MkII or S-Type, what say you?

I thought I would ask the experts -

I am considering either puchasing a mid-60's MkII or similar period S-Type. They look somewhat similar to me, but the MkII looks a little more "heritage" in style. The S-type looks more useful as a car.

With all things being the same (including price) which car would you go for? As a Healey & Austin saloon owner, I am a little out of touch with the Jaguars.

I am open to brutally honest opinions on this!

Thanks!

Personally, I prefer the Mark II, not sure why, its just something about its lines compared to teh S-Type. Both very nice, but if I had to choose one it would be the Mark II

Basil

The MkII looks better, I must say. The S-Type is a great looking car in its own right, though. In addition, it really is the better car, much better handling than the MkII.

I believe that it is less expensive as well.

I'd take either one I suppose.

I have one of each. The MKII is the most desirable from a styling view but drives like a XK150 sedan. (read old truck) The S-Type has the independent rear suspension and rides more like an early XJ6. I've logged in over 100000 miles in S-Types and at least 50000 in MKI/II's and all are similar in service requirements.

If I ever build another MKII for myself , it is getting something else for a rear suspension. I've 'heard' that some in England have installed the S-Type IRS in the MKII's.

Alan T

And another thing.....If you are looking for a manual gearbox sedan then the later MKII and 65> S-Types have the full-syncro gearboxes. The original Borg-Warner automatics are leaky power-robbing behemoths but reliable. I've installed many TH350's and 700R4's in MKII's and MKIX's and it totally changed the personality of the cars in a very good way.

Alan T

Alan T, would you give some pointers on installing a GM tranny in my '65 S type? What do I need? I want to keep the steering column Shifter. I know i'll need a different gate, but you already know how-to do that, right? I agree the original Studebaker auto tranny is reliable. What I want is a 4th top-gear to relax the engine rpms's at interstate speeds.

Alan, the MK-II is not going to be the same price as the S type, it's going to cost you a lot more dinero unless you get a rotted example which is going to cost a lot of dinero to restore just the same. The MK-II is over-rated and over-priced compared to the other two "Small Saloons".

I don't know why, but people prefer the rear looks of the MK-II, which to me looks like it has Volkswagen Beetle tailamps and a lot smaller trunk than the S type. Well, maybe THAT'S what they like.

The S type (1963-1968) uses the same tailamps as the Rolls Royce and Bentleys of 1962-1968, not to mention the same IRS of the E-type and that makes for a better riding and handling car. In that department, the argument is over.

Compared to the S type, the MK-II rides too "stiff" (for my taste), and the rear seat is way cramped. It had a nasty habit during hard cornering where one tire loses contact with the pavement, (the stiff rear axle) and the car ends up on three tires. I've seen pictures of this problem.
The S type eliminated that problem with the IRS.

The S type has twin tanks like the 420 and the XJ which came after it. The MK-II does not.

The MK-II has a single exhaust system, the S type has a twin exhaust system.

The S type has more beautiful Walnut wood inside, the MK-II has more vinyl.

The MK-II has 4.25" diameter auxiliary lamp buckets, the S type has 5.25" diameter auxiliary lamp buckets.

The S type has beautiful sculpted "eyelids" in all 4 front lamp buckets, like a giraffe's, like the 420 and the XJ, the MK-II front lamp buckets look like "shaved eyebrows". (look at the attached file of my S type and wear your sunglasses to protect your eyes).

The S type has a giant trunk (boot) big enough for me and Madonna to spend the night inside, with built-in pillow rests and Upholstered Headboard, and enough leftover room for a serving tray with champagne. Try THAT in the MK-II.

About 25 thousand S types were made for the whole world, compared with the MK-II, whose numbers are more like triple that, counting the 240 and 340, so the S type is the rarer model of the two. (The 420 is even rarer, since it was made for less than 3 years).

When Jaguar Cars decided to revive the concept of the "Small Saloon" in 1999, they named it the "S type", not the MK-II. wonder why?

But: it's your money, buy the one you like.

Ex

here's our bedroom,

here's our basement,

here's the Rolls Royce, Bentley, and Jaguar S type taillamps,

Ex- what do you think of the V8-250 version??

UH Did you mean the 250 V8 Saloon, Dart??---Keoke- /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Dart, I think the Daimler version is very pretty, essentially a MK-II with the beautiful fluted grille but no Leaper hood ornament. You would be very dissapointed at the V8, it's very very slow. Why ? I don't know. I drove one, no cigar.

The 6 cylinder 3.8 liter engine delivers real performance.

I never figured where they got that V8 engine or why. Must have been a leftover engine from Daimler? (the 250-V8 coincides with the time that Jaguar bought Daimler, right?).

Ex

Damilar V8 engine Max boosted HP = 1500 show me an XK engine that will do that and stay together. OH! and it be a Hemi everbody thinks its a
Chrysler--Keoke- /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/hammer.gif

Keoke, Maybe the DAMILAR V8 goes up to a max 1500 rpm, but I thought we were talking about the DAIMLER 250-V8, not Chrysler Hemis.

Jag bought Daimler in 61 or 62, took the SP250 engine and used it for another x years in their sedans. In the SP, it generates about 140hp in standard trim, but is only trying to move about 2,200 lbs. The hemi design was original Daimler, borrowed from Triumph Twin V motorcycle. I knew Keoke would have to chime in on this since he's the only BCF'r I know with one of the sedans. And I would personally trade leaper for flutes any day.

Exotexs -

Thank you so much for your insights into the two cars. I would also note that the S-type has very nice bumpers.

The S-type to me does seem to combine some Italian styling hints of the time, and I can see how it was the executive's car to have.

I am leaning towards the S-Type, but if I can get the MkII I am looking at for the price I want, I may go for that.

The boot is a consideration, as my wife keeps asking if it'll fit our kid's strollers in there. Looks like the S-Type can handle it!!!!

Dart,

here's for you:

a Daimler 250-V8 fluted grille and a S type Leaper

Alan

you're welcome - glad to help. yes, I forgot the prettier bumpers of the S type, much nicer than the "heavy" bumpers of the MK-II.

what Small Saloon collectors don't like about the S type, is the rear wheel arch openings, because they prefer the MK-I and MK-II full openings with the Spats or "skirts". That's funny because the S type's rear wheel arch opening is the same design as in the E-type! And that same design was carried to the 420, the 420-G, the MK-X, and all the XJ-Series.

Personally, I think the S type has a beautiful design from the rear doors back, very "elegant". But it's a matter of individual taste.

Look at my car's side view so you can see the rear wheel arch openings. (click below where it says 5716-side-view-S-type.jpg).

Also here's two pictures showing a modified S type with the MK-II-style wheel arch openings. (they copy the front openings and transfer them to the back). Looks beautiful too, BUT is not original, so I don't know what "damage" it does (if any) to the future value of modified S types. I plan to keep mine original, I stopped trying to outsmart Jaguar engineers a long time ago!

Please read my advice on buying one of these next.
Ex

advice on buying a Jaguar S type, officially named the 3.4 'S' or 3.8 'S'.

1) don't buy a rotted car. I spent years looking for an un-restored, un-rotted example. I found it in San Francisco.
I travelled South, East, North, and everytime it was a rusted/rotted example. I have a collection of pictures dating back to 1994 of the 20 cars I inspected. I rejected all 20. Car number 21 is the one I bought and I didn't even haggle the price, when I saw the car, that was it.

These cars are "unibody" construction, the Western cars were factory-treated with anti-corrosion, (that's a story in itself), but not the rest that were exported to the USA, so you need to look carefully, inspect the rocker panels, and the exhaust system, the doors, if they are rotted, the inner frame is rotted too, and then you are talking serious surgery, your wife will not like it. It doesn't pay to restore one of these Small Saloons.

Find a clean un-restored example, that's your best bet. A restored example, unless fully documented with detailed photography, will have "secrets" that you will not learn about until it becomes yours.

You can find many S types on eBay, there's always one for sale. But never put a bid on any one car unless you inspect it yourself first. Sellers exagerate, pictures lie. Don't fall in that trap, or you'll pay for it, it never fails.

There were 25 thousand S types made in the 5 years it was made, and that's for all the world markets, UK, Europe, Africa, Australia, Canada, South America, and the USA. Not many were sent over here, so look carefully now, you'll be happier later.

Good luck.
Ex

All of you a bit cofused. If you want them skinny bumpers then: 1] Buy a Jag MK11, 240 or a 340.

2] Buy a Daimler V8 250.


No EX, I was not talking about RPM I was taking about the Daimler 250 Hemi V8's "HP" Potential.

-----P.S. Sure looks like that Cat on the hood is in pain!

---------------------------Keoke-------------- /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif