Advertising Last completed movie pages
2008 Jaguar XF SV8 [X250] Comments about this vehicle| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2007-12-24 16:29 |
The vehicle details for VX57 XFR are: Date of Liability 01 09 2008 Date of First Registration 20 09 2007 Year of Manufacture 2007 Cylinder Capacity (cc) 4197CC Fuel Type Petrol Vehicle Status Licence Not Due Vehicle Colour GREY From episode 18.03: ![[Image: topgearjaguarxf183.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/784/topgearjaguarxf183.jpg) ![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small} -- Last edit: 2012-11-09 01:10:35 (G-MANN) |
|
◊ 2007-12-24 16:56 |
now that is one disgusting vehicle. Sir Lyons is probably rotating in his grave... |
|
◊ 2007-12-24 17:49 |
great desing  |
|
◊ 2007-12-24 18:29 |
I think it's a great looking car. I don't know why almost everyone seems to hate it  |
|
◊ 2007-12-24 18:36 |
Seem we have here a comunity against modern cars Raul  |
|
◊ 2007-12-24 19:53 |
I know - because it looks like some kind of Lexus or Infiniti or something.. This is not a Jaguar I would like to drive... I mean - it does not look like Jaguar at all.. (well, we lived thorough Jaguar making Estate and Diesel.. and Diesel Estate, so we will live through this as well, but it definitely is a pity, as all tradition is fading away  ) |
|
◊ 2007-12-24 20:35 |
My problem with the car is not so much about it not being traditional as it is about it looking like a Hyundai Sonata: /vehicle_7590-Hyundai-Sonata-1997.html  I actually liked the concept C-XF's front end more than the production version. -- Last edit: 2007-12-24 20:44:32 |
|
◊ 2007-12-24 21:43 |
I agree with badlymad? It simply DOES NOT look like a Jaguar!!! (Looks more Asian than British) |
|
◊ 2007-12-24 21:59 |
I'm sorry but 'classic' Jaguar design doesn't sell well. Look at XJ for example. Anyone under 60 won't buy it. Sometimes you have to come up with something new, otherwise there won't be any future classics. |
|
◊ 2007-12-24 22:12 |
I would |
|
◊ 2007-12-24 22:22 |
It first reminded me of a Ford Mondeo.  |
|
◊ 2007-12-24 22:26 |
Why I see Hyundai on this picture? :D:D. |
|
◊ 2007-12-25 00:17 |
This is very "Jaguar" design, people who don't see that need to look beyond 1980s into Jaguar's heritage. |
|
◊ 2007-12-25 03:23 |
ok, name one model that could even remotely remind this thing. |
|
◊ 2007-12-25 14:45 |
It blends the styling of the 1950s-1960s styling with the shape of the Jaguar Kensington concept (which later inspired the likes of Lexus GS - this is in fact a Jaguar shape rather than Lexus). I believe the most connections can be found with the Mark X/420 G. The most important is, however, that it doesn't attempt to ape a previous design (in a more or less lousy way, like exemplified by the S-Type), but carries the Jaguar style forward. It is a very contemporary design, at the same time exhibiting the essence of Jaguar. |
|
◊ 2007-12-25 16:33 |
on contrary I think it totally lacks even trace of Jaguarish lines - especially from side view.. Front should be somehow acceptable, but the side view is just pure japanese... |
|
◊ 2007-12-25 17:50 |
1990 Jaguar Kensington concept - http://www.autocult.com.au/img/gallery/full/TorqueOmata4746.jpg Jaguar is some two decades late in putting this concept into production, but this still is a Jaguar shape. That Lexus (and Daewoo Leganza) went to take advantage of Jag not building it by buying "Kensington-inspired" designs from Giugiaro is Jag's own fault, but this IS a Jaguar. |
|
◊ 2007-12-25 22:00 |
Sorry but let me hate this car. The design is brilliant, but is just not a Jaguar. It's a cross between a Hyundai, a Mondeo, a Maserati Quattroporte and a bit of Aston Martin |
|
◊ 2007-12-25 22:07 |
I dont see why some of you say, "it is not a Jaguar", it is impossible for a car not to resemble to any others in the market, the fact that it resembles a bit of another car means it is not a Jaguar anymore will never understand that kind of comments |
|
◊ 2007-12-25 22:17 |
Anyway, I prefer the S-Type over this. I'm a Jaguar fan and i'm very very very disappointed with this car -- Last edit: 2007-12-25 22:17:53 |
