STOP THE PRESSES! Wait, THIS All-new Electric Vehicle ISN'T Shooting Out The Lights Saleswise?

1: It looks like a nasty little hatchback.
2. It's a Jaguar which is synonymous with unreliable and poor quality.

Why is this surprising?

It’s not.

@00R When I was first given a seat at the table in the group, the other men in the group were in their 60s and ran the Jaguar franchise we had at a stunning loss because it was their hobby brand. It took a lot of pushing on my part and ruffled feathers on their part to realize that Jaguar is dead and always will be dead as long as it is allowed to be Jaguar (i.e. the producer of expensive junk).

We've not had a Jaguar franchise now for 6 years and the money pit is gone. Fortunately, the table is now comprised mostly of men 30-40--I'm the youngest--and we are guided by brand performance.

We've been approached to take Jaguar back with Land Rover/Range Rover thrown in to supposedly sweeten the deal. Let's see...a brand that doesn't sell (Jaguar) and two that sell but which are warranty/reliability nightmares (LR/RR) thanks, but no thanks.

We're currently at war with FCA because we want to drop Fiat, Maserati, and Alfa Romeo all three for utter lack of sales and the last one for being such a quality/reliability sh!t storm. They act like we should fear losing Jeep and Ram. #not. THEY fear that we will say "OK take them."

It is selling well in Europe, outselling the Tesla in Norway. With production limited (intentionally) they will focus on the EU market for now.

It is much smaller, slower, and less efficient than the Model X. It has way less range and is not as practical. It might look better, but I have seen literally 0 ever in Silicon Valley, which has a stupidly high adoption rate for EVs.

We’ve yet to see one on the road that isn’t a corporate car from HQ.

I've seen a few in NoVA. It is a rare breed indeed, but frankly so are the fossil brothers, the F-type and the E-type. The e-Tron SUV is having a slowish start last month, hope it picks up. The EQC is still MIA.

Jaguar and electric car are oxymorons.

This is very unfortunate for those of us who believe we must begin the transition to learn transport. Jaguar style the car nicely, with with lousy range and no way to drive it cross country, buyers are not fooled: it is not a complete system, and is certainly not a Tesla killer.

Electrify America is making a significant progress to fix the long trips issue. Both coasts are covered with other charging networks as well .

It looks like a Communist-era penalty hatchback.

Apple or Google could buy if the price was right. Fun fact, Google did try to buy Tesla in the past.

Also, if Google bought Tesla we (consumers) would be screwed. Between Waymo and Tesla they would have a solid monopoly on the robotaxi market.

The only value of Tesla is its name. The designs are not noteworthy. The technology is in no way cutting edge. Geely, GAC, or BAIC will likely gobble them up and spit out the garbage in Fremont and use only the name.

the only value in tesla is waking up people to the possibilities of ev's for their daily driver. not for long trips which most people dont take anyway but for regular driving. as soon as a lower cost manufacturer comes out with similar range and more variety tesla is dead.

@OneodOne You're delusional: "...the only value in tesla is waking up people to the possibilities of ev's for their daily driver..." So your thesis is that people should be forced to drive $60-100K daily drivers?

This: "...as soon as a lower cost manufacturer comes out with similar range and more variety tesla is dead..." is more than a decade away. Currently, the penalty for an EV is 2X the price. A Bolt is 2X the price of a Sonic. The Model 3 is 2X the cost of a Fusion--and don't start the bullshittery (sic) of the $35k Model 3. Most Model 3s are $50-60K which is double a CamCord or AltFusNata.

Come down to earth and get real.

Just because the ASP is $49k, doesn't mean you can't buy a stock $35k Model 3 (or the silly $33.5k model in Canada). You can easily spend $30k on a Camry, Fusion, or Accord. Spending $5k more on a better-in-almost-every way Model 3 and getting that money back in gas/maint savings makes sense. That is without factoring in EV incentives, which are still $6-7k on a Tesla for most states until July.

@SanJoseBullshitter You know fully well that the average Camry is about $30K and that the Model 3 is more likely to be $60K. You also know that you're comparing an average-optioned Camry to the stripped-to-unpleasantness base, unicorn edition Model 3 that doesn't exist. I sincerely hope you're paid by Elon himself to issue the drivel that you spew because if not, then you need to get a vasectomy--assuming you're straight of course (not that not being so is a bad thing)--so that your spew doesn't produce idiot, moron offspring.

