During the Frankfurt Auto show I ended up exchanging yucks with Jag Design Chief Ian Callum. We discussed our Chevy hot rods (I have a '55, he has a '56.), the Goodwood Revival Meeting and of course his new concept car the Jaguar C-X16, which is not yet officially approved for production.
Somewhere in the conversation he said this, "If we do the C-X16, clearly we would have to consider doing a convertible." He then added the fact that more than 50 percent of Jag XK sales are convertibles.
I immediately called our inhouse design chief Mark Takahashi and asked him to chop the C-X16's top. "I'll do two," he said. "One with the top up and one with the top down."
What do you think?
chirsch3 says:
10:34 AM, 09/17/11
pretty nice actually
i'd buy it
shadrach2 says:
11:10 AM, 09/17/11
Reminds me a great deal of the current Z4.
ed124c says:
08:07 AM, 09/18/11
Reminds me of a LOT of cars. Are designers in a rut? Or are potential buyers of these expensive cars afraid of change? Maybe both.
altimadude05 says:
08:15 AM, 09/18/11
+1 ed124c
Is this the Next Honda S2000?
rod_stewart says:
10:23 PM, 09/18/11
This car needs a nose job so it doesnt look like a tacky 350Z, maybe your photoshop guy can help Jaguar with that?
Also what the heck are "yucks" and how do you exchange them.......or don't I want to know......
-Rod
bankerdanny says:
09:49 AM, 09/19/11
I think it looks fine. But it could be a number of cars. Nothing about it (or anything in the Jaguar lineup these days) says Jaguar.
I just can't think of any compelling reason to buy any model Jaguar over its competitors.
higgsboson says:
06:20 PM, 09/19/11
I suppose it is too much to ask for car companies to stop calling convertibles, "roadsters."
When is the last time you saw a actual roadster? Mid-90's Viper?
sodiezl350 says:
10:46 PM, 09/19/11
Jaguars look like Aston Martins which is totally fine by me. This one less so than say the XK but I can still see the similarities. To be fair to this car, this picture is not very revealing of the actual design. Something tells me that in real life this won't look anything like an S2000 and that the color in the current picture is really what is giving that impression. My bet is this car weighs at least 800lbs more than an S2k.
lolxd says:
07:02 AM, 09/20/11
Aside from the X-Type, this is probably going to be the first Jaguar in history to look dull.
Not feeling the front end nor the side profile. Too S2000 for a Jaguar which is not bad but not good either.
I think Jaguar should've approved the Bertone B99 design language and use it for the E type alone (Thre rear end and the front end would be much more fitting for an E-Type).
Here's the front end:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-oJrwc_ywGvQ/TV3FeOhEgYI/AAAAAAAEAIw/99Spo3ly04I/s1600/Bertone-Jaguar-B99-2.JPG
And here's the back end (I think this resembles a lot of E-Type rear end):
http://motoren.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/jaguar-b-99-bertone-3.jpg
tucson07 says:
09:52 AM, 09/20/11
Memo to Ian Callum:
September 19, 2011
Re: C-X16 Prototype
Sir:
Yawn.
Respectfully,
Your public
akula1 says:
12:57 PM, 09/20/11
What do I think? I think soft tops suck. In all aspects. Time to stop raking in profits by using cheap cloth and obsolete tech. Join the modern world and provide your customers w/ the looks, performance and durability they expect when paying > $60K. A freaking Miata has it and so does the mid-engined Ferrari 458! Stop disguising profit gouging as 'cute' or 'chic' retro/traditional.