A Promise Unfulfilled

The Jaguar I-Pace shone brilliantly, but briefly.

Image: motor1.com

Rarely can a car have carried such a weight of expectation at launch than the Jaguar I-Pace. It was first previewed in concept form at the Los Angeles Auto Show in November 2016 and the reaction was overwhelmingly euphoric. Designed in-house by a team led by Ian Callum, the I-Pace Concept successfully integrated Jaguar’s styling cues into a low-slung crossover coupé form. That automotive sub-genre had been around for almost a decade(1) but the I-Pace was radically different in proportions and stance to other such vehicles, many of which looked like regular SUVs with a (not always successful) roof chop. The I-Pace, with its ultra-long wheelbase(2) and cab-forward stance, was new from the ground up and, stylistically, very much the better for it.

Buoyed by the reaction, Jaguar moved quickly to bring the I-Pace to market and the production car was launched in March 2018, with deliveries beginning in June of that year. Wisely, Jaguar made only fractional adjustments for the production vehicle, and one would need a keen eye and tape measure to tell it apart from the concept.

The EV technology underpinning the I-Pace was also all-new, with twin permanent magnet synchronous motors located front and rear, each producing power of 150kW and torque of 348Nm. These were powered by a 90kWh liquid-cooled lithium-ion battery pack comprising 423 individual cells, which was mounted low within a bespoke variant of JLR’s D7 Premium Lightweight Architecture aluminium platform. The symmetrical positioning of the batteries and electric motors gave the I-Pace a near-perfect 50:50 front / rear weight distribution.

Image: Wired

The official WLTP range(3) was an impressive 470km (292 miles). Jaguar claimed a 0 to 100km/h (62mph) time of 4.8 seconds and an electronically limited top speed of 200km/h (124mph).

The long wheelbase and compact powertrain made the interior remarkably spacious for such compact exterior dimensions. The abruptly truncated ‘Kamm’ tail(4) helped it achieve a CD of 0.29, which was not outstanding but very competitive for such a vehicle. The distinctive shallow DLO and ultra-large 22” road wheels(5) disguised the fact that the I-Pace was actually quite a tall vehicle: at 1,565mm (61½”), it was 149mm (6”) taller than the XE saloon and just 102mm (4”) less tall than the F-Pace SUV.

Image: carwale.com

The production I-Pace was greeted with great enthusiasm as a hugely impressive achievement for a relatively small automaker launching its first EV. The I-Pace duly won both European and World Car of the Year awards in 2019.

Reviewers were overwhelmingly positive about the new Jaguar. In a review published in September 2018, Autocar magazine asked rhetorically if the I-Pace was “the most significant new car to leave the halls of a British manufacturer since the McLaren F1?” The reviewer continued by claiming with justification that it was “remarkable that the Jaguar I-Pace – not just a new Jaguar but a new breed of Jaguar, remember – was conceived in a mere four years.”

The I-Pace was awarded 4½ stars out of five by Autocar, its attributes cited as “genuinely innovative design, brings mainstream credibility to luxury EV market(6), responsive, accessible, seamless performance.” The only criticisms of the car itself concerned the rather intrusive stability control system, some inferior quality interior plastics and a slow-witted infotainment system.

A more serious concern was one totally outside of Jaguar’s control, the lack of a UK network of 100kW chargers necessary to charge the batteries to 80% capacity in 40 minutes. By contrast, the rollout of Tesla’s proprietary 120kW ‘Supercharger’ network was already well advanced, giving that company’s Model S a significant advantage as a grand touring car.

In any event, all seemed set fair for the I-Pace to take the automotive world by storm. However, there were already problems looming. Jaguar had outsourced production of the I-Pace to Magna Steyr in Gratz, Austria and there were reported delays in ramping up production to meet initial demand.

As with any ground-breaking design, there were inevitably teething troubles to iron out. There were reported software gremlins and complaints about the driving range falling short of expectations. When issues arose, a lack of training and experience at Jaguar dealerships caused frustration for early adopters, tarnishing the model’s reputation.

Image: New York Daily News

Reported problems included unresponsive infotainment systems, faulty bonnet latches, flush door handles that wouldn’t retract fully in freezing temperatures, a malfunctioning cruise control switch on the steering wheel, air-conditioning gas leaks(7), premature failure of the battery coolant pump, software issues with both the friction and regenerative braking systems requiring recalls to fix, and a faulty telematics control unit causing battery drainage.

