GTP Cool Wall: 2014+ Jaguar XFR-S Sportbrake

[Jahgee]

2014+ Jaguar XFR-S Sportbrake nominated by @Xilor

Production: 2014+
Styles: 5 door estate
Engine: 5.0 S V8
Transmission: 8 speed Automatic
Layout: Front Engine, Rear Wheel Drive
Power Output: 542 HP

 

[Famine]

Uhhh...

2014+ Jaguar XFR-S Sportbrake nominated by @Xilor

Production: 2012+
Styles: 5 door estate
Engine: 2.0 T I4, 3.0 V6, 3.0 S V6, 4.2 V8, 4.2 S V8, 5.0 V8, 5.0 S V8, 2.2 I4, 2.7 V6, 3.0 V6
Transmission: 6 speed Manual, 8 speed Automatic
Layout: Front Engine, Rear Wheel Drive
Power Output: 237-542 HP

 

[AudiMan2011]

A fast supercharged Jaguar estate to truly put one in the eye for the RS6 Avant and E63 Wagon.

Very Cool.

 

[Jahgee]

Uhhh...

Whoops, went off of the wikipedia article for it, guess I messed up

 

[Dennisch]

Not available in British racing green. Wat?

Does look good though, and powerful.

Cool.

 

[Leonidae@MFT]

Sub Zero. Wagon that will humiliate many musclecars.

 

[Roger the Horse]

The silly aggressive 'sports' styling knocks it down from Sub Zero to uncool.

 

[Famine]

Whoops, went off of the wikipedia article for it, guess I messed up

Still isn't a manual - and you're 6hp down.

Drove the saloon version of this. Utterly ridiculous - though I actually prefer the 500hp V8 XFR and they don't offer that as a Sportbrake...

Hits just the right level of obvious performance to lift it out of uncool sleeperness, but not so much it becomes obnoxious. Cooler than the ridiculously carbon-fibre spoilered saloon too. I shall cogitate twixt cool and sub zero.

 

[Katiegan]

Sub zero because V8 estate.

 

[Moglet]

Practical, fast, and a bit mental. It looks quick but not as quick as it actually is. If you've bought this then it means you've avoided going for the equivalent Audi. Sub Zero.

 

[Roger the Horse]

Shame it seems to be doing everything it can to look like an Audi...

 

[JAHHAJ]

A mix of mentalness and fairly practicalness, Sub Zero.

 

[Panoz]

You can have your cake and eat it too.

Sub-zero.

 

[GTPorsche]

Cool.

 

[Tornado]

Seriously uncool because Jalopnik.

 

[GranTurismo916]

This car is crazy, but it pulls it off without it looking too crazy. Sub-Zero.

 

[Sage Ages]

The silly aggressive 'sports' styling knocks it down from Sub Zero to uncool.

Pretty much this. Sporty sedans, or in this case, a wagon usually look stupid and out of place.

Whoops, went off of the wikipedia article for it, guess I messed up

Yeah, you might wanna not do that.

 

[Joey D]

Seriously uncool because Jalopnik.

This pretty much sums up all fast wagons. If Jalopnik thinks it's cool then it probably isn't.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I'm going to go uncool because the other three wagons actually look better than this and then taking in price and the fact that they have more power (even if slightly) since that is the objective here. You know being an over the top wagon for the family that can basically help you rob a bank and out run the cops, and basically not save money on gas during the trip you planned out.

CTS-V (which @AudiMan2011 didn't give a nod to) and the Audi and Merc seem better than this.

 

[Wolfe]

Uncool because automatic only. It has a big grumbly V8 (yawn) with an excess of power, and it predictably weighs over two tons. All I see is an echo of the '00s chase for pavement pounding mega-performance at the expense of the driving experience. zOMG NUMBERS!!1! It's like a Jaguar-ized E60 M5 wagon ten years after the fact. How unique and creative.

