Automotive

Jaguars are good cars, but like a one Michelin star restaurant, it's just that.  A good restaurant.  

Two Michelin Stars equate to a good restaurant worthy of a detour.  

Three Michelin Stars equate to an exceptional restaurant worthy of a journey.  

There are better cars than the Jaguar.  There are great cars.  There are cars that are worthy of a detour or nearly great.  And there are good cars.  

Take a Jaguar for a spin, literally.  It will likely spin with some slightly aggressive driving.  After driving the XKR I noticed the rear was quite unstable and would squirm when braking [even] in a straight line.  I thought it was a fluke and was told by many other individuals that I likely got a bad example ("it's the only reasonable explanation," said one friend).

I then drove the new F-Type R and on the highway onramp, a cloverleaf turn onramp, I could feel the car was about to go into oversteer (wag its tail) and that the rear just felt light.  On the positive side, it would be a very easy car to drift.  

All in all, the handling of the Jaguar XKR and F-Type leaves something to be desired.  Men buy the aforementioned Jaguar cars for their looks (and sometimes for the inches it adds to their manhood), but in reality, if you want pure performance, there are better balanced cars.  I doubt a serious race car driver such would take a Jaguar XKR or F-Type over the other similar products from BMW or Mercedes-Benz or Porsche or a Nissan GTR.  

There are cars that are subtle in appearance that are truly great and worthy of three Michelin Stars (Porsche 911 Turbo).  A Porsche is right at home in Ginza, Tokyo, a modern city with clean sterility, chef Jiro has his white-walled restaurant in Ginza.

There are cars that are wild and works of art that are great to drive but have reliability, longevity, or issues with catching fire (Ferrari - parts of the car dissolve when the car is driven and they catch fire) that are still worthy of a three Michelin star rating.  Joel Robuchon, reservation for two, because the Ferrari can only seat two.  

There are cars that are like "test tube cuisine" that are so cutting edge and are so sharp that they handle with surgical precision, like the  McLaren 650S, which supposedly deserves three Michelin stars (please note: I have not experienced the McLaren yet and I'd like to).  A car that is surgical like the McLaren 650S but has less power is the Porsche Cayman GTS, a great instrument, but at only 340 horsepower - it's one lacking in brute power (some would say lacking in flavor), it gets two Michelin stars.  

Take that a bit further to molecular gastronomy levels where you eat your food out of test tubes and you have things like Porsche 918s, Ferrari LaFerrari, McLaren P1s.  Of which are still three Michelin star bestowed.  Think Noma in Copenhagen or perhaps El Celler De Can Roca (both of which are on my bucket list and are currently two-starred).  

The Jaguars mentioned are good.  But not complete.  They may make the grade to get a single Michelin star, and if they did, they'd be on the low-end of the wide spectrum of single starred restaurants.  They're beautiful cars.  But they don't drive especially well, and the chicken was undercooked.  And how often does a Michelin starred restaurant serve chicken?  The Jaguar is definitely more beautiful than the BMW, but the BMW does drive exceptionally well.  The criteria for getting a 2nd Michelin star requires a certain ambiance in addition to already superlative food (this is where the tablecloth of a restaurant is taken into account).  In the car world, that ambiance is translated to exclusivity.  That BMW M3 won't be exclusive, but it will still be a perfectly executed dish worthy of a Michelin star.  

This critic would give Jaguar an honorable mention, but not a star.  But I'd love to try it again when it's ready to receive one!