Jaguar F-Pace Luggage Test: How much fits in the cargo area?

The Jaguar F-Pace has been around for a while now, and perhaps it's just me, but it feels like it's been forgotten. That's a shame. This was the first time I've driven the F-Pace since the first drive event in Montenegro and therefore the first time I've really driven it in anything resembling normal conditions. And man, is it ever good, at least the R-Dynamic S you see here with the P400 engine. This is right up there with the Porsche Macan and Aston Martin DBX in terms of SUVs that are legitimately great to drive. The steering alone ... chef's kiss.

But I'm here to talk about cargo capacity, so enough of that driving impressions stuff. The F-Pace is bigger than compact SUVs like the Mercedes GLC and BMW X3, but it's smaller than a GLE or X5. It's fairly similar to the Lexus RX in that way, which I just-so-happened to have luggage tested last week. Perfect timing, then!

The specs say that it has 26.6 cubic-feet of space behind the back seat. I have a sneaking suspicion that volume represents a measurement from the floor to top of the seat back, or roughly the cargo cover. That's not just because what I found in the course of doing this test but because the F-Pace was reported to have 33.5 cubic-feet when it was launched back for 2017. That number seems more applicable to what you'll find in other SUVs. Either way, that's kinda why I do these tests to begin with!

Here is the cargo area. It is quite deep and wide with an acceptable lift-over height. The F-Pace originally had a sliding rail system running the length of the cargo area along each side, but Jaguar has apparently replaced that with the fixed tie-down points you see here.

There is a rigid cargo cover in place, which is probably good for NVH, but rubbish for cargo hauling. As a result, I will be testing with and without this cover in place.

As with every Luggage Test, I use two midsize roller suitcases that would need to be checked in at the airport (26 inches long, 16 wide, 11 deep), two roll-aboard suitcases that just barely fit in the overhead (24L x 15W x 10D), and one smaller roll-aboard that fits easily (23L x 15W x 10D). I also include my wife's fancy overnight bag just to spruce things up a bit (21L x 12W x 12D).

All of the bags fit underneath the cargo cover, so that pretty much confirms that whole thing about the current cargo volume representing floor to seat back. Now, the fancy bag is a wee bit squished, but it still totally fit. The Lexus RX was better, which I suspect is the result of its cargo area being wider.

This would seemingly be better than the compact luxury SUVs I've tested. I say "seemingly" because many of them did not include cargo covers, so I'm just making an educated guess based on the photo evidence. In general, though, it's been a rarity for all the bags to fit under cargo covers (or phantom ones).

As such, it's pretty obvious that everything will fit when the cargo cover is removed. Time to bring in the bonus items.