Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Rumorpile: Jaguar Ponders A Entry-Level FWD Model

    William Maley

    Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

    August 19, 2013

    From the 'this isn't really happening, is it?' file, a new report from Autocar says that Jaguar is considering a lineup of small, front-wheel drive models. Why? Economy and emission regulations.

    The European Union wants to have a manufacturer's lineup to produce an average 95 grams of CO2 per kilometer by 2020 and get lower in the coming years. In April, the European Parliament voted in laws that would accomplish this. Manufacturers who make more than 300,000 vehicles per year must meet these targets, a big problem for Jaguar and Land Rover since by 2017, they are expected to be churning out 700,000 vehicles.

    Even with a new compact sedan and possible crossover on the horizon, that might not be enough for Jaguar to meet those standards. Enter the small, front-wheel drive vehicle which could help the company get to those standards.

    Jaguar has a couple options available. The company could develop a new compact architecture for a line of compact vehicles, but it could prohibitively expensive. Jaguar has also been taking a look at using the architecture from the Range Rover Evoque.

    Source: Autocar

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at [email protected] or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    I agree with you Drew, having a FWD appliance to meet emissions will hurt not help their luxury name. Better to come out with a new subcompact line of product so Jag does not drop into that also has FWD appliance area.

    Why not come out with a Cheetah line of CUV's and FWD/RWD low priced appliances.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Like I said, time for them to have an entry level line of auto's under a different name.

    My Choices for a new Economy line of auto's with high gas mileage:

    Cheetah

    Sphynx

    Burmese

    Calico

    I think these would all play well as being entry level to Jag's. :)

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, offering a FWD entry level model would be consistent w/ the approach MB has and BMW is moving towards...the younger buyers at the entry level price point are use to FWD appliances and not discerning enough to demand RWD...so if Jag wants to pander to the indifferent masses, this is how they have to go..

    Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Or, they can simply ignore the law and pay the fine. It'll amount to about 6000 Euros for their 3.0L V6 diesel cars and 12800 euros for their V8 supercharged models. About a 12~13% price increase.

    That is a lot stiffer the US CAFE penalties which is really negligible -- a manufacturer which misses the 54.5 mpg "target" by a whopping 53.5 mpg by making cars which gets no better than 1 MPG will pay a fine of roughly $2,900 per vehicle. That of course is ridiculous unless the automaker makes 70 ton main battle tanks exclusively. If GM does absolutely nothing to improve fuel economy and is still at it's 32.9 MPG CAFE number from 2012, it'll have to add $1,188 to the price tag of its cars.

    If you have ever wondered why the US automakers don't fight CAFE rules, it's very simply:-

    (1) It doesn't really matter how strict or how lose they are. It doesn't matter how high an MPG rating CAFE demands. If it applies to everybody then it doesn't really put anyone at a disadvantage. In 2025 if 54.5 MPG is not achievable in the kind of cars consumers want to buy then they simply won't meet CAFE, sell mostly whatever the consumers want and pass along the fine.

    (2) Fines from CAFE are relatively mild and tolerable. This makes them basically immaterial in vehicle sales and choice. Eg. A consume may still choose a 40 mpg CRUZE over a 55 MPG hybrid because the $800 fine is cheaper than $6000 Hybrid drivetrain. In fact whatever state or federal tax incentives may be available will most like have a greater bearing than whatever CAFE penalty exists. A Corvette buy may still buy a 23MPG corvette over a 55 MPG hybrid because he will willing pay the $1700 fine to go 0-60 in 3.8 secs.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I have a question: is it 300k vehicles worldwide, or just sold in the EU? If the EU means worldwide, dwightlooi has the right idea. If that rule only applies to cars sold in the EU, then abandon Europe as a car market. Neither Jaguar nor Range Rover should deviate from their unique selling point if they are to remain viable. Screw the EU for their excessive rules.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I have a question: is it 300k vehicles worldwide, or just sold in the EU? If the EU means worldwide, dwightlooi has the right idea. If that rule only applies to cars sold in the EU, then abandon Europe as a car market. Neither Jaguar nor Range Rover should deviate from their unique selling point if they are to remain viable. Screw the EU for their excessive rules.

    EU = Socialist attempt to standardize the same same for everyone. Just does not work in the real world.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Awful idea, they want an SUV too, which is a bad idea. Jaguars need to sell on being beautiful looking sports cars, they don't have that wide range appeal of BMW or Benz. They do need a small RWD sedan below the XF, that at least gives them 3 sedans and 2 coupe/convertible models, 5 products is good, let Land Rover do the SUVs.

    If they plan to dress up a lesser front wheel drive car as a Jag, they won't be doing a Cavalier turned into a Cimarron, they would be working with the Tata Nano.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I have a question: is it 300k vehicles worldwide, or just sold in the EU? If the EU means worldwide, dwightlooi has the right idea. If that rule only applies to cars sold in the EU, then abandon Europe as a car market. Neither Jaguar nor Range Rover should deviate from their unique selling point if they are to remain viable. Screw the EU for their excessive rules.

