Jaguar C-X17 SUV Concept - Here are a bunch more photos

"Speedmonkey" (Speedmonkey)
09/08/2013 at 12:48 • Filed to: Jaguar C-X17

Last time the Jaguar C-X17 leaked photos were shown there were only two. A load more have since come to light. !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

DISCUSSION (55)

KillerRaccoon - Group J's Sébastien Loeb > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 12:53

Check the link.

Mikeado > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 12:56

Did you mean to embed this link?

http://www.carscoops.com/2013/09/jaguar…

Jayhawk Jake > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 12:59

That thing is beautiful. 10/10 would hoon

ss_lump > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 13:17

Could I have oppo posting permission?

Speedmonkey > Mikeado
09/08/2013 at 13:43

Oops. Cheers for that. No, linked to my own site. they've spread across the net now

Speedmonkey > KillerRaccoon - Group J's Sébastien Loeb
09/08/2013 at 13:43

Done and altered. Thanks

Speedmonkey > ss_lump
09/08/2013 at 13:44

Find https://twitter.com/NobodyFromOppo on twitter and ask

Leadbull > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 13:45

THE ULTIMATE SHOPPING MACHINE

TFRN > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 13:53

I think people are bagging on this so much because they can't get through their thick skulls that Jag needs a vehicle like this to push to the sales goals they need to keep making the big, bold, British bruisers we all love. Get over yourselves.

Speedmonkey > TFRN
09/08/2013 at 13:55

HeroOfTomorrow has a star > TFRN
09/08/2013 at 13:56

What do their sales goals have to do with other people's opinion on the aesthetics? I think this thing is ugly. They could have made it better-looking.

KillerRaccoon - Group J's Sébastien Loeb > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 13:57

I'm liking the CX-17 more and more.

TFRN > HeroOfTomorrow has a star
09/08/2013 at 13:59

It doesn't look much different than an XF or F-Type…

Not trying to sound rude but, what should it have looked more like?

Speedmonkey > KillerRaccoon - Group J's Sébastien Loeb
09/08/2013 at 14:05

Same here. It's elegantly done

Pete Zapardi's Pizza Party > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 14:05

I want so badly to hate on this thing, but I can't.... I just can't.

Speedmonkey > Pete Zapardi's Pizza Party
09/08/2013 at 14:08

You know why? Because Tata let Jaguar make beautiful, individual cars and Jaguar's bosses let Ian Callum and his team make beautiful, individual cars. When managers tell designers what to design you get the X6 or Cayenne

HeroOfTomorrow has a star > TFRN
09/08/2013 at 14:15

You don't sound rude at all. Personally, I'm not a big fan of the F-type (because the rear quarter is so oddly proportioned, it gives me headaches) and the XF is very generic. So also the problem with this car: what is the differentiating factor? It's a Jag: that used to be special. I'd like to see it look more special.

ptak appreciates old racecars > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 14:16

Now it's a wagon!

Kinja'd!!!

#dealwitit

tommyh4 > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 14:19

It looks great! They should definitely build it! Now we need some specs

Dr. Mantis Toboggan, M.D. > Leadbull
09/08/2013 at 14:20

That probably would have worked if this was a BMW

P601 > HeroOfTomorrow has a star
09/08/2013 at 14:32

The best way that Jaguar could have made the cx17 SUV better looking would be not to make it an SUV in the first place. I would imagine that it is hard to make a vehicle which is both an obvious SUV and a continuation of recent Jag design. Personally I think that Audi (Q7) and Range Rover pull this of well.

It could also do with a name change, people who buy SUV's generally don't like alphanumeric model codes (and neither do I).

P601 > HeroOfTomorrow has a star
09/08/2013 at 14:32

It could also do with a name change, people who buy SUV's generally don't like alphanumeric model codes (and neither do I).

KurtBroz > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 14:35

Color choice: 10/10

Style: 5/10

Name: 0/10

Would I rather drive this than an rusted, woody Wagoneer? No. 0/10

Do we need another blob of 'luxury utlity'? 0/10

Overall score: 15/50

DankyBrobrowsky > Pete Zapardi's Pizza Party
09/08/2013 at 14:52

I agree, I got no beef with it. While I can't stand SUVs/CUVs, the thing looks good. The interior, especially center consol area, is a little too Land Rover'y for me, so hopefully they will change that.

maximum_sarge > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 14:52

Kinja'd!!!

And with the new LR4 now available without a low speed transfer case, isn't this Jaag sort of redundant? The Jaag is decent looking, for an utterly stupid vehicle. That is, a tall, heavy car. Why not buy a low, sporty car?

And can we start calling these what they are?? SUC's; Sport Utility Cars. They are not 'SUV's in the proper sense of the word. That title belongs to vehicles engineered for heavy towing and/or off-roading, and other 'manly' endeavors not part of the skill set of these luxury poseur-mobiles...

ss_lump > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 14:59

Thanks

Speedmonkey > maximum_sarge
09/08/2013 at 14:59

You are absolutely correct in all but one regard - Jaguar absolutely have to make this if they are to break out of being a relatively niche manufacturer to one that makes 300,000 units a year, which is its target, by 2020. China, US, Russia love SUVs and it WILL account for 50% of all sales - just as the Cayenne does for Porsche

It will also serve as the foundation for a small FWD hatchback , which it has to make because the European Union has legislated super low average CO2 levels across a manufacturer's range.

Speedmonkey > tommyh4
09/08/2013 at 15:08

Specs coming tomorrow. One of the regular team will no doubt post

San Baban > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 15:12

looks as if its based on the Evoque, even if it is, it will still be gorgeous next to anything from the Ze Germans. and besides its not like its gonna need any kind of off road capability any way.

its not like any one's gonna off road his/her "Jaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaag"

Jartosz > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 15:19

I don't understand what everyone is so excited about, it looks like any other CUV/SUV on the market. Sure, the specs will be different, and the badge is of a better brand but for Christ sakes, don't make it seem like this is next best thing to sliced bread. It bloody isn't.

