By now, I suspect that everyone has exhausted their supplies of rich, creamery vitriol when it comes to the Jaguar 00, the most controversial new Jaguar since, well, I guess since the company changed their name from Swallow Sidecars back in 1945. Now that everyone has accepted the fact that, oh damn, they’re serious, there are finally some pre-production cars getting into journalists’ cold hands, and we’re finally learning some more details about this polarizing machine. There are some changes we expected, like how it’s now a four-door GT car instead of a two-door, but there’s at least one big shocking reveal, for me at least: despite that massive hood, this thing seems to have no frunk.
I know storage under the bonnet isn’t exactly a Jaguar trademark by any means – traditionally, that’s where they kept glorious V12 engines and where mechanics spent a lot of expensive hours. But in an electric car like the Jaguar 00, I think it’s not unreasonable to expect at least a token attempt at a front trunk! The packaging of an EV drivetrain is different enough from a combustion car that there should always be some volume of space up there that can be reserved for the owner’s use. I mean, some companies, like Audi, have had EVs with absurdly tiny frunks, but I respect the effort. It’s a matter of principle, a carmaker respecting their buyers. Some carmakers get it, some don’t.
I think Jag should get it for the 00, in part at least because of the car’s wild proportions; the hood on the Jag 00 is absurdly long. In fact, the distance between the front axle and the driver’s footwell is a prairie-like stretch that is nearly three feet long. That’s basically a meter, or yard!
I got the measurement from this Studio5054 Magazine tweet, who was invited to drive the new Jaguar, and was given that measurement by Jaguar. The tweet also notes that this new Jag has no storage under the front hood, and only a tiny cargo area at the rear, big enough for, as the tweet says “a pair of overnight bags.”
A drive of the Jag in Sweden. That's one weirdly proportioned car. Is the boot really that small? Sounds like an XJ and an XK120 merged. pic.twitter.com/CDLgfrk8zc
— Studio5054 (@5054magazine) February 2, 2026
What the hell? How is this possible? On a car this huge, one designed to carry four fully-grown humans! Jaguar is shooting for a range of well over 450 miles per charge, and the fact that this is said to be a four-door GT car – not a sports car or a city car or a track car or whatever, but a GT car – that implies to me that this should be a road trip car. That’s what a Grand Touring car is all about – going fast, for long distances, with more comfort and room than a more focused sports car. Think something like the Jaguar XJ, a car that (among others) is referenced in this review, which, like all of this first batch of pre-production reviews, takes place on a frozen lake in Sweden:
It seems that about 150 of these pre-production cars have been built; while they’re still disguised and car software and other details are yet to be finalized, these reviewers are stating that the main basic hardware of the car is as the production version will be. Which suggests to me that if there’s no frunk now, there’s unlikely to be one upon the car’s release.
I can’t speak to the driving dynamics of this 1000 horsepower beast, but I’m sure it was fun to whip around in all that ice and snow, even if that tells us next to nothing about how these things will actually be used in reality by their owners, a group of people who I think are not super likely to take their likely $200,000+ cars out on frozen lakes, whipping shitties.
But what I can see is the packaging, and I can see that a lot of compromises seem to have been made in the service of styling and drama. And that’s fine! Both are excellent reasons to make compromises, especially for a car like a Jag. But they are compromises.
I think everything we see stems from one fundamental decision, which is that Jaguar wanted this car to be long and low. Modern EVs tend to be built on skateboard-type platforms with their batteries integrated into the floor, which leaves a lot of usable room on top, but also necessitates a somewhat tall car, because you’re sitting on the battery. When your design goal looks like this:
… there just isn’t any room to put the battery below, so all of that battery volume has to go somewhere. In the case of the Jag 00, it seems like it’s been divided between the front and rear of the car, which you’d have to do to keep a nice low floor. I suspect a lot of battery may be shoved into a massive central tunnel, like the method used on the Fisker Karma/Karma Revero, and pictures of the preproduction interior seem to support this:
My guess is that the battery is in the car in a sort of barbell-like setup, with big blocks at the front and rear, linked by a long central battery spine:
I’m guessing, of course, but if they actually do have a 50:50 weight distribution, I’m really not sure how else they’d pull it off? As a result, I wouldn’t be surprised to find the interior is pretty cramped, again like the Fisker Karma, which, if you’ll recall, was classified as a subcompact by the EPA because it had an interior volume of less than 100 cubic feet, despite the car being way bigger than, say, a Mitsubishi Mirage.
