One For Classic Car Fans.....
- Thread starter Alex H
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
They've aged very well.
Profpointy
Legendary Member
A blue plaque on a nice house in Leamington. Not a bad epitaph to be fair !
I gather he'd done the C and D types and the later XJ13 Le Mans car as well
I gather he'd done the C and D types and the later XJ13 Le Mans car as well
Last edited:
Profpointy
Legendary Member
And how about this utterly stunning Mk2 Jag. Got chatting to owner and it seemed it had been upgraded to a 4.2 from the original 3.8 litre, and presumably other things too. But wow, what a beauty
I'd seen it driving around a few times previously but this time parked up
I'd seen it driving around a few times previously but this time parked up
Profpointy
Legendary Member
A rather lovely Talbot.
I am rather tempted to get a classic car, and whilst I've always mostly considered a sixties Jag or Triumph TR, there is an appeal of pre-war cars like this. Now that even a 60s car is unlikely to be the "daily driver", a pre war car is not such an issue for practicality
I am rather tempted to get a classic car, and whilst I've always mostly considered a sixties Jag or Triumph TR, there is an appeal of pre-war cars like this. Now that even a 60s car is unlikely to be the "daily driver", a pre war car is not such an issue for practicality
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
He did some good songs in the 70's.
raleighnut
Legendary Member
- Location
- One of the 'Elite'
Why would you do that when the 3.8 was a better engine, sure the 4.2 has better torque but it won't rev as high and the cylinder block is known to twist. If you just want to cruise along then fine but with tuning the 3.8 will be more powerful at the top end, the D-type would hit 190mph (on the Mulsanne straight) according to Norman Dewis.
People do funny things to Jaguars though including fitting wider wheels and tyres which knacker the rear suspension and make the steering incredibly heavy but that's life
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
Nice, but a '78 on black plates just looks daft.
Profpointy
Legendary Member
And yet Jaguar themselves had the 4.2 version of the XK engine in the later 420, the Mk10, the Daimler limo/ hearse, the Scorpion tank and the XJ6.
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
And yet the 4.2 was so problematic to run in production form jn any real state of tune they gave up, designed the AJ6 to replace it, and obtained more power and greater reliability from only 3.6 litres as a result...
Mr Nut is right. The 4.2 worked, but it pushed the underlying design too far and was compromised in several ways as a consequence. Of course, having bet the ranch on it and spent a load of money tooling up to build it Jaguar, a relatively small concern in car terms back then, had little choice but to run with it and flog as many as they could to fund the development of the AJ6 replacement (itself delayed by nearly a decade for all sorts of reasons.)
Mr Nut is right. The 4.2 worked, but it pushed the underlying design too far and was compromised in several ways as a consequence. Of course, having bet the ranch on it and spent a load of money tooling up to build it Jaguar, a relatively small concern in car terms back then, had little choice but to run with it and flog as many as they could to fund the development of the AJ6 replacement (itself delayed by nearly a decade for all sorts of reasons.)
Last edited:
raleighnut
Legendary Member
- Location
- One of the 'Elite'
All cruisers, and as @Drago posted the 4.2 although it had better torque at low rpm than the 3.8 it was better suited to a slushbox. My own opinion is that it was tailored more to the American market than to the British sports car domain.
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
As Mr Nut alludes, enlarging the 6 banger to 4.2 pushed the block too far. The casting was too thin in places, lost torsional rigidity, would crack, liners wouldn't then be secure in the bores, it was a mess. That its replacement made a very reliable 40+ extra BHP from a mere 3.6 litres in supercharged form shows whas a mess thd 4.2 XK motor really was.
Profpointy
Legendary Member
To be fair the 3.6 was a 50 year more modern unit so it's not wholly surprising it could be made more powerful. I'm presuming they had the supercharger in mind when they designed it, or at least designed it to be strong enough to get more power out of it by whatever means over time.
As an aside, there's a story about the Porsche flat six engine evolving over time to have twice the power. The original design engineer wryly commented that if he'd realised it had that much potential he wished he'd made it lighter !
Profpointy
Legendary Member
Are you thinking of Leo?
