1992 Jaguar Xj6 Base Sedan 4-door 4.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2018 Jaguar F-Pace S Long-Term Review | Wrapping up our six-month test

It's been six months since our long-term 2018 Jaguar F-Pace S arrived to warm our hands and hearts. Jaguar's most popular model with consumers was equally popular with the Autoblog staff. We drove it 13,000 miles and would continue to rack up more if Jaguar would just let us keep the keys. It was a great follow-up to our fuel-efficient but slightly gutless 2017 Jaguar XE diesel. Our Caesium Blue bomber is loaded with nearly every option. That includes heated seats front and rear, a black package that swaps out chrome for black trim, and a full-size spare (that takes up a lot space). The S model's supercharged 3.0-liter V6 sends 380 horsepower and 332 pound-feet of torque to all four wheels through an eight-speed automatic. All in, our F-Pace S will set you back $74,640. Editor-in-Chief Greg Migliore: I spent a lot of time in the F-Pace this year. It's powerful, sporty, looks sharp (love the lively blue-purple paint) and has a solid interior. The styling resonated with me. I think Jaguar design boss Ian Callum and team nailed the proportions and curves. A crossover was sure to be controversial with Jag loyalists, but it's beautiful, and the reasoning for joining the SUV fray is ironclad. Everybody from Ferrari to Porsche is there. I appreciated the driving dynamics. The steering has decent feedback, the engine sounds good and has energy, and you ride just high enough to feel in command. The Jaguar DNA comes through. I took it to a tailgate, where I was boxed in and had to be the guy in the Jaguar who asks people to move so he can leave early. Cutting through rows of tailgaters in a purple Jag with black wheels isn't exactly subtle. But the car was versatile. I put tons of groceries in the back. My dog enjoyed the second row. It was good in snow. All the things you want in a crossover. The F-Pace was one of the more memorable long-termers we've had at Autoblog. It was fun to drive and stayed in high demand, even after we'd had it for months. It's not perfect. The interior was a little plain, and I don't love the infotainment, but in its first attempt at a crossover — Jaguar nailed it. Senior Editor, Green John Beltz Snyder: While I found it comfortable for long highway drives Up North, this thing is absolutely ferocious in Dynamic Mode with the gear selector set to S. The paddles amp up the fun. It really changed the character of this cat, and I was always surprised by the transformation. I got a lot of looks in the F-Pace.

2019 Jaguar I-Pace gets official 234-mile range rating

The 2019 Jaguar I-Pace is officially rated to travel as far as 234 miles on a single charge of its battery pack. That's down slightly from the 240 miles initially promised when the slinky electric crossover was first unveiled here in the States. And, while it's roughly equal to the base version of the Tesla Model X, that's not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison. Quoting maximum electric range without considering the capacity of a car's battery pack is the same as quoting the maximum driving range of a gasoline-fueled vehicle without considering how many gallons of gas the tank holds. The I-Pace's battery pack is rated at 90kWh. The Model X's smallest pack is 75kWh. So the Tesla can go about the same total distance as the Jaguar using significantly less energy. It's not just Tesla that boasts greater efficiency figures than the Jaguar. Chevy manages to eke 238 miles out of the Bolt EV's 60kWh battery pack, and Hyundai gets 258 miles from the Kona Electric's 64kWh pack. These vehicles certainly don't all play in the same market segments, and there are a lot of variables to consider. For instance, the Jaguar's 4.5-second 0-60 rating is quicker than the Model X's 4.9-second rating, and its advertised power output of 394 horsepower and 512 pound-feet of torque is higher than Tesla's for the 75D (though Tesla's actual power numbers aren't really advertised in traditional hp and lb-ft figures). But even if cars like the Model X, Chevy Bolt, and Hyundai Kona EV aren't directly comparable across the board, their range and battery capacity figures do help us understand the relative efficiency of each specific vehicle. The efficiency of electric vehicles rated by the EPA is expressed as a MPGe (miles per gallon equivalent) figure. The 2019 Jaguar I-Pace's figures of 80 city, 72 highway, and 76 combined MPGe don't compare favorably with the Tesla Model X's 91 MPGe city, 95 MPGe highway and 93 MPGe combined ratings. It'll be interesting to see how much EV buyers care about the Jaguar's comparatively poor MPGe ratings, but they will definitely have an impact in the real world. In practical terms, what all of this means is that the Jaguar I-Pace is going to use more electricity per mile than the Tesla Model X. And that means it's going to cost more to drive the same distance in the Jag when compared to the Tesla, or just about any other modern long-range EV that's currently on the market. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party.

Jaguar's Callum refutes two XJ bodystyle rumor

Not long ago, we relayed word from Edmunds that Jaguar was planning to split its next-generation XJ sedan into two bodystyles - one model that continued the ambitious design approach fostered with the current X351-based model, and another, more upright model to better appeal to China's conservative design sensibilities.
We expressed some cynicism in the idea, noting that such a strategy "might catch more profits for the marque, but it might also represent a setback to design head Ian Callum's vision for a thoroughly modern Jaguar portfolio." Callum has been quite insistent in his belief that Jag needs to be a forward-thinking brand in terms of design, and the two-model strategy seemed to conflict with that idea. We tried to get some comment from Callum at that time, but were unable to reach him.
As it turns out, our cynicism was well-placed. Autocar says that while the next XJ will continue to have two wheelbases, Callum has denied the two-model talk, saying flatly: "I can't see us doing two bodystyles. The cost would be enormous and the message inconsistent. You have to believe in what you produce and to do two bodystyles would undermine that."