2016 Jaguar XE

[68_427]

the butt hole

[SVT666]

They don't look like an afterthought at all.  They look very cohesive.

[hotrodalex]

In this class I love the ATS but this is probably a better choice assuming it doesn't have similar engine or CUE flaws.

[12,000 RPM]

That's because nobody builds anything in the segment that looks like a Juke.

I love this place

I think the design is not bad, but it is very, very, very generic. It could be anything from a Holden to a Volvo, depending on what nose/tail they put on it. On the other hand, tehre's no mistaking something like an XJ, F-Type, Evoque etc.... if you are going to sell a car on design alone in this era it has to have Evoque level distinctiveness.

[hotrodalex]

I love this place

I think the design is not bad, but it is very, very, very generic. It could be anything from a Holden to a Volvo, depending on what nose/tail they put on it. On the other hand, tehre's no mistaking something like an XJ, F-Type, Evoque etc.... if you are going to sell a car on design alone in this era it has to have Evoque level distinctiveness.

Cars throughout history could have put a different badge on and looked like something else. Getting away from that leads to Jukes and Aztecs and Lexus.

[12,000 RPM]

Cars throughout history could have put a different badge on and looked like something else. Getting away from that leads to Jukes and Aztecs and Lexus.

Sure, cars with middle of the road designs. A good design is generally unmistakeable.

[CALL_911]

The big questions are who and why though. Yes the segment's design levels are low and conservative, at least from the German side. But the 335i and S4 are great cars. The next C-Class has smartly given up fighting the 3 and carving its own very distinct and important niche, going back to what the OG 190E was. Q50 is a tech powerhouse and looks better every time I see it. Lexus IS seems to be the choice of dental hygenists and ricer douchebags. Etc. There's no room for another conventional sport sedan, especially with the ATS on the scene.

I don't know about any of this. Apparently the C-Class (at least the C400) is still very much aiming for the 3er. The Q50 is hilariously bland and unappealing compared to the V35/6. IS is most definitely gunning for the 3er (and is probably my pick of the litter), as is the ATS.

[2o6]

The Q50 is bland?


I always thought the Q50 was hilariously overwrought and ill-styled.

Cars throughout history could have put a different badge on and looked like something else. Getting away from that leads to Jukes and Aztecs and Lexus.

Maybe in 1910 when manufacturing techniques were far more uniform and we werent able to make the shapes we can now, but for the past 30 years cars as a whole haven't looked THAT cohesive.

The taillights on the trunk. 

I don't think it's not cohisive, but I don't think it's the most elegant solution. I think a thinner rear lamp paired with a plate on the bumper cover would have made the car more expensive.


Also, the design relies too hard on large wheels with rubber band tires.

[12,000 RPM]

I don't know about any of this. Apparently the C-Class (at least the C400) is still very much aiming for the 3er. The Q50 is hilariously bland and unappealing compared to the V35/6. IS is most definitely gunning for the 3er (and is probably my pick of the litter), as is the ATS.

C-Class is a mini S-Class now. Its focus is tech/luxury, not backroads prowess. Shrewd move on MB's part IMO.

Infiniti stumbles in and out of the wilderness, and they are back there now. Q50 is a bit of a mess, but it's selling about as well as the G was at this point last year.

IS is dynamically solid, but unlike the ATS Lexus has its interior sorted out as well. And IIRC the IS is still a good clip cheaper than a similarly equipped 3. IOW there are more reasons to buy an IS than its backroads prowess.

This kind of deal could be a good look for a brand like Maserati, that can pass off a middle of the road or overpriced car on name alone (like they have with the Ghibli- all reviews on it have ranged from "WTF" to "meh"). Jaguar's brand isn't that strong.

[CALL_911]

The G was also a 6-7 year old model at this point last year. That the Q50 is selling about as well as the G was is hardly anything to brag about.

[CALL_911]

The Q50 is bland?


I always thought the Q50 was hilariously overwrought and ill-styled.

Maybe in 1910 when manufacturing techniques were far more uniform and we werent able to make the shapes we can now, but for the past 30 years cars as a whole haven't looked THAT cohesive.


I don't think it's not cohisive, but I don't think it's the most elegant solution. I think a thinner rear lamp paired with a plate on the bumper cover would have made the car more expensive.


Also, the design relies too hard on large wheels with rubber band tires.

Yeah, the Q50 is bland. Looks like a generic sedan used in insurance commercials

[SVT666]

The G was also a 6-7 year old model at this point last year. That the Q50 is selling about as well as the G was is hardly anything to brag about.

