1990 Jaguar Xjs V12 Classic Collection Conv. on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Porsche tops J.D. Power quality index as Korean brands soar

While complaints about infotainment systems remain a thorn in the side of automakers for J.D. Power's annual Initial Quality Study, there's a lot to celebrate this year. The average number of problems reported per 100 vehicles fell to 112 in 2015 – a three-percent improvement compared to 116 in 2014. The results of this year's survey are based on the responses of over 84,000 people about problems within the first 90 days of buying or leasing a 2015 model-year vehicle. For the third consecutive year, Porsche tops the rankings with an average of 80 problems per 100 vehicles. Although, that's slightly more than the 74 the German sportscar maker scored in 2014. "While the Japanese automakers continue to make improvements, we're seeing other brands, most notably Korean makes, really accelerating the rate of improvement," Renee Stephens, vice president of US automotive quality at J.D. Power, said in the study's release. In fact, Kia ranks as one of the biggest movers in this year's list. The Korean brand jumped to second place from seventh last year. The company had an average of 86 problems per 100 vehicles, a 20-point improvement. Third place went to Jaguar with an average of 93 problems reported, versus last year's second-place finish with 87 of them. Fourth place was Hyundai, and fifth-place Infiniti also earned a gold star for improvement with 97 issues per 100 vehicles – 31-points better than last year. Fiat still anchored the bottom of the list. However, its 161 problems this year is a lot better than the 206 in 2014. Ranked by nationality, Korean brands (Hyundai and Kia) are now leading the industry in initial quality with an average of 90 problems reported per 100 vehicles. According to J.D. Power, this is the first time Europe's figure beat Japan with 113 and 114 issues, respectively. The American brands also averaged 114. Whereas General Motors dominated last year, the segment awards are spread out in 2015. GM, Hyundai, Nissan, and Volkswagen Group are all tied with four models each earning prizes. For more information, you can also see all of the graphs, here. J.D.

Jaguar F-Pace leaps into crossover segment [UPDATE]

UPDATE: Jaguar has issued a statement indicating that the F-Pace cargo volume specified in the original official press release, was incorrect. In short, the correct figure is 33.5 cubic-feet, not 23 cu-ft, and we've updated the text. Here's the statement: "The previous draft of the release we issued incorrectly identified cargo volume in the Jaguar F-PACE using a figure that was not calculated using the US Market standard SAE methodology. The correct specification for rear load space volume in the 2017 Jaguar F-PACE with the second row seats up is 33.5 cu.ft., not 22.95 cu.ft." It's been two years since Jaguar showed off the C-X17 concept crossover at the Frankfurt Motor Show, giving us a deep metallic blue taste of what the world would look like with a leaping-cat in it. Here we have the production result, the 2017 F-Pace, coming to dealerships in Spring 2016. It will be offered in four trims - Premium, Prestige, R-Sport, and S - with three engines. Two supercharged V6 engines come at launch, one with 340 horsepower, the second with 380 hp, both shifting through the same ZF eight-speed transmission from the sedan range. Some time after that a 2.0-liter Ingenium diesel will join the lineup, offering 180 hp and 317 lb-ft. To get in, the price for that eventual diesel is will be $40,9907, while the V6s start at $42,390 and $56,700. If you liked the look of the C-X17 then there's nothing to put you off the F-Pace. The illuminated intakes from the concept are gone and the fender vents have a slightly different graphic, but otherwise you'll find Waldo before you'll find significant exterior changes. The body is one third aluminum, tweaked with high-strength steel, magnesium, and composites creating torsional stiffness numbers that match the new XF. Wheels go from 18 inches to 22 inches, hung at the ends of a double-wishbone setup in front, an integral link suspension in back, and monotube dampers all around, over a wheelbase that's 113 inches. Short overhangs front and back that mean a maximal approach angle of 25.5 degrees, a max departure angle of 25.7-degrees. The standard instrument binnacle is two analogue dials flanking a TFT display, the upgraded unit is a 12.3-inch virtual instrument cluster. It sounds like the interior trim will go as high up as you want it - something has to justify the $14,310 price difference between the V6 models - with "available leather" on the low end, aluminum mesh and satin grey ash at the other end.

Jaguar design boss admits X-Type was a mistake

History has a way of repeating itself, especially in the auto industry. When Jaguar was owned by Ford, the British brand attempted to field a competitor for the BMW 3 Series, called the X-Type. Based on the bones of a Ford Mondeo, it aped the styling of Jaguar's flagship model, the XJ, while borrowing liberally from the Ford parts bin. That was 2001.
Now, in 2013, Jaguar is planning a new 3 Series challenger based on the platform previewed by the C-X17 Concept, while Ford is attempting to take the latest Mondeo upmarket. The moves have both brands recognizing where, why, and how the X-Type failed. "It didn't look mature or powerful or anything. It was just a car," Jaguar's current head of advanced design, Julian Thomson, told PistonHeads. Basing the X-Type on a front-drive car while giving it styling that was meant for a rear-driver lead to proportions that "were plainly wrong," Thomson told PH. Ford's European head of quality, Gunnar Herrmann, added that the X-Type was "a fake Jaguar, because every piece I touch is Ford."
For what it's worth, the X-Type's successor in the segment will sport rear-drive, with plenty of input from Ian Callum. Thomson described the new model, which would challenge the 3 Series as having, "Big wheels right to the ends of the car, low bonnet, short overhangs, very low cabins." Sounds good to us.