You know that dreaded statement when being set up for a blind date? "Well, um, he/she has a good personality." The all-new 2007 Jaguar XK8 is the opposite, meaning the superficial part of us would love going on a blind date with the car. As soon as you see it you're like, "Score!! Oh yeah, this will work!" But get in it for a drive and, if you're like me, your rally call will quickly switch to, "Check please!"
The car and I got off to a bad start when I fired the engine up and it immediately began blowing cold air on me. I was already cold and wanted it to stop, but there was no obvious way to shut the climate control system down. I eventually settled for turning the temperature up, but with the engine being stone cold it took several minutes before the chilling blast turned luke warm. It wasn't until the next day that I found the climate control's "virtual power" switch buried in the LCD control system. I don't know how to make this clearer for the automakers, but STOP BUNDLING BASIC CONTROLS INTO THE LCD INTERFACE! It does nothing to enhance the driving experience and, arguably, makes a car more dangerous to drive in terms of driver distraction.
The other immediate impression I got from the Jag was a heavy, almost lazy feel regarding the vehicle's dynamics. I know it has aluminum construction and suspension pieces, and both the suspension and engine offer adequate responsiveness when pushed -- but that's just it. You have to really push this cat before it feels remotely frisky, and even then I wasn't particularly thrilled by it. It just seems like everything (steering response, throttle response, handling dynamics) sort of happens in slow motion. This is fine for a pure luxury machine, but when you're competing with the BMW 6 Series, Cadillac XLR and the Mercedes-Benz CLK you really have to offer solid luxury appointments while maintaining a sense of performance/fun. The Jaguar doesn't adequately fulfill the second half of that equation. It's certainly no worse than the Lexus SC, but that car is ancient and the XK is brand new.
I'm disappointed because I loved the styling of the previous XK and I think this one looks great as well (especially against the 6 Series, CLK and XLR). But in its current form I would never pick up the $80,000 dinner bill. I've been set up with an XKR rendezvous next week -- maybe that one will restore my hopes in the model line.
This version won't be getting a call back.
By rsholland
on October 27, 2006
03:51 PM
I'm not fond of the styling of the headlights of these new Jags. It doesn't work for me at all.
By phinneas519
on October 27, 2006
06:28 PM
Truth be told, I don't recall ever having been impressed by Jaguar's offerings. Ford would do well to let that dead weight portfolio listing go.
By rsholland
on October 28, 2006
07:04 AM
It's funny how Volvo and Aston Martin have flourished under Ford, yet Jaguar has not.
By sabastian
on October 30, 2006
12:06 PM
Judging by Car and Driver's recent big-convertible test, I doubt you'll like the XLR much more. It placed dead last to the Jag's third.
-Sabastian
By billymay
on October 30, 2006
12:41 PM
I haven't driven the new XK, but the bland styling plus your review make me think I won't be rushing over to the Jag dealer.
What happened to the ultra-sexy F-Type?
This car doesn't look agile, although compared to the pavement-crumbling 3900lb flabmobile BMW 6 series it might...
By chavis10
on October 30, 2006
02:57 PM
I happen to think the new XK is leaps and bounds better than the previous model. The old car's interior was atrocious and it's exterior wasn't much better. The front and rear overhangs were simply ridiculous and the car lacked any sports car flare whatsoever. Just a matter of styling taste I suppose. I also think it looks a lot better than the 650Ci.
By ahightower
on October 31, 2006
07:02 AM
It definitely is a matter of personal preference, because I think the previous XK was the best looking car on the planet. It was a true classic. The coupe was just as beautiful as the convertible, and the XKR in both types was even better. Unfortunately, the interior was too cramped. Not like I could afford one right now, but I did sit in one at an auto show, and wished I hadn't. I was so disappointed at the lack of leg room, it really shattered the fantasy of what I would do if I won the lottery.
I understand the idea behind the new one, more modern/techno, less retro. But I just can't warm up to it. I'm sure it's a better car in every way and the new style will grow on me. But the old one is just perfect to my eyes, and I'll try to forget all practical considerations.
By hondacura4
on October 31, 2006
05:23 PM
The older (pre-Ford) Jags had a certain mystique and class about them. The newer offerings dont have that "JAG-U-AH" look or feel. Although Ford has somehow made the comany a little better they took away what made a Jaguar a Jaguar.
By domesticdude
on June 27, 2007
10:59 AM
I find the xk very attractive, much more so than the sl or mxw 6 series. The only car of its class that is more attractive is probably the cadillac xlr. The interior is functional and straightforward, instead of convoluted and confusing like its German counterparts, even though there are too many functions through the gps. The car is also slightly underpowered, but thats where the xkr comes in. It it Jags only good car currently, and it is extremely impressive, especially for being much cheaper than the sl.