G37 sales never dropped.

2007    71,809
2008    64,181
2009    47,174
2010    58,143
2011    58,246
2012    59,844
2013    57,878

[r0tor]

  Rumors of a V8 in an R model

[Raza]

What is the case for the XE... the segment is already at capacity, their other sedans are barely selling, and the most recent entry into the segment (ATS) is skrugglin

Who says? BMW creates useless niche after useless niche and people buy them left and right. Do you think it's at capacity simply because the cars already there are already there and you can't conceive another car? Or is it at capacity because the ATS isn't selling well? Neither of those cases prove anything. If every company sat back with this view, we'd only have the 3 series in the segment with people saying that it's impossible to break into.

But the XJ and F-Type are two of the best designs of this era by a landslide. But you need more than good designs to have a sustainable business model today.

Funny you mention the F-Type and XJ. One is gorgeous, the other is a massive hideous hulking beast that looks like a Lincoln vomiting a Buick. The XJ may well be the worst looking car ever to wear a Jaguar badge.

[Raza]

Just showed it to my brother. He was asking who to write the check to.

[r0tor]

The biggest problem will be the wait.

[Raza]

The biggest problem will be the wait.

Nah, I think it's great that they debut a product two years before it's available for sale!

[12,000 RPM]

Who says? BMW creates useless niche after useless niche and people buy them left and right.[ Do you think it's at capacity simply because the cars already there are already there and you can't conceive another car? Or is it at capacity because the ATS isn't selling well? Neither of those cases prove anything. If every company sat back with this view, we'd only have the 3 series in the segment with people saying that it's impossible to break into.

Wooosah.... take a deep breath and I will walk you through it. You just made my point for me.

BMW creates niche after niche. Why? Because they have tapped out all the folks who will buy conventional 3/5/7s. Those channels are not just at capacity- for the 7s they're actually shrinking. 3 series global sales have pretty much levelled off. You're a businessman... growth growth growth! If they have milked the last drop from the base lineup they have to look outside to grow.

Now, if BMW is tapped out on how many 3 series it can sell, as the originators and benchmark of that segment, what makes you think Jag can come in and move units at this point in the game? Especially considering how many others have come in and tapped into whatever potential excess volume the segment had over the last 15 years? When Infiniti debuted the G and Lexus brought out the IS, Jag had the half ass X-Type. The time for the XE (and revamped "Ring Time" lineup) was then

Funny you mention the F-Type and XJ. One is gorgeous, the other is a massive hideous hulking beast that looks like a Lincoln vomiting a Buick. The XJ may well be the worst looking car ever to wear a Jaguar badge.

Well, everyone has their right to an opinion.

[Raza]

Companies don't create niches because they're out of room in their current ones. They create them to fill a want or need that is currently unfilled. You completely misunderstood the point of my statement (and the point of niche vehicles).

[12,000 RPM]

Companies don't create niches because they're out of room in their current ones. They create them to fill a want or need that is currently unfilled. You completely misunderstood the point of my statement (and the point of niche vehicles).

OK then, what was your point, and are you really going to sit here and tell me that BMW's niche craze has nothing to do with the base 3/5/7 sales leveling off?

[Raza]

OK then, what was your point, and are you really going to sit here and tell me that BMW's niche craze has nothing to do with the base 3/5/7 sales leveling off?

The point is that the if the market can sustain a flood of barely different cars like the niche vehicles that BMW makes, there's room for another sedan. 

[r0tor]

OK then, what was your point, and are you really going to sit here and tell me that BMW's niche craze has nothing to do with the base 3/5/7 sales leveling off?

Its the Porsche method of increasing profits.  Economically create slightly different versions of existing cars that you can sell for an absorbanent amount of money.

[12,000 RPM]

The point is that the if the market can sustain a flood of barely different cars like the niche vehicles that BMW makes, there's room for another sedan.

All of the 3 variants are CUVs and hatchbacks, and aside from the 4 Gran Coupe are very different from the 3er.

[Raza]

All of the 3 variants are CUVs and hatchbacks, and aside from the 4 Gran Coupe are very different from the 3er.

That doesn't mean they're not cross shopped.

[12,000 RPM]

That doesn't mean they're not cross shopped.

That's arguable, but more importantly is very different from claiming they are "barely different". I don't think anyone is cross shopping 4 series convertibles and X3s but that's just me.

