1995 Jaguar Xjs 2+2 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Jaguar Land Rover will electrify all new models after 2020 — and maybe some old ones

Just as Volvo did earlier this year, Jaguar and Land Rover announced a date after which all new models introduced will be electrified. That date is 2020, a year after Volvo, and JLR's definition of electrification is very similar to Volvo's, including full electrics, plug-in hybrids, and mild hybrids. Whether the British automaker's mild hybrids will be something like the 48-volt start-stop function on the Audi A8 or a more conventional hybrid has yet to be announced. Regardless, internal combustion engines won't disappear from the Jaguar and Land Rover lineups yet, and there's still a couple of years before the start date for the companies to sneak in a fully gasoline or diesel model if they wish. And on the flip side, there's nothing stopping the companies from releasing EVs or hybrids before the start date, which is exactly what Jaguar is doing with the I-Pace. Jaguar reiterated that the electric crossover will go on sale in 2018. View 11 Photos Jaguar specifically isn't just looking at electrifying future cars, but also possibly classic cars. Jaguar Land Rover Classic revealed its fully electric E-Type concept. The vintage car department took a first-generation model and created a battery pack and electric powertrain that could fit in the car, leaving as much original as possible, including the way it drives. The battery pack and motor are mounted up front, with power sent to the rear, and they weigh roughly the same and fill roughly the same space as the old straight-six engine. This keeps weight distribution the same, makes packaging easy, and should keep the driving experience roughly the same as the old car — though the electrified version is faster. Jaguar claims a 0-62 mph time of 5.5 seconds, which is about a second quicker than the gas-powered model. It also has a range of 170 miles and a charging time of around 6 to 7 hours. Other changes include an updated interior with touchscreen infotainment, carbon fiber dash, and LCD instruments. Jaguar said this electric conversion is just a concept right now, which could be just as well. We're not sure many E-Type owners would line up to replace their old six- and 12-cylinder engines. After all, part of the appeal of those cars is the sound of the engine, and stirring a manual gearbox.

Jaguar to follow up with larger J-Pace crossover

Jaguar is about to launch its first foray into the crossover market (that's the C-X17 Concept you see above) with the upcoming debut of the F-Pace, but that won't be its last. According to the UK's Car magazine, plans are already underway to launch a bigger J-Pace crossover as well. Just as the F-Pace is set to serve as the high-riding counterpart to the XF sedan, so too would the J-Pace align itself with the upcoming new XJ – in a strategy not unlike what Mercedes is taking with its crossovers, aligning the GLE (nee M-Class) with the E-Class, the upcoming GLS (GL-Class) to the S-Class and so on. That would make the J-Pace a rival to the likes of the aforementioned GLS and Audi Q7. Tipped to launch in 2019, the Jaguar J-Pace is expected to borrow its aluminum underpinnings from the flagship Range Rover, but take a sportier, more dynamic approach than the top-of-the-line Landie. Expect V6 and V8 engines to be offered, alongside diesel and hybrid powertrain options. The J-Pace has reportedly won out over other proposals to expand the XJ family with coupe, convertible and wagon variants, as the crossover is expected to drive higher sales. Here's hoping those revenues could be poured back into those back-burnered projects, too. Related Video:

Jaguar solution to keyless start could save lives

UPDATED: An earlier version of this story indicated the Jaguar keyless start function was meant as a safety feature, when in fact, it is meant as a convenience one and will not work as described if automatic stop/start is not engaged. Today, The New York Times published an article about more than two dozen deaths related to drivers accidentally leaving their cars running, closing their garages and later succumbing to carbon monoxide that flooded their homes. The reason has been identified as "keyless start" features, or proximity entry and push-button start, where owners don't need to physically handle a key or fob to gain entry into the vehicle or start it. It is the latest, and deadliest, issue raised with this system after those related to security and simple inconvenience (for instance, leaving the car at a valet or car wash with the fob in your pocket). From my personal perspective, The New York Times had a rather harsh "evil carmakers" tone throughout the article. This is not a matter of a known faulty component, as with the GM ignition switch recall. This has as much to do with user error where people leave their car without pressing the "off" button and without noticing the engine is still running. About half of the cars in question are produced by Toyota and Lexus, brands that have offered keyless start longer than most. They are also brands with high rates of elderly owners, who seemingly made up a majority of reported deaths and injuries. One fire department in Florida even started a campaign alerting those in the area of the dangers of leaving your car running when it noticed a correlation between an increase in cars equipped with keyless start and calls related to carbon monoxide poisoning. I see several contributing issues at play, most of which go well beyond this particular issue. First is insufficient training of owners by dealers and/or owners not paying close enough attention during this training. Cars are complicated, but you should at least know how basic functions work. Second, woefully inadequate driver training in this country. Third, and with apologies to the AARP, insufficient testing of elderly drivers and/or insufficiently low standards for elderly drivers. If you don't know you have to shut the car off or cannot hear that an engine is running, perhaps you shouldn't be driving. Fourth, re-examining keyless start systems.