Roadfly Home | Features | Car Review Videos | Car Reviews | Cars For Sale | Used Car Parts Classifieds | Forum | Car Review Archives | Forum Archives Index


09-01-2005, 02:27 PM

Just saw the the 2007 XK series and boy am I vastly underwhelmed. While the series one XK looked like a good beginning for the re-entry of a great line, it fell short, in my opinion, in the rear exterior styling, the interior, and lack of a standard or real SMG. Ergo the reluctance of me buying one. But the nose and hood on the XKR was right on target. Very retro and in keeping with the XK styling cues from the E type.

With the announcement of the new styling change last year, and rumors of borrowed tooling from the discontinued DB7 (a beautiful car by the way) Jaguar had a tremendious opportunity to launch something really special. From the rear and sides of the 2007, the car was redone extremely well, very Aston like. Even the interior was better. Everything that fell short in the series one. But come around to the front of the car and you are looking at a 1991 Ford Taurus. What were they thinking? They effectively had taken away the one attribute that linked the car to its heritage. The grill opening is to high taking away its low slung look, the generic air dam washes away any charater, and the headlights makes the car.....well, look hurt. Even if all Jaguar had done was to borrow the complete tooling from the DB7 and made a few "Jaguar" changes, it would have been a better looking car.

Now I'm thinking that the 2006 XKR Coupe doesn't look so bad. Before anyone chimes in to tell me to buy an Aston, the doubled sticker price, inherent and numerious mechanical breakdowns that plague the car, and severe depreciation of these cars have detered me. I actually like driving my cars and depreciation at $85K I could stomach, $170K is another matter. Plus I'm a Jaguar enthusiast. Everytime Jaguar comes out with a new model that looks like a Ford Contour, I walk in to my garage and stare at my 68 E-type OTS and ponder why has this great marque had lost its way. Hope I didn't offend anyone, but personally, I'm disappointed.

09-01-2005, 03:58 PM
I agree about the Taurus front end ruining what is otherwise not a bad package (perhaps a nose transplant could be made from a current XK!!!!) However, a lighter car with slightly more horsepower and perhaps a little less refinement (i.e. more of a sports car in terms of handling and exhaust pitch) is surely a big improvement. I love my XKR but I am now spending money to lower it and make it louder but it will still be a GT not a sports car. The new one looks to be a sports car and should be a step in the right direction. I think that the front end will work in some colours and in any case this is what we are stuck with...

09-01-2005, 04:41 PM
How does the front look like a Taurus? Looks almost exactly like the current car in front. Are you talking about the line thru the grill? I don't like it but that can't make the entire front look like a Taurus.

09-01-2005, 07:48 PM
What would they gain by using parts from the DB7? The DB7's chassis dated back to the 1970s XJS while the 2007 XK uses the new XJ's aluminum chassis.

09-01-2005, 08:13 PM
Itlooks like a sports car caracature in a Chevron poster. All this over an aluminum body to save 200-300 lbs? Get Carrol Shelby or Gordon Murray (McLaren) to take over design and engineering. I think they are available. I'm afraid that our cousins across the pond will not be able to 'muddle through' this one or 'fool most the people most the time' this time. And where will you fix the body? Not locally. And what if they split or crack after the warranty period? (I hope that the aluminum is not Nikasil coated.)

09-01-2005, 08:53 PM
The 2007 XK will have more interior and cargo room than the current XK along with more features. The current 6 series convertible weighs over 4,200 pounds.

Here is an article about Jaguar and aluminum (

(the link no longer works so I'll post it here)

September 2003

XJ is something different: The new Jaguar sedan, with its all-aluminum monocoque construction, will provide some challenges for body shops and technicians alike.

by Paul Weissler | Service Tech

Jaguar says its 2004 XJ is the world’s first mass-produced, all-aluminum “monocoque.” But maybe you are thinking, “Hey, that’s just for the body shops to worry about.” Well, there are things for technicians to realize too. Like any monocoque, including an airplane, the body panels form an important part of its strength. That means “creative time-saving” is not a possibility, such as cutting some little access panel in an out-of-sight location, then covering up the opening with some sheet aluminum and pop rivets.

Interestingly, the XJ is not welded (well, it has a few, primarily for specific issues). It is built with 3180 self-piercing, high-strength rivets and 394 ft (120 m) of structural adhesive (a one-step epoxy). Because the rivets alone would provide a much stronger assembly than the 5000 welds typical for a car of this size, the overall result is “belt and suspenders.” However, the adhesive really silences body vibrations, and that is reason enough for its use.

