• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    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 william.maley@cheersandgears.com or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    0


    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0


    User Feedback


    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.

    0

    Share this comment


    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. :)

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Maybe they need a sub-brand instead. It's a shame they couldn't get the Rover name back.

    Maybe they could bring back Sterling.. No wait, bad idea.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Maybe they need a sub-brand instead. It's a shame they couldn't get the Rover name back.

    Maybe they could bring back Sterling.. No wait, bad idea.

    :fryingpan: Shame on you for even thinking that. :P

    0

    Share this comment


    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
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    FWD appliance, Ask any owner of a GTI, Fiat 500 or RR Evoque.

    Frankly, someone who buys an Evoque isn't indifferent. Someone who buys a dowdy ol' M-Class is.

    0

    Share this comment


    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.

    1

    Share this comment


    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.

    0

    Share this comment


    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.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Bring Tata here, problem solved.

    Maybe they need a sub-brand instead. It's a shame they couldn't get the Rover name back.

    0

    Share this comment


    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.

    0

    Share this comment


    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.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

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

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor




  • Popular Stories

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. gmcbob
      gmcbob
      (42 years old)
  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      The Environmental Protection Agency has today proposed to keep its vehicle emission targets through 2025, shocking a lot of people and possibly setting up a major fight between regulators and the automotive industry. 
      According to Automotive News, the proposal will now enter a 30-day comment period. After this period, the EPA administrator could finalize this proposal and begin enforcing these standards a bit quicker. By 2025, automakers will need to increase their  to 54.5 miles per gallon corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) numbers to 54.5 miles per gallon.
      Why move the proposal up now? A proposal was expected next year with a final decision in 2018. The EPA said in a statement their “extensive technical analysis” has shown no reason as to why the timeframe or standards should be changed. Also, automakers will be able to achieve those 2025 standards at “similar or even a lower cost”.
      “Due to the industry’s rapid technological advancement, the technical record could arguably support strengthening the 2022-2025 standards. However, the administrator’s judgment is [that] now is not the time to introduce uncertainty by changing the standards. The industry has made huge investments in fuel efficiency and low emissions technologies based on these standards, and any changes now may disrupt those plans,” said Janet McCabe, acting assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation on a conference call.
      That analysis started back in July and is used to determine whether or not the EPA needs to make adjustments to the regulations or schedule.
      But there might be another reason. With President Obama leaving the White House on January 20th and President-elect Donald Trump, there are concerns that Trump's administration could challenge the regulations. By doing this now, it would make the process of undoing these regulations more complicated - notice and comment requirements, possible court battle with environmental groups, etc. McCabe denied this, saying the decision was based on analysis and a “rigorous technical record,”
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)
      Pic Credit: William Maley for Cheers & Gears

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      The Environmental Protection Agency has today proposed to keep its vehicle emission targets through 2025, shocking a lot of people and possibly setting up a major fight between regulators and the automotive industry. 
      According to Automotive News, the proposal will now enter a 30-day comment period. After this period, the EPA administrator could finalize this proposal and begin enforcing these standards a bit quicker. By 2025, automakers will need to increase their  to 54.5 miles per gallon corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) numbers to 54.5 miles per gallon.
      Why move the proposal up now? A proposal was expected next year with a final decision in 2018. The EPA said in a statement their “extensive technical analysis” has shown no reason as to why the timeframe or standards should be changed. Also, automakers will be able to achieve those 2025 standards at “similar or even a lower cost”.
      “Due to the industry’s rapid technological advancement, the technical record could arguably support strengthening the 2022-2025 standards. However, the administrator’s judgment is [that] now is not the time to introduce uncertainty by changing the standards. The industry has made huge investments in fuel efficiency and low emissions technologies based on these standards, and any changes now may disrupt those plans,” said Janet McCabe, acting assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation on a conference call.
      That analysis started back in July and is used to determine whether or not the EPA needs to make adjustments to the regulations or schedule.
      But there might be another reason. With President Obama leaving the White House on January 20th and President-elect Donald Trump, there are concerns that Trump's administration could challenge the regulations. By doing this now, it would make the process of undoing these regulations more complicated - notice and comment requirements, possible court battle with environmental groups, etc. McCabe denied this, saying the decision was based on analysis and a “rigorous technical record,”
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)
      Pic Credit: William Maley for Cheers & Gears
    • By William Maley
      Plans for a flagship Jeep may have been trashed. Autoline Daily reported yesterday that Fiat Chrysler Automobiles have cancelled plans for the Grand Wagoneer that was due for the 2019 model. Citing information from industry planning company Auto Forecast Solutions, Autoline Daily says the company cannot stretch out the platform that underpins the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Dodge Durango for a model that would be in a higher segment. 
      Autoline Daily goes on to say that work may continue on a flagship model for Jeep, but use the platform that underpins the Ram 1500 pickup.
      Rumors of the Grand Wagoneer have been floating around for a couple of years and it only recently confirmed by Jeep CEO Mike Manley. Last month, we got a possible preview as to what Grand Wagoneer's front end could look like.
      Source: Autoline Daily (Video Below)
       

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Plans for a flagship Jeep may have been trashed. Autoline Daily reported yesterday that Fiat Chrysler Automobiles have cancelled plans for the Grand Wagoneer that was due for the 2019 model. Citing information from industry planning company Auto Forecast Solutions, Autoline Daily says the company cannot stretch out the platform that underpins the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Dodge Durango for a model that would be in a higher segment. 
      Autoline Daily goes on to say that work may continue on a flagship model for Jeep, but use the platform that underpins the Ram 1500 pickup.
      Rumors of the Grand Wagoneer have been floating around for a couple of years and it only recently confirmed by Jeep CEO Mike Manley. Last month, we got a possible preview as to what Grand Wagoneer's front end could look like.
      Source: Autoline Daily (Video Below)
       
    • By William Maley
      Ever since Mercedes-Benz introduced the new E-Class earlier this year, there has been speculation as to when its sister model, the CLS would be redesigned. A new report says that it will take place in 2018.
      According to Automotive News, the next-generation CLS is expected to go on sale in the summer of 2018 for the U.S. The model will use Mercedes' Modular Rear Architecture (MRA) that is not only lighter than the platform underpinning the current CLS, but also bring more room. Spy shots reveal that the design of the next CLS will evolve, but will not depart from the current look. There is talk that the new inline-six that Mercedes announced earlier this month could be used for the CLS.
      The interesting bit about Automotive News' report is that Mercedes could move the CLS name to a new four-door sedan that AMG is currently developing, while the standard model would use the CLE nameplate. Also under speculation is that CLS shooting brake will be dropped when the next-generation model is introduced.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

      View full article
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)