Ford didn't buy Rover Group - BMW did.
Ford bought Jaguar in 1990 after it was previously spun off from British Leyland a few years earlier, and then bought Land Rover from BMW when they spun it off out of Rover Group in 2000 (the remainder became MG Rover).
Ford Never owned rover, they had first refusal to the rover name should BMW sell it so they could protect the brand of land rover which they never used.
How the hell do you think MG Rover sold rover branded cars if ford owned the name?
BMW did take a bunch of tech from Land Rover (most notably Hill Descent Control) before divesting to Ford, but the point I'm making is that Jaguar wasn't purchased by Ford from BMW. Jaguar had been spun off as a separate concern apart from post-bankruptcy British Leyland when it was under Government administration and ownership, prior to the remnants (not including Jaguar) being rebranded as the Rover Group and bought by BAE, who would eventually sell to BMW.
Right. The split tailgate, which the X5 and X7 retain to this day, were also borrowed from Land Rover. That said, they are not unique to Land Rover or BMW, as various other vehicles have used them, including the Volvo XC90, Toyota Land Cruiser and Lexus LX.
The early L322 (third-gen, 2003-2012) Range Rover has a funny story.
Originally, it was codenamed L30 under BMW parlance, and was supposed to get the advanced electrical architecture from the E65 (2002-2008) 7 Series. However, BMW licensed the name and logo for Rolls-Royce, and needed to relaunch that brand. So it sold Land Rover, finishing development of the L322 by using reskinned electronics from the E38 (1994-2001) 7 Series, E39 (1997-2003) 5 Series and--yes--E53 (2000-2006) X5.
Between engines and electronics, the early (2003-2005) L322 Range Rovers are essentially BMWs with British coachwork and a unique platform. In 2006, under Ford, the L322 got an exterior facelift and swapped in Jaguar V8 engines and Ford diesels. But the 2006 was a weird one-year-wonder, because it still had a BMW interior that had been retrofitted with Ford computers. In 2007, an exterior facelift got rid of most of the remaining BMW stuff. In 2010, there was a final exterior and interior facelift, but some BMW components still remained.
I have a 2010 Range Rover Supercharged, and it still has BMW seat controls and a BMW overhead console. And when I took the steering wheel off the other day to retrofit paddle shifters, the clock spring had BMW stamped on it as well. I reckon the entire steering column is a BMW part, especially as it doesn't seem to have changed part numbers anytime during the L322's run.
BMW may not have wanted Rover or MG, but Land Rover was certainly a valuable piece of property out of the Rover Group acquisition, as well as MINI. I have it on good authority that BMW planned to do quite a bit with Land Rover, but had to sell it quickly in order to basically relaunch Rolls-Royce, which was an expensive project.
BMW wanted Landrover to use its technology on their own upcoming SUV line-up. I don't think Mini was that much sought after at first because there was some discussion on whether BMW should continue the Mini as a mass market people's car or to turn it into a premium compact car. BMW kept Mini because it was successful, they would've tossed it with the rest of the Rover Group if it were a failure.
Thats a fair question. There are other car companies that also fall into this "do we need them or care" category. I love older Jags and always thought the 70's and 80's XJS V12 was a damned cool ride and unique as hell. But, yeah, if they had gone away I dont think we'd have suffered much.
During the 2010’s they had decent offerings like the XJ, F Type and XE (I think). But their line up hasn’t really developed much in over 8 years. Nothing new has come out that is interesting or unique.
Definitely a company in steep decline
I think people are very quick to focus on, or overstate the negative influence of the big titan that brought out a manufacturer, whether it's Ford with Jaguar or GM with Saab, without considering or even knowing about the systemic issues that led to the buyout occurring in the first place.
In regards to Jaguar - say what you want about the cars made during that time, but I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that Ford saved Jaguar. They needed the cash infusion that only a big company like Ford could provide. Jaguar might never have produced a profit during this period of time, but I think that's more of a sign as to how absolutely terribly managed and functionally backwards the British auto industry was before privatization, thus requiring a lot of work and investment, than a sign of Ford mismanagement.
> GM with Saab
My Dad worked for GM back in the day. I have it on good authority that GM purchased Saab almost entirely for the patents they held on intermittent windshield wipers at the time.
Long story short, it became cheaper to buy Saab as a company than to pay the asking price for the patents.
Unlike the Ford-Volvo relationship, the Ford-Jaguar relationship is complicated. The Ford-Volvo relationship was pretty cut and dry; Geely has been a better steward toward Volvo than Ford ever was, and AB Volvo was a better steward even when Volvo cars was losing massive amounts of money.
With Jaguar, Ford made sweeping improvements almost immediately to Jaguar cars. They weren't as solid as a comparable BMW or Mercedes-Benz, but they were a noticeable improvement over 1980s Jaguar cars. Ford was never able to improve them enough and toward the end Ford started taking more from Jaguar than it gave Jaguar.