An old gag refers to a vehicle “held together by its paint job,” and there is a kernel of truth in that with the XJ. The aluminum body panels use a special alloy that is “bake-hardened” in the paint oven—to 165°C (330°F)—substantially increasing their strength (particularly resistance to dings). And the epoxy cures in that same oven.

The new model is 60% torsionally stiffer than the previous XJ, but thanks to all the aluminum, the car is over 200 lb (90 kg) lighter, despite greater size. The use of magnesium—which is as strong as aluminum but 30% lighter still—for the XJ’s seat frames and cross-car beam that supports the instrument panel and steering column also contribute to mass savings.

If a glued/riveted panel has to be replaced in a body shop, Jaguar has approved a two-step epoxy that cures at ambient temperatures. Happily, the front fenders and front bumper structure are bolted on for easier repair. The front-end module is said to be able to withstand a 10-mph (16-km/h) impact without structural damage being inflicted thanks to its impact-absorbing properties between the front-end module and body shell.

Made from injection-molded plastic, the bumpers of the new XJ are designed to withstand a 5-mph (8-km/h) impact without structural damage. “Lift-off” door hinges make removal easy if collision repair is needed, reducing time and cost.

As for those few welds, the roof is welded on because it helps produce a cosmetically superior appearance at the four corners. And a few parts from outside suppliers include welds. More importantly, the 26 body electrical grounds are supplied by welded-on studs and nuts because the glue is not conductive. If one of these grounding fasteners ever breaks off or suffers irreparable damage to threads, a replacement can be welded on unless an aftermarket repair kit becomes available.

Here is another article about Jaguar and aluminum.

more aluminum (

Aluminum underbody components are fastened together with aerospace-grade epoxy adhesives and some 3,200 self-piercing rivets to create the new XJ's chassis.

Jaguar uses magnesium for a cross-car beam that supports the dashboard and instrument panel. It is used with aluminum to create a lightweight steering column.

The new XJ is roughly 26 % bigger than the previous steel XJ yet the weight is kept down.

Another article

even more aluminum (

09-01-2005, 09:47 PM
All remarks aside, no one has seen the finalized car, only a display model. And no one has driven the car either. It therefore seems that neither positive exuberance or negative criticism of the car really mean much. Since press releases by the manufacturer are biased (and writers and magazines do not want to endanger their access to the manufacturer's advertising money), it is difficult to have anything other than subjective and speculative responses. For my $.02 worth, since I already have one of the great Jaguars, an XK8, I'd rather buy and restore an E-type for the same approximate $70-75K and then I'd have two great Jaguars. (At least they look like Jaguars).

09-02-2005, 12:00 PM
Kaplan, my comments were strictly limited to the car's styling. I'm sure the performance characteristics have been greatly improved and understand the benefits of an aluminum monocoque construction after 25 years of racing. But being a 60's Jaguar fan, I was hoping for a better tribute to the XK legacy. When the DB7 first came out, my first impressions was it looked more XK rather Aston. From a marketing perspective I believe that Jaguar would have done much better with just a mild tweeking of the old nose. Look at Ford's new Mustang GT, they finally got it right, and the dealers are selling them at a premium if they have any (V8 not the V6). And the car looks like a Mustang......a contemporary '68 in fact. So with all the "generic" looking performance cars out there these days with all the new technology available, wouldn't Jaguar be better positioned to rise out of the crowd by taking more styling cues from it's E-type center piece? I know I would be putting a reserve on a new '07 if that was the case.

And Jose, the nose still looks like a Ford Taurus to me :)

09-02-2005, 12:13 PM
looks of the New XK and the Adren XK. I like the Arden Kitted XK a lot better from the front.

Wish there was a way to graft the front of the Arden looks to the new model.

Carnival red
09-02-2005, 02:49 PM
*Get Carrol Shelby or Gordon Murray (McLaren) to take over design and engineering. I think they are available.*

Sell your Jag and by an old Cobra or a McLaren F1 instead!

*I'm afraid that our cousins across the pond will not be able to 'muddle through' this one or 'fool most the people most the time' this time. *

Yeahh right! Wonders were the bosses for FORD sits?? US??

*And where will you fix the body? Not locally.*

If anybody buy a car for a 70-80 k £, Do you really think they bother about this! Grow up! Ask Audi TT owners!

*(I hope that the aluminum is not Nikasil coated.)*

Its not Jaguars fault that UK and US oil companies sells crappy gas with high sulfur. Is it? Never had that problem in rest of Europe!

This is my humble opinion. If you don’t like the car please at least be objective in your comments!

09-02-2005, 04:27 PM
I'm with you -- got this month's Car and Driver and they actually had side-by-side pics of the coupe -- still prefer the existing to the new. And according to C/D, the woodgrain is "optional" -- they go for the industrial / aluminum look. While popular today, I still prefer the wood...

09-02-2005, 09:26 PM
The new Mustang is one of the few retro-styled cars that might age well. What is the next Mustang going to look like? A 69?

The new Mustang doesn't have to comply with new European pedestrian safety regulations.

The DB7 looks quite nice, but the grille didn't stand out enough which changed for the better with the new DB9.

09-02-2005, 10:53 PM
I don't see the taurus comparison except for maybe the line thru the grill. The hood is from the current XK for sure. :)

09-02-2005, 11:35 PM
Kaptain, Tell me if Jaguar re-badged the DB7 as an XKR, used the Jag drive train and rounded out the grill it wouldn't make for a tremendious Jag? They even got the headlights right.

I also understand about goverment safety regulations (still remembered those god awful 5 mph bumpers that were mandated back in the 70's) but look at the DB9, same regulations but it looks great.

While I'm not sure if the mustang would pass Euro standards, the point I was trying to make is that if Jaguar took more of the styling cues from Aston they would have had a run away winner with pre sales overtaking production for several years (as like the Boxster in the beginning or the new GT40 which is trading for $100K over sticker). The US market has gotten very affluent over the past decade with most of the wealth in the late 40's early 50's age group. As a result, This is the generation that grew up admiring the E-type. And now that we have the disposable income, we want one with all the latest technology including a GSP. As I have mentioned before, I have a 68 E-type which is a blast to drive. But not really a daly driver. Wouldn't be great to have a reliable, comfortable, and modern XK-E to drive to work? I think so.

I take it from your posts that you may be European, but do you work for Jaguar as well? If so, can you plaese pass on the sentiment, I have my check book in hand and I'm dying to buy one. :)

09-03-2005, 12:14 AM
Ian Callum designed the DB7, DB9 and the new XK. The front bumper looks odd on the XK because it's too pointy. Should have been rounded out more.

09-03-2005, 12:51 AM
Jose' I'm glad to hear that you finally see what I see. And maybe the direct correlation to the Ford Taurus is a bit unfair, but it gives off the same visual cues. From your comment that Ian Callum was the same designer for the Astons as well as the XK, it all makes sense now. I could see how Ian would have held back on the Jaguar as Aston would have been his higher end accomplishment relatively speaking. Plus utilizing all of the DB7 design would have suggested the provirbial "well running dry" coming from the same drafting table. Although the rear and sides come very close. Perhaps one day Jaguar will see the shortfall, pity though, they are so close.

09-03-2005, 01:38 AM
<i>Kaptain, Tell me if Jaguar re-badged the DB7 as an XKR, used the Jag drive train and rounded out the grill it wouldn't make for a tremendious Jag? They even got the headlights right</i>

The DB7 looks nice, but I don't think Jaguar should copy a ten-year-old design and use a very old chassis when they can use the new XJ's aluminum chassis. The new XK will spread costs due to the fact that it shares the new XJ's aluminum chassis.

I don't care for the side vents on the new XK or some other details, but I like it more than its rivals which all weigh more.

From top to bottom

D-Type, XJ13, E-Type, 2005 XK8, and 2007 XK

4Car went for a ride in a new prototype XK at the Nurburgring and seemed impressed.

The new XK has a more blunt front bumper to comply with new European pedestrian safety regulations. The DB9 came out before the new regulations take effect on October 2005 for new cars built in Europe.

In short, politicians and others think that auto makers should compensate for poor drivers and pedestrians. Europe has a lot of pedestrian deaths in car crashes relative to the U.S.

check these links

link one (

link two (

link three (

link four (

Here is an excerpt from a interview with Henrik Fisker, Aston Martin's Director of Design from 2001 until December of last year. Henrik Fisker finished the styling of the DB9 which Ian Callum started.

MotorSportsCenter: Does the V8 Vantage adhere to the new European safety law regarding pedestrians?

