• Aug 23, 2009
2010 Jaguar XJ - Click above for high-res image gallery

The XJ was, for the longest time, the model most commonly associated with the Jaguar brand. Like Porsche's iconic 911, the XJ's basic shape had soldiered on for decades with significant platform changes hidden behind an all-too-familiar face. When Jaguar switched things up by introducing the forward-looking midsize XF a couple of years ago, people started to take notice that it wasn't going to be business-as-usual anymore in Coventry – or Mumbai for that matter. Heritage and tradition were one thing, but Jaguar needed something radical to reclaim its place at the top of the luxury sedan class. Enter the 2010 XJ, an all-new vehicle with an all-new look that should help Jaguar capture some all-new customers.

Borrowing heavily from the XF playbook, the new ultra sedan offers tastefully modern styling with a dash of traditional elegance and a healthy dose of British class. Sure, the tail lamps might look like they were borrowed from a Citroen, but in person this car has genuine presence. It is a large vehicle compared to the previous XJ, but not as big as, say, an S-Class Benz. The proportions remind us of the BMW 7 Series and the new Porsche Panamera.

As we've told you from our first encounter with the car a month ago, the new 2010 Jaguar XJ will be available in regular or extended wheelbase form, with one of three variations of the company's direct-injected 5.0 liter V8 underhood. The base models get a 385-horsepower normally-aspirated version; the XJ Supercharged gets boosted to 470 hp; and the top-of-the-line Supersport gets the XFR's 510-hp mill. Prices will range from a base of $72,500 to $115,000, making this one dear kitty. No matter the price, it's one striking sedan, and we can't wait to get some seat time soon. Until then, check out our high-res gallery from Pebble Beach below.




Live photos from Pebble Beach copyright ©2009 Frank Filipponio / Weblogs, Inc.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 34 Comments
      • 5 Years Ago
      Just awful.
      Does not even remotely look like a Jag.
      Look at Audi, Mercedes, BMW. they have heritage.
      You can tell that a 30 year old one and a new one come from the same company.
      Jaguar has no heritage anymore.
      The DNA has been destroyed.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Front end is great, back end sucks. The C-pillar is bad enough and even a dark color doesn't hide it due to the massive gaps, but that aside those marty feldman tailights look retarded, the flabby overhang is off balance, and the general shape an detailing is incredibly boring. It really does look like an old man's car - not 60 years old, but 80.

      Just due to the back end this may be the ugliest Jag ever.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Yes, the fit and finish does not look too good.
      • 5 Years Ago
      It looks so much better in black.
        • 5 Years Ago
        The front end looks too much like an Infiniti FX for my taste. And that ain't a good thing.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Very impressive up front. The back is still great but needs some better presence. I guess I'm looking for the XF's tail to be somehow matched with this new car face and then it would be ideal.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Am I the only one who finds this car -slightly- ugly?
        • 5 Years Ago
        I find it more than slightly ugly. I do wonder what Ian Callum was thinking here, particularly with that grille.
        • 5 Years Ago
        I feel a little Buick, maybe a touch of Audi and even a bit of the Mercedes & VW roofline. Put it all together with a hood with squared off cues that look like it was made on a press by hand and frankly I find the entire car a pile of fail.
        • 5 Years Ago
        You're not alone. To me it's SO close to being awesome, and I'm betting it's a fantastic car from the driver's seat, but it seems like they were just trying to do too much with the styling.
        • 5 Years Ago
        more like..............really ugly!
        • 5 Years Ago
        I don't like the rear 3/4 view at all, but the rest are very impressive (especially in the darker colors... er colours...) Overall, I love the car and it has grown on me a bit.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Half of this car's design is great. The other half is a big mistake-- hard to understand how it got through the system. In general people seem to be trying to be open minded to liking it, but I think we're all going to realize,

      nope.

      It's just bad.
      • 5 Years Ago
      the tail of the car just doesnt seem to fit right, Maybe if the rear bumper needs some re-styled it looks like an Olds/Buick rear with a little Maserati tail lights....They should of kept the same direction the XF theme had in the rear....
      • 5 Years Ago
      It's not a bad panel gap. Someone didn't close the hood properly. Take a better look. It's lifted near the grill and near the right fender.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Actually if I close my S-type hood wrong it looks exactly the same as the one in these photos.
        • 5 Years Ago
        If it wouldn't be closed properly the hood would stick up at least 1". Its misaligned and look at all the other sheetmetal gaps. I fully expect that poor built and quality from a Jaguar.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Any chance of some 1600x1200 or bigger photos Autoblog?
        • 5 Years Ago
        You don't want to zoom in on that, they should be 640X480 low quality, like the car.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Why does that look so much more amazing then when i first saw the car? Fantastic thing that.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Can someone please explain the odd rear quarter / C-Pillar /Trunk-lid arrangement? It looks like they just have up.
    • Load More Comments