Choosing a Jaguar is like choosing a wife...

[198686d]

That's what one neighbor and XKE owner told me over the weekend. He added that even if you want to get rid of her, it's expensive.

So, gentlemen (ladies too, for that matter), I want a Jaguar...Not a roadster...and not over $20K...and one that is as potentially reliable as a Jaguar can be.

I have now read a number of reviews, etc. and heard from some of you that the XJ6 should be ruled out. I like the Mark X. And, oddly, I like the the 1997+ XK 8.

Am I in the ballpark? Am I out of my mind?

Appreciate your advice, insight, experience, and graduation from the school of Jaguar hard-knocks.

dave in st. louis

61 AH BE Sprite
04 Mini Cooper S
05 Vespa ET 4 (? I know that's a strange addition)

p.s. I'm not new to the BC Forum...go the Sprite site all the time...just new to Jaguar.

 

[jessebogan]

Why rule out the XJ6? They made a lot of those cars, and sold them to a lot of people. Something must have been OK. I personally like the series 2 cars, both coupes and LWB models. I think the roof line is "prettier" and the chrome door handles and the like. As built they had water controlled chokes on the carbs, which were not so good. Replace the carbs with a set of series 1 manual choke carbs, and install the choke cable, and away you go. The series 2 cars also came with a 3.31 to 1 ratio rear end, instead of the series 3 2.88, making them much quicker off the line, and in the most part, a "livelier" drive in general. Nothing really wrong with the series 3s though. They are newer, and have more "goodies" like the trip computer, and sunroofs. As with most cars of this age group, the most important thing is to find a car with no rust, that is used regularly, and owned by someone with either the deep pockets, or the ability to keep the car up. Most used Jags ( and likely cars in general) that are up for sale tend to be behind the curve in maintainence. With a Jag, catching up can be a daunting task. A car that is driven regularly most likely has not slipped too far down the curve. Regular use is what keeps the cars reliable, and all systems go. That said, I would avoud all the V8 jags unless there is written documentation that the timing chains and tensioners have been repaired/replaced as required. The chains fail with almost no warning, leading to catastrophic engine failure. There are also a number of cars that have cylinder wall failure due ,evidently, to sulphur in the gas in high concentrations, that causes damage to the nicasil cylinder walls. The only cure is to replace the block. The last car you might consider is an E type 2 plus 2. The purists don't generally like them as much as the 2 seat coupes and roadsters.They don't look as pretty when you look over your shoulder as you walk away, but you know what?? They look the same from the drivers seat. I think the series 2 cars are the best of that bunch as drivers anyway. Many came with automatics , AC and power steering, which in reality makes them nicer to drive on a daily basis. ( At least the AC and PS anyway) Decent unrestored cars are well into your price range. In fact, I saw one on Ebay with a BIN of around 12K, for a running car, and that price leaves some room for improvements. Avoid rusty E types like the plague, same with those that have had "engine conversions" Very bad Ju Ju. Hope this helps.

 

[198686d]

Dear Mr. Warrior (aka: Jesse):

You have responded before. You obviously know what your foruming about. I appreciate it sincerely. I will keep researching with the benefit of your insigts.

thanks,

dave in st. louis

 

[Deleted member 8987]

Well, kind of.
Sometimes, one falls in your lap.

I got mine, and while some tinkering has been needed, basically to un-do 30 years of "gas station maintenance", but I drive it all the time now.
Have 1200 miles on it in three months.

How old, how much money, and how much work?

A 1963 RHD 2.4L MK2 was on Craig's List near Seattle a couple of months ago, wire wheels, overdrive, bare metal, for $2,000.

Personally, a Jag needs an oval grille, be is 120, 140, 150, MK1 or MK2.

 

[Cottontop]

Dave in St. Louis

Tim in Dallas here.

I'm not sure exactly how "new" a Jaguar you will accept, but keep your eye on THIS web site.

Click on <span style="font-weight: bold">Inventory</span> at the top of the home page.

While most the their offerings are newer (2000+), occasionally they will have an 80's or 90s car shown.

3 weeks ago, my wife bought a ABSOLUTELY LOADED Topaz 25,000 mile 2005 S-Type from them for $17K.

We know 3 other couples who have bought cars from them. They are GREAT folks to do business with.

Tim

 

[DrEntropy]

That said, I would avoud all the V8 jags unless there is written documentation that the timing chains and tensioners have been repaired/replaced as required. The chains fail with almost no warning, leading to catastrophic engine failure. There are also a number of cars that have cylinder wall failure due ,evidently, to sulphur in the gas in high concentrations, that causes damage to the nicasil cylinder walls. The only cure is to replace the block.

Treat this li'l phrase as Gospel.

At just under 40K miles those tensioners go off like they had a timer in 'em. ~SNAP!!~

 

[brdave]

Do not rule out all V8 jags. The nikasel issue was resolved in 2000 and the timing chain tensioner issue was resolved as well. There is excellent information available on Jag Lovers site with details of engine numbers, car numbers etc.
brdave

 

[tony barnhill]

Sometimes your wife chooses your Jaguar.

I don't know much about Jag's...I've had a 1994 XJ6 - hated it; terribly unreliable, awfully epensive to repair.

But, I have 2 older XJ6's, an '85 & an '87 - love 'em both!

I'd think twice about eliminating them - I especially like the Series III.

 

[198686d]

Tim:

Thank you! That is one tantalizing website. I really appreciate it.

dave in st. Louis

 

[198686d]

Dear Doctor:

After reading similar remarks, I know am putting this critique in the "Gospel" category.

thanks,

dave in st. louis

 

[198686d]

Dear Brother Dave;

O.k. will look at Jag lovers on post 2000 v-8's.

Appreciate the help.

dave in st. louis

 

[198686d]

Right on, Tony: Didn't you just get the '87 in Nashville and your wife commandeered it?

The advice, suggestions, opinions I'm getting are, as might be expected, quite varied and anecedotal. Some say the post 1990 Jaguars are far more reliable...others, of course disagree.

Some suggest the v-8's are to be avoided at all costs, others say the post 2000 v-8's straightened out mechanically.

And some say it isn't a Jaguar unless it has an oval grill.

All of this variance is part of the pursuit and process. I am learning a lot.

dave in st. louis (who you told about the 87, but didn't didn't take action...which by the way was Hamlet's tragic flaw)

 

[tony barnhill]

Dave - she drove it home as we'd gone up in my big Dodge truck...when she pulled into the drive, she let me know it was HER car!! Good thing I have my '85 XJ6....