Other Cars (British & British-Inspired)

a place to discuss all our other favorite cars, especially the modified and/or V8 ones

Go to Thread: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicLog In
Goto Page: 12Next
Current Page: 1 of 2


Moderator
Curtis Jacobson
Portland Oregon
(4483 posts)

Registered:
10/12/2007 02:16AM

Main British Car:
71 MGBGT, Buick 215

authors avatar
Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: Moderator
Date: July 25, 2010 05:45PM



fasttiger
Jerry Porsch
Las Cruces, New Mexico
(78 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 08:40AM

Main British Car:
1966 Sunbeam Ford 380 ci with twin turbo's

Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: fasttiger
Date: July 25, 2010 07:19PM

To bad you did'nt go fuel injection with a good managment system. Just my opinion since I went with with it on my Tiger .
Otherwise neat job and clean!


dadhadaroverp63500s
Richard Harrold

(15 posts)

Registered:
08/31/2010 11:38AM

Main British Car:


Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: dadhadaroverp63500s
Date: August 31, 2010 11:51AM

NOOOOO!!! An old XJ without a straight-six or a V12 is heresy... he needs to get that engine out of there and put a proper Jag motor in there! Also, just how necessary are those louvres in the bonnet, or the ram-air intakes in place of the headlights? Plus those fake spinners on the wheels look really crappy.

Now, someone needs to get an Eagle 4.7 litre XK straight-six, maybe stick a supercharger on it, and bung it in this thing.

In fact, there needs to be a big mission to buy up V8-engined XJs from the USA, bring them back here, have them properly restored where necessary by KWE in Newbury and get the right engines in 'em... same goes for Triumphs with V6s or V8s (excepting Stags, where original Triumph V8s should be put back).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/31/2010 01:02PM by dadhadaroverp63500s.


socorob
Robbie
La
(173 posts)

Registered:
09/17/2009 04:42PM

Main British Car:
1963 Sunbeam Alpine Series 2 Ford 2.8 V6

Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: socorob
Date: August 31, 2010 03:27PM

Under the title at the top of this page says "IMPROVED", hence getting rid of the old unreliable anemic british engines. I do prefer leaving the outward appearance stock though, but thats just my taste. But if you insist, heres a v10 in a Jag, is that close enough to a v12?

[carscoop.blogspot.com]


dadhadaroverp63500s
Richard Harrold

(15 posts)

Registered:
08/31/2010 11:38AM

Main British Car:


Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: dadhadaroverp63500s
Date: September 01, 2010 05:20AM

Socorob, there's nothing anaemic or unreliable about a modernised XK engine. Eagle's 4.7 litre XK straight-six will happily push over 400bhp and 400 ft lbs of torque - and the Eagle E-type is famously reliable, it'll put up with pretty much anything, including day-in, day-out use, short and long journeys, high-mileage touring and all. This Jag isn't improved, it's just changed, and not for the better either - an all-iron American pushrod V8 in place of a partly-aluminium twin-cam straight six is no improvement. A V10 in a Jag isn't good enough either, since a V10 doesn't have inherently balanced primary and secondary moments - either it gets balancer shafts (meaning more weight and inertia and poorer throttle response) or you can get unpleasant harmonic vibrations in the engine. There's a reason why Bill Lyons stuck doggedly to straight-sixes and V12s.


Moderator
Curtis Jacobson
Portland Oregon
(4483 posts)

Registered:
10/12/2007 02:16AM

Main British Car:
71 MGBGT, Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: Moderator
Date: September 01, 2010 01:36PM

Quote:
There's a reason why Bill Lyons stuck doggedly to straight-sixes and V12s.

Richard, are you only posting here to be a troll? Surely you know that there are also good reasons why many other manufacturers haven't bothered with straight sixes or V12s, and why so many Jaguar owners have taken their original Jaguar engines out and thrown them away. When you're building engines for a "performance" car and they weigh more than a small block Chevy, you should know you've got a problem!

Personally, I rather like a Jaguar inline six. I suppose it would be a good engine for a truck - but you can't deny that it's heavy, long, tall, and that parts for it are expensive. (I'd wager that they're relatively more expensive on this side of the Atlantic, where Chevy and Ford parts are dirt cheap.) With a Chevy V8 instead of a stock Jaguar engine, owners usually get more power, more torque, they reduce weight by over 150 pounds, and they move engine mass both lower and further rearward for better handling.

I don't have any use at all for the Jaguar V12. It makes a glorious noise, but that's the only merit I see in it. That engine got its bad reputation the old fashioned way - it earned it! The Jag V12 particularly suffered as emissions laws got tougher. All the plumbing Jaguar put on top of that engine! An absolute nightmare to work on! The reason Jaguar stuck with it at that point was they couldn't afford to develop and tool-up for a newer and better engine. The American manufacturers did a better job of meeting emissions requirements (and of course the Japanese manufacturers did even better...)

In your earlier post, you mentioned the Triumph (Stag) V8 engine. Now I'd just like to see you TRY to defend that horrible engine. It alone ruined any chance the "Midlands Mercedes" had for success in export markets. Since your dad had a 3500S, surely you know that the Rover aluminum V8 engine was superior in every single respect. One of history's great mysteries is why Triumph even bothered creating their own V8 when they could have simply used the Rover division's engine. The only explanation I can think of is arrogance, which Triumph had in spades.


dadhadaroverp63500s
Richard Harrold

(15 posts)

Registered:
08/31/2010 11:38AM

Main British Car:


Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: dadhadaroverp63500s
Date: September 01, 2010 02:58PM

Hi! No, not at all trolling. I know many manufacturers aren't bothered with V12s (bulk, complexity, even weight), and straight-sixes for packaging reasons, but when you have room for a straight-six, and the car was designed for one, you ought to keep it. At least in the UK, parts for the XK engine aren't all that expensive, and it's a fine engine, free-revving, very smooth, bombproof reliable if properly set up, sounds wonderful, it's very tunable... just look up Eagle and their E-type. They use a 4.7 litre version of the XK straight-six, all-aluminium, over 400bhp and 400 ft lbs easily achievable without sacrificing reliability or cruising ability.