    It's 300,000 in the EU, how many cars you sell and what kind outside of the EU is not within their jurisdiction. There is no legal basis for the EU to fine a company for products sold or not sold in China or the USA. The EU regulations apply only to the EU. In fact, it is based on new vehicles REGISTERED in the EU not sold or made or whatever.

    Manufacturers making 10,000~300,000 cars are subjected to a less stringent (and fixed) 25% reduction from their 2007 carbon footprint rule. The same fines apply for going over.

    Manufacturers doing under 10,000 cars are not subject to the new emission rules or crash standards. But they are subject to a different tax applicable to custom vehicles and some countries won't let owners register them. Eg. your Koenigseggs and Caterhams are exempt.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Rivian has opened a new 8 stall 350kW fast charger station at Lynnwood mall plus a 9th Handicap fast charge stall. Seems when remote service is being done they are tagged red as two of the units are. They take credit or debit cards on top of if you setup a Rivian app account.  There are now over 100 fast charge stations within a 5 mile radius of where I live.
    • Yes. Ferrari was always a company selling towards the top tier rich.  I am not sure about Porsche's marketing after 1945, but I do know that Porsche wanted to go up market, really up market,  to sell to the rich in the late 1990s.    Rolex watches were always expensive.  But not always being a  chic jewellery accessory.  Rolex watches were expensive time pieces because they were highly precise time pieces meant for professions that required time pieces that were precise in time telling. Also, Rolexes were also engineered to be tough and not break in those job environments. Therefore the high price tags of them were because the high standard of engineering that went into them.  The value of the brand went up because of the people that bought them praised them. It was after the quartz movement of the 1960s and 1970s that Rolex needed to re-invent themselves as battery powered watches were MORE precise ate their lunch. So...like many other "swiss" automatic watch makers launched their new image as luxury time pieces. It was easy for Rolex to do as Rolex was coveted as a great engineered watch to begin with.   Like I said...its a boys club that they want to be known as and bought by (rich) people that have bought into that boys club mentality.  It aint for you or for @ccap41.   Even if you or @ccap41 had the money, its obvious that you guys have not fallen for this marketing gimmick.  Its barely for me either.  1. I cant afford Ferraris, Porsches or Rolexes. 2. I do not want to be in a Porsche Boys club.  I like Porsches and all, but Im not in their camp.  Not because of the boys club marketing schemes. Its just that I am not a rabid Porsche guy fanatic.  3. If I had 1% money, I am not sure Id be a Ferrari guy either.  After deep thought, I am more of a Ferrari guy than I am a Porsche guy.  But maybe not enough for me to fall for this kind of sales scheme either. 4.  Rolex...   I do like a Rolex.  But I am not one to boast about what kind of time piece Im wearing. So...nix me on that club as well. 5. It looks like I am aligned with you and @ccap41's take on this, but with me, I shrug it off.  I see why the companies want to go down this road. And I see why there are some people...rich people...that do not mind giving their monies away to these companies. And at the end of the day, its what makes them happy and superior to the rest of us as we do not have the time or money or will to buy into any of this. And kudos for them for buying into that lifestyle.    At the end of the day, whether we are talking about Ferrari or Porsche or Rolex, some of their product, past and present, have been REALLY REALLY EXCELLENT product. Whether we are talking about looks and style or engineering and technology, all 3 have styled and engineered awesomeness.  We could talk about their products that were failures, but wouldnt that signal some sort of sour grapes analogy on our part? Its a company's right to mold their brand image as they wish.   Whether we agree to it as individuals is irrelevant. What is relevant though is how collectively we ALL feel about it.  In Ferraris case its a huge success. Porsche and Rolex have to work on it just a tad more. But I feels its successful.  If there is a downfall for Porsche, I think it has more to do with their decisions to being a sports car maker ALONGSIDE being a (rich) family grocery getter/soccer mom SUV maker.  The failure of having two opposing identities is killing Porsche.  And it is a double edged sword.  On the one hand, if not for the SUVs, Porsche would have been gone by the early 2000s.  The inevitable was prolonged?  Rolex... Too many boutique time piece makers have propped up in the last 15 years that took their place in some areas of the really expensive realm.  Quartz time pieces keep on being a nuisance to them. This time around its the fashion watch trend. The name brand watch sellers like Michael Korrs and Hugo Boss and even Porsche that have taken some of Rolexes market share.  The advent of smart watches also hurts them.  So they decided to change it up in the sales realm.  Are there enough Rolex worshippers out there that will buy cheaper Rolexes or older models just to get that one highly anticipated limited edition time piece? Well...although watches are strictly fashion devices today, there are more than enough fashionable time pieces around for people to by-pass Rolex fandom.  Some have their own unique look to them and are sought after and some just emulate Rolex but watch brand snobs are too few today so Rolex has a steep hill to climb because most people that wear watches dont give a shyte what kind of watch you wear.  Unlike cars, car snobbery actually still exits...  Hence why Ferrari is still king of the douchiness and going on strong. Stronger than ever Id say.    
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search