In What Car magazine’s 2022 reliability survey of electric vehicles up to five years old, the I-Pace came in a poor 13th place out of 14. Ironically, the only EV to perform more poorly was its supposed nemesis, the Tesla Model S.

It’s important to maintain a sense of perspective about these issues, which were frustrating rather than safety related. That said, when considering a car with revolutionary and not yet fully proven technology, potential buyers are likely to be even more sensitive to reports of unreliability. In any event, the I-Pace has, for whatever reason, never come close to fulfilling its early promise. Here are the global sales numbers(8) since its launch in 2018:

Year: Sales:
2018 6,893
2019 17,355
2020 16,457
2021 9,970
2022 7,307

Undoubtedly, the 2020 Covid Pandemic, Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine and the global microchip shortage must have had some negative impact, but total sales of around 58,000 in five years has to be be a major disappointment for JLR, given the great reception afforded to the I-Pace and its early promise. However, as the only model likely to survive the cull in 2025 when Jaguar becomes an EV-only marque, the I-Pace it still hs a supporting role to play in Jaguar’s future. It is not overstating the case to say that the ‘reimagining’ currently underway at Jaguar will be absolutely critical in determining if there is a viable future for the storied British marque.

(1) The lumpen 2007 BMW X6 is widely regarded as the first crossover-coupé. It was not an auspicious start for the genre.

(2) The I-Pace was just 10mm (1/2”) longer overall than the Jaguar XE saloon, but its wheelbase was 155mm (6”) longer.

(3) The real-world usable range was reported to be around 380km (236 miles).

(4) According to Autocar, Ian Callum was not wholly happy with the abruptly truncated tail. His other regret was not giving the I-Pace a more distinctive front-end, to emphasise its new powertrain.

(5) These were optional: the standard fitment on entry-level models were 19” diameter, which looked distinctly undernourished within the large wheel arches.

(6) It is extraordinary to read that, less than five years ago, Tesla was still regarded as an automotive outlier and EVs needed “mainstream credibility” from an established marque such as Jaguar.

(7) Caused by overly long bolts used to connect the hoses to the compressor, so they failed to seal properly.

(8) Sales data from http://www.insideevs.com

Author: Daniel O'Callaghan

Shut-line obsessive...Hates rudeness, loves biscuits.

34 thoughts on “A Promise Unfulfilled”

  1. Discussing the failure of Jaguar’s range the other day, DTW’s commentariat were accused of writing inordinate bollocks. So here’s some more.

    I agree that the I-Pace seemed to have everything to make it a success, including glowing reviews. So why didn’t that happen? Poor quality is the obvious suggestion, but that doesn’t seem to have put people off the Tesla S, or closer to home, various Range Rovers.

    So I’d suggest it was Jaguar’s perceived position as an outlier. They were asking purchasers to stump up a lot of money for unproven technology that had neither the assumed backup (right or wrong) of a very large manufacturer nor, as Daniel states, the well thought-out charging infrastructure offered by Tesla. The perception was, buy an I-Pace and you’re on your own. People liked the car, but were unwilling to take the gamble.

    And was the electric XJs cancellation maybe due not to it being a bad car, but because it was conceptually too close to the I-Pace. Once they saw that the I-Pace was so far from the roaring success they had justifiably expected it to be, Jaguar got cold feet. Very cold feet.

    1. I’m always late at reading the DTW end notes, but Daniel pointing out that at the time of the I-Pace launch Tesla was not seen by Autocar as mainstream, whereas Jaguar was, is telling. Has my view of these things changed so much over that time, or is this another case of Autocropley still living in the 20th Century when it comes to the world’s perception of certain UK brands?

    2. Bristow, WLTP range is optimistic by 20% as Daniel notes in footnote 3. However the Model S has a real world range that is greater than the I-Pace by at least 100 miles.

      The charging network is not very much of an issue for most people who can afford this sort of car, and even in cheaper segments like Enyaq, and its twenty or so competitors… Everyone but Tesla uses the same charging protocol. This is not an excuse for Jaguar.

      Did you see the spy photos of the cancelled XJ? Were as you enthralled as I was? (/s for sarcasm)

      I saw my very first I-Pace in the metal about a week and a half ago. The pandemic, and then the chip shortage hit the I-Pace harder than most because it is exponentially more reliant on external suppliers than Tesla, or most ICE cars.

      This is bad luck, I wouldn’t say it is bad business because the I-Pace looks a lot better in the metal than it does in pictures, so it is going to remain fresh and novel assuming that its most glaring engineering faults are rectified. Compare to the e-Tron GT, first sighting three days ago: creases and flaps and doodads everywhere, once I identified what I was looking at I had to look away, and I don’t think it will look so fresh in three years.

