[EricP]

If I'm going to buy a sports car, I want a damned manual tranny.

However, people who can afford to buy this car aren't buying a sports car, they're buying a status symbol. Most of them wouldn't be able to use it, and if they could, they certainly couldn't shift it properly (i.e. heel-toe). So, an automatic or ****** paddle gearbox is put into the car, because it won't prevent the people with the money from buying the car, which a manual could.

 

[dffman2001]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhd812 I think the new jag looks nice but probably drives like every other jag, heavy and heavy. Not that I would mind owning one...

Jaguars are not heavy. In fact, handling is one of the greatest virtues of a Jag; William Lyon's famous motto: Grace, Pace, Space is embodied by all of its vehicles. Its vehicles have always been sportier and handled much better than its competition.

As for the manual transmission; it is simply not fitting for a car of this character. Although Manual transmissions do have its advantages; in many cases of todays vehicles do not need them any more. First, cars today have enough power that the manual no longer provides benefits of significance in this area. I say this because in the era where 175hp was huge (Mercedes Benz 300SL gullwing; won tons of races, loads of power for the time) the manual was important because it allowed the driver greater control of the RPM of the engine such that it could be kept in the optimal, toriquiest range. These days, motors have plenty of power and flat torque curves. Second, lots of the american population doesnt know how to drive manual; automatics have become a way of life. Lastly, its unfitting of this kind of car; this is a luxurious, but sporty car, part boulevard cruiser; and is not the kind where the owner would bring his car on the track on weekends.

I have an X-type and 3 other british marquees in my garage and I would have to say that the realiabilty is very "british". It handles well, fit and finish is wonderful, 4 wheel drive gives great traction, steering exceptionally communicative; BUT, the transmission was repaced under warrenty within a year. Powertrain failures is a very major concern, but the new cash inflows from ford should help to slowly reduce the amount of problems per vehicle. Don't prejudice Jags just because it is under the umbrella of Ford; every car company knows how to build a good car, its just if they carry it out or not. Unrealiability stems from cutting corners from use of poor materials, unskilled labour, or insufficient quality control. At the price point we purchase verhicles, there is only so much one can do to ensure reliability.

what is an exotic car without exotic problems?

 

[zowie]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dffman2001 As for the manual transmission; it is simply not fitting for a car of this character. Although Manual transmissions do have its advantages; in many cases of todays vehicles do not need them any more. First, cars today have enough power that the manual no longer provides benefits of significance in this area. I say this because in the era where 175hp was huge (Mercedes Benz 300SL gullwing; won tons of races, loads of power for the time) the manual was important because it allowed the driver greater control of the RPM of the engine such that it could be kept in the optimal, toriquiest range. These days, motors have plenty of power and flat torque curves. Second, lots of the american population doesnt know how to drive manual; automatics have become a way of life. Lastly, its unfitting of this kind of car; this is a luxurious, but sporty car, part boulevard cruiser; and is not the kind where the owner would bring his car on the track on weekends.

And you missed another reason -- some of the computer controlled automatics have become excellent over the last 5-10 years, shifting fast and figuring out the right gear virtually all of the time and can actually offer better performance than a manual with some drivers.

I currently drive a stick but I'd want that jag as an auto.

 

[dffman2001]

Quote:

Originally Posted by zowie And you missed another reason -- some of the computer controlled automatics have become excellent over the last 5-10 years, shifting fast and figuring out the right gear virtually all of the time and can actually offer better performance than a manual with some drivers. I currently drive a stick but I'd want that jag as an auto.

Indeed, very true. The car with the sequential automated clutch transmission is noticibly faster at shifting than I am on the manual, however, it does not approach any where near as smooth as manual or on an automatic. The sequential has a lot of bite to it, very racy, but seems to be rather inappropriate for inner city driving. Perhaps its because of the way the computer is programmed on my car.

