Marc Tuxhorn posted the graphic comparison over in a forum to compare the 2 vehicles. As can be seen the greenhouse and passenger space is quite similar even though the X is a foot longer in length.
This is not my work, Mark Tuxhorn an I-Pace reservation holder from Europe did the comparison, and others for reference. But it is very helpful in understanding the size of the vehicles. I-Pace looks smaller on the outside then it really is on the inside due to packaging, mostly the cab forward design. When you look at the side profile, next to Model X, I-Pace really makes Model X look ancient with its long overhangs, and I-Pace looks more like a concept car in proportions.
Wut? "Overhangs"? I guess you mean the I-Pace, with its almost clownishly oversized wheels, has unusually large fender cutouts for those wheels. How strange to characterize that in a Tesla-bashing manner! Anyway, the proper comparison isn't between the I-Pace, which is a 5-seat hatchback, to the Model X, which is a 7-seat CUV. If you must compare the I-Pace to a Tesla car, then compare it to the Model 3 or the Model S. The only reason anybody online is comparing it to the Model X is because Jaguar deliberately mis-categorized the car as an "SUV" for marketing purposes. -
His picture gives a much better sense of size comparison. Not sure what your picture is trying to show. How much better looking I-Pace is?
Yup. The Model X is a CUV which Tesla calls an "SUV" for marketing purposes. I suppose one can reasonably argue that since so many auto makers these days are putting the "SUV" label on CUVs, that the generally accepted meaning of SUV has been broadened. Perhaps so, but I personally am never in favor of making a formerly useful, specific term so vague that it becomes virtually meaningless. -
I can't imagine why I'm getting negative remarks about my the photo which I took the time and trouble to find and post here. In case it's not clear, I didn't appreciate Mr. Green's snide remark about the photo I posted not being a "real picture". Especially not when he followed my actual photograph with an infographic that obviously uses computer renders rather than actual photos! Let's keep our disagreements to our opinions about the cars, the facts, and the figures, and not descend into needless personal acrimony, hmmm? -
In response to a comment by David Green earlier in this thread... In another thread, David complained about what he described as "Remember, you came to the I-Pace board to attack..." Okay, after some consideration and some private messages exchanged with my "posse", I agree that it was unfair for me to categorize David's remark as "Tesla-bashing". David is certainly entitled to his opinions, and it was inappropriate for me to escalate the acrimony. So, David: I apologize for both my remark and for adding to divisiveness here. However, David, it is entirely a misconception on your part to think that I "came to" this discussion thread to "attack" anyone or anything. In fact, in my first comment about the I-Pace (posted to an InsideEVs News article about the new model), I said I was glad to see Tesla finally getting some real competition from another auto maker! That is, based on the descriptions and the photos of the car, it looks to me like the I-Pace is good enough to offer some real comparison to the Model S. (However, I think it's a mistake for Jaguar to compare it to the Model X, for reasons I've already stated.)
Back to the original post. I am surprised how close they are. Things missing are what actually fits in each vehicle with seats folded and frunk space.
Unless you don't mind removing the seats, it's an either situation. You can have both, just not at the same time.
