Talk:Jaguar XF
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of Wikipedia Project Automobiles, a collective approach to creating a comprehensive guide to the world of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you are encouraged to visit the project page, where you can contribute to the discussion. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. | |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. | |
Reference to production of a "millon cars" suggests a misunderstanding of the nature of Jaguar. They didn't aim to be a mass market car. This needs radical rewriting.Ncox 03:54, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hey, I got this news,
The C-XF showcases a new technology, called JaguarSense that allows certain functions in the cockpit to be activated with a gesture of the hand instead of the push of a button.
I guess, we can add this to the article. --Prashrb 19:16, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Sections and pictures
The C-XF picture appears next to the XF section and vice versa, I suggest this is switched. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.21.145.14 (talk) 22:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] How much?
How much is the MSRP supposed to be on this car? I'm thinking if it's cheap enough I'll have to get several in different colors, you know how it is. :P -Mike Payne 04:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] New direction?
The design team for this new concept car talk of existing models being apparently 'retro', and wanting to move away from this to attract 'cool and edgy' types. Would the current designers please note: there is truly no such thing as 'retro' in design, only good design, and poor design. Are you suggesting that once all well-executed designs are exhausted, we should move to poorer aesthetics to avoid being classed as 'retro'? (compare the lines of a Barris Kustom 1949 Mercury to a Fiat Punto mk1.. and tell me which is superior). This is a condition that has blighted the industry for at least two decades now- 'hey who cares if it looks bad, as long as it's different, right?'.
The car industry design ethic is thus particularly prone to stagnation: ironically, this unwillingness to truly think progressively is actually exemplified by what the designers suggest. Contrary to what they may think, the new approach is ultimately more conservative than any of the older 'retro' designs, as it attempts to take Jaguar in the same direction as everyone else. Forward-thinking progression is apparently making your marque look like a BMW.
Jaguar has a history of beautiful, classic design: it is entirely possible to draw inspiration from this and expand on it in an innovative way, rather than going down the well-worn 'me too, high-bootline, wedge-shaped, BMW-headlighted approach'. Nice interior btw, but the outside is just too unimaginative and er.. ugly.
As a final hint: any self-respecting 'cool and edgy' type would prefer a chopped Kustom Mercury with its beautiful curving lines over a BMW anyday- perhaps you should look there for inspiration (note the lines and how they flow) and be truly mould-breaking , rather than running with the pack like everyone else straight out of design college.-Truetillbrew 00:18, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] GM Styling
A new Buick from Jaguar 66.48.177.167 06:14, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Production XF
My contribution re the production XF is a combination of information from the reference websites, promotional literature, and my local Jaguar dealer. Without doubt, there is plenty of scope for expansion and refinement by any interested editors (that's how the wiki works), but at least it's a start! Take it away guys. --Red Sunset 20:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] XF Stereo System
Is it really necessary to devote so much article space to this? --Oosh (talk) 01:01, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
It does benefit readers and the information is factually correct. --NoisyMe —Preceding comment was added at 17:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] reads like an ad
this thing reads like an ad