Bringing it all back home... the sport sedan market is tapped, and if this chart is any indication, the whole concept of a sedan is growing old with Americans.



Makes sense- if you don't care about the act of driving, and can deal with a 3-5 MPG fuel economy ding, a CUV makes sense if a hatchback isn't available to fit your tastes. And contrary to popular belief, I would bet the majority of "sport sedan" drivers just buy the cars for image and luxury. So I think we will see a shift like this Accord/CR-V thing across the board, with actual driving enthusiasts going to more extreme ends and gutting out the compromised middle...

...which is exactly where Jag took aim with its XE, and Caddy with the ATS/CTS.

GM at least has huge corporate (and govt ) backing, as well as the highly underutilized (IMO) plug in hybrid tech in the Volt. Caddy has been floundering for decades. This is a hail mary for Jag and I'm not sure the market will catch this pass......

[ifcar]

Bringing it all back home... the sport sedan market is tapped, and if this chart is any indication, the whole concept of a sedan is growing old with Americans.

How do the data support *that* conclusion? Accord sales have been high and steady even as CR-V sales also increased.

[12,000 RPM]

How do the data support *that* conclusion? Accord sales have been high and steady even as CR-V sales also increased.

Accord (and Civic) sales have been flat while CR-V sales seem set to pass them in the next couple of years, while experiencing double digit growth for damn near a decade....

The # of new CUVs over the last 5-6 or so years far outnumbers the # of new sedans. Esp at BMW.

Etc. etc.

[thewizard16]

I like this. And the ATS. And the 3 series. And the E class. And the A4.

I agree. I actually like all the entry lux cars from the big names stylistically and "overall" right now. The ATS, 3 series, IS, A4, C-class and Q50 are all appealing cars in my opinion. I like the A4 best though I think it looked slightly better previously (same for the IS), but there's not a bad looking car, or a "bad choice" really in the whole bunch. If the XE can be at least as good as middle of the pack in dynamics and be up to snuff on quality/features (I can't imagine it won't) and looks like that, it could sell quite well.

The inner tails look really bad, sort of like an afterthought. 

Yeah, I'm still on your side on this. The more I look at this the more I wonder if it's just a problem with how these photos are done of if the tail light curves really just don't line up with the trunk lines. It's clear they're trying to mimic that LED tail line from the XF through the middle part of the tail light, but it's something about the angles where the tail light meets the metal creases on the inner part of the trunk that just looks wrong/tacked on. But I notice and obsess over little details like that and they ruin what would be an otherwise very attractive car for me. (Like the face-lifted Optima tail lights that are just slightly different sized and no longer line up properly like the previous ones did, bugs the hell out of me.)

The Q50 is bland?


I always thought the Q50 was hilariously overwrought and ill-styled.

I don't think it's not cohisive, but I don't think it's the most elegant solution. I think a thinner rear lamp paired with a plate on the bumper cover would have made the car more expensive.


Also, the design relies too hard on large wheels with rubber band tires.

.... I ... I actually agree with you on something style related. (Better call my optometrist right away.)

I too think the Q50 is the "trying too hard" of the segment style wise. (One of the docs I round with drives one and I see it every morning. Not bad looking, but it looks like it wants to scream "I'm sporty, I swear!".)

I also think you're right on what would have fixed the trunk. I'm okay with the garish wheels and thin tires though.

[ifcar]

Accord (and Civic) sales have been flat while CR-V sales seem set to pass them in the next couple of years, while experiencing double digit growth for damn near a decade....

The # of new CUVs over the last 5-6 or so years far outnumbers the # of new sedans. Esp at BMW.

Etc. etc.

The CR-V has evolved at a faster pace than the Accord because the starting point was so low. It became less like a tall economy car and more like a family vehicle, while the Accord has been a wildly successful family vehicle. "Oh no, the Accord was only Honda's best-selling product and only sold 366,000 units last year! People just don't like sedans anymore."

And there have been more crossovers added because fewer automakers sold them before, and counting different niche low-volume bodystyles of the same crossover skews the idea of their popularity. It would be like saying, for instance, that Hyundai sells three compact cars -- Elantra sedan, Elantra hatchback, Elantra coupe.

[TBR]

Accord (and Civic) sales have been flat while CR-V sales seem set to pass them in the next couple of years, while experiencing double digit growth for damn near a decade....

The # of new CUVs over the last 5-6 or so years far outnumbers the # of new sedans. Esp at BMW.

Etc. etc.