Jaguar X-Type Named Worst Car Of Decade By New York Times

[Spectre]

From the New York Times: http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2007...rssnyt&emc=rss

October 15, 2007, 2:13 pm
Jaguar X-Type: Dud of the Decade?

By Jerry Garrett

The worst automobile of the decade? We still have three years to go in the “00’s,” but it seems highly unlikely any other offering in today’s automotive market could stink so badly for so many years as the Jaguar X-Type.

Who would have thought any other ‘00-era vehicle could out-stink the ugly Pontiac Aztek? But the Aztek, which embarrassed its manufacturer for only five years compared to eight for the X-Type, resulted only in the overdue, well deserved death of plastic body cladding. By the time Jaguar finally runs out of X-Types sometime next year (or, worst case scenario, the year after), it may be remembered as the model that took the venerable British luxury carmaker down with it.

It is not surprising that Jaguar, or actually its parent (for now) Ford Motor Company, has finally disclosed that it will kill the X-Type — as of the 2009 model year. What is surprising is that it took so long. The X-Type has been a dud since it was introduced in 2001.

But it could have been a cool car.

Let’s set the scene: BMW was having its way in the entry-level luxury car market with its 3-Series models. Dr. Wolfgang Reitzle, who was calling the shots at Jaguar then, had previously worked for BMW. So Dr. Reitzle knew exactly the type of vehicle it would take to go toe-to-toe with the 3-Series. And that’s what he set out to have Jaguar build.

But Ford, the former “Better Idea” company, sent in the bean counters, who decided they could cut costs by disguising a blue-collar Ford Mondeo, a family sedan sold only in Europe, as a blue-blooded Jag. They dumbed it down, cheapened it up, and chased off Dr. Reitzle (who decided he would rather sell forklifts than Fords).

But potential X-Type buyers were not as dumb as Ford counted on them to be. Instead of meeting its completely unrealistic sales goal of 100,000 X-Types a year, Jaguar struggled to sell half that many — in its best year (2003). After that, sales plunged faster than Enron stock. In 2005, when just 10,941 X-Types were sold, it was interesting to note that BMW’s 3-Series outsold the Jag 10-to-1. Only 5,416 moved off dealer lots last year, and only 2,403 through September of this year. (Sales have been a bit better internationally, where the X-Type will soldier on until 2010.) It comes as no shock that the X-Type’s residual values are consistently among the lowest in the auto industry (holding only about 21 percent, on average, of its original plus-$30,000 value after five years, according to Kelley Blue Book).

Funny footnote: Despite its reign of futility, the X-Type is the best-selling Jag of all time. But as a former owner of a Jaguar XJS, which was manufactured back in the days Jags oozed charisma (as well as oil), I ask: Were Jaguars ever meant to be as ubiquitous (and ordinary) as Big Macs?

Maybe the X-Type could have been saved, if Ford had decided to re-design it, rather than stick with the same D.O.A. design for the better part of a decade.

When Jaguar, in desperation, introduced an even crummier wagon version of the X-Type in 2005, I was reminded of a quote from Henry Ford: “A business that makes nothing but money is a poor business.”

Other contenders for “Dud of the Decade” fall far short of the X-Type’s year-over-year record of futility, such as the recall champion Ford Focus; Ford’s last tango with the minivan, the Freestar; all minivans from General Motors; the near-worthless Chrysler Sebring; the entire Hummer line, perennial punching bag for environmentalists; any Mitsubishi (except for the Lancer Evolution).

I have to agree with that. The other thing is I loved the author's review of the X-Type Wagon (a huge misstep) and its title: "Purebred Looks, Meow Mix Parts". http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/15/au...s/15BLOCK.html

[No Boss]

Bad car? Well, yeah.

But the worst car? I dunno bout that... shouldn't that award go to something like a G-whiz or something Chinese? On second though, I guess not if they're trying to appeal to just us yanks.

[Spectre]

Yeah, I think the "award" is just for "Worst Car Sold In America".

[Vette Boss]

I wouldn't say the X-Type is the absolute worst car this decade. My vote would be the entire range of GM off-roaders, they're all rubbish despite the fact how many idiots buy them.

Jaguar sticks with their styling heritage, at the very least.

[Spectre]

No, I have to agree with the author. The X-Type is the worst car, because 1) Ford was pretending it was something it wasn't, 2) Jaguar charged entirely too much money for what it did have, and 3) It was never competitive in its class.

The GM stuff is excused because they're stupid cheap. Something that is stupid cheap can be excused a lot of faults.

[jayhawk]

Originally Posted by Spectre

The GM stuff is excused because they're stupid cheap. Something that is stupid cheap can be excused a lot of faults.

My old Sunfire fit into that category. I bought it new, mind you, for $11,000. And it was worth every penny, as it skyrocketed my credit rating.

[BlaRo]

Originally Posted by jayhawk

My old Sunfire fit into that category. I bought it new, mind you, for $11,000. And it was worth every penny, as it skyrocketed my credit rating.