Henrik Fisker: The Vantage actually comes out before that law takes effect. Just to give a comment on that - and this is just purely my opinion, not reflecting on Ford Motor Company - but there is a problem today, in my opinion, where you have too many government officials that don't understand the car industry but are making up laws, with good intent, but they end up really lingering the progress of even safety. You are only looking at one aspect; when you force only one aspect on a car, like pedestrian safety, you force the company to spend all their time and resources on that aspect, where if you look at it in a more holistic way - like, for instance, what Volvo has done for years; they have always had an eye on safety. Where does it make the most sense to improve safety? Volvo is the one that came out with a lot of [safety improvements] first, not from government regulations at all. That would be, for me, the better way to do it.

This pedestrian safety restriction, I think, is a waste of opportunity. And it's going to cost a lot of money, and it is money that will be paid for, in the end, by the consumers.

I think there are more innovative ways to deal with [safety]. Maybe some of that will come out; there will be some adjustment - that's my prediction. Unfortunately, we will spend a lot of money in the next few years, but then somebody will realize that maybe that was not the bet ideas, and then there will be some new ideas coming up.

Bentley Flying Spur's plastic grille designed with pedestrian safety in mind

(The Flying Spur went into production before the new regulations took effect)


Posted Date: 5/12/05

Observers may be astonished that the wire mesh-looking radiator grille on the $165,000 Bentley Continental Flying Spur is plastic.

Bentley is not cost-cutting or trying to save weight on the 5,456-pound sedan.

The grille is designed with pedestrian safety in mind, said Engineering Director Ulrich Eichhorn. On impact, the grille breaks, and the relatively soft radiator behind it then deforms, he said.

Bentley said it has not designed the grille to help the 2006 Flying Spur meet European Union pedestrian safety regulations, which require a bigger crush zone between the person being hit and so-called hard points such as the engine.

“It was to meet our own standards,” Eichhorn said.

He doubts that the EU’s new pedestrian safety regulations will do much to protect pedestrians.

“No matter how you try to soften it, a car is hard,” Eichhorn said. The “really bad impact” is the secondary impact, when the pedestrian hits the street.

Said Eichhorn: “The best thing is to avoid the crash."

I would love a new Jaguar sports car, but I'm not sure they could make one from the XJ.

09-03-2005, 09:23 AM
The European pedestrian crash standards have no force here in the States, which is Jaguar's largest market. A U.S. specification face valence/grill could have been designed for export and a European spec. front valance/grill could be put on for that market. What would be the problem with that? They would be paid for it wouldn't they?

09-03-2005, 04:41 PM
The DB7 looks nice, but I don't think Jaguar should copy a ten-year-old design and use a very old chassis when they can use the new XJ's aluminum chassis. The new XK will spread costs due to the fact that it shares the new XJ's aluminum chassis.

10 year old design? Hell, I'm looking at coping a 40 year old design with current technology. I've read all your articles in your post (sure you are not in the automtive industry?) and have come to the conclusion that the British car industry has some serious problems. This is much like the Federal mandate of 5 mph bumpers back in the 70's here in the states. No matter how much you dressed up the car, it was still ugly. A very dark time in US car production indeed, and as you may recall, imports from Japan almost wiped out the big 3 with Chrysler being bailed out by the Federal government and AMC liquidating (yes the gas crises had some to do with it as well). But to have an across the board requirement that all cars must comply by '07 including the specialty manufactures like Chateram and Morgan is ridiculious. How many cars do they make? 200?, 300 tops? And I expect that 90% are exported out of the country. Can you imagine a Lotus Super 7 with a bulbus nose cone? Same with the XK's, last time I was in Britain, everyone was driving XJ's, Damelers, Fords, and a small number of Bentleys and Rolls', so how many XK's stay in the country? As someone mentioned in this thread, the bulk of the XK production comes into this country, so wouldn't it be smarter to set a limit of the number of cars sold in the UK as the determining factor for the safety requiremnet? But I fear that the Parliment is much like Congress, unless you have tons of money to lobby, you have to live with it. But wouldn't it be nice if the XK could truely live up its predecessor.

