Jaguar is planning a production feasibility study of the C-X75 that could see up to 2000 made

Jaguar is planning production feasibility studies of up to 2000 cars a year for its new 780bhp C-X75 supercar, according to sources.

Jag is remaining coy about firm production plans for the elegant mid-engined C-X75, but Autocar sources say that two levels of production are under consideration. The higher one is up to 2000 cars a year, the lower one up to 1000 cars a year.

See all the pics of the stunning Jaguar C-X75 concept

Each needs to be explored independently because they demand different production methods — the lower number with more hand assembly and lower tooling costs, the higher one with more automation, but higher tooling costs.

A production version faithful to the gas turbine-powered C-X75 will also have to wait between five-and-seven years while Jaguar proves and productionises the Bladon Jets micro gas-turbines at the heart of the hybrid-electric powertrain.

Chas Hallett blog: Jag's show stunner should go on sale tomorrow

“We’re talking two-to-three years for implementation of the gas turbine technology, then another three-to-four years to integrate into a vehicle,” says Jag’s head of advanced powertrain Tony Harper.

The cost of developing the gas turbines for production could be in the C-X75’s favour, being significantly less than an equivalent IC engine, running into the “tens of millions”.

Harper is also confident the gas turbines can be engineered and proven to rigorous car industry reliability and endurance standards: “There’s much less to go wrong; there’s about 100 times fewer parts in a gas turbine than an IC engine.”

Read the full story on the stunning new Jaguar C-X75 concept

The load duty-cycle of the gas turbine will also be less harsh over its lifetime, being characterised by steady running at 80,000 rpm, rather than the ever-changing rev pattern of an IC engine.

Replicating a production supercar faithful to the C-X75 design is largely dependent on these gas turbines, because they take up such little space in the engine bay that Jaguar has been able to position the cabin 300mm further back than typical in a conventionally-powered supercar.

The styling of the C-X75 is the work of a senior member of Jaguar's design team, Matt Beaven, whose credits include the R Coupé and RD6 concepts. A former VW designer, Beaven counts the original VW Touran and second-gen Audi A3 among his work.

Julian Rendell

Read Autocar's A to Z review of the Paris motor showRead Steve Cropley's full report of the Paris motor show, including show pics

See all the latest Jaguar reviews, news and video

Join the debate

Comments
26

7 October 2010

Build it and they will come! Oh and this photo really shows off the front end, of which I WAS a critic: http://www.monstersandcritics.com/lifestyle/autos/features/article_15894...

7 October 2010

"A production version faithful to the gas turbine-powered C-X75 will also have to wait between five-and-seven years..."

That's a lifetime and by then Jag may well be owned by VW...

7 October 2010

If we are being asked to believe that gas turbines really are that much better and cheaper and more reliable and more efficient and easier to make and more durable and easier to put into prodcution [sic] than these confounded and complex internal combustion engine things they've been fobbing us off with for the last 100 years and more, should we not be asking why the various GM, Fiat and Rover projects rolled out in the 1950s and 1960s never progressed beyond the concept car stage?

7 October 2010

I hope that they do build the car in its current format, just as long as they do not say that they cannot get the turbines to work and they have to install the Countryman WRC engine instead.

7 October 2010

[quote Liam F]should we not be asking why the various GM, Fiat and Rover projects rolled out in the 1950s and 1960s never progressed beyond the concept car stage?[/quote]

In those vehicles the turbine drove the wheels, unsuccessfully. Here the mini turbines are used as range extenders with no connection to the drivetrain.


7 October 2010

Let us hope that its not another XJ220 - promises much, takes deposits, ends up costing a fortune for something completely different..

To live is to drive

7 October 2010

[quote Liam F]If we are being asked to believe that gas turbines really are that much better and cheaper and more reliable and more efficient and easier to make and more durable and easier to put into prodcution [sic] than these confounded and complex internal combustion engine things they've been fobbing us off with for the last 100 years and more, should we not be asking why the various GM, Fiat and Rover projects rolled out in the 1950s and 1960s never progressed beyond the concept car stage?[/quote]

I don't recall any projects other than this which used microturbines, nor do I know of any that used turbines of any kind to charge a battery.

Perhaps you could enlighten us all?

Which of the projects you listed were even remotely similar to this?

jer

7 October 2010

How do you get enough air sucked into the turbine to support the constant 85k rpm rotor speed when the car is moving slowly?

7 October 2010

[quote jer]How do you get enough air sucked into the turbine to support the constant 85k rpm rotor speed when the car is moving slowly?[/quote]

It's not that kind of turbine. The only oxygen that is required is that which is necessary for combustion.

7 October 2010

[quote zthomasz]

I don't recall any projects other than this which used microturbines, nor do I know of any that used turbines of any kind to charge a battery.

Perhaps you could enlighten us all?

Which of the projects you listed were even remotely similar to this?

[/quote]

Don't be so harsh, I am sure that by now Liam has understood that he missed the point - mainly that those old experiments were attempting to introduce turbines to directly drive the wheels.

This is an entirely different proposition, of course, where the turbines will run at constant speed to charge the battery pack and where they may attain a thermal efficiency of 55-60% (compared to less than 45% for a current diesel engine).

Pages

Add your comment

Log in or register to post comments

Find an Autocar car review

Driven this week

  • 2016 Hyundai I30 1.4 Turbo prototype
    First Drive
    30 August 2016
    We get early access to the third-generation Hyundai i30 1.4 Turbo. Does this prototype show promise?
  • Citroën C4 Grand Picasso
    First Drive
    26 August 2016
    The Citroën Grand C4 Picasso gets tweaked styling, improved tech and new personalisation options to keep it ahead of rivals
  • Car review
    26 August 2016
    Wolfsburg celebrates the GTI’s 40th with its most extreme version yet
  • Kia Optima Sportwagon
    First Drive
    25 August 2016
    New Kia estate looks the part, has good space and handles tidily, but its engine's flexibility and refinement let it down
  •  Kia Optima PHEV
    First Drive
    25 August 2016
    Plug-in hybrid Optima is a practical, tax-efficient PHEV that undercuts rivals and fulfils its main remit well, but keen drivers need not apply