|
◊ 2007-12-25 22:29 |
I DO like Jaguars too a lot, and im not dissapointed at all |
|
◊ 2007-12-25 23:31 |
Do you believe a Jaguar can only be another rehash of the XJ? I've been annoyed with people complaining about the XJ's "recycled" and "stale" design, about X-Type "looking like a deflated XJ", about Jaguar lacking creativity - and now that Jag comes up with something fresh and progressive to lead the way again like they used to do, people are complaining that it's not the same. Peeps, do look into Jag's history and discover that this is pure Jaguar by the traits it exhibits. That others were trying to be like it is only a compliment. PS. An S-Type is much more of a Kia or Hyundai than this one. |
|
◊ 2007-12-25 23:33 |
I do not complain about the XJ and the X-Type, they're brilliant, but this isn't |
|
◊ 2007-12-26 22:39 |
The XF is exactly what a proper Jaguar should be -- modern, sleek, sporty and stealthy. |
|
◊ 2007-12-26 22:40 |
You couldn't be possibly more wrong. X-Type is a joke. -- Last edit: 2007-12-26 23:19:37 |
|
◊ 2007-12-26 22:41 |
No. You're not a Jaguar fan. If you were a real Jaguar fan, you would consider the S-Type to be an affront to what a Jaguar should be. |
|
◊ 2008-01-05 01:46 |
Well, I'm not so fan of Jaguar as I am of Rover, but I wouldn't tell to any other Rover fan what he has to like to be a Rover fan. |
|
◊ 2008-01-05 05:03 |
I think its okay ... reminds me of the current generation Subaru models with the headlamps and center grille ... Link to "plod.popoever.com" |
|
◊ 2008-01-05 11:54 |
Hear hear. Jaguars are normally a bit out of my league; but I once lived with an early 4-litre S-type for a week and upwards of 2000 miles, and while I was a bit underwhelmed at the attempted retro styling, if this is as nice to drive - and as nice a place to be generally - then I'm all for it. |
|
◊ 2008-01-18 22:22 |
Don't like the look of this at all. I agree with all those people who say it's like a Hyundai. |
|
◊ 2008-01-18 22:26 |
On this pic above I saw that car for the first time. If it wouldn't be listed as an Jaguar, I wouldn't have recognized it. Perhaps for me it could be a Hyundai, too, perhaps a Chrysler or Kia either. |
|
◊ 2008-01-18 22:26 |
I swear! |
|
◊ 2008-01-18 22:38 |
Both cars have the big problem with the total lack of reliability. For that reason I would not buy a car of this brand. I would do so, the these three points were here: Big. Cheap. Reliable. But I have a Rover-part in daily use: my pens on my desk are lying in a rubber-dish from the top of a Rover 216(?)-dashboard. I've stolen it a long time ago on a junkyard. |
|
◊ 2008-01-27 20:58 |
You can smell the fear from zhe Germans... yeah... this time Jaguar is coming with guns blazing against your A6/E/5 brigade. -- Last edit: 2008-01-27 23:39:47 |
|
◊ 2008-01-27 21:07 |
Bad news for G-MANN: In the UK, there have been over than 3.000 pre-orders for the Jaguar XF. |
|
◊ 2008-04-06 18:22 |
Why hate it? We finally have a Jaguar for young people -- Last edit: 2008-04-06 18:22:41 |
|
◊ 2008-04-06 19:19 |
That's what the X-Type (a pale imitation of a Jag) was supposed to be. At least Jaguar aren't making an SUV (although I may be speaking too soon). |
|
◊ 2008-04-22 19:27 |
XF is a nice new car. Much better than the compromised S-type had been. As to how a Jag should look, we LOVE our X308 (1999) XJ8 Vanden Plas----that's sleek and cat-like. The newer X350 models (late 2002 onward) are bloated by comparison. So everybody has design preferences..... |
|
◊ 2010-12-04 13:50 |
From 2008 as the reg date says. |
|
◊ 2010-12-04 14:03 |
But on DVLA is as 2007. |
|
◊ 2010-12-04 14:14 |
I read the date of liability line by mistake. Silly me! The car was brought in as a 2008 model however, with VX57____ being a pre-production series used on press cars. That and the other one being listed as 2007 but registered in 2008 muddled my mind. -- Last edit: 2010-12-04 14:15:27 |
|
◊ 2016-07-15 20:28 |
my dad had a 2009 |
|
◊ 2016-08-10 07:02 |
nope. My dad had a 2007 Diesel. |
Add a comment Advertising Advertising
![2008 Jaguar XF SV8 [X250]](i145724.jpg)