09-03-2005, 10:06 PM
Right you are Allen. If they can make left-side drivers for American export, they can put an export only to U.S. front valance on them too. The problem is because the epidemic of ninnies has become world-wide. Will the 'Nininites' prevent Arden from producing an alternative body kit complete with an 'anti-pedestrian who isn't looking where the hell he/she is going grill'? Jaguar is facing the 'perfect storm' with sabatoeurs in the European Union, a falling U.S. dollar, and strong competion from their historic 'friends' in Japan and Germany. Oil Prices anyone? The dealers are awash with excess large sedans and XK's. Potential buyers are putting their money in real estate, not new Jaguars-(but they are buying the other brands-especially Lexus.) The Taurguars are now coming off leases in droves and have nowhere to go. Discontinuing the X type will not help this for a while. Strangest of all to me is Ford's leadership or lack thereof. Ford is piling it in with a retro Mustang and 'calling out' Ferrari with the retro GT-40, but does not see the opportunity to graft the retro Jaguar alphabet themes -'C', 'D', 'E' DNA unabashedly in their new design. Jaguar needs to produce something different--like a 'sports car'. Just wait and see what happens when the Soltice gets a V-6 turbo or a small alloy V-8. You see GM hired Lutz -a 'car guy'(Viper) and now Caddy, Corvette, and Pontiac are rolling. Isn't Carol Shelby available? Do you have to by a Porsche or a Lotus Elise to go racing and leave the Jaguar at home? Why?

09-04-2005, 08:45 AM
I'm sure the Jaguar chiefs have all heard these echos, even if they don't actually task somebody in their marketing department to follow this message board (if they don't - they should!). However, with present day "global market" thinking it is most unlikely that they'll pander to styling requests from one particular single market, even if it is presently the biggest. One of the problems from Ford's Jaguar acquisition was the double claim on the "Oval" shape - Jag's mouth and Ford's Emblem. I guess this is why there is seeming parentage between something you guys call a NASCAR TAURUS (btw What does this look like?) and an XK8, even though the E-Type (X-KE) actually predated them both by quite some margin.

European laws have no force in the United States, true - but they do have precedence in Europe where the car is made and where the majority of sales will probably be placed.

I'm still smarting from what the Ralph Naders of the world did to my old MGB - raised the ride height, and strapped on some lumps of black rubber front and back so as to comply with some dubious pork barrel lobbying politicians.... which is what I suspect is going on in Brussels.
As I've expressed before, I think we should all reserve judgement on this car until it's been thoroughly test driven (initial reports are very good) and has been seen with ones own eyes. I'm keeping the faith, so far!

09-04-2005, 11:27 AM
I doubt you will see an ugly Ferrari, or Porshe, etc. its a poor excuse for lack of styling. Saleen, Corvette, and zillions of other still look great. If Europe doesn't want to build cars someone will.I it a built in euro deal of will it include imports? the_cat

Carnival red
09-04-2005, 12:31 PM
Talking about getting emotional… I think you are right about this one TGRACEN … *laughing*

Honestly! How many of you guys/girls are sitting there and nodding your head in respect to TGRACEN and approve to this b-sh-t?

09-05-2005, 04:26 AM
Is the next Mustang going to look like a 1970 model?

The new Ford GT looks great, but the 2006 GT "Heritage Livery" doesn't really build on the GT.

On display for the first time at the 2005 Concorso Italiano, amidst a sea of red-painted competitors, a blue and orange-striped Ford GT rose above the rest, just as it did in 1968 and 1969 capturing victory at Le Mans. New for 2006, the limited-edition Ford GT ‘Heritage’ paint livery harkens back to the JW Automotive/American Gulf Oil-sponsored Le Mans-winning Ford GT racer. This unique paint scheme, one of the most memorable looks in Ford racing history, features a Heritage Blue with Epic Orange-striped exterior and four white ‘roundels’ allowing customers to apply the number of their choice.

09-05-2005, 04:31 AM
Both the Porsche Cayenne and Ferrari Enzo are ugly.

09-05-2005, 06:21 AM
I've seen lots of ugly Porsches and Ferraris.... Cayenne - 612, Testarossa from the nineties, 348 etc..

And since I don't like open to the navel shirts, chest wigs and gold medallions - its unlikely that Corvettes, Vipers or Saleen things will attract my future attention. Carol Shelby?? Who she? - No don't reply, I know all about this guy that stuffed a big V8 into the tiny AC Ace all those years ago.... but other than some quirky efforts along the same theme, that he rolls out from time to time, what has he really done of automotive importance? Shouldn't we be talking about Jaguar cars, Bill Lyons, Lofty England, Mike Cross etc... on this message board?

09-05-2005, 01:35 PM
I was mostly refering to the frontal un-BLUNT-ness so to speak of the other cars. Can't they just graft and XKR nose to it or something - It just tooooo Tarus !! the_cat.

09-05-2005, 04:45 PM
Carroll Shelby and Roy Salvadori won the 1959 24 Hours of Le Mans in an Aston Martin DBR1, Aston Martin's only overall win at Le Mans.

He also took on Enzo Ferrari.

Cobra Ferrari wars (

And transformed the Mustang from a secretary's car into a performance machine.

09-07-2005, 07:27 AM
I suspect the new European pedestrian safety laws are at least partly to blame for the out of place nose. The DB7 and DB9 were both designed before these laws came into effect.

An interview with Callum in a recent Jaguar magazine, indicated that the perfectly oval grill goes back to that of the E-Type and was a distinctive feature of Jag. Maybe Taurus, and a few Buick and AM models are copying Jag?

The nose and overall lines looked a lot better to me when I saw the ALC in person than they did in pictures. There appear to have been a number of changes made, especially to the nose, in the picture you attach from that of the ALC. Who knows what the final version will look like.

09-07-2005, 05:23 PM
Dear Mr. R. Hankey. The 'perfectly oval grill' in the new car has, in my opinion no relation to the E-type and is hardly distinctive. It is rather a distinctive feature of the TAURUS!. (Look at it's height.) The sanctioned blather about E-type grill and 'hatchback' is pure P.R. (B.S.). It looks like the new Eclipse more than anything else. P.S. The engine in the new Lexus IS 350, a 3.5L, puts out 306 BPH @ 6400 RPM and 277 ft./lbs. torque @ 4800 RPM. Naturally-aspirated. Light weight. Too bad the Cat can't put that in a smaller aluminum body coupe. There is a lack of imagination and a unrealistic assessment of the market's competition by the "Greens". Their trajectory curve is beginnig to fit the Railton,Frazer-Nash, Healey, Triumph, Sumbeam, etc. I saw the 'new' car twice and had my hand on it's stationary wheel. If you think it looks good, I suggest that you park it next to something else and take a long look first. Maintain your XK8 well, and you'll understand how fortunate you are when you park it next to this 'new' one. (All this for just 300 lbs. less weight?-I'd rather see more horsepower and more cylnders.)

09-07-2005, 05:47 PM
It's not just the weight savings that will help the car but the stiffness of the body. The lower weight improves the power to weith ratio. The car will be MUCH sportier in handling. I suggest read this.

09-07-2005, 11:32 PM
Dear Jose. The first paragraph in the linked article exactly periphrases what I have been writing in these threads for months--almost word for word. Also, in my previous tract, I wrote that the Lexus ISO 3.5l (V6) would be better for this car--I'm glad they picked up on the hint by using their own 3.5! Yes-- I'm glad they heard me when I told their factory rep to get rid of the chrome door latches, chrome side 'gills', and not put the gill vents above the beltline--but the face panel is not meant for the U.S. and it should not be sent here in left-hand drive export cars. How many out there in XKR/8 coupes complained of body flexing? In these cars, the suspension is luxury-tuned as a GT. These cars were simply tuned differently for a different market in a different time. These changes are reversable. You can tighten-up your XKR/8 if you want to. Decreased mass helps to accelorate and make tighter turns-- until a drunk in a more massive (F=mv/dt) SUV sends you to the E.R., with the help of your stiffer car's body that may not 'crumple' around you as well as the old XKR/8 'iron maiden's did. Somehow, a lot of this would be forgivable if the car at least looked like a Jaguar! It will only be about as noticeable as a Corvette or a 350-Z, but no one will even know what it is! Then there is that undefinable quality-'character'. What ever it is, Phill Hill must know--he says that from his first ride to today, his favorite car has been the 1938 Alpha Romeo 8C 2900. The point: Will the new XK 'feel' like a Jaguar? A back-seat ride with a professional driver on a familiar course is hardly a test. When I sit in the back seat while my wife drives, will I tell you it isn't scary?

09-08-2005, 05:10 AM
Mercedes-Benz seems to think more hp will make a car better, but that isn't the case.

Colin Chapman, the founder of Lotus, said to add lightness for more speed which will obviously work with the new XK.

09-08-2005, 07:34 AM
The XJ has already been proven to be safer than the car it replaces. Insurance companies agree also. Maybe they should send another front bumper to the US but will they? Motortrend has some nice pics this month of the front of the car.

09-08-2005, 09:00 PM
It seems that the more people complain, the more the design changes--keep it up!

Roadfly Home | Car Reviews | Forum Archives Index