Jensen Healey Question

I know this should be in other cars, but I thought I'd get a better response here. Why are the Jensen Healeys not as popular as most other British Cars. They look like they would make a great touring car, with more power and more creature comforts than our "B"s. The price I've seen on most of them is very reasonable compared to some others. They have a very nice body style. Are they hard to get parts for? Are they difficult to restore? Something seems to be holding the price down. Could it be popularity? Just curious. PJ

PS, What are the best years, if any?

I'm sure others will jump in here, but the parts supply situation does not seem to be a vibrant. I don't think nearly as many were sold over here in the first place so it might have been harder for them to develop a following...

Didn't Practical Classics just do a buyers guide on these?

It seems like a lot of them were sold in the California area. Looking through the ads, more appear to be for sale there than other areas around the country. Were they mostly sold here in 1973 & 74?

It is my understanding from articles that I read over the years that the J-H was pushed onto the market before its Lotus engine was properly sorted out. I've seen a number of articles that discuss engine transplants for the J-H and most cited reliability issues as the reason for the transplants.

I guess what I'm trying to get at is that while all LBCs require more maintenance than a Toyota or Honda, owning a J-H represents a commitment above and beyond what most of us have chosen. That said, I've always thought it would be great to own one. I liked the fit of the J-H steering wheel from the first time I sat in one.

I would place the lack of popularity with the indifferent styling rather than mechanical spec, although that might scare a few people away.

The look of the cars just doesn't grab you the way - well, a 3000 did.

Nice touring cars and wonderful engine (when sorted)

There are a couple for sale locally;

https://orangecounty.craigslist.org/car/403846444.html

https://orangecounty.craigslist.org/car/406384248.html

tdskip said:

There are a couple for sale locally;

https://orangecounty.craigslist.org/car/403846444.html

https://orangecounty.craigslist.org/car/406384248.html

Click to expand...

The first link has been deleted. The price is very fair, I think on the second one. Only problem there, it's 3000 miles away. Not worth the price of shipping, let alone not seeing it in the real.

Were any made without the rubber bumper?

Yeah you have to have extra patients to own on for sure.

I think they are beautiful cars though.

My Dad owned one briefly (he restores/turns british autos) and I remember him saying that he and the buyer drove the car to the bank to get the cashiers check and it started raining heavy, after a few minutes the dashboard instruments started flipping back and forth.

There is nothing inherently wrong with these cars...unless you count the fact that the early cars had a tendency to have oil where they weren't supposed to and no oil where they were supposed to. However, the Lotus engine is available- but very pricy.

They are nice looking cars and when sorted, very pleasurable cars to drive, but the parts situation is nothing like a 'B. You may pay the same price for a similarly priced starting point, but then the J-H will conservatively cost twice as much from that point on.

Now, if you like it, that's not a reason to avoid it. No one drives a 20+ year old sports car (of any type) because penny pinching is top on the list....but you have to have your eyes open going in.

Here in the UK a couple of reasons I guess.

Generally cars made using major components from other manufactuers are not as highly regarded, Reliant Scimitar, Gilbern Invader, Jensen Healey and Lotus to a degree are prime examples.

Second I think there is some wariness of the motor (although I beleive if looked after correctly its ok).

How do you know if it has the Lotus engine?

It'll have "LOTUS" onna cam covers. /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

The 907 engine used in the cars was of Louts design/manufacture. It'll look the same as the Esprit engines, may have "Jensen-Healey" on the cam covers on later cars...

& the timing belt is right out in front so you can see it.

Thanks Doc, Tony. Clears up a couple of things.

Those 'things' would be ???

The main reason Jensen Healey’s aren’t popular is because there aren’t that many people who want an LBC that’s unique, goes faster and handles better. /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif For those of us who do it’s a great car.

Just kidding. Well, not exactly kidding. It really is faster and better handling than most other (stock) LBC’s of the era.

The real reason you don’t see or hear much about them is that they just aren’t widely known. There aren’t many people who look back and remember them from “back in the day” and go looking for them.

There weren’t many of them made. Look at the TR6. They made around 100k of them (ish). I don’t know how many are left but if for example 80% were lost over the decades there would still be 20k on the road. That’s about twice as many cars as JH ever built in the first place. Nobody knows if there are even a thousand of them left in the world.

For a relatively obscure car parts availability was quite good for the longest time. It’s not as good as it once was but it’s still reasonable. Lotus engine parts are more expensive than many other LBCs’ but not hard to get.

