http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCQIb...rec_grec_index

Anyone else seen this before? It's really interesting to watch an artist speak of his own work!

 

Ian here gave he exact description i was looking for "correct". It looks correct and come to think of it I wonder why would Jaguar under TATA allow the new shape of the XJ in 2009 upward to loose ALL of its charm? I am sure TATA wats t give new generation designers a chance but why mess with somehing very "correct". The Porsche Carrera is still the same since 1961 because like a good scotch it sould not be ruined by Cola or even water. The new XJ cold have been easily Christianed Jaguar GT (as it is the new trend now) and keep the lines of the legendary XJ with a correct DNA. A fanatic friend of mine gave me a rather racial remark which is making sence now, Indians are very fond of the Toyota Camry and they now want he XJ to look like one.... a real shame.

 

I don't think you can blame Tata for anything at this point. The new XJ was probably thought up while Ford was still in control. Blame Ian Callum!

The new XJ is still very striking. It's just not the same as the old one. In case you haven't noticed, "more of the same" has not been working for Jaguar recently and it almost drove the entire brand into the ground!

My personal preference, though, is the X350! It looks like the old ones, but more muscular and modern.

 

You make a good point. As striking as the new XJ is it is sad to see the classic XJ lines fade away. I remember reading an article in a car magazine way before the X350 came out and it said that Jaguar did extensive surveying of current XJ owners and the vast majority of them stated they did not want the classic XJ lines to change. Hence the new for 2004 XJ8 was true to the heritage. So I wonder what changed in 2010 that they had to take such a revolutionary approach with the X351? Although not all is lost on the new model. It actually has a more slow-slung look than the X350 did.

 

Was Ian the head designer of the 2004-2009 XJ's? I though it was still Geoff Lawson who was the head designer of the X350's

 

Looks like it was Ian. From the original press release for the X350:

The new Jaguar XJ delivered by Callum and his design team is longer, taller and wider than its predecessor with a more spacious interior. Under Callum's leadership, the exterior proportions of the Jaguar XJ have subtly transformed to reflect the added space for occupants and their luggage.

 

I think Geoff Lawson started the design of the X350 before his death (and set it down the traditional path) and then Ian took over and finished it up.

 

If you google Geoff and the X350 that does look like it is the case, they just neglected to mention it in the Press Guide!


"Unfortunately Jaguar wasn't able to define a progressive style for the new car. Geoff Lawson and his team were not to blame for the so-called retro look of the X350 (or, for that matter, the X200 or X400). This was dictated by Ford - in Dearborn - who had very fixed ideas of what a Jaguar should look like.

Lawson and his team simply did as they were told. In addition, Ford directed that Jaguars should platform share with Ford. The platform they insisted on using was the DEW98. This was the most up to date RWD platform Ford had.

The layout of this platform is what caused the X350 (and X200) to be tall, wide, and consequently, frumpy looking.


Geoff Lawson died at the early age of 54 in 1999 and was succeeded by Ian Callum, but this succession was too late to influence the X350's overall look."

 

^^The X350 did not use the Ford DEW98. It was a 100% Jaguar layout on the X350 as far as I know. Just the S type and later XF used it.

 

The example of Porsche is a classic story that could be told to anyone who believes that "more of the same does not pay". It was in the early 80's that Porsche had great dissficulties selling the classic 911 (carrera) and being the only German company that sells more than 50% of its products to the US at the time they had to save the brand as VW and Audi (shareholding owners) wanted results. This is when they decided to introduce the 944 as being the affordable Porsche. The German Chamber of commerce and ministry of economics pushed all they can to borrow from different German companies copyrights as possible to decrease the cost of the new porsche from $ 400 million to less than $100 million. This saved them for a while all until the economy made a recovery. Did they change the lines of the 911? No. Later in the late 90's early 2000 they went into difficulties after Porsche went independent and they were looking for an affordable Porsche and decided to introduce the Boxter then the Cayman again did they change the 911? No. Even when they decided to let go of their air cooled engine to water cooled, they kept the good old design of the carrera although it was much easier to alter the design and allow easier access of the water cooled or even move the engine to the front like the beetle did ( and when they did, they called it Panamera) instead of changing the symbol of every man's dream.

