Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.
Audi A3 TDI Clubsport Quattro concept
Spy Shots: Production Audi TT Clubsport Quattro
Chevy Camaro getting early unveil at Indy in September
James Garner recovering from mild stroke
VIDEO: God's ringtone is a V10-powered Audi R8
First Drive: 2009 Ford Escapes, more of almost everything
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Ford Shelby GT500 Mustang
Future Classic: 1984 Chrysler Minivans
_thumbnail.jpg "Lamborghini Reventon unboxed in Las Vegas")
Reader Comments for
Subscribe to this threadKitschy Cat: Galpinized Jaguar XF
(Page 1 of 1)
Chopper @ Mar 12th 2008 5:45PM
All that work, and they STILL left the ugly headlights in there.
Ubizzle @ Mar 12th 2008 5:55PM
The headlights are there purely to comply with certain regulations, but i can't remember the exact ones. So, yeah, they couldn't really change them... And it's not that they're ugly, it's that they don't match how stunning they concept's were.
Chopper @ Mar 12th 2008 6:04PM
What!?!?!?? I dunno what regulations you speak of, but the headlights on this XF are just plain old BAD DESIGN!!!
How they can nail the rear light design so perfect... and then miss the mark so badly on the front is beyond me.
They look like they were taked right of a Chrysler Sebring.
Ubizzle @ Mar 12th 2008 6:18PM
It was in a car magazine (possibly Autocar or Car) a while ago, i would dig it up, but at the moment i'm a wee bit busy. I definitely remember thinkin "oh, well at least they have an excuse there".
madgamer @ Mar 12th 2008 6:42PM
I read that it wasn't regulations, but heat build-up problems with putting the HID's into the smaller sized housing that the concept car had. Most customers would prefer a non-melted hood and functional lights over the alternative.
Val @ Mar 12th 2008 8:50PM
I seriously doubt there is any reason not to keep the original headlights from the concept, apart from a tight budget. They just went with what was available and thats it. They could have worked with the leading headlight and bulb manufactrers and paid some money, but nooo, the company was barely surviving. The heat problem i believe was due to the LEDs on the concept. It was a poor decision that totally ruined the car, I really hope that when tata buys jag they will find the money to put proper headlights on the thing, probably at a mid-life facelift in a few years. I am not holding my reath though. For comparison's sake, the aforementioned 159 headlights really look about the same size as on the xf concept, check it http://www.autospies.com/news/Spy-Photos-2007-Alfa-159-Spotted-In-Los-Angeles-9723/
Jomil @ Mar 12th 2008 9:10PM
its because they cant, the smaller headlights created too much heat, it was not possible. I still like them. i am studying Industrial Design, and the concept headlights would have been too small for the car, and besides the car as a whole is beautiful, its a car you can see a soul, it isnt just a machine.
Mark @ Mar 13th 2008 5:15AM
@Yaroukh: They're Italian, of course they don't :)