I suspect the Jaguar 00 may end up in a similar position, as a sort of reverse Tardis: huge on the outside, small on the inside. Take a look at the rear door and its opening from the Autocar video:
From what I can see in these videos, the driver’s hip is about at the lower part of the B-pillar, and the rear door and opening looks pretty cramped. The look of the car is very important, no question, and I do appreciate how low it is – but what will this thing be like to live with? I need to get inside one before I can really judge, of course, but so far it looks cramped in there. And without a rear window, we may be getting into an in-car experience that gives a spelunking-like experience.
The concept car version of the Jaguar 00 had these odd little compartments on the sides of the hood, and I can’t recall exactly what they were for. Charging cables? Some sort of small, specialized luggage? Whatever it is, this seems to be gone on the pre-production car.
It’s just so much car, especially so much hood area, and it’s hard not to be disappointed that none of that is available for use by the driver or passengers. We’ve imagined the joys of a truely hugely frunk’d car here before, and it is a glorious idea. But that doesn’t seem to be what we’re getting from Jag. It looks like we’re getting a huge, low slab of battery wrapped in a car, with a little bit of room inside to cram into. I appreciate the drama of the thing, so I’m going to reserve final judgment until I can spend some time with one in person.
I’m still going to be disappointed if it doesn’t have any sort of trunk, though. Even a hilariously small token effort that could only hold, say, a Mounds bar and a wristwatch would be enough for me! Just something to suggest that they tried. It’s not the production one yet, so I guess we’ll just have to see what happens.
Top graphic image: YouTube
In many places, “00” on a door indicates that the door leads to the toilet.
Hmm…
It’s a British car, so shouldn’t the tiny trunk be stuffed with Cadbury Eggs or Dairy Milk bars? (Or maybe Bournville if they’re trying to be posh.)
All y’all talking about practicality here are deeply missing the point. It’s a long, low, sleek sports sedan, and if it drives like a proper sports sedan and lives up to those proportions, they’ll have hit the mark. Want practical? There’s a thousand CUVs around to pick from. A Jag is a tuxedo with wheels, it’s not supposed to be practical.
A sports sedan is first and foremost a sedan, a practical family car that exists so an enthusiast doesn’t need to go get a CUV when they start a family. Cargo space isn’t “missing the point”, it is the point.
For the analogy, A tuxedo is a very practical outfit, it has 2 internal jacket pockets, 3-4 external pockets, 2-4 pant pockets, it’s layered to provide warmth and ventilation for a variety of weather conditions and is often paired with a hat, for protection from the elements. Besides, if a Jag is a tuxedo, that makes it a luxury car, not a sports car (it can be both, of course).
The only cars that don’t need to be practical are the track-suits, from the likes of Lotus and Caterham.
I’m just so utterly baffled here. If this was, like, a Model S-tier thing in terms of pricing I could forgive a lot of its quirks, but it’s costing well into Bentley territory. Anyone who’s paying a quarter million for a single car isn’t going to want all these compromises unless they’re buying a standalone sports car, and the people who do want sports cars have shown they don’t want them to be electric.
Like, if you told me to design a car that appeals to the least number of people possible I don’t think I could’ve done a better job.
And then we have the question of whether or not Jaguar can actually pull off true, genuine luxury? Because I don’t think they’re capable of it.
On one had yes, but haven’t weird quirks always been ironically part of the ownership experience of super high end cars? I seem to recall reading a car and driver article (admittedly quite awhile back) where they were saying how the new Mercedes S class was a “better” car than a Rolls Royce, but also that’s not why someone buys a super exclusive car like this, it’s purchased because its exclusive and I would wonder even if some of the quirks get rationalized as charming artifacts of owning a low production vehicle?
As a photographer I’ve also seen this with high end camera systems, where even an entry level Canon is a more polished experience than a high end Leica but all the rich guys still buy Leicas.
I’m assuming (hoping) this is just the most impractical halo car ever, and there will be a lineup of actually useful Jags below it, borrowing bits of the new design language, for better or worse.
My understanding is that they’re betting it all on this thing. The age of the semi-affordable Jag will never return, at least until you can buy a bricked one of these in 2 years for $25k.
Looks like Jag….
Got the frunk out.
Boooo
But it is true. I don’t like what I see here, so I guess I gotta get the frunk out…
A frunk would make it practical, like an old VW or Skoda, and I don’t think that’s the market Jag is pursuing here..
To everyone complaining this car is too low and long to be useful: i hope you’re not the same people who whine about everything being SUVs nowadays. There seems to be a general irrational feeling that one must hate it, perhaps because of the marketing or some fragile people just can’t handle that Jaguar dared to paint a car pink idk.
Clearly a case of visual drama>packaging, in that sense it is pure Jag.