Speedmonkey > San Baban
09/08/2013 at 15:19

There's already been an off-roading Jag!

ChampagneChariot > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 15:23

Looks like the Infiniti JX35

Rollk1 > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 15:24

It looks good, but seems like the new Jag styling (interior included) is following in Audi's footsteps of very similar and strong traits across the entire lineup... doesn't leave much to the imagination as to what the next XF, XJ, XK and all future Jags will look like.

Susan > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 15:25

not a bad LR to Jag conversion.. you can definitely see the hints of LR though.

San Baban > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 15:25

Ha Ha Ha Ha, you are right man, my bad. i forgot about this one

He is doing more off road action than a brand new range rover owner will ever do !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

maximum_sarge > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 15:27

You're not wrong, but something IS wrong with a certain part of the human race...

I bought my wife an X5 4.8i several years ago. Stupidest vehicle I ever bought, except that I bought it so cheap it was a 'free car' for about a year (paid way inder wholesale used). Why was it stupid? Useless off road, bad in the snow, lousy fuel economy on road trips, cramped uncomfortable rear seat, useless third seat, too heavy and tall for fun mountain roads... And all the cars in that class have the same problems. That whole vehicle segment is just plain stupid.

Pete Zapardi's Pizza Party > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 15:29

So true. You know what else happens when managers and/or accountants run the design and engineering departments? The X-Type happens. Or GM in the 90's happens. It's a formula that rarely works for long. I wasn't sure what to think of the Tata acquisition when it first happened, but they've clearly done a much better job of letting Jag be Jag than Ford ever did.

Pete Zapardi's Pizza Party > DankyBrobrowsky
09/08/2013 at 15:33

Yeah, I kinda see a little resemblance to the Evoque in there, but if that's the worst thing that you can say about a CUV/SUV, then they've definitely done something right.

Hindered23 > San Baban
09/08/2013 at 15:47

I quite like the look of the Audi SUVs

TheSergeMeister > maximum_sarge
09/08/2013 at 16:38

Oh no an suv that cant do what a sportscar does! Oh no a business is trying to make more money! Stop crying no one is making you buy it. Also calling it a sport Utility car is the same thing as calling it a sport Utility vehicle genius.

AMC/Renauledge > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 16:56

Purrfect!

It keeps LR making SUVs with real off-road ability, while making beautiful, graceful Jaguar styling available to more customers in more markets.

I'd rather have a sexy Jag CUV over a watered-down LR/RR.

DarthDuster > San Baban
09/08/2013 at 17:00

It's on the new aluminium architecture (that's not currently used on any vehicles). I can't remember the name of it, but it will underpin all future Jaguars.

F1guy hates duck billed F1 cars > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 17:39

Let us all remember:

This car will pay for the low-slung cars that Jaguar, and us, want them to build.

Are they being sellouts? No. And they're not the only company to do something like this. Look at Porsche (though the Cayenne is a capable off-road vehicle in it's own right)

Let this thing sell to every Crystal, Sara, and Erika out there. They'll pay for the undeniably awesome sports cars that Jaguar will suddenly have the cash to produce.

goto(andLego); > maximum_sarge
09/08/2013 at 17:41

I thought they were being called Crossovers now.

Speedmonkey > F1guy hates duck billed F1 cars
09/08/2013 at 18:10

Yep. Exactly

Bfil > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 18:14

After earning shittons of money from this i hope they produce that super car.C-X75

DankyBrobrowsky > Pete Zapardi's Pizza Party
09/08/2013 at 18:46

Very good point. I'm also curious to see what they do in terms of an AWD system. Presumably it will be RWD biased, but will be interesting.

Beldrueger > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 20:12

Yes, yes. SUV's and CUV's are a plague on society! Then I had one kid, and the GTI wouldn't cut it anymore. Then I had another kid and the A6 wasn't cutting it anymore. Now we're thinking about a third, my oldest played her first soccer game today, and the TSX wagon was already barely cutting it. You really think we're getting a minivan? Which one would you buy? The CX-17 is looking pretty good. My wife drives the wagon. I drive an Abarth.

Mers > Speedmonkey
09/08/2013 at 20:47

If making this means they can make the CX75, then go for it.

maximum_sarge > goto(andLego);
09/08/2013 at 22:16

Yes, but Sport Utilitiy Car sounds more dorky, and this closer to the truth. beyond that, SUC certainly has the derogatory ring I'm after...

maximum_sarge > TheSergeMeister
09/08/2013 at 22:19

An SUV that can't do more than a wagon, but can't keep up with a wagon on Tarmac, which is where 100% of them will spend 100% of their miles. Less fun, but it wastes more fuel, so there's that I guess.

And SUC offers a much more pointed acronym, so there is a difference, retard.

TFRN > HeroOfTomorrow has a star
09/08/2013 at 22:34

I actually think that the car could use a little more character beyond cribbing some elements from two existing vehicles. I guess time will tell

typhoon5000 > ptak appreciates old racecars
09/09/2013 at 09:36

MUCH better :-)

San Baban > DarthDuster
09/09/2013 at 10:07

Interesting, i did not know that. thanks for the info, and if they do use Aluminium like they have in all the recent jags this thing should be wonderful. i just hope they manage to fit that big ol 5.0 engine. that will just make it delicious!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TheSergeMeister > maximum_sarge
09/09/2013 at 13:19

New suvs get perfectly acceptable mpg