As a general rule, brand new cars are automatically uncool in my book unless they defy the trends of ballooning size/weight and performance>fun. Following the herd is uncool. Once the XFR-S is older and no longer stylish, it could gain cool points for its wagon body and RWD dorifuto-ness.

 

[Murcie_LP640]

Cool because it's a wagon version of the outdated but still absolutely loveable Jaguar XF, with bonus points for its performance.

 

[ildd]

It's a beautiful, RWD, supercharged V8 wagon. You literally cannot get any cooler than that. Sub-zero.

 

[JMoney]

It's supercharged. Superchargers are never uncool. It's has a good name, too, Sportbrake. Driving one of these tells people you put a lot of thought into your purchase. You didn't go straight for an M5 Estate or an RS6, you went with a supercharged Jaaaaag.

Sub-Zero.

 

[Doog]

Driving one of these tells people you put a lot of thought into your purchase.

Driving one of these will make people wonder if you were thinking at all.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Driving one of these will make people wonder if you were thinking at all.

Exactly as I pointed out compared to a traditional wagon...well this isn't and now my point has been made again

It's supercharged. Superchargers are never uncool. It's has a good name, too, Sportbrake. Driving one of these tells people you put a lot of thought into your purchase. You didn't go straight for an M5 Estate or an RS6, you went with a supercharged Jaaaaag.

Sub-Zero.

Yeah you put a lot of thought into not saving money for a more expensive less powerful, limited production wagon that is dull looking compared to the other three.

Car magazine
As such, Jaguar expects the XFR-S Sportbrake to be very low volume model, and it sports a price tag to match. It's £82,495 – £5510 more than an Audi RS6 Avant and £6610 more than a Mercedes E63 AMG Estate.

The CTS-V is 70-72k which is far less than the 100k + these would run in the U.S. So all three of these cars (not the Jag) are probably a wiser choice in the end when deciding to buy a no longer meaningful family car turned performance car in hiding.

 

[niky]

Would've gone seriously uncool... modern luxury sedan, but it's a wagon... so, just "uncool"...


But then, it's a Jaaaag... so maybe a "meh" is in order....

Plus points for not being brown, manual or diesel.... the other stuff that wagon lovers go inexplicably insane over... so... cool it is.

 

[Azuremen]

Meh because you'd have to explain to everyone why you didn't just buy a Subaru. At least here anyhow.

Also, weight and Jaguar.

 

[GTP_Ingram]

I love fast estates, and this is my favourite of the bunch. Very cool car, not quite SZ.

CTS-V and the Audi and Merc seem better than this.

Why?

Yeah you put a lot of thought into not saving money for a more expensive less powerful, limited production wagon that is dull looking compared to the other three.

Personally I think that all of the millions of Audis and Mercs you see on the road (many of which are cooking models with bodykits apeing the performance models) make them far more dull. I like the look of the Caddy, but I still prefer the Jag.

and basically not save money on gas during the trip you planned out.

The CTS-V is 70-72k which is far less than the 100k + these would run in the U.S. So all three of these cars (not the Jag) are probably a wiser choice in the end when deciding to buy a no longer meaningful family car turned performance car in hiding.

Choosing a high performance car based on purchase price and fuel economy figures. That's cool.

What I'm trying to say is that you're completely missing the point. Are people in the market for a 500bhp+, £70,000+ car that bothered about fuel economy, or stretching an extra few thousand quid for the car they want? Bolting a stupidly powerful engine into a practical car isn't meant to be sensible, it should be about which car makes the rudest sound and is most capable of scaring the kids in the back.

 

[SVT Cobra GT]

Supercharged V8, 500+hp, Jaaaaaag and enough space for your dog to ride shotgun around a racetrack. Cool.

 

[TheCracker]

This pretty much sums up all fast wagons. If Jalopnik thinks it's cool then it probably isn't.

The only thing uncooler than a car that Jalopnik thinks is cool, is still using that site as a reference for anything.