I think the complaints are stemming from the fact that it’s a large four-door sedan, and by its nature it should have more storage than a Ferrari 298, otherwise, why not just build a pure sports car?
It’s looking increasingly as if this will appeal to almost no one. Sports car people won’t want it because it’s a sedan, and an electric one at that. Luxury sedan buyers won’t want it because it’s too compromised in its packaging, and the rest of us can’t afford it. I foresee another Aston Martin Rapide situation here, but the difference is that Aston actually had other cars to sell besides just the one.
It’s not obvious to me that it has less storage than a 298, it’s still a 4door and a hatchback. Cars have historically had no frunks, how has that become a make/break for EVs is baffling to me.
They’ll have an SUV to sell at higher volumes. This is supposed to be a visual statement. As a spiritual XJ successor it makes sense to me, positioned as a sportier equivalent to a Bentley perhaps, more exclusive and visually striking. They’re either gonna flop or find a new niche for themselves, either way the sheer scale of hate from supposed car people i just don’t understand.
I think of it rather as a modern day Lagonda. Looks and presence are everything, rest be damned. I think that’s rather refreshing. And they don’t need that many rich people to recognise that as something they want to be seen in.
I don’t personally think the lank of a frunk is the end of the world, but you’d expect a car of this size to have more storage than it appears to.
I am curious where you’ve heard there’s going to be an SUV, though? As far as I’m aware this is the only thing they’ll be building for the foreseeable future, and a high-priced luxury SUV is no longer the guaranteed home run it was during Covid.
Some of the hate, especially any directed towards the marketing, is ridiculous, but I get the overall skepticism for the car itself. Jaguar has historically built a lot of really cool stuff at relatively affordable price points, but that’s seemingly out the window now. They cancelled everything in their lineup to build one (1) gigantic EV barge that will end up costing a quarter million dollars by the time all is said and done. If they were selling this alongside a new F-Pace, F-Type, XJ sedan, and whatever else, I would not mind it in the least, but it just really sucks that they cancelled literally everything just to build this one vehicle.
If you’re trying to reposition a brand you need a clear message. Old high volume BMW-beater strategy wasn’t working, cars were barely selling and making no money. Not worth it to keep producing money losers.
Yes an SUV is confirmed.
I’m appalled by the new Jaguar 00 in general. They cancelled the electric XJ for this.
With this additional information, now I hate it even more! So they give it a stupid battery pack design just so you can sit lower.
Except that sitting lower isn’t what older demographics want. Old/Older people want something that is easy to get in and out of.
And this design does not achieve that.
I predict this is gonna flop and flop hard for this and other reasons.
Honestly they would be better off buying/licensing the Tesla Model S design and dolling up the interior to make it feel more luxurious.
> Except that sitting lower isn’t what older demographics want. Old/Older people want something that is easy to get in and out of.
I think it’s pretty clear from the recent ads/rebrand/positioning work they’ve done that they’re chasing other demos than old people.
The question then being how many other demos have enough money to drop 200K on a car like this, and why would they go for this over something else
I believe you’ve got your finger on Jaguar’s conundrum.
There are weird cars I respect like the Renault Avantime and Vel Satis. I’d happily drive one of those, but this thing… I think it’s because the Renaults are trying to attack packaging problems of one sort or another in an interesting and stylish way. What is this Jaguar’s reason for the way it looks? It’s a rolling Florida facelift.
“ It’s a rolling Florida facelift.”
Ouch.
I guess it’s a GT and not a full sports car, but I also wonder what the increased polar moment of inertia from having battery stacks front and rear instead of center is going to do to handling.
Jaguars targeting the types of buyers that just have the luggage flown ahead to meet them I guess? Man this is going to be a hilarious cybertruckian failure.
I was hoping Jaguar would celebrate their English heritage and, in an homage to Bristol, mount a spare tire in that long front quarter panel. They could use the opposite side for critical storage, like a small wine cellar to access while charging.
Now that you bring it up I’m… almost surprised no one has done something like that yet. I suspect the sad reality is that most people would call for help before changing a tire on the side of the road, and the recovery truck drivers of the world aren’t at the forefront of design priorities.
Not only is the front long, but it’s also very tall, and looks difficult to see over.
I get that driving when you’re sitting at the center of the wheelbase feels great, but that thing looks claustrophobic, like a last generation Camaro but even uglier and bigger. But also so very British, very Gary Anderson looking.
“Even a hilariously small token effort that could only hold, say, a Mounds bar and a wristwatch would be enough for me!”
What if it’s only small enough to hold the Mounds bar *wrapped* in the wristwatch?