17 Jaguar C-X17 - one good looking SUV

Cover for Jaguar C-X17 - one good looking SUV

With each day passing without Jaguar releasing a production version of C-X17, they are losing lots and lots of potential revenue.

Other luxury brands, like Porsche and Mercedes, have long been building crossover type vehicles with great financial success. In Porsches case, it was the Cayenne that turned the company around and saved it from the brink of bankruptcy.

C-X17 - a crossover concept that Jaguar just revealed in Frankfurt auto show, is a "slam dunk", as far as looks are concerned.

With it's relatively low roof line, long wheelbase, and low ride and tire profile, it may not look and, eventually, may not function like a great off road vehicle, but it certainly would look great in city streets.

Since Jaguar and Land Rover are essentially the same company, I assume Jaguar will be able to use many of Land Rovers technological solutions for chassis, suspension and four wheel drive.

If the production version looks 80% as good as the concept, I can see loads of people, such as X5, Cayenne and ML loving "Russian businessmen", ordering this car on first day.

It's got the right badge, it's got the looks and, most importantly, it is an SUV/crossover, which is what people want. Apparently, regular cars are not high, heavy and fuel inefficient enough.

11y ago by FastestLaps
User avatar
User avatar

Anonknowmouse  11y ago

Best looking sporty SUV to my eyes.
Much nicer than a Cayenne, X6 or Range Rover Sport. Possibly nicer than an Evoque which I like a lot. Only thing I'd really change is the grill design but it's ok.


User avatar

Shaggy  11y ago

@ Mental: Look at those tires, the C-X17 isn't designed for going off-road, neither are the SUVs it will compete against, it's designed to carry 5-7 people and cargo in comfort and style. I personally don't hate any style of automobile (except hybrids and electrics), they all have their uses, advantages, and disadvantages, one must choose their vehicle based on their budget, lifestyle, and needs.


User avatar

Mental  11y ago

"SUVs ride on a truck's frame and usually have a truck's engine and powertrain."

Yeah, I'd like Jaguar SUV to be built on the truck platform and using a 550 PS 5.0 supercharged V8.

The C-X17 looks to be based on the XF (right?), me doubting it can go off-road better than XF.


User avatar

Аnon  11y ago

If somebody wants the same car as his neighbors have for whatever reason, that's his decision/need, isn't it?

For example, Homer can buy exactly same car as Flanders but with one option extra just to piss him off having better car. It's not better or worse than a desire to drive a mid engine roadster.


User avatar

Viking  11y ago

@Anon I selected my sports car since I wanted a mid-engined roadster for fun commuting. I don't move furniture, don't have kids, don't have to move trash, don't go off road, and don't have to drive in snow. So I don't want or need a crossover. :)


User avatar

Viking  11y ago

@Anon I believe that I would be the primary spreader of hypocrisy. I think anyone should buy whatever they want and can afford, but I do think a lot of people follow trends/fads that don't make any sense. If one has an independent mind, then one can select one's vehicle based on desires, and needs. Lots of people seem to buy based on what their neighbors have, whether it suits their needs/wants or not.


User avatar

Аnon  11y ago

You guys are hypocrites. You say that somebody shouldn't drive an SUV/crossover but driving minivans, but using this logic all of us should drive hybrids, cause they are much more efficient, and there should be no supercars or even cheap sportscars at first place, only priuses everywhere...

So let it off, people are willing to drive/use whatever they want and whatever they have money for.


User avatar

Shaggy  11y ago

@ Viking: I just put my groceries in the back seats and rear floorboard. The cities have sanitation departments, but I live 10 miles from the nearest "city", and that isn't really a city, just a little sleaze-pit of a one-horse hick town, on the rare occasion I do go there, I can't get out of town fast enough for my liking. ;)


User avatar

Viking  11y ago

@Shaggy fortunately for me here in California we have dumpsters for trash, and also big trash bins for recycling, and they all get picked up regularly. My sports car is ridiculously impractical. I decided I wanted a trunk, so I finally took out the spare tire. Now I have a frunk (a front trunk), in addition to the small storage bins behind the seats. Even so when I go grocery shopping in my car, I primarily use the passenger seat, and floor since it is by far the largest place to put groceries. Silly but fun car. :)


User avatar

Shaggy  11y ago

@ Viking: One reason I drive a pick-up truck is because where I live, there's no sanitation department, so I need to take off my own garbage, I tried that in c car once, it resulted in a big, nasty, stinky mess, plus if you have a pick-up truck, you'll find uses for it.


User avatar

Viking  11y ago

@Shaggy I completely agree with you. Most SUV buyers would be better off driving either Mini-Vans or Station Wagons. Mini-Vans have the most cargo capacity, and better gas mileage than SUVs. Station Wagons have cargo capacity that is at least equal to SUVs, but with better gas mileage, and handling. Pick-ups are best for hunting, farming, and construction work. IMHO. :)


User avatar

Shaggy  11y ago

@ Viking: True, I think they renamed station wagons to crossovers because too many people don't want to drive "station wagons" which were the vehicle of choice for "soccer moms" before the invention of the minivan, quite frankly, I don't see what the big deal is. I've driven a Chrysler Pacifica and I loved it, my mom loves minivans for their comfort, practicality, and fuel economy, she drives a 2010 Dodge Grand Caravan, I've driven it and am not ashamed to admit it, that's actually her 3rd minivan. BTW: Around here, deer hunters use pick-up trucks.


User avatar

Viking  11y ago

True SUVs do have a purpose. If one is on a Safari use a Range Rover, regular deer hunting use a Jeep. I don't see a point to Crossovers. If I wanted a car-like SUV, I would prefer one with an even lower roof line, smaller frontal area, lower center of gravity, and yet have the practicality (read covered cargo space) desired by SUV buyers. These vehicles have actually been out quite a while; in the U.S. they are called "station wagons". :)


User avatar

Shaggy  11y ago

The difference between crossovers and SUVs. Crossovers ride on a car's chassis with a car's engine and powertrain. SUVs ride on a truck's frame and usually have a truck's engine and powertrain.


User avatar

Shaggy  11y ago

@ Mental: That's not what they're about, I think this one is supposed to have the performance of a car and practicality of an SUV.


User avatar

Mental  11y ago

I personally disrespect crossovers. Because they are not adapted for the true off-road. They get stuck in a simple dirt, like some simple family saloon. Yet people buy crossovers.

However, this Jaguar's C-X17 is appealing to me. I like its styling, it doesn't look chick and too glamourus. This Jag does look manly enough. However, some similarities with Mazda and Subaru can be noticed. I consider C-X17 to be the best crossover.

No doubt, I understand that this crossover will be very profitable for Jaguar. But instead of the crossover, I'd wish they built a real SUV. A BADASS Jaguar SUV! Being based on Range Rover and using supercharged 5.0 V8.

I see making a crossover is nowadays a trend, survival strategy for every trend... Porsche, BMW already have their crossovers.. Maserati, Bentley, Rolls Royce, Alfa Romeo, Lambo are planning their ones... Soon there will be Ferrari too :p ... As a sports car enthusiast I don't feel too much happy about that...


User avatar

Fangio Man  11y ago

The C-X17 has a good looking exterior, IMO.

But the name reminds me pretty much of the similar named Mazda CX-7 that does not look very different in shape, especially the back.