The engine in the second Craigslist add is very obviously a Lotus 907. It’s very distinctive. Not that you can see it in the pic but the motor is slanted over at a 45deg angle. The twin carbs stick sideways out the top, there are twin cam covers with plugs down the middle and the exhaust drops down the opposite side.


As for the other stuff in the add:
Jensen Healy convertible – JH’s are only convertibles. The coupe is a Jensen GT.

Rare 5 speed – Most were 4-sp but the 5-sp is hardly “rare.”

Rebuilt Lotus Motor – Only a good sign if he can show that the work was done right.

WestCoast head – well know local builder, potentially a good sign

J&E pistons – popular high perf improvement, if the machining was done well.

New Paint – Done well, fine. Earl Scheib, …

Spax Adjustible shocks – A common upgrade. They were the only shock upgrade available for a few years. There are others now.

needs a little finishing – Yeah, there’s a surprise. If it really is just a little the advertised price is a bargain.

As for desirable years, that’s one of them. I think most guys will agree that ’74 and up are preferred but every car is unique. It’s better to have a good example of any year than a thrashed one of “the best” year.

Early ‘74s had steel bumpers (my preference) and 4-sp’s (not as big a deal as one might think, both boxes have the same top gear, 1:1. The 5-sp cars have closer ratios and a slightly taller diff).


PC.

DrEntropy said:

Those 'things' would be ???

Click to expand...

I think you guys have answered all of my questions but one. What year was the first one made? I can't think of any other questions about the car. Seeing how I'm a chrome bumper nut, I guess I'd prefer an early 74 or earlier, if there were earlier models. I have to look into this further. I'm interested, but not fascinated. A super deal on a TF would knock everything else out of the box. I mean a SUPER deal, I am a little on the thrifty side.

PAUL161 said:

...I think you guys have answered all of my questions but one. What year was the first one made? ...

Click to expand...

They were manufactured from ’72 to ’76 but I believe the earliest “year model” was ’73.

The earlier “Mk I” cars were less refined, with plastic dashboards and center consoles and rubber floor mats. The later “Mk II” cars got woodgrain interior details (as seen in the craigslist pix), padded consoles and carpeting. There were a variety of small mechanical detail changes too.


PC.

As I recall JH wanted to start production before Lotus had sorted the motor out, Lotus wasn't offering it in any of their cars yet, and I think they said they wouldn't warranty it either, therefore when the problems arose it pretty much put Jensoen out of business.

So I think they have a low price for two reasons, the first the reliability when new, and 2nd they are a 70s era sports car, where the british stuff, even that built in the 70s, is 60s and 50s era, with wire wheels and chrome bumpers and quirky charm, and name recognition for MG Truimph and AH, that JH doesn't have. Put it another way--sure it is cheaper than acomparable B or TR, but so is a Fiat 124 Spyder or a TR7, which also have more creature comforts and modern design (if not more all out power). The 60s is seen as a nostalgic good car era, the 70s still not so much.

I think they are a great bargain and I would love to have one to go as the bookend to my early Austin Healey. I also have always thought they were kind of handsome cars, though certainly not beautiful like an E jag.

They know how to solve the engine problems now, so it is a great choice as a bargain sports car you can drive to work, take on trips, they are good autocrossers as well--no no wait they are still unreliable, have all the charm of a 70s GM product, and boring styling (did I say the right things to keep the price down so I can still afford one?)

glemon said:

As I recall JH wanted to start production before Lotus had sorted the motor out, Lotus wasn't offering it in any of their cars yet, and I think they said they wouldn't warranty it either, therefore when the problems arose it pretty much put Jensoen out of business....

Click to expand...

The Lotus “teething” issues were mostly sorted out during Mk I production and by the time the Mk II came out were understood and controlled. Jensen kept going well after that. The British auto industry as whole suffered greatly in the 70’s. Jensen’s demise was a microcosm of the greater scene.

glemon said:

...sure it is cheaper than acomparable B or TR, but so is a Fiat 124 Spyder or a TR7, which also have more creature comforts and modern design ....

Click to expand...

Not sure what creature comforts the 124 or TR7 have over the JH?

(Engineering) design-wise the three are basically the same, front engine/rear drive convertible, independent suspension front/multi-link live axle rear, coil springs and telescoping dampers all around. The Fiat does have 4w disks, JH and TR disk/drums fr/rr. Engine-wise the JH’s 907 is certainly the most modern and advanced. I do love the Fiat’s engine, though.

(Styling) design-wise, well, there’s no arguing with Pinifarina. As for the Brits, “more modern” doesn’t always translate as “better.” It’s up to personal taste.


PC.