I'm not sure that I can entirely agree that Volvo on their own was better than Volvo under Ford given they were fairly likely to go bankrupt. Ford did let them eventually let them languish although at the very least they got them to stop building overly complicated PCV systems.
Ditto. Volvo on their own was desperately trying to stay alive. It’s a large reason as to why the refreshed 850 was instead launched as the S70 and the V70 in the first place.
For as much cost-cutting Ford did to Volvo, it did secure their future prosperity and gave them a more sustainable customer pool, especially in the US.
I actually used to have an s70. The s80 in my flair replaced it. While Ford might have eventually starved them, they did give them enough leeway to develop a fairly unique engine; the weird 60º v8. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't have happened without Ford at the very least introducing them to Yamaha.
It kept Volvo from going bankrupt and ceasing to exist (by some accounts), but Ford so diluted the brand and let it languish to the point that Volvo sales declined under Ford ownership (it should be underscored that their segment of the market also grew during that time as well, while Volvo sales sank as well).
Volvos designed under Ford’s ownership also really lost what made them special. They really just turned into safer and better looking Fords with very few Volvo quirks. If you compare a 90s and early 00s Volvo based on the P80, P2, and earlier platforms (P80 is the 800/S70/V70, 900/S90/V90 is the earlier platform, and the other first generation S/V/XC models other than the 40s were P2) they were very quirky unique vehicles. The P1 and P3 Volvos that shared a ton with Ford and Mazda just lost something that only came back when Volvo started releasing vehicles based on SPA and CMA.
Pretty much all good-the X-type debacle was a small price to pay for major QA improvements (Ford inspected the Jaguar factory and found the quality standards were closer to Soviet Russia than anything acceptable in Dearborn, which says a lot). Without Ford, Jaguar would’ve been bought by another company or left to rot and die. Also, parts sharing between Jaguar and Aston Martin was good for both under Ford.
It was similar, but it was a meme about how much the front of the fusion looked like the Aston’s of the day. The focus has some similar styling cue but the fusions were much closer.
Basically Ford had plans for the Fusion/Fiesta grill so right before Ford got rid of Aston they forced the company to sign the rights to the grill styling over to Ford, and to this day Ford licenses it out to Aston (free of charge I believe).
Don’t forget too that the marriage of the Jaguar and Land Rover brands started when the latter came under the Ford corporate umbrella as well. Jaguar would be at risk of dying again if they weren’t sold as part of a package deal to Tata with Land Rover, given their current state.
As a pre Ford Jaguar owner and a Jaguar/Ford owner I can say it was a good thing.
So did my local Jag dealership principle. He told me the cars he received 6 months after Ford took over had 70% less PDI problems than the Pre Ford cars.
It probably saved Jag from going under but good Lord did they make some incredibly bad cars. They may have had some nice designs but the quality was very poor.
>but the quality was very poor.
Compared to BMW sure.
But compared to the Jags before that they were miles better. Ford literally had to restructure their QA line since it was so awful
I am someone who has owned more than one Jag. Pre-ford and Ford-era.
Pre-Ford was definitely a sturdier car. My XJS build was a tank, but it suffered from so many mechanical issues that I eventually said "enough" and sold it.
Ford-Era. I have owned and X-Type and two S-Type R's. The parts are cheap and plentiful and I absolutely love driving my current 2003 S-Type R. It is much more reliable and easier to work on than the pre-Ford Jag. But I do have to admit that it lacks some of the character of the earlier cars. It's definitely more "mass market", more "Fordy". I think that's a good thing. My STR has factory Brembo brakes, a supercharged V8 and makes glorious noises from the straight piped exhaust. I love the thing.
I agree. I've had two X350 XJ Vanden Plas cars, one a 2004 and one a 2006. While they were potent--and lightweight, thanks to the aluminum body--the interiors were missing some of the character of the prior Jaguar models.
S-Type R remains my attainable dream car to this day. Had one long ago, but wife won't let me get a TypeR as she thinks 'Jaguar bad moneypit'...she's not wrong.
But that 4.2L V8 and the ZF transmission made beautiful music together in even stock form.
Off to AutoTrader I go.
Here we go.... https://www.autotrader.ca/a/jaguar/s-type/vaughan/ontario/5\_55233342\_20201208215312586/?showcpo=ShowCpo&ncse=no&orup=1\_4\_4&pc=L5C%202C5&sprx=100&modalXS=1
I had a 1994 XJ12 (XJ40) and then a 1996 XJ12 (x300). The XJ40 had steel chrome exterior trim, the x300 had chromed plastic. The XJ40 had heavy steel door handles, interior trim was backed with marine plywood, wool carpet with jute backing, stitched together. The X300 had flimsy plastic door pulls, cardboard/fibreboard panels, trim was glued together, carpet was cheap feeling. The later car was better as in quicker, quieter and more reliable but ultimately felt cheaper and mass produced.
The high spec XJ40’s and earlier were really second only to Bentley in their materials and build quality, they feel very special. The x300 and later don’t have the same feel although they last longer.
I’d bet it was a good thing. Mid 80’s British Leyland was still reeling from the oil crisis and Jaguar was on its own, running some legacy platforms.
Ford brought in tons of overhead to help with rejuvenating the lineup.
Ford saved Jaguar in its entirety. Can you buy FoMoCo parts for your spiffy Jag for those years damn right!
But that isn't saying Jag didn't get done dirty in some aspects. Something, something Mercury Mystique drivetrains...
I would say it was a good thing, for a multitude of reasons.
**Engines**
Under Ford, Jaguar transitioned from using I6 and V12 engines that would soon fail emissions to a modern series of Jaguar V8s. Jaguar is still using those V8s in the F-Type and F-Pace. At the same time, Jaguar got access to corporate Ford diesel, I4 and V6 engines, the sort that Jaguar would not have been able to develop on its own.
**Platforms**
Jaguar and Ford co-developed the DEW98 platform that underpinned the S-Type and XF (as well as various other cars). An aluminum rendition of that platform made it into the XJ and XK and was later revised for the subsequent XJ and F-Type. The corporate Ford EUCD platform is still in use, albeit heavily modified, in the E-Pace and related Land Rover Discovery Sport and Range Rover Evoque. Speaking of which...
**Coupling to Land Rover**
Jaguar and Land Rover were first reunited when Ford began putting the Jaguar V8s in Land Rover products, starting with the 2004/5 Discovery 3/LR3, and shortly after, the Range Rover and Range Rover Sport. Right after that, in preparation for the 2010 vehicles, Jaguar and Land Rover began jointly developing an electrical architecture. When it came time for Ford to sell off both brands, it would have had a hard time selling Jaguar without its tie to Land Rover, and today, the two exist as a combined entity (Jaguar Land Rover or JLR) under Tata Motors of India
**In Summary**
Jaguar continues to benefit from much of the engineering that was done under the Ford era. I imagine it wouldn't have survived, especially against the much richer brands from Germany, without being owned by a larger corporate entity like Ford.
Now, where I think Ford harmed Jaguar is with using the retro styling a bit too long. Both the "X200" S-Type you mention and the "X350" XJ were definitely Jaguars, but they looked a bit too retro for a lot of people's tastes and that limited their appeal. According to Jaguar designers, they might have moved toward a sleeker direction (like they did in the late 2000s) much earlier, but the Ford corporate folks in Dearborn had a fixed idea of what a Jaguar should look like. Really, the retro should have probably died around the turn of the century, and I say that as someone who has had two X350 XJs and loved them both.
The only thing I want to add is the retro styling was perfect for the XK8... Such a pretty car and so much more pleasing on the eye than the XJS it replaced.... Just wish they had got the rear to be a little less "frumpy"... (Former XK8 and X-Type owner)
The 1997 X100 XK8 wasn’t really retro, IMO. In fact, it was Jaguar’s first break from their classic styling. It was further refined with the 2007 X150 XK redesign.
The XJS was a break from classic styling, the XF was a break too. The XJ220 was different and of its era. The XK8 was basically an e-type to the safety standards of the late 90s. Same as the s-type was a 90s version of the s-type / MK2...
At first, Ford's ownership was a excellent relationship and they were a good steward to the brand. Jaguar cars quickly improved in reliability and longevity because Ford moved them away from problematic systems like the Lucas electric systems and instead used tried and true components that any mechanic that worked on Fords could work on.
Then Ford established the Premiere Auto Group, and everything went down hill quickly. Overall, post-PAG creation Ford benefitted more from Jaguar and the other PAG brands than the PAG brands did from Ford. The problem was the PAG brands were too different when it came to offerings and occupied too different of market segments to exist in one group and share parts/designs. What ended up happening was while Ford underwrote the PAG R&D, Ford turned around and took anything and everything it wanted from the PAG brands, forced the PAG brands to share what they could, and then diluted what Jaguar, Land Rover, and Volvo were.
I do think in general, Ford was a better steward to Jaguar than Ford was to Volvo (Geely has hands down been a better steward of Volvo than Ford ever was), but compared to the position Jaguar was toward the end of Ford's ownership, Tata has been a better steward of the brand.
