CptMatt

I like that you took the Gran Torino front end, the big open grille with dual headlights on either side. My Father owned a '72 Gran Torino wagon, silver with the black knitted vinyl interior. It had the 351 Cleveland and could easily smoke the optional G70-15 Goodyears Polyglas he speced on it. It was a station wagon, but it was still cool.

All y'all can debate number all you want. When it comes to "numbers" I'm a firm believer in "Lies, damn lies and statistics". Gimme real world experience. I have a long time friend (since high school, 1976) that has worked his way through just about every high line auto company dealership service department, from mechanic to service department manager. He ranks 'em, from personal experience of seeing them come in the door.... 1) Mercedes 2) BMW 3) Jaguar 4) Audi He works right now for a Lexus dealer that also owns a Jaguar franchise. He says the last generation (X308) and the current aluminum cat are one of the best built luxury cars out there. Very few problems, very few warranty claims and when there is a problem, its easy and quick to fix. Yes, he has anecdotal stories of problematic cars, but he says those are "1 in a thousand". If he could afford one, he's own one of the new XJs. I'll take the mechanic's word over Mr. Power and others with a drum to beat.

They already have a "super" XJ, the Portfolio series. Its extremely expesive and very, very low production. The Daimler models sold in England are what's sold here as the Jaguar Vanden Plas. The top "Jaguar" model is called Sovereign over there, Daimler is above that. As for aspirational, I think the Jaguar is already that. Benz's and BMWs are dime-a-dozen, even the top line models. You can walk down a Chicago Loop street at midday and no will even blink as one of those goes by. Run a Jag by, not all but quite a few will watch it pass.

Jaguar's problems stem from Nasser's stupidity of trying to make Ford a conglamerate, forgetting the auto end and the current administration conservative, no-risk-taking mind set. It was stupid to try to sell a reskinned Ford Mondeo as a Jaguar X Type. Its a good platform but not good enough that anything could be done to it that would make it handle, ride or perform like a true Jaguar. It was also stupid to try compete with BMW and Audi model for model, the reasoning behind the X Type in the first place (a lower price entry model). Jaguar is expensive and exclusive, if not in price, then by production. The S Type has gotten long in the tooth and Ford management neglected it for far too long. It should have been updated this year or last, not 2 years from now (2008MY). The XJ is suffering from the same thing that is killing the Five Hundred, its too damn boring. They took the very elegant lines and proportions of the Series III/X300/X308 and bulked it up. Unfortunately, it threw off all the proportions and destroyed the gracefullness of those older designs. They needed to break with the past and built something more "conservatively radical". They should have kept some design cues from the past but taken them in a new direction. The XK is beautiful but it looks too much like an Aston Martin. AMs are muscular and beefy in their look, while Jags are supposed to be sleek and light, like the old E Type or the XK its replacing. The new XK looks like an upmarket streetsweeper, the R model doubly so. But I'm sure it will sell well. I don't think Ford should cut Jaguar loose any more then Land Rover or Aston Martin. They are excellent halo cars, much like the Ford GT. They dovetail well with Ford's history with England. What Ford needs to do is keep their mitts out of them and let them get on with it. Let there be tech cross-pollination, like Chrysler and Benz, but let the Brits design their own cars. They know how to do it better then a bunch of Detroiters.

Hi, I thought I read some where that Ford wasn't going to be doing fleet sales on the Five Hundred because it didn't want to fall into that same trap they did with the Taurus? On my way to work this morning, here in Chicago, I saw 3 Yellow Taxi Five Hundreds. What's up?

What the heck is it with Ford and thier stupid naming conventions? First, its Land Rover. They kill a really great SUV name like Discovery in favor of LR3 (its still Discovery in the rest of the world). Rumor has it the next Freelander will be LR2. Now, its the Mercury Zephyr being dumped for MKZ and Aviator for MKX. Do they think consumers are so dumb they can't remember a friggin' name? We need to have letters and numbers. What the heck is wrong with "real" name on a car? I'm not even gonna start on the stupid F, E and M naming convention. :angry: