Doubtful.  There were poor people in 1974 too.  Besides, what’s the big difference between driving at $3 per gallon (in today’s dollar) and getting 15 MPG ($0.20 fuel cost per mile) back then and driving at $10 per gallon today getting 50 MPG, or same $0.20 per mile. Fact remains that when things are cheaper we tend to consume more, whether it’s food, water, gasoline, or pretty much anything.   If we had gradually increased fuel and energy prices over the last 50 years since oil crisis, I’m certain cars today would be even more efficient than 50 MPG, lowering fuel costs per mile below that of 1974.  The poor would have adapted just like everyone else and been fine.  Obviously fuel costs per mile are lower today than in 1974, which leads to people driving more.   As for the poor being affected disproportionately, remember that the gasoline superusers are not the poorest amongst us.  The top 10% of users are estimated to consume more gasoline than the bottom 60 percent.  My guess is that if gas had gradually gone from $3 to $10 per gallon over the last 50 years (in today’s dollar), vehicles like RVs, boats, private planes, etc. would also be much more fuel efficient because even those who are better off financially would not want to spend $1,000 for a fill-up.  Higher energy costs would also incentivize more energy efficient homes, living closer to work, reducing trips through better planning, etc.   Anyway, IMO we squandered a great opportunity over the last 50 years to become a much more energy-efficient country, and in the process also reduce GHGs.  Just hope we learn from past mistakes.

As they say, no guts, no glory.  Time will tell if Jag made the right move or not.  All depends if the owners have the patience to wait it out.  

still looks like a bloated tick...

Well look at how well their last ad campaign went. Also lots of news organizations have been tying that to them killing production off (which was planned anyways) as a failure of the company. 

They are using the tech to make the batteries, that is what the issue is, they aren't coming from China, plus Ford has developed their own batteries, but that is another 3-5 years out for production.  https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ford/2025/04/24/ford-ev-battery-lithium-manganese-rich/83231092007/

That would never fly because it would make it more expensive for everyone to do and disproportionately hurt lower wage makers who often drive further to work. So it wouldn't work politically 

Adjusted for inflation, gas prices were around $3 per gallon at start of oil crisis 50 years ago, when cars reportedly only got about 14 MPG or less on average.  By comparison, a family car today similar to hybrid Accord or Camry that gets over 3 times the mileage could drive at same fuel cost per mile even if gas was around $10 per gallon.   Instead of CAFE, had government addressed fuel efficiency and desired lower consumption by gradually increasing fuel prices over the last 50 years, we would now have even more efficient cars/vehicles, and more importantly would have incentivized people to make better fuel-saving decisions.  CAFE addresses the vehicle itself but doesn’t encourage driving less in order that we collectively burn less gas overall.  Initially the goal 50 years ago was oil independence and today it’s more about reducing green house gases, but regardless we still burn a lot of gas/fuel because it’s cheap.  Please don’t get me wrong, I like stuff to be cheaper, but in this case if we really want everyone to use less gas, just make it more expensive.  I see higher energy costs as a necessary evil if we actually want significant results.    

Looks good for city and adventure driving on easy trails, but charging rate seems too slow to me for long touring highway trips.  If it takes 30 minutes to charge from 10-80% battery SOC as reported, and required every couple of hours of high-speed cruising, it would get old extremely fast.  I look forward to seeing driving range at steady 75 MPH tested.

Fair point, lol. 

“In the new era, it (Jaguar) wants to cater to a younger crowd of 'progressive people.'“   “Jaguar’s Managing Director, Rawdon Glover, recently stated that the company has come to grips with the fact that most customers will take their business elsewhere following the brand’s reinvention. He estimates as many as 85% of buyers won’t return to purchase the Type 00 when it arrives in production guise later this year.”   https://www.motor1.com/news/766281/new-jaguar-all-about-exuberance/   I don’t know about you, but this does not strike me as a recipe for success.  I could be wrong…