That is a stupid comparison you are making. A dollar is a dollar. Compare a $30k Camry to the $35k Model 3 (which DOES EXIST), that is the only fair and true comparison. Or better yet, compare a $39k Lexus IS to the $39k Model 3. Even with no incentives, you get better performance and a more advanced car.

Your argument would only make sense if Tesla limited the versions you can get. In the US, you can get any Model 3 variant within a week, including the $35k one.

SanCarlosJoseAsshatter must have gotten a mean text from Elon who saw this discussion and commanded the poor socialist to either spew more inanity or suffer the consequences.

A dollar is not a dollar. A $35K Camry is posh when compared to the Trabantesque (sic) interior of the cheap Model 3 which exists only on paper with a couple stashed in the parrking lot so Tesla can say with a straight face that they build strippers.

Super disagree, would take the Model 3 interior over a Camry or Lexus ES any day of the week.

It sure costs a lot. I know the Tesla does too, but Tesla has cult appeal and the Jaguar, as nice as it looks, is anodyne. It could be any small SUV. As is the case with Jaguar's other offerings these days, the vehicle does not say "Jaaaag." There is nothing uniquely British about it--Ian Callum strikes again. Without an emotional reason to be drawn to the vehicle, comparisons on price and range (big factor), make other cars seem a more sensible buy. Add to that the lingering reputation for Lucas levels of quality, and it's no wonder the sales lag.

Nope

EV manufacturers are pioneers and pioneers are the ones with arrows in their back. The old axiom use to be that it took 40 years for an innovation to take hold and be broadly accepted, think commercial air travel, computers, TV, etc. The world of research and development today moves at a much faster pace than ever but it still takes years for consumers or mass markets to fully embrace life changing innovations, especially when the cost of entry is so high.

Bullsh!t: "...pioneers are the ones with arrows in their back..." That's a better description of foolish people who get ahead of themselves. Musk is a case in point.

Pioneers are the ones who get it right. VW had the Type 2 but it was not right. Ford and GM attempted vans and got them wrong TWICE. Along comes Iacocca with the Caravan and both are considered pioneers BECAUSE they got the formula right.

So VW, Ford and GM who were there first (the very definition of pioneer) didn't end up with arrows in their back. I think your example made my point perfectly.

Selling or not on a individual model by model basis, 8% of all light vehicle sales in Canada are now EV's. The grow rates in 2017 and 2018 have been shocking. While markets will differ the data shows that the adopting rates for EV's is picking up steam.

https://www.guideautoweb.com/en/articles/48372/ev-sales-reached-8pc-in-canada/

jaguar sales have always been tepid at best. theres a reason they get passed around like a drunken whore. they have no value whatsoever except in the minds eye. in reality they are to be avoided

It's a bit of a shame people are not giving it a serious try. Jaguar first entry into EVs is quite valiant, and unlike other automakers Jaguar is trying to advertise and market the I-Pace with financing incentives. About the efficiency/range, it is actually not bad in moderate speeds, only hurts at highway speeds.

Alsp poor charging speed.
Adds up.

With the exception of the pent up demand for the Model 3 - which is tailing off (They are actually shipping SOME entry level models) - we have real indication that the HUGE demand espoused by so many for EVs was a GHOST.

Now that the $7500 tax credit will be dead for Tesla - I do not see who they are going to sell all of these HIGH POLLUTING EVs to - and maybe - just Maybe - we have seen the end of the initial jubilation and it will now require more than just vaporware to start the next generation of EVs.

In addition - the basic purpose of the EV was as a device for commuting to and from work. WHile Tesla tried to make it otherwise - even their SUV did not sell because it is weirdly configured - according to some. Maybe there is no Demand for an EV SUV though.

Just watched an online review of the i-Pace, and the biggest issue I saw is that it isn't coming close to its EPA range. Rated at 234 miles, but this tester wasn't breaking 200 miles, even with gentle driving. He was more like 160-170. So many things to like about the overall car, but for that kind of money, it should have an honest 230+ miles.

If the brand says 300 miles (for example) the customer should get it. It would be interesting to know whether the disappointing range of the Etron is an underestimated figure.

How close do Teslas come to their stated range? I loathe Teslas, but I've not heard bitching about the range not being what was.

Actually - Telsas have been good with their ranges and you can do better driving conservatively

Still - the EPA sets a range figure too - and they have been close to the Manufacturers figures - they are not pure guesses. I would guess that the TESTER was pre-production.

OF course - I note no one has brought up that this TINY little SUV costs around $70,000. Maybe if it were in the $40,000 range it might sell - but it just is too pricey.