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

    • OUCH, a very solid assessment of Tesla imho. 'He's Alienated The Wrong People' — Scott Galloway Blames Musk's Politics For Tesla's Fall From 8th To 95th In U.S. Brand Rankings
    • This isn't new.  I can't make a decision on buying a car, since I haven't made the even bigger decision to precede when and WHERE to buy a car. I've got a lot of points from my GM Card.  Never would I have thought the market would change so drastically after I last used its accumulation and would start accumulating again. So, if I were to buy a tide over used car to keep for a few years, then what?  All low mileage ... the last Buick Verano 2.4 L the last Chevy Impala 2.5 L the 2015 Malibu with Camaro rear lights 2.5 L the last Mercury Milan 4 cyl. the last Charger base 3.5 V6 Something else Low mileage "older" cars cost a bundle, IF it's a dealer that's selling them.
    • Been 1 year since I installed my home Level 2 charger and have to say, I have had zero problems with it. No issues from ChargePoint and still going strong. Total cost of home charging for the year to cover roughly 19,000 miles has been $ 757.00 based on the tracking that the ChargePoint app on my cell phone does.
    • Much appreciated, thank you. That is crazy and sad that GM, Toyota, Nissan in this day and age have allowed sloppy manufacturing to happen. Demming and Drucker were right about needing to keep a close eye always on quality for long term success. I do not blame your friend and hope GM does right by him and all the others. I think a 10yr / 100,000 mile powertrain warranty is proper here.
    • One of my best friends bought a 2024 Silverado Trail Boss with the 6.2 and he's not too stoked about it. He hasn't' had any issues thus far, but he's very skeptical about long-term ownership. He said there's a rumor that they'll extend the warranty to 10yr/100,000 and he'd be satisfied with that, but if they don't he certainly wouldn't want to own it past his OEM warranty. I don't blame him, either. It sucks because he said he planned to keep the truck for 10 years as it's kind of a do-all for his family and him. He doesn't want to have to trade it in after 5 years because he has a good chance of needing to replace the engine. GM needs to do right by all these owners.  https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a64611938/chevy-silverado-tahoe-cadillac-escalade-defective-v8-recall/ "General Motors is recalling 721K full-size trucks and SUVs with the 6.2-liter V-8, as the engine might be defective; a stop-sale has also been ordered. The recall list includes popular models such as the Cadillac Escalade, Chevy Silverado 1500, and GMC Yukon—all of which are 2021–2024 models. The problem stems from internal manufacturing defects, and vehicles must pass inspection or possibly require an engine replacement. "
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • 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