This is why and due to the new trend taking over in which all companies are now introducing a GT model (inspired by the Maserati), Aston Martin, Bentley GT, now BMW introduced its new GT, Audi is working on a new one, Merceded and all the gang will have one in the coming few years. The new Jaguar XJ could have been easily introduced as Jaguar GT since it carries all the components of a GT. Meanwhile the XJ could have remained inspired by the original model.

I have based my decision to buy an XJ mainly because of the shape now tempered with, because frankly speaking, otherwise any other brand is a better choice mechanically, electonically and affordability.

 

Jag has to do what Jag has to do. Relying on old customers to keep buying an old looking XJ is not going to build the marque and keep workers employed.

I like the new XJ. It may not be the best interpretation of the XJ, but is certainly British looking and obviously heralded in that segment.

Jag has to do aluminum rivet bonding and push the V8 throughout their whole range.

 

That's not what Wikipedia's article on Geoff Lawson says.

"Before his death, he also supervised the styling of the 2001 X-Type compact saloon, and the completely new aluminium-bodied 2004 XJ."

I know it's just Wikipedia, but that's what it says! I truly believe that if Ian Callum had been in control of the X350 from the beginning, he would not have stuck with a traditionalist design.

 

Huh? That actually agrees with what the other article says. They both state that he was working on the design of the X350 until his death.

I know, which is why I prefer to reference Jaguar literature but in this case the press release neglects to mention Geoff's input!

 

Sorry, I don't have good reading comprehension.

I assumed since your quote said it wasn't blaming Geoff Lawson and his team, that you were saying Ian Callum was responsible for the design direction.

 

To my eye, the utter disaster of the X350 visual design is spelled "X-Type". Even today, after both models have been around for years, from a distance of a couple of hundred yards, I still can't tell if that is an X350 or an X-Type headed this way. What a strategic error to have the top of the line and the bottom of the line look so similar, except for scale! All the stylistic cues from the one are echoed in the other. Incomprehensible. To me, the X300/X308 are far more visually appealing than the X350, with the X300 XJR being the most fundamentally interesting - the last of the supercharged straight sixes.

 

This is true, it is often difficult to determine if you are seeing an X-Type or an X350 from the front. However, it's only from the front. You could say the same thing about the 2000s-ish 911 and the Boxster!

I think the X300 and X308 are gorgeous cars. However, they just look old and boring now, although they do look classic. Not to mention they are just too darn small for a flagship luxury sedan.

 

The strange thing to me about the X350 is that when I approach it, it seems like a very low car, even though it's like 5-6" taller than the X300/308. Once you are inside it though, there is plenty of headroom.

Oddly enough, sedans like the Lincoln MKZ are a staggering 5" taller than the X350!

 

It is interesting how inconstant and personal all our observations on styling design are. One man's chalk is another man's cheese - and with time, one's chalk turns into cheese. Whenever I start to think that my opinion on any element of car design is worth anything, I always have to remind myself of the XJ-S. When the XJ-S came out, I thought it was just absolutely dreadful in a visual sense (of course, I was an E-Type owner at the time). Nowadays, to my eye the XJ-S looks very appealing, with the flying buttresses, the pagoda tail-lights, the Sayer elliptical body sections.... Somewhere along the way, the car did not change, but the way I look at it did. (Even though I still have that old E-Type as a point of reference.) In the same way, where the X300/X308 looked sort of frumpy at one time, they are now starting to look better - sort of like the classic XJ6 body shape upon which someone has stepped down hard. But the X350 - I dunno, maybe it has still not aged enough (and there is that odious doppleganger X-Type - my apologies to anyone offended by my opinions). As for the XJ40 - I still can't forgive its abiding flatnesses. But I do love the latest XJ series - to my eye, they are majestic majors (with apologies to Daimler). Ehhh - it's all just one man's opinion.

 

Yup. Definitely beauty is in the eye of the beholder. And time definitely has an effect, too. The reason I like the X350 in some ways more than the X300/308 is that it just looks more voluptuous and muscular than the X300/308, at least in certain colors. In other colors, the X350 can just look plain awful.

 

i just wants to apologise for given my opinion with no enough respect to others. My idea is that the new X351 could have been introduced and keep the X350 untouched (a treat to every taste). The XJ does look from certain angles like the x-type and that is a shame, yet i sometimes confuse the new series 5 and 7 with BMW. Also the front of the Bentley Arnage is an exact replica of the Bentley Azure with $120 K difference in price.