Has Jaguar ever made an ugly car?

"sm70- why not Duesenberg?" (sm70-whynotduesenberg) 06/16/2014 at 10:29 • Filed to: None

2

35

I realize this is a matter of opinion. Some people might argue that the 80's XJ or XJS were not lookers, and I would disagree completely. Some people might argue that the pre-facelift XF or the X-Type were ugly, and I would disagree there also. So, has there ever been an unanimously ugly Jaaag, or for that matter, even a Jag that wasn't particularly good-looking?

willkinton247 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/16/2014 at 10:30

11

Yes:

505Turbeaux > willkinton247 06/16/2014 at 10:32

2

disagree, I will agree with X type though

Aya, Almost Has A Cosmo With Toyota Engine Owned by a BMW. > willkinton247 06/16/2014 at 10:33

0

That's a Ford Mondeo

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > willkinton247 06/16/2014 at 10:33

1

Hmm. That comes close, but I still kind of like it. It could do without the inner set of lights, but other than that, the lines are all there. I wonder if anyone can shop out those lights so we can see what it would look like.

Corz > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/16/2014 at 10:34

2

Mk2 E-type. It's like wiping your ass with the Mona Lisa

Jagvar > willkinton247 06/16/2014 at 10:34

3

I actually like the look of the S-Type, particularly in R-Line trim.

Audi-os, Amigos! > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/16/2014 at 10:35

2

I find the front fascia of this-gen XKR very uninspired and pretty bland. UGLY? Eh, maybe not. But it does absolutely nothing for me.

RazoE > Jagvar 06/16/2014 at 10:36

0

the S Type R was the only nice S type.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Audi-os, Amigos! 06/16/2014 at 10:36

0

The grille itself, on the R, is a little boring. But the car itself is phenomenal, IMO. Therefor, go for the non-R, as it will look better.

Vicente Esteve > Jagvar 06/16/2014 at 10:36

0

I second this

mcseanerson > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/16/2014 at 10:36

4

Personally I find the E-type 2+2 ugly but beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

People will come on here and argue there is nothing wrong with the Panamera's styling for crying out loud.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Corz 06/16/2014 at 10:37

0

That's true. Particularly the Godawful 2+2, which I forgot about.

Jagvar > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/16/2014 at 10:38

2

I thought the XJS convertible was attractive, but I never cared for the rear styling of the coupe. The buttresses do nothing for me.

Mattbob > Audi-os, Amigos! 06/16/2014 at 10:38

0

agreed. Those headlights don't go with it at all.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > mcseanerson 06/16/2014 at 10:39

2

Aaand I forgot about that one. Jesus it's awful, particularly becuase the bottom half is still good-looking, and then they ruined it by sticking on the cabin from the Popemobile.

mcseanerson > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/16/2014 at 10:41

2

I think I win because it's easier to say something kind of bland that leans a little towards ugly is passable but if you ruin something beautiful it just turns into a bunch of

Jobjoris > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/16/2014 at 10:44

1

As much as I love the XJ-S I really disliked the XJ-SC:

Jaguar itself replaced it after 5 unsuccessful years with a full convertible so they probably were not very pleased with it themselves...

McMike > Corz 06/16/2014 at 10:45

0

That's a photo of a Series 3

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Jobjoris 06/16/2014 at 10:45

0

I was unaware that existed. I do not like it.

Corz > McMike 06/16/2014 at 10:46

0

Is it? I stopped giving a f**k after the Mk 1

McMike > Corz 06/16/2014 at 10:48

0

Yeah, it's the LWB Series 3. Dead giveaway from that angle is the grill in the air inlet.

Corz > McMike 06/16/2014 at 10:50

0

I know you own a Jag, so apologies if I offended you. I just think the mk1 was perfect. DAMN YOU CRASH REGULATIONS

McMike > Corz 06/16/2014 at 10:51

0

LOL, no worries. I agree, the SI was the best series.

Andrew Kizewic > willkinton247 06/16/2014 at 10:54

0

My girlfriend drives one and I think its butt ugly

Jake - Has Bad Luck So You Don't Have To > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/16/2014 at 11:01

9

Yes. http://motoburg.com/images/jaguar-…

BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires > Jagvar 06/16/2014 at 11:39

0

I love them oddly. Imagine it without them and I think it'd look a bit naff, like the TR7 (which could really have done with flying buttresses IMHO).

Looks even better with some black trim (artfully applied using MS paint):

Jagvar > BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires 06/16/2014 at 11:46

1

This is what the XJS looks like with the buttresses removed.

leathermansouth > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/16/2014 at 12:07

2

There are definitely some "meh" Jags - X-type and S-type come to mind, as does the front of the pre-facelift current gen XK...but none that qualify as outright ugly, IMO.

BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires > Jagvar 06/16/2014 at 12:14

0

Interesting. I'm not sure if I think it looks weird just because it's different, or because I don't like it. Hard to tell.

I think if the c-pillar was a bit sharper I'd rather like it though.

Evan, Pope Of Jalopnik by Self-Appointment > mcseanerson 06/16/2014 at 12:25

0

The Panamera is gorgeous. This is a monstrosity that should have never existed. The standard E-Type S1 was gorgeous...this is an abomination.

mcseanerson > Evan, Pope Of Jalopnik by Self-Appointment 06/16/2014 at 14:03

0

See, I told you, styling is subjective. I knew one of these nutjobs would come out of the woods and say they like the Panamera's styling.

Aston Martin Vespertine > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/16/2014 at 15:32

2

The trouble with Jaguar is, even at their blandest and most uninspired, they are still mighty handsome.

Evan, Pope Of Jalopnik by Self-Appointment > mcseanerson 06/16/2014 at 16:25

0

I love it

merkyg > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/16/2014 at 19:24

1

.......nah. That's still cool.

Aston Martin Vespertine > Aston Martin Vespertine 06/17/2014 at 04:40

0

Take, for example, the beluga whale that is the 420G/Mark X.