No wonder I see so many around here! Arrgh, it's like an infestation...where's my shotgun?!

P.S. that avatar really makes you look like a classy, badass motherfucker. 8)

[edkwon]

Isn't the X type the same thing as a Mondeo? So does that make the Mondeo the worst car of the decade by proxy?

[Vette Boss]

Originally Posted by edkwon

Isn't the X type the same thing as a Mondeo? So does that make the Mondeo the worst car of the decade by proxy?

No, the Mondeo is an honest car. The X-Type was bad because it pretended to be a proper Jaguar, when it wasn't.

[Steve Levin]

I have to say the X-type was a failure for those who wanted it to be a big Jag.

That said, it's an AWD version of the Mondeo ST220 -- a brilliant car. Sure, the non "Sport" models were softer, but still, haven't we always said the Mondeo was brilliant? "Proper" Jaguar -- what the heck does that mean? That it didn't look like a Jag? It did. That it wasn't done up nicely on the inside? It was. That it wasn't somehow an $80,000 car that sold for $30,000? Well, you got us there, I suppose.

It was a bit over the top in price, at least at sticker, but purchased at a good price, it was a good car. Compared to many American cars (can we say... Buick) it was near the top of the class.

I suspect the real reason the reviewer didn't like it is that it only has a single cupholder.

To me, the S type, despite having the retro styling, was a loser car. Too small to be a proper executive car, and too big and floaty (with the exception of the R) to be fun.

Steve

[bartboy9891]

The X-type isn't bad to drive. Therefore even though it's not really a Jag, it can't be the worst car of the decade.

[Ottobon]

Originally Posted by bartboy9891

The X-type isn't bad to drive. Therefore even though it's not really a Jag, it can't be the worst car of the decade.

it can be if its over-priced

Originally Posted by BlaRo

P.S. that avatar really makes you look like a classy, badass motherfucker. 8)

His Avatar looks alright, but does anybody know why there are so many damn videos of people smoking on youtube? I mean who the hell cares? Please don't tell me its some stupid fetish now or something.

[Deanodriver]

The X-Type might not be the luxury car it claims to be, but come on, you can't seriously say it's worse than the Pontiac Aztek.

The X-Type was poor because it didn't live up to a Jaguar badge, but the Aztek would've struggled to live up to a Daewoo badge.

After all, Daewoo ads in Australia featured a blind man driving while being instructed by a guide dog. Now, I think that relates fairly well to an Aztek, because you'd have to be blind to buy one.

[JoHaaN]

It might have been overpriced, but what about the second hand market.

These cars do depreciate quite a lot. So if u buy one now u can have a smooth/comfy/stylish car. That isn't to bad to drive. And that all for a resonable price.

And it might be half a Mondeo underneath, but it does everything what a jag is supposed to do IMO.
Looks like a good deal to me! Or am i missing something here :p

[Dsemaj]

Feels like it was just created to fill a sector in the market. They could have atleast tried to twist the styling around, rather than just shrinking an XJ. The styling only works on bigger cars, on the X-Type, it just looks stupid and awkward.

@Deanodriver hahaha, I remember that! What the hell was the point of that ad anyway?

[Deanodriver]

Originally Posted by Dsemaj

@Deanodriver hahaha, I remember that! What the hell was the point of that ad anyway?

I think it was because of that dog they had as the Daewoo mascot. Then again, the cars were also dogs. Either way, you'd have to be blind to buy a Nubira (then again, I got my licence in one).

[Dsemaj]

Originally Posted by Deanodriver

I think it was because of that dog they had as the Daewoo mascot. Then again, the cars were also dogs. Either way, you'd have to be blind to buy a Nubira (then again, I got my licence in one).

How did that guy get his licence anyway? You know, being blind and all...

Such horrid cars, they were. I have to drive one just for the experience one day. I'll should pick one up and destroy it Jeremy Clarkson style!

[Homer_Bart]

As someone who likes Jags, I'm somehow disappointed by the X-type. It looks a little wrong. But still, it can't be the worst but at least not that bad! Aztec! G-wiz! Proton Wira? Damn I'll be hating the guy and the publication and the publication's editor and everyone working there!

[HuevosRancheros]

i can think of worse cars sold this decade in the US. The X-type sucks but there are much much worse. any article that writes off entire manufactures (Hummer, Mitsu) is suspect to me

[Ezbok58a]

Originally Posted by HuevosRancheros

i can think of worse cars sold this decade in the US. The X-type sucks but there are much much worse. any article that writes off entire manufactures (Hummer, Mitsu) is suspect to me

H2= Reskinned Tahoe with a 35k markup

H3=Reskinned Colorado with a 25k markup

And since the H1 isn't made for civilian purchase anymore I have to agree with the article on that.

Mitsubishi?

Lancer=crap
Eclipse=crap
Outlander=crap
whateverthehelltheirtruckscalled=crap

The article isn't lying on that parts. I still think the Aztek is worse than the X-type...