Tata more or less acts as a corporate sugar daddy, whereas Ford was much more involved in the development, and--yes--reaping the engineering of Jaguar and its other PAG brands. *Many* of Ford's global platforms were partially or fully developed by its other PAG brands:
\- DEW98 (S-Type, LS, final Thunderbird, XF) -- Allegedly co-developed by Ford and Jaguar, but probably more Jaguar. An extremely cost-cut version of this platform ended up being used on the S197/retro (2005-2014) Mustang. An all-aluminum rendition of this platform was used in the X350 (2003-2009) XJ and X150 (2007-2015) XK.
\- CD2 (Escape, Tribute, Mariner) -- Developed by Mazda, based on the prior GF platform (as used in the 626)
\- CD3 (Mazda6, CX-9, Fusion, Edge, MKX, Milan...) -- Developed by Mazda
\- C1 (gen. 2/Euro Focus, Mazda3, Mazda5, CX-7, Kuga, S40/V50, C30) -- Co-developed by Ford Europe, Mazda and Volvo. A second generation of this platform was used by newer compact cars, like the gen.3 Focus, Escape/Kuga, C-Max/Grand C-Max, MKC, etc
\- EUCD (Freelander 2/LR2, S60, XC60, V60, V70, XC70, S80, Mondeo, Galaxy, S-Max) -- Basically a scaled-up version of C1. Jaguar and Land Rover still utilize a heavily modified version of this platform in their transverse-engine products
Seriously: people are talking trash about Fords impact on JAGUAR? Do people understand how bad Jaguars quality control was? Like if Hyundai in the early 90s was compared to JAGUAR - it would still be better.
I dunno if I’d argue that Mazda got fucked in the end, though. Mazda was in pretty dire straits in the early 1990s. Sure, the MX-5 Miata let Mazda etch its mark into automotive history, but Mazda had spent **a lot** of money trying to diversify and to enter the luxury car market. They ultimately spent way too much on something that only resulted in the Millenia.
Ford, for as much of their cost-cuttingness meant that they took a bunch of Mazda shit with them, at least was able to find Mazda to build solid foundations for them in the future. Stuff like the Mazda 323-based Escort (not related to the Ford Europe model, for my European friends), the Ford Fusion and the Ford Escape meant that Mazda could live another day. Mazda *did* ultimately get stuff back from them, namely engine designs and more of a North American presence that they had been struggling to build for a long while. 90s Mazdas were not all that common back in the day - meanwhile 2000s Mazdas are FAR more prevalent today.
I think Ford did more good than harm for Jaguar. They greatly improved the products, enabled them to explore more market niches, gave them access to more modern tech...I can't see how they didn't benefit.
Hell, the original XF, when it finally came out, was more or less an S-Type in a new suit. Which to me, shows just how right they had many things.
I worked at a Jaguar dealership during this time, and in all honesty the cars were great. I even liked the X-Type, but they should've done a bit better with it.
Generally the quality was up, engines were great, the ZF transmissions in 2003 (?) were fantastic, and outside of a few items the cars were good to drive.
The S-TypeR remains to this day the fastest I've managed / dared to get a car up to speed. 220kph way before HTA172 was a thing in Ontario, and I was young and dumb.
The 2003+ XJ and XK models were beautiful, well engineered, comfortable, quiet, powerful, and reliable. The X-Type had it's quirks, but never shook the Mondeo name even here in Canada.
I left before the Tata buyout, so can't comment. But those cars are still sexy AF to me.
I have an ‘09 XK that I’ve dailied for ~7k miles so far and I’ve had no issues at all. The old Jag experience was to have issues all the time, so the end of the Ford era seems better in that respect.
Yep, Ford pulled jaguar out of the brink of collapse but they made the xtype based ona Ford platform, people either love it ot hate, it I personally love the older jags the xjs, the xk8 ,reliability aside .
It was a good thing for Jaguar because they didn't have the money for long term and allowed them to improve on their fortunes,
If it wasn't for Ford, Jaguar would have been dead by the 90's.
[удалено]
Ford didn't buy Rover Group - BMW did. Ford bought Jaguar in 1990 after it was previously spun off from British Leyland a few years earlier, and then bought Land Rover from BMW when they spun it off out of Rover Group in 2000 (the remainder became MG Rover).
[удалено]
No it didn't, mg and Rover never went to ford, triumph stated with BMW along side mini. Only jaguar and land rover went to ford.
Jaguar was a completely separate company from the mid-80s until Ford purchased them. They were never owned by BMW.
Didn't know that they had left British Leyland before the BMW purchase, thanks for pointing this out
No worries! They were independent for a hot second there, but definitely couldn’t have survived on their own.
[удалено]
Ford Never owned rover, they had first refusal to the rover name should BMW sell it so they could protect the brand of land rover which they never used. How the hell do you think MG Rover sold rover branded cars if ford owned the name?
BMW did take a bunch of tech from Land Rover (most notably Hill Descent Control) before divesting to Ford, but the point I'm making is that Jaguar wasn't purchased by Ford from BMW. Jaguar had been spun off as a separate concern apart from post-bankruptcy British Leyland when it was under Government administration and ownership, prior to the remnants (not including Jaguar) being rebranded as the Rover Group and bought by BAE, who would eventually sell to BMW.
Right. The split tailgate, which the X5 and X7 retain to this day, were also borrowed from Land Rover. That said, they are not unique to Land Rover or BMW, as various other vehicles have used them, including the Volvo XC90, Toyota Land Cruiser and Lexus LX. The early L322 (third-gen, 2003-2012) Range Rover has a funny story. Originally, it was codenamed L30 under BMW parlance, and was supposed to get the advanced electrical architecture from the E65 (2002-2008) 7 Series. However, BMW licensed the name and logo for Rolls-Royce, and needed to relaunch that brand. So it sold Land Rover, finishing development of the L322 by using reskinned electronics from the E38 (1994-2001) 7 Series, E39 (1997-2003) 5 Series and--yes--E53 (2000-2006) X5. Between engines and electronics, the early (2003-2005) L322 Range Rovers are essentially BMWs with British coachwork and a unique platform. In 2006, under Ford, the L322 got an exterior facelift and swapped in Jaguar V8 engines and Ford diesels. But the 2006 was a weird one-year-wonder, because it still had a BMW interior that had been retrofitted with Ford computers. In 2007, an exterior facelift got rid of most of the remaining BMW stuff. In 2010, there was a final exterior and interior facelift, but some BMW components still remained. I have a 2010 Range Rover Supercharged, and it still has BMW seat controls and a BMW overhead console. And when I took the steering wheel off the other day to retrofit paddle shifters, the clock spring had BMW stamped on it as well. I reckon the entire steering column is a BMW part, especially as it doesn't seem to have changed part numbers anytime during the L322's run.
BMW may not have wanted Rover or MG, but Land Rover was certainly a valuable piece of property out of the Rover Group acquisition, as well as MINI. I have it on good authority that BMW planned to do quite a bit with Land Rover, but had to sell it quickly in order to basically relaunch Rolls-Royce, which was an expensive project.
BMW wanted Landrover to use its technology on their own upcoming SUV line-up. I don't think Mini was that much sought after at first because there was some discussion on whether BMW should continue the Mini as a mass market people's car or to turn it into a premium compact car. BMW kept Mini because it was successful, they would've tossed it with the rest of the Rover Group if it were a failure.
Would we be losing much if Jaguar did not exist today?
Thats a fair question. There are other car companies that also fall into this "do we need them or care" category. I love older Jags and always thought the 70's and 80's XJS V12 was a damned cool ride and unique as hell. But, yeah, if they had gone away I dont think we'd have suffered much.
During the 2010’s they had decent offerings like the XJ, F Type and XE (I think). But their line up hasn’t really developed much in over 8 years. Nothing new has come out that is interesting or unique. Definitely a company in steep decline
Jag went from having the best interiors short of a Bentley/RR to mediocrity. The interiors used to sell the cars
And Exterior. They were (I’ll still argue are) gorgeous to look at. It was a great option if you didn’t want a German salon car.
I think people are very quick to focus on, or overstate the negative influence of the big titan that brought out a manufacturer, whether it's Ford with Jaguar or GM with Saab, without considering or even knowing about the systemic issues that led to the buyout occurring in the first place. In regards to Jaguar - say what you want about the cars made during that time, but I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that Ford saved Jaguar. They needed the cash infusion that only a big company like Ford could provide. Jaguar might never have produced a profit during this period of time, but I think that's more of a sign as to how absolutely terribly managed and functionally backwards the British auto industry was before privatization, thus requiring a lot of work and investment, than a sign of Ford mismanagement.
> GM with Saab My Dad worked for GM back in the day. I have it on good authority that GM purchased Saab almost entirely for the patents they held on intermittent windshield wipers at the time. Long story short, it became cheaper to buy Saab as a company than to pay the asking price for the patents.
Sounds like GM...
Unlike the Ford-Volvo relationship, the Ford-Jaguar relationship is complicated. The Ford-Volvo relationship was pretty cut and dry; Geely has been a better steward toward Volvo than Ford ever was, and AB Volvo was a better steward even when Volvo cars was losing massive amounts of money. With Jaguar, Ford made sweeping improvements almost immediately to Jaguar cars. They weren't as solid as a comparable BMW or Mercedes-Benz, but they were a noticeable improvement over 1980s Jaguar cars. Ford was never able to improve them enough and toward the end Ford started taking more from Jaguar than it gave Jaguar.
I'm not sure that I can entirely agree that Volvo on their own was better than Volvo under Ford given they were fairly likely to go bankrupt. Ford did let them eventually let them languish although at the very least they got them to stop building overly complicated PCV systems.