  2. Hi Daniel, the I-Pace’s story makes me sad and a little bit angry. The comparison is flawed in that it leaves out Tesla, but in many ways, the I-Pace is Betamax: a superior product done to death by technically inferior competitors with broader market power. The I-Pace is an intelligent design (in packaging if not in drivetrain it may even rival Tesla, but its drivetrain comes remarkably close as well) that’s miles better than what the premium three could come up with: take our biggest SUV, slap some batteries in them, hire Volkswagen’s software engineers to finnagle more than 300 kms or range out of them and chuck them on the market as “innovative”. Okay, maybe it makes me more than a little bit angry.

    As far as I can tell, the problems were much as you descibe, with the addition of the market power of Merc and Audi et al that could promise much more in the way of improving the charging infrastructure than little Jaguar ever could on its own. I can remember some outcry by early customers that the range dropped in low temperatures, something the dealerships seemingly hadn’t prepared them for, showcasing a certain lack of knowledge that you also touch on. Also, for some reason, there seems to be an air of stagnation around the I-Pace where Teslas are famously continuously updated over the air and other mainstream brands have now gotten their EV product strategy off the ground and are offering something “new” almost every minute (only now catching up to the I-Pace in packaging and drivetrain, but still behind Tesla – after a decade). That could just be me, though.

    Tesla was better at generating the hype, other mainstream brands simply have more market power. So even for a very good product like the I-Pace, it’s an uphill battle.

    I just thought of something: for Ferrari, famously, the rest of the car could be a rusty bit of scaffolding as long as the engine was good. Tesla seems similar in that it has an excellent (unrivalled still) EV drivetrain while the rest of the car hangs together with spit and wire, although less so than when they got started. Now all we need is for his Muskiness/edgelord/dogelord to start wearing large sunglasses whilst sitting at his desk. I’m sure it’s not beyond him.

  3. When I first saw the I-Pace I imagined what mine would be like; white with black alloys and grill. Really disheartened to about it struggling.

    Hopefully, a new version will be among Jaguar’s 2025 reinvention line up. Electric cars are becoming more and more mainstream, so perhaps it’ll become more accepted.

  4. I think there are a number of issues here. First, there are the looks. I really like and admire the avant-garde nature of the design, but I think I am the only person I know who thinks so – my wife and daughter in particular find the i-Pace ‘ugly’. Second, there have been a number of issues around reliability, including the critical charging equipment on-board. Third, and related, the lack of training and knowledge among sales and service staff when it was launched.

    However, for me this bigger sins were more strategic relating to platform. Bar the replacement XJ (and even that seemed like an afterthought), the i-Pace has a bespoke and unshared platform. So, all the investment in R&D resides in this sole model for purposes of depreciation and amortization. This is insane when one thinks about it. It’s as if it’s development was thought about and decided upon in a hurry, like all management wanted to achieve was to be first to market with a premium EV SUV, which surely can’t be right.

    Hence, it has all the traits of a standalone product – poorly developed when in life/ production, poorly understood by those meant to sell/ service it, and very quickly seeming moribund and a dead end model. The car never seemed to gain any momentum or ‘catch-on’. And so, we are left to rue what might have been, and Jaguar is left with another depreciation write-off. Just think where Jaguar could have been by now if it had an EV platform/ matrix for the i-Pace which could have by now have underpinned and sired replacements for the F-Pace, E-Pace and XF? If the i-Pace had been heavily revised by now, benefitting from constant continuous improvement and development? It reads like a BL nightmare all over again.

    1. I think that’s very good analysis, S.V.

      It’s a nice enough car, I suppose, but I don’t find it very desirable. It looks a bit – utilitarian? – is that the right word? It has similar proportions to the Volkswagen Group EVs, and that’s not a compliment.

      Its proportions are dictated by its technology and batteries are still developing / sub-optimal. Perhaps that puts people off. I also think that an SUV shape, for all the criticism it gets, can carry off the bulky look required to accommodate current EV technology. Other body styles struggle because of the length and height that seems to be required for a reasonable range..

      There are plenty of secondhand I-Paces available – at good prices, too.

    1. It clearly scores highly for practicality. I wonder if the seats fold flat to make a double bed.

  5. The i-pace was initially a pretty big success here in Norway, so there has been some writings in the news here about its reason for failing after the first two years where it was a very strong seller.

    First of all, the range issue cannot be understated – electric cars are in their infancy, and range was one of the important specs for buyers in those early years – once the competitors started comfortably outranging it people started losing interest.
    Norway was pretty quick to get a nation wide supercharging network, so every non-tesla already started on the back foot when it came to enticing the buyers, and when word gets around about mileage being worse then advertised, the spec-sheet buyers will start looking elsewhere.

    Another factor was that jaguar was hit incredibly hard by the semiconductor and battery shortage during the pandemic, so while there were plenty of buyers lined up, they had no cars to sell, which made the model slip out of the buyers minds foe when the bottlenecks were resolved.

    Except for the few initial quality niggles and mediocre range it seems like a very well liked and good car though. supposedly the best driving in its class.

  6. I like the I-Pace – and wanted to like it even more than I did, back when it was launched.

    At the time, a senior designer friend of mine, after having been very enthusiastic about the concept car, stated that a large part of the magic had been lost in the transition into production model. Back then, I found this quite the overstatement, but today I believe he was right – the stance simply isn’t that of the ‘R-D6 that’s been to the gym’ I detected with the concept car.

    That compromised stance was in no way aided by yet another case of unavoidable BMW-mimicry: The utterly idiotic decision to charge extra for appropriately-sized wheels. This move resulted in a great many early I-Paces looking not just challenging, but plain awkward – creating many a first impression that’s impossible to repeat.

    Other, less drastic, but still dubious decisions concerned the interior, which was infinitely better than the Jaguar norm at the time, but offered little that was unique, with regards to ambience. Minuscule details like the very cheap JAGUAR print on the lower body’s black cladding didn’t help creating an impression of superior quality, either (although that particular aspect has since been addressed).

    Most damning of all, visually speaking, was my wife’s first encounter with an I-Pace: ‘What the hell is that?’ I went on to explain that it’s an electric Jaguar, featuring highly original packaging solutions, yada-yada-yada. ‘It doesn’t look like a Jaguar to me, at all.’

    And that’s the fine challenge Prof Gerry is facing today: Creating a Jaguar that’s completely different from, yet true to its roots. A mighty challenge I-Pace has proven itself not to be up to.

  7. Might I propose this as a suitable fusion of the traditional and the modern?

  8. Hello all and thank you for your interesting comments. The I-Pace is indeed something of a conundrum. It seemed to have the ingredients to succeed, but somehow fell (far) short. Concerns about reliability undoubtedly played a part, as did the global microchip shortage.

    Christopher, you make a good point about the wheel sizes. The I-Pace hides its height well when on optional 22″ wheels (and still on relatively tall 40-profile tyres) , but the design is hugely sensitive to wheel size. Take a look at these two comparative photos. This is how the I-Pace should look in side profile:

    But this is how it looked on the standard 19″ wheels when launched:

    Not only do they look far too small, but the weedy multi-spoke design seemed to be a ploy on the part of Jaguar to force buyers to pay up for nicer wheels. Many manufacturers play this game: both our Mini and Boxster are fitted with optional larger alloy wheels because the standard items look a bit nasty. In the case of the I-Pace, however, Jaguar pushed this too far and ruined the stance of a car whose major attraction was how its looked.

    1. I must have an affliction of some sort… I kind of like an I-Pace on those small wheels. Firstly, I find it hilarious that 19 inch wheels look this small, secondly I have a perverted appreciation for gawkiness. Apparently.

    2. Hi Tom. Perhaps it’s simply the case that you have resisted the conditioning of car designers sketches to make you desire ever larger wheels? The photo of Peter’s Mazda 3 below shows just how far that dial has been moved over the past two decades.

    3. Hello Daniel. I hadn’t commented yet, as the i-Pace is way beyond my automotive aspirations, but your comparative photo forced words out of my mouth, and they weren’t good! I’ll censor them somewhat.
      It’s amazing how quickly our eyes have become accustomed to ever-larger wheels with ever-lower profile tyres. The other day I came across a photo of my last car, an ’05 Mazda 3 Maxx Sport which I sold in 2015 ( as I can’t drive nowadays). I recall it had quite an adventurous package for an ’05 model – 16 inch wheels running a 50-profile! But when I saw the picture, the sidewalls looked much higher then I remembered! Never mind; the twenty-ish new owner was ecstatic. You’ll want to see it, so….

      But back to Jaguar. The dull tyre sidewalls in the bottom pic do it no favours. Those standard wheels look like cheap aftermarket 15 inchers from about 1980, with the 70-profile radials whuch were mundane even then. What they do not look like is 19 inchers with any modern profile. I guess this is probably a reflection on the success of the design, that it can make such huge wheels look so small – are many sold with this cheap-and-nasty looking wheel/tyre package? It’s most unflattering. That’s quite an ask for the upgrade.

    4. Good evening Peter. I had to check and was amazed to find out that your first-generation Mazda 3 was launched twenty years ago! It’s still a good looking car and, apart from the (perfectly sensible and good looking) alloy wheels, the only thing that dates it is the cleanness of the design and its lack of creases, slashes and fussy ornamentation. In fairness to Mazda, the same compliment can be paid to their current designs.

      Regarding the I-Pace, I think the problem with the smaller wheels is significantly exacerbated by the length of the wheelbase. Perhaps the solution to car designers’ (and buyers’) fetish for ridiculously large wheels which often ruin the cars ride and are a menace when parking next to a kerb is the return of white (or silver) wall tyres? 😁

    5. Those 22 inch wheels seem to run on very low profile tyres. I’m sure they would be quite suitable for driving in the showroom, but not for any public roads I drive on. Were the designers unable to design a car that looked OK on sensible wheels ? Has anybody tried lifting a 22 inch wheel to refit it and line it up with the studs ?

    6. Good morning Mervyn. Surprisingly, the 22″ wheels on the I-Pace still carry 40-profile tyres, so not the ride-killers you might imagine. Once again, the unusual proportions of the I-Pace play tricks with one’s perception.

    7. I have to go with Tom V here. I can not understand the reasoning behind these large wheels. A couple of decades ago supercars would have 18 inch wheels and even that felt extreme, nowadays small cars are equipped with 17 inches at least. What is more we are talking electric cars where the greater diameter has e deteriorating effect on range. Let alone comfort, price etc. The only advantage would be some marginally better roadholding in extreme conditions but none of these vehicles will ever be driven that way.

    8. Mervyn, perhaps luxury car makers need to add a Power Spare Wheel Lifter to the options list? 🙂

    9. Daniel, I’m running 225×45 tyres on 17 inch rims, and with the car at 15 years old, 3 of the wheels are still 100% round. But I am very precious with my car (s). I remember a CEO, much less precious, who bought a new 7-Series that came on 19 or 20 inch rims. After 6 months the wheels were quite badly kerbed, and of course the alignment gone, but the car was too new to need an NCT. Run flat tyres allow you to keep driving even when the steel cords have worn thru, and the tread band separates from the side-wall….

    10. Hi Mervyn, I’m also not a great fan of ultra-large diameter wheels. My F-Type was on 20″ wheels and it was a nightmare to park alongside kerbs, exacerbated by it being just too wide for a supposed sports car. Despite being very careful, I still managed to kerb one of the wheels in the two months I owned the car. In contrast, I’ve had two Boxsters on 19″ wheels for a total of thirteen years without incident. (That’s probably a really dumb thing to say, hostage to fortune and all that!)

    11. Stop giving car makers ideas for new and expensive options, Peter, please… 😉 Your former Mazda looks picture perfect like that.

      I simply cannot get over the gigantism that seems to be pervading an unsuspecting (or entirely witless) automotive industry: I recently saw an Ioniq 5 (which I otherwise admire) parked just in front of an ID3. The VW is not a small car to begin with, but it was dwarfed by the Ioniq, whose hatchback design looks like a mistake to me, like those stories of someone ordering something of the internet that turns out to have a completely different size than the pictures suggested. Likewise the “donk” wheels that many need SUVs to look vaguely like a car. I suppose the smaller wheels (I’d probably go for 20″ were I ever in the market) on the I-Pace communicate a measure of honesty to me that I find refreshing.

      Donk or Hi-rise:

      S.V.’s point about the I-Pace being a standalone product rings very true as well: had it been it the basis of a range of electric Jags, its standing would probably have been better. Something similar can be said about the Mustang Mach E, which Ford was unable to spin other products off of, but the Blue Oval is big enough to get away with it.

  9. As an allways up to date person, allways aware of the last news, this post rang a bell in my brain.

    Being naturally equiped with an automatic visual noise supressor, I am lucky enough to almost allways ignore the surrounding environment.

    Though, this post made me recall that on the past few months/years, I’ve occasionally seen some not unpleasent automotive entity passing above(!) me (and my Smart Roadster)

    So, today I payed a bit more attention to my imediate environment, and there they were: A mile around home, I spotted effortlessly two especimens of such wild animal.

    Both looking fine, both equiped with the appropriate size wheels… and both being representative of the only recent Jaguar model I guess is being bought around here.

    Regarding wheel size: I have some dificulty believing that someone who has the money to buy the car also has the nerve to stick with the smaller rims

  10. And I agree: it may be big, but it doesn’t seem big
    Proportions, proportions…

  11. this article is a great follow up to the one dedicated to the XE and E-Pace. I think both articles make one thing painfully clear: Jaguar is just not making decent enough products people would spend their money on. This could only be leveraged by a brand that adds enough cachet to make up for the flawed products. But no, it’s obviously not working, and has not worked for a very long time.

    Jaguar is a failed brand, just like Alfa Romeo. Tata would be wise not to sink a single penny more into it.

    1. I think Tata needs to reconsider their brand strategy entirely. “Discovery” is not a viable brand either.

      Considering Gerry McGovern’s body of work since 2000, especially his Lincoln concepts and the striking new large Range Rover, I wouldn’t write off Jaguar quite yet.

      I wish someone would explain to me why the I-Pace and the Mustang Mach-e are one-offs from their respective dead-end platforms. These are “skateboards”, so any shape of body will fit on top, like a Tamiya RC model, as GM is busy proving with their many sized and widely spread price points of their Ultium platform versions.

      Ford have needed to share a platform with VW (not exactly the most lauded either) for their second EV, while the cancelled XJ was to be available in both ICE and EV versions, which would explain why it needed a different platform. But what would prevent a theoretical XF successor or even the forthcoming McGovern XJ sized EV from helping to amortize the I-Pace’s mechanicals?

      It occurred to me that the I-Pace wasn’t intended to turn a profit for JLR, and that it perhaps wasn’t even developed in Gaydon or even by Tata, but is really a “Magna” with only badges in common with other JLR products, so intended as a loss leader/image builder for Jaguar. Is that it, or what am I missing here?

    2. gooddog: There really are more questions than answers when it comes to I-Pace but I do not feel sufficiently well informed to offer much by way of comment – although your last observation certainly appears credible. Perhaps Magna owns the IP? Certainly, there does not appear to be much enthusiasm for the model from the powers that be at Gaydon. As to the cancelled XJ, from what intelligence I have gleaned, its cancellation was no great loss. According to the party line, I-Pace is the only component of the current Jaguar ‘range’ and I do use that word advisedly these days that is set to survive the upcoming mass extinction event – I will shed no tears for any of them.

      I would concur as regards awaiting developments. Say what you might about Gerry McGovern, but his track record on design is deeply impressive and I am most interested in seeing how his team has ‘reimagined’ the leaping cat. Hopefully, we will see something tangible in a little over a year’s time. And I do emphasise, hopefully.

      Regarding Discovery. It requires either a total recalibration to become a wholly different vehicle (Defender now fulfils its role), or to be taken out and shot.

    3. A rule I live by: never attribute to planning (or conspiracies) what you can attribute to human stupidity (including my own, by the way, very liberating). Given JLR’s other BLMC-esque maneuvers I find it entirely possible that the I-Pace is the flop it seems to be.

      I’m not technically minded enough to understand why the I-Pace and Mustang Mach E are unique platforms, but given that platform sharing is second only to unneccessary creases in the Automakers’ Big Book Of Being A Succesful Automaker, I’d imagine that Ford and Jaguar aren’t lying when they say the platforms are unique (I seem to remember the Mustang having early teething troubles with charging, maybe some weakness is hard-wired into the whole thing). The IP not (entirely) belonging to Jaguar (and maybe the Mustang’s IP being not wholly Ford’s) sounds very possible to me, too.

      All this represents only my musings. I have no unique information and may be woefully off the mark. Anyhow, in the eternal words of every Lancista, Alfista and Jaguar-ist: let’s hope for better things to come.

  12. The I Pace has been given JLR’s refreshed infotainment, but was in sore need of a more comprehensive update. If they followed the industry standard they could improve battery power density and charging rate by around 20%, all without affecting weight or packaging. A bit of a cosmetic refresh all round and you would have a compelling car to help lead customers towards the electric future.

    As it is, the I Pace is now, er, off the pace, and as good as dead. Maybe the deal with Magna Steyr is so bad that JLR would rather it just went away?

    This is a great piece of design. What is wrong with people? Why do they choose something that is much duller and / or needlessly aggressive instead?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: