Here's The Sad Truth Behind Jaguar's F-Pace SVR
The sheer, staggering performance capabilities of modern SUVs is, first and foremost, a measure of how far chassis and suspension technology has come. It all started with Porsche’s divisive but profitable Cayenne, the first really decent-handling performance SUV of them all.
It’s even madder today. The latest versions are laugh-out-loud fast, whacking you gleefully around the chops with their boost sticks and demonstrating enough cornering grip to see both your eyes ending up on the same side of your face. The same goes for Jaguar Land Rover’s recent forays into the art of sharp-driving SUVs. The Range Rover Sport set a Pikes Peak class record in 2013 – a record Bentley is now going after with the genuinely incredible (like it or not) Bentayga.
Then there’s the F-Pace. We can’t dispute that it drives well. At its launch, Matt R called it “a gem to drive,” so it’s clearly not without talent. This week we learned that it’s getting an SVR version with the hard-edged, sexy, angry supercharged V8 from the JLR stable. That’ll be 542bhp. In a medium-sized SUV.
What you might have overlooked is that neither the XE nor XF saloons have been granted this honour, yet. As far as we know, wrestling a roaring V8 into both cars (which share chassis architecture) should be possible. So why hasn’t it happened? The truth is, rather predictably, all down to money.
You already know that SUVs are the thing right now. They sit the driver up higher so Joe (or Jo) Average feels more important. They give a better view of the road. They imply greater status and wealth, for some archaic, primal reason no doubt linked to size. In short, people want to buy them. But physics dictates that these taller, heavier cars can never handle with as much directness, balance and panache as a lower, lighter car.
Sure, you can fudge it with fast steering ratios, clever suspension and all the power in the world, but if you put the same developmental muscle into an SUV and a saloon that use essentially the same chassis, as the XE/XF and F-Pace do, the SUV fundamentally couldn’t be better to drive. That, in turn, means that the majority of real people with real money would rather buy an image than a better car. After all, if the driving position and implied status are all you want, why not just buy an Evoque?
We can’t help but think that this is a bit sad. We know the money-spinning F-Pace is good for business, and we’re 100 per cent behind British manufacturing. We also know the F-Pace SVR will be an awesome thing, but an XE SVR would be better, and truer to what physics and tradition say is the best layout for a sports car. It would, to us, have a credibility that no hot SUV ever can, no matter how fast they’ll go around corners.
We can’t afford a new F-Pace SVR, and we couldn’t afford a theoretical XE SVR either, but only one of those cars would have us sitting in front of the classifieds, dreaming of owning one someday. Sorry, Jaguar, but it’s not the F-Pace.
Comments
I give it 10 years until the SUV phase dies out…
starts praying
That’s what they said about hatchbacks back in the day
Sadness Intensifies
Well , this is a perfect analysis of the problem . But you’ve said about jag is the same thing that’s happening to a lot of builders in the world … I mean Maserati , they’ve created the levante “trofeo” or “trophy” , another beastly powerful suv with an unappropriate surname… What kind of trophy can you run on a suv ? But this superengine will never power the GT -.- … And if even Lotus is creating this trend is starting goin Viral … Yeah a little part of me is still curious to know what a Lotus can do with an high ride car , but another part of me is hyperdisappointed… Finally , my hope is that the suv movement will be just a trend like jeans and t shirt , and one day they will start not to sell anymore and we will be happy. Happy as easter that’s today aahahah , so happy easter 😂😂😂
Even in the future, they (SUVs) would still sell, but maybe not as much as amount that they can sell right now
My theory is SUV is the counterpart of modern smartphones. The modern technologies enable the smartphone to complete tasks like playing music, taking very good pictures, surfing the web and etc that would used to require a dedicated hardware. Yes, the smartphone may not do the task as well as those dedicated hardware and enthusiasts might still carry around a DSLR camera or a high-end Sony walkman, it just works for most normal people. The same goes for SUV, that it can complete the task of a sedan, a minivan, and a off-road vehicle to a certain extent. Even though it does not handle as well as a sedan, load as much as a minivan or off-road as well as a off-road vehicle, from a normal consumer standpoint, having a compromise in one vehicle works better than having to take care of three standalone vehicle.
If everybody wants an SUV, and it becomes the norm to have one, all the status those cars bring along with them will be gone. People will start looking elsewhere, and while the new craze probably won’t be something petrolheads love, it’ll probably make mainstream SUVs a thing of the past
Think of SUVs like memes.
They become popular. They get overused. They die.
Except SUVs will take longer to die than it took Ugandan Knuckles to die
Literally the same but to a greater extent than premium saloons in the UK!
I don’t think that is true though. The best selling SUV in US is the Honda CRV, and I don’t think that car has any status.
I don’t think people buy expensive premium cars because they corner well. I think a car along the lines of an M5 is primarily a cruiser car, not a corner carver. Big presence, big luxury, and big power makes these cars the kings of high-speed cruising and effortless passing. Cornering ability therefore isn’t a primary focus - these cars are more like sophisticated muscle cars. Fast, comfortable freeway bullets, not so much quick-footed track cars.
With respect to the large super-sedan’s primary ethos as a cruiser, which isn’t to say super sedan’s can’t corner will, an super-SUV makes just as much sense, if not more than, say, a CTS-V. Super SUVs are easier to drive at low speeds, are insignificantly less competent than their sedan counterparts in their primary high-speed element, and sell like hotcakes. They’re pretty much a win-win for most sides, really.
You see I have to disagree with you here. One of the joys of modern cars over the old ones IS THE CORNERING. It’s the reason why Fiesta ST was faster than the Bugatti EB110 over the Eboladrome.
Plus people actually buy these cars because you can track them. Both the E63S and M5 have drift mode on board. And hell a Lexus LS500, a proper GT car, when taken to track, absolutely blasts thru corners.
Another note, SUVs have a bigg drag coefficient, making them not as good in straight line as sedans. They are also more dangerous (less ability to avoid stuff) than sedans. Also an SUV no matter how many excuses you find “they are for urban roads, bla bla” is an offroad vehicle. If you raise a car a couple of inch in your factory, you automatically give the journalists the right to test it offroad.
I’ll hope it ;)
Personally, I think Jaguar are being quite arrogant towards the situation. They know full well that the V8 slots into the XF, and yet they refuse to make an SVR simply because it won’t make them as much money as the F-Pace. There are audiences who buy super-saloons, and Jaguar would make money off one. Plus, the fact they put that engine in the last-gen XFR and XFR-S just makes it frustrating.
The one which they should make is an xf svr with switcheable AWD sistem like the m5 and e63 and wiith the engine from the project 8
It is kinda sad to say that there is no chance for that to happen. The R&D for those AWD system costed a fortune. Considering how tough sell even the regular XF is, they probably will spend that money towards the next gen Range Rover rather than this.
“In short, people want to buy them”
I read that as “short people want to buy them”
This is a essentially a Range Rover Sport SVR but with a crappier badge…
How is Jaguar a worse badge than Land Rover?