a driveability, performance and fuel consumption point of view.
I've heard BMW have issues with the 4cyl diesel 320, but not heard of widespread probs with the 6cyl versions.
The Peugeot / Ford V6 needs pretty expensive driven belt work at some point - not sure of the mileage - it was 100K, I think. Which will be unwelcome for anyone buying a highish mileage used car with that engine fitted.