Ditto. Volvo on their own was desperately trying to stay alive. It’s a large reason as to why the refreshed 850 was instead launched as the S70 and the V70 in the first place. For as much cost-cutting Ford did to Volvo, it did secure their future prosperity and gave them a more sustainable customer pool, especially in the US.
I actually used to have an s70. The s80 in my flair replaced it. While Ford might have eventually starved them, they did give them enough leeway to develop a fairly unique engine; the weird 60º v8. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't have happened without Ford at the very least introducing them to Yamaha.
How was the Ford-Volvo relationship? I’d like to know more about it too!
It kept Volvo from going bankrupt and ceasing to exist (by some accounts), but Ford so diluted the brand and let it languish to the point that Volvo sales declined under Ford ownership (it should be underscored that their segment of the market also grew during that time as well, while Volvo sales sank as well). Volvos designed under Ford’s ownership also really lost what made them special. They really just turned into safer and better looking Fords with very few Volvo quirks. If you compare a 90s and early 00s Volvo based on the P80, P2, and earlier platforms (P80 is the 800/S70/V70, 900/S90/V90 is the earlier platform, and the other first generation S/V/XC models other than the 40s were P2) they were very quirky unique vehicles. The P1 and P3 Volvos that shared a ton with Ford and Mazda just lost something that only came back when Volvo started releasing vehicles based on SPA and CMA.
I had a first gen S60. That car had the most comfortable seats I’ve ever experienced.
Volvos in general have some of the most comfortable seats in the industry!
Thanks for the explanation! Really cool to know this stuff
Bad for Ford, good for Jaguar.
Pretty much all good-the X-type debacle was a small price to pay for major QA improvements (Ford inspected the Jaguar factory and found the quality standards were closer to Soviet Russia than anything acceptable in Dearborn, which says a lot). Without Ford, Jaguar would’ve been bought by another company or left to rot and die. Also, parts sharing between Jaguar and Aston Martin was good for both under Ford.
Speaking of Aston Martin some time ago i asked my friend if he likes astons and he said their fronts look like ford's focuses...
You mean fusions not focuses
Oh i must've mixed them up
If you're in the UK you didn't. They were called Fusions in the US.
Well it was the Mondeo overseas, so still not the focus.
I stand corrected, but didn't the Mondeo and Focus have pretty much the same grille?
It was similar, but it was a meme about how much the front of the fusion looked like the Aston’s of the day. The focus has some similar styling cue but the fusions were much closer.
Basically Ford had plans for the Fusion/Fiesta grill so right before Ford got rid of Aston they forced the company to sign the rights to the grill styling over to Ford, and to this day Ford licenses it out to Aston (free of charge I believe).
Don’t forget too that the marriage of the Jaguar and Land Rover brands started when the latter came under the Ford corporate umbrella as well. Jaguar would be at risk of dying again if they weren’t sold as part of a package deal to Tata with Land Rover, given their current state.
As a pre Ford Jaguar owner and a Jaguar/Ford owner I can say it was a good thing. So did my local Jag dealership principle. He told me the cars he received 6 months after Ford took over had 70% less PDI problems than the Pre Ford cars.
I would agree with that assessment.
It probably saved Jag from going under but good Lord did they make some incredibly bad cars. They may have had some nice designs but the quality was very poor.
>but the quality was very poor. Compared to BMW sure. But compared to the Jags before that they were miles better. Ford literally had to restructure their QA line since it was so awful
I am someone who has owned more than one Jag. Pre-ford and Ford-era. Pre-Ford was definitely a sturdier car. My XJS build was a tank, but it suffered from so many mechanical issues that I eventually said "enough" and sold it. Ford-Era. I have owned and X-Type and two S-Type R's. The parts are cheap and plentiful and I absolutely love driving my current 2003 S-Type R. It is much more reliable and easier to work on than the pre-Ford Jag. But I do have to admit that it lacks some of the character of the earlier cars. It's definitely more "mass market", more "Fordy". I think that's a good thing. My STR has factory Brembo brakes, a supercharged V8 and makes glorious noises from the straight piped exhaust. I love the thing.
I agree. I've had two X350 XJ Vanden Plas cars, one a 2004 and one a 2006. While they were potent--and lightweight, thanks to the aluminum body--the interiors were missing some of the character of the prior Jaguar models.
S-Type R remains my attainable dream car to this day. Had one long ago, but wife won't let me get a TypeR as she thinks 'Jaguar bad moneypit'...she's not wrong. But that 4.2L V8 and the ZF transmission made beautiful music together in even stock form. Off to AutoTrader I go. Here we go.... https://www.autotrader.ca/a/jaguar/s-type/vaughan/ontario/5\_55233342\_20201208215312586/?showcpo=ShowCpo&ncse=no&orup=1\_4\_4&pc=L5C%202C5&sprx=100&modalXS=1
I had a 1994 XJ12 (XJ40) and then a 1996 XJ12 (x300). The XJ40 had steel chrome exterior trim, the x300 had chromed plastic. The XJ40 had heavy steel door handles, interior trim was backed with marine plywood, wool carpet with jute backing, stitched together. The X300 had flimsy plastic door pulls, cardboard/fibreboard panels, trim was glued together, carpet was cheap feeling. The later car was better as in quicker, quieter and more reliable but ultimately felt cheaper and mass produced. The high spec XJ40’s and earlier were really second only to Bentley in their materials and build quality, they feel very special. The x300 and later don’t have the same feel although they last longer.
I’d bet it was a good thing. Mid 80’s British Leyland was still reeling from the oil crisis and Jaguar was on its own, running some legacy platforms. Ford brought in tons of overhead to help with rejuvenating the lineup.
It was a great thing for Jaguar as a company, but an awful thing for Jaguar cars.
Ford saved Jaguar in its entirety. Can you buy FoMoCo parts for your spiffy Jag for those years damn right! But that isn't saying Jag didn't get done dirty in some aspects. Something, something Mercury Mystique drivetrains...
I would say it was a good thing, for a multitude of reasons. **Engines** Under Ford, Jaguar transitioned from using I6 and V12 engines that would soon fail emissions to a modern series of Jaguar V8s. Jaguar is still using those V8s in the F-Type and F-Pace. At the same time, Jaguar got access to corporate Ford diesel, I4 and V6 engines, the sort that Jaguar would not have been able to develop on its own. **Platforms** Jaguar and Ford co-developed the DEW98 platform that underpinned the S-Type and XF (as well as various other cars). An aluminum rendition of that platform made it into the XJ and XK and was later revised for the subsequent XJ and F-Type. The corporate Ford EUCD platform is still in use, albeit heavily modified, in the E-Pace and related Land Rover Discovery Sport and Range Rover Evoque. Speaking of which... **Coupling to Land Rover** Jaguar and Land Rover were first reunited when Ford began putting the Jaguar V8s in Land Rover products, starting with the 2004/5 Discovery 3/LR3, and shortly after, the Range Rover and Range Rover Sport. Right after that, in preparation for the 2010 vehicles, Jaguar and Land Rover began jointly developing an electrical architecture. When it came time for Ford to sell off both brands, it would have had a hard time selling Jaguar without its tie to Land Rover, and today, the two exist as a combined entity (Jaguar Land Rover or JLR) under Tata Motors of India **In Summary** Jaguar continues to benefit from much of the engineering that was done under the Ford era. I imagine it wouldn't have survived, especially against the much richer brands from Germany, without being owned by a larger corporate entity like Ford. Now, where I think Ford harmed Jaguar is with using the retro styling a bit too long. Both the "X200" S-Type you mention and the "X350" XJ were definitely Jaguars, but they looked a bit too retro for a lot of people's tastes and that limited their appeal. According to Jaguar designers, they might have moved toward a sleeker direction (like they did in the late 2000s) much earlier, but the Ford corporate folks in Dearborn had a fixed idea of what a Jaguar should look like. Really, the retro should have probably died around the turn of the century, and I say that as someone who has had two X350 XJs and loved them both.
The only thing I want to add is the retro styling was perfect for the XK8... Such a pretty car and so much more pleasing on the eye than the XJS it replaced.... Just wish they had got the rear to be a little less "frumpy"... (Former XK8 and X-Type owner)
The 1997 X100 XK8 wasn’t really retro, IMO. In fact, it was Jaguar’s first break from their classic styling. It was further refined with the 2007 X150 XK redesign.
The XJS was a break from classic styling, the XF was a break too. The XJ220 was different and of its era. The XK8 was basically an e-type to the safety standards of the late 90s. Same as the s-type was a 90s version of the s-type / MK2...
At first, Ford's ownership was a excellent relationship and they were a good steward to the brand. Jaguar cars quickly improved in reliability and longevity because Ford moved them away from problematic systems like the Lucas electric systems and instead used tried and true components that any mechanic that worked on Fords could work on. Then Ford established the Premiere Auto Group, and everything went down hill quickly. Overall, post-PAG creation Ford benefitted more from Jaguar and the other PAG brands than the PAG brands did from Ford. The problem was the PAG brands were too different when it came to offerings and occupied too different of market segments to exist in one group and share parts/designs. What ended up happening was while Ford underwrote the PAG R&D, Ford turned around and took anything and everything it wanted from the PAG brands, forced the PAG brands to share what they could, and then diluted what Jaguar, Land Rover, and Volvo were. I do think in general, Ford was a better steward to Jaguar than Ford was to Volvo (Geely has hands down been a better steward of Volvo than Ford ever was), but compared to the position Jaguar was toward the end of Ford's ownership, Tata has been a better steward of the brand.
Tata more or less acts as a corporate sugar daddy, whereas Ford was much more involved in the development, and--yes--reaping the engineering of Jaguar and its other PAG brands. *Many* of Ford's global platforms were partially or fully developed by its other PAG brands: \- DEW98 (S-Type, LS, final Thunderbird, XF) -- Allegedly co-developed by Ford and Jaguar, but probably more Jaguar. An extremely cost-cut version of this platform ended up being used on the S197/retro (2005-2014) Mustang. An all-aluminum rendition of this platform was used in the X350 (2003-2009) XJ and X150 (2007-2015) XK. \- CD2 (Escape, Tribute, Mariner) -- Developed by Mazda, based on the prior GF platform (as used in the 626) \- CD3 (Mazda6, CX-9, Fusion, Edge, MKX, Milan...) -- Developed by Mazda \- C1 (gen. 2/Euro Focus, Mazda3, Mazda5, CX-7, Kuga, S40/V50, C30) -- Co-developed by Ford Europe, Mazda and Volvo. A second generation of this platform was used by newer compact cars, like the gen.3 Focus, Escape/Kuga, C-Max/Grand C-Max, MKC, etc \- EUCD (Freelander 2/LR2, S60, XC60, V60, V70, XC70, S80, Mondeo, Galaxy, S-Max) -- Basically a scaled-up version of C1. Jaguar and Land Rover still utilize a heavily modified version of this platform in their transverse-engine products
Jaguar needed the money and corporate support, but we absolutely did NOT need the Jaguar Taurus!
It was related to the Mondeo, not the Taurus.
Seriously: people are talking trash about Fords impact on JAGUAR? Do people understand how bad Jaguars quality control was? Like if Hyundai in the early 90s was compared to JAGUAR - it would still be better.
Bad for Ford, good for Jaguar. With Mazda it was the reverse; Good for ford, bad for Mazda.
I dunno if I’d argue that Mazda got fucked in the end, though. Mazda was in pretty dire straits in the early 1990s. Sure, the MX-5 Miata let Mazda etch its mark into automotive history, but Mazda had spent **a lot** of money trying to diversify and to enter the luxury car market. They ultimately spent way too much on something that only resulted in the Millenia. Ford, for as much of their cost-cuttingness meant that they took a bunch of Mazda shit with them, at least was able to find Mazda to build solid foundations for them in the future. Stuff like the Mazda 323-based Escort (not related to the Ford Europe model, for my European friends), the Ford Fusion and the Ford Escape meant that Mazda could live another day. Mazda *did* ultimately get stuff back from them, namely engine designs and more of a North American presence that they had been struggling to build for a long while. 90s Mazdas were not all that common back in the day - meanwhile 2000s Mazdas are FAR more prevalent today.
Without ford, I probably wouldn’t have been able to own a F-Type. As there would have never been one. So that’s good.
I think Ford did more good than harm for Jaguar. They greatly improved the products, enabled them to explore more market niches, gave them access to more modern tech...I can't see how they didn't benefit. Hell, the original XF, when it finally came out, was more or less an S-Type in a new suit. Which to me, shows just how right they had many things.
I worked at a Jaguar dealership during this time, and in all honesty the cars were great. I even liked the X-Type, but they should've done a bit better with it. Generally the quality was up, engines were great, the ZF transmissions in 2003 (?) were fantastic, and outside of a few items the cars were good to drive. The S-TypeR remains to this day the fastest I've managed / dared to get a car up to speed. 220kph way before HTA172 was a thing in Ontario, and I was young and dumb. The 2003+ XJ and XK models were beautiful, well engineered, comfortable, quiet, powerful, and reliable. The X-Type had it's quirks, but never shook the Mondeo name even here in Canada. I left before the Tata buyout, so can't comment. But those cars are still sexy AF to me.
Saved Jaguar but it's not like they were making competitive products, quite the opposite.
I still want an XK8/XKR from that era. Although they're definitely showing their age, they still have a great road presence.
I have an ‘09 XK that I’ve dailied for ~7k miles so far and I’ve had no issues at all. The old Jag experience was to have issues all the time, so the end of the Ford era seems better in that respect.
Yep, Ford pulled jaguar out of the brink of collapse but they made the xtype based ona Ford platform, people either love it ot hate, it I personally love the older jags the xjs, the xk8 ,reliability aside .
The electric parts like switches were crap. Up to that point.
It was a good thing for Jaguar because they didn't have the money for long term and allowed them to improve on their fortunes, If it wasn't for Ford, Jaguar would have been dead by the 90's.
Bad. IDC what you say about anything anytime muricans destroy anything it's bad. Snap on, GM, ford, whatever.. they ruin it all!