 

[zoboomofo]

I was watching Top Gear on the BBC World Channel. Last time, they had an Aston Martin Vanquish vs. a Ferrari (575M I think?) The Aston Martins don't look a whole lot different now than they did 10 years ago, but they, and their Jaguar cousins look much nicer with the manly front ends, the large wheels,and the sexy rear fender. I thought I'd bring it up since the Vanquish looks to be a different flavor of this same car, but with a higher performance twist.

from Channel 4 website

On the Top Gear program, they poopoo'ed the Vanquish despite its "550" bhp. It supposedly understeered too much, and the "flappy paddled gearbox" interfered with the fun of it (although it sure looks fun to see them powersliding about.) The gearbox also pooped out under the hp strain several times. Then they went on about the virtues of the Ferrari, and decided they liked the Vanquish better

This Aston Martin is a lighter and slightly tweaked version of the DB9, and I like the lines here more than the DB9. The brakes are also a fancy ceramic type. I can't remember how the 2 V12s squared up in performance though. If I remember correctly, the reviewers decided it was a close call, but the Aston Martin won for sentimental reasons. For the wrap-up, they then went on to say that compared to the DB9 (and presumably the new Jag) the Vanquish was not as good a value.

So in a round-about way, I guess I'm saying, "Nice car, Kevin."

 

[skyskraper]

as a former jag owner (ah how i miss my x300 xjr....), i have to say the overwhelming ASTON statement of the styling is dissapointing. no don't get me wrong i _LOVE_ the db9, and can't wait to test drive it when i am given the chance, but the loss of a distinctly JAGUAR character in its design is sad for me.

the xj is one of the sexiest cars to have ever graced roads anywhere, the smooth fluid and organic lines just seem so naturally slick yet still betray the aggression underneath the surface just enough so you can see it still has the agressive jaguar traits.

i knew of the cross platform sharing that was going to happen within the prestige group at ford, and i know the db7 ran on the old xj chassis, but if its going to be like the ford/mercury/lincoln/whatever simple rebadging and different trim of ford usa then i don't like it one little bit.

i wish i was still at a job where i could afford to have a nice sports car (albeit the xjr was a sports salloon, it did have the jag sports pack with bbs wheels, uprated brakes and suspension, and factory fitted supercharge upgrade) again. im a poor student now and had to sell it to finance myself through completion of my degree. doesn't bother me hugely though. i'll be back on the market for one in a few yrs

 

[Jasper994]

OMG!!! Now that's sexy...

 

[rsaavedra]

The new Jag looks nice, but in their "Inspiration" section they should have included a pic of the real thing:

 

[skyskraper]

you mean....

 

[RYCeT]

That Jag is ugly, it looks like Ford Cougar to me

 

[rsaavedra]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RYCeT That Jag is ugly, it looks like Ford Cougar to me

Oh man no comparison!! Btw I do think the Nissan Z had some inspiration in the Aston Martin. The Cougar, if it had any such inspiration, was terribly implemented. Ugly car that Cougar.

Skyscraper, the headlights of the Aston in the pic you posted are too stretched imho, and the "nose" too sharp. It's not just perspective in your pic, notice the distance between the side ends of the front grill and the tires. Also, the surface on top of the headlights in yours is basically flat, on mine is curved both along the width and length of the car, and ends up aiming a bit downwards at the front end, just perfect. Still prefer the Vanquish in my pic. That Vanquish is one of the best looking cars ever made imho, flawless beauty.

 

[skyskraper]

oh the vanquish is infinetely more gorgeous then either the db9 or xj. however the nose is a simple cosmetic mod (rounder then db9) and the lines match (the bulges on the front and rear wheel wells and the rear buttresses) not to mention they are on the same chassis/running gear

 

[mjg]

sorry guys, call me a "jag hater" but the car is just plain ugly.

 

[skyskraper]

oh the grill and lights are just a vain attempt to carry on from the previous xk

although its all really just splitting hairs. the xj woulda come out of the same design shop as the db9 and vanquish.... im dissapointed they kept the rear wheel arch shoulder of the astons rather then creating something more fluid ala current xk.

u know now i remember the amv8 is due now or shortly or whenever i realise i may be mixed up and it may be based on that? the body is a bit more akin to it iirc, but the boot is different

 

[rsaavedra]

Quote:

Originally Posted by skyskraper oh the grill and lights are just a vain attempt to carry on from the previous xk

Oh man oh man. The subtleties of car design... While the Vanquish V12 exterior looks, at least to me, like bare skin over lean muscle, that Jaguar just reminds me of Bingo from the Banana Splits

Seriously: