OV9

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:30 pm**

Jimexpl wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 2:59 pm Jaguar have always been brilliant at this -
XK120, E-type, XJS, XJs except for the last model, S Type, both generation of XK - all compromised packaging for their size.

Which generation? I always thought my dad's old '65 S-type had a pretty decent boot?

(generic s-type image, not his car)

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:37 pm**

I can only assume that most of the volume of the car is just batteries to give the beast an at least somewhat acceptable range!

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:43 pm**

It looks decent parked outside a stately home

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:44 pm**

Mito Man wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:43 pm It looks decent parked outside a stately home

No it doesn't. It looks as out of place as a Rolls Cullinan.

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:46 pm**

Jobbo wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:44 pm
Mito Man wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:43 pm It looks decent parked outside a stately home
No it doesn't. It looks as out of place as a Rolls Cullinan.

Agree to disagree. I think it looks fab in that photo.

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:48 pm**

The photo looks AI generated anyway - there's something wrong with the stonework of the house. So the fact that there's nothing remotely classy or traditionally English about the Type 01 sort of fits with that...

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:50 pm**

Of course it's AI generated, but until I see one parked outside a mansion in Surrey it'll do.

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:52 pm**

Make it a 2 door again, then the lack of storage and practicality is not so much of an issue.

That shot of it it in front of a stately home kind of talks of a romantic grand tourer usage where you can whisk the family down to the south of France like you would in your V8 Range Rover, but the lack of storage fucks that up.

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:56 pm**

Have we sneered at the rear door aperture vs door size yet? Long doors that can't be fully opened when beside thing, with none of the normal advantage of a wider ingress/egress aperture.

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:59 pm**

mik wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:56 pm Have we sneered at the rear door aperture vs door size yet? Long doors that can't be fully opened when beside thing, with none of the normal advantage of a wider ingress/egress aperture.

look at that massive rubber seal section - looks like a flappy elephants ear draped across…

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 4:12 pm**

That rear seat looks like it's going to be really comfortable, what with the thickness of the padding...Perfect for long journeys

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 4:17 pm**

mik wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:56 pm Have we sneered at the rear door aperture vs door size yet? Long doors that can't be fully opened when beside thing, with none of the normal advantage of a wider ingress/egress aperture.

This plus the boot size is absolutely preposterous. It will do for Jaguar what Homer Simpson's creation did, save that was a successful company beforehand.

The middle also looks like it has a pair of skis preinstalled or perhaps some IKEA flatpack. I just can't imagine the mentality of the people who designed this. As swerv also said - look at the tiny foam seat on top of a comical beam that presumably is again full of batteries or motor. Most electric cars are bad with a rear seat squab that's too low in the back with knees around your ears (see Mercedes EQE or Jaguar iPace) but this takes the biscuit.

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 4:33 pm**

Rich B wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:59 pm
mik wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:56 pm Have we sneered at the rear door aperture vs door size yet? Long doors that can't be fully opened when beside thing, with none of the normal advantage of a wider ingress/egress aperture.

look at that massive rubber seal section - looks like a flappy elephants ear draped across…

You're right! I'm going with Asian rather than African.....

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 4:46 pm**

Jobbo wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:48 pm The photo looks AI generated anyway - there's something wrong with the stonework of the house.

That, and the classy, stately spaghetti drive.

: JagNoodle.jpg (57.44 KiB) Viewed 260 times

That rear door aperture is laughable.

This car looks striking (I like the overall shape), but once you get past the shock of that, it's a fucking dogs dinner of poor choices all over the shop. I sort of assumed that it would be quite sensible inside, bags of legroom, big boot, etc because it's Jaguar, they're not stupid.

But it's not. Every important detail seems to be wrong in some way. I predict lots of 48hr test drives, and buggerall sales once the usual footballers and influencers get bored of it.

Honestly, at this stage, if this car kills Jaguar, it'll be entirely justified and no tears should be shed.

Edit: Why the fuck doesn't it have a rear windscreen, by the way? I bet that's not claustrophobic as fuck in the tiny rear seats with the tiny rear windows and no natural light from behind

"Well, obviously it's a 2+2 you shouldn't have rear passengers"
Then why does it have laughably poorly designed rear doors?

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 5:07 pm**

Beany wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 4:46 pm
Jobbo wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:48 pm The photo looks AI generated anyway - there's something wrong with the stonework of the house.
That, and the classy, stately spaghetti drive.

JagNoodle.jpg

That rear door aperture is laughable.

This car looks striking (I like the overall shape), but once you get past the shock of that, it's a fucking dogs dinner of poor choices all over the shop. I sort of assumed that it would be quite sensible inside, bags of legroom, big boot, etc because it's Jaguar, they're not stupid.

But it's not. Every important detail seems to be wrong in some way. I predict lots of 48hr test drives, and buggerall sales once the usual footballers and influencers get bored of it.

Honestly, at this stage, if this car kills Jaguar, it'll be entirely justified and no tears should be shed.

Edit: Why the fuck doesn't it have a rear windscreen, by the way? I bet that's not claustrophobic as fuck in the tiny rear seats with the tiny rear windows and no natural light from behind

"Well, obviously it's a 2+2 you shouldn't have rear passengers"
Then why does it have laughably poorly designed rear doors?

And remember - all of this from a completely BLANK SHEET DESIGN.

I get it - if you have to turn an XJ into an XJ-E, fine, you may have some consequences but where starting from scratch it shouldn't be riddled with compromises as this clearly is.

I mean how can you use it when it has such an unusuable (shape as much as size) boot. Its supposed to be a 4 door four seat GT so needs Range Rover levels of luggage capacity.

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 5:12 pm**

Apparently they're bragging about how this is what a car looks like if you let the designers start the process, and then the engineers work to that spec, rather than the other way around (IE engineers create a platform, designers fit their ideas to that).

I think we're learning why it's done that way.

How the fuck can you have a car the size of a full fat range rover in footprint, but with seemingly less space inside than a Ford Mondeo??

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 5:15 pm**

Beany wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 4:46 pm
Jobbo wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:48 pm The photo looks AI generated anyway - there's something wrong with the stonework of the house.
That, and the classy, stately spaghetti drive.

JagNoodle.jpg

That rear door aperture is laughable.

This car looks striking (I like the overall shape), but once you get past the shock of that, it's a fucking dogs dinner of poor choices all over the shop. I sort of assumed that it would be quite sensible inside, bags of legroom, big boot, etc because it's Jaguar, they're not stupid.

But it's not. Every important detail seems to be wrong in some way. I predict lots of 48hr test drives, and buggerall sales once the usual footballers and influencers get bored of it.

Honestly, at this stage, if this car kills Jaguar, it'll be entirely justified and no tears should be shed.

Edit: Why the fuck doesn't it have a rear windscreen, by the way? I bet that's not claustrophobic as fuck in the tiny rear seats with the tiny rear windows and no natural light from behind

"Well, obviously it's a 2+2 you shouldn't have rear passengers"
Then why does it have laughably poorly designed rear doors?

Tbf, don't several of the Volvos and Polestars have no rear window? I mean, I think it's utter shite and must make it an awful place to be a passenger, especially as apparently "EV sickness" is becoming a thing. But the posh van idea is already done.

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 5:31 pm**

I wonder if it genuinely started off as a 2 door like the concept. Then the accountants said they really still want a job by this time next year so make it 4 door so they have a few months longer to find a new job.

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 8:08 pm**

mik wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 3:30 pm
Jimexpl wrote: Wed Oct 07, 2026 2:59 pm Jaguar have always been brilliant at this -
XK120, E-type, XJS, XJs except for the last model, S Type, both generation of XK - all compromised packaging for their size.
Which generation? I always thought my dad's old '65 S-type had a pretty decent boot?

(generic s-type image, not his car)

I was thinking of the second gen Lincoln based car, but your dad's had a big boot at the expense of not really fitting adults in the back without sliding the seats forward.

Posted: **Wed Oct 07, 2026 10:10 pm**

I like that they’ve had the balls to do something crazy.

Although I hate it and think it looks ridiculous and can’t see them selling more than a few as statement piece for ‘look at me’ types who will soon get bored and move o to something else.

OV9

Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?

Re: Jaguar?