As for the V12, I don't especially care for the noise it makes, for me a V12 should howl, but it's INCREDIBLY smooth. It is, I will admit, bulky and heavy, and in original form complex and unreliable. However, as with all Jaguar engines, fixes have been made, sorting out the plumbing and electrics into neat bundles, easy to work on. Jaguar were working on two new engines at the time - the AJ6 that later replaced the XK straight-six, and a 60-degree narrow-angle OHC V8 (much like the Taurus SHO V6-based Volvo-Yamaha lump). Unfortunately, the AJ6 was much delayed by work on the V8, which proved a total failure.

Also, as for the Triumph Stag V8, again, it suffered from reliability issues, but is far from beyond redemption. Where I live, Stags are an all but everyday sight, and I've spoken to loads of their owners. The Stag V8 is easily fixed, can be 100% reliable, it revs freely and makes the most glorious noise. Admittedly, it is a bit heavier than the Rover engine (not by much, though), but it is a very good engine just spoiled by the way workers sabotaged it by failing to drill oil-ways and whatnot. There was nowt wrong with the design. The thing about it is it's more of a sports-car engine than the Rover - it revs more freely and revs higher, it sounds sportier, whereas the Rover engine is a smoother, torquier, less revvy sort of engine. Different character altogether. I think the reason why Triumph were creating their own engine was because they'd started work on it before they were merged with Rover/Alvis to produce Leyland Motors, and well before the Leyland/BMC merger, and felt they shouldn't abandon it. Spen King recalled that he was told the Rover engine wouldn't fit in the Stag (clearly this wasn't true, and he said he shouldn't have believed it), but he took the attitude that the work was so advanced, it would be a waste to abandon it. Now, of course, there was a great deal of tribalism going on, and the Canley workforce were notoriously disruptive and work-shy, but that doesn't make the Triumph V8 a bad design. It wasn't, not by any means.



BlownMGB-V8
Jim Blackwood
9406 Gunpowder Rd., Florence, KY 41042
(6003 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 12:59PM

Main British Car:
1971 MGB Blown,Injected,Intercooled Buick 340/AA80E/JagIRS

authors avatar
Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: BlownMGB-V8
Date: September 15, 2010 11:35AM

Didn't it have a problem with the head studs? I seem to recall that frozen studs were common, meaning that the head could not be removed from the block, simply because the studs went in at different angles and therefore once they were frozen that was the end of it. Not being able to remove the studs meant not being able to remove the head, and the whole thing became a rather bad boat anchor. As I recall, a problem that was carried over from the TR7 engine and magnified by two. The studs were known to snap off inside the head and if you had that happen you were done.

JB


Argatoga
Graham Hill

(8 posts)

Registered:
02/08/2010 12:06AM

Main British Car:


Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: Argatoga
Date: September 23, 2010 12:45PM

The Dolomite was on its own right a bad engine, slapping two of them together as in the Triumph V8 is proof enough that two wrongs don't make a right. The ruined Buick 215 (Rover V8) was a better engine even with the Rover liner issue.

How usable is a 400hp XJ6? From what I have heard you start hitting overlap issues not far over 300hp. Unless you are talking super charged.

Jag engines are pretty solid. Replace the gaskets and ditch the Lucas (or MM stuff) and they will run forever.

Concerning Jag's use of V12s and L6s. Until the '90s no one was able to make a smooth V8. L6s and V12s are naturally smooth due to their design (no counter weights are needed).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/23/2010 12:52PM by Argatoga.


flitner
John Fenner
Miami Fl
(168 posts)

Registered:
03/11/2010 10:58AM

Main British Car:
1972 MGB 350 CHEVY

Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: flitner
Date: September 23, 2010 11:35PM

Had a guy at the shop next door in 87or 88 put a dyno tested and tuned 500 ci Cadillac with a/c and all the fixins! Talk about a smooth and sleepy Jagillac!


cdodgyd
Chris Davies
Wales, UK
(4 posts)

Registered:
07/17/2010 03:25AM

Main British Car:
1959 AH Sprite, 1971 Mercedes 280se 1.5L Ford in the Sprite, 3L diesel in the Merc.

Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: cdodgyd
Date: October 01, 2010 08:32PM

Richard, if you want stock motors then you're on the wrong website. Its not called British V8 for nothing!
I'm a Brit myself and I have to say I'm with the US guys on this one - give me a nice, reliable, potent US V8 any day.

I had an E-type with the straight 6 and had major problems with the engine. Blown head gaskets, a stripped plug, failed oil pump, slipped liners etc. It was rebuilt twice by a leading UK XK engine builder who advertises regularly. The third time I did it myself and got shot of it. I didn't abuse it by racing or anything, just regular enthusiastic road use. Unlucky? Yes, more than most I suppose, but I know I'm not alone on this one.

In stock form even with triple SU's it only puts out around 220bhp. Less in the XJ6. Yes, I'm sure Eagle can get a lot more out of it, but their prices are astronomical. I also seem to recall Jeremy Clarkson having problems on his tour of Europe in an Eagle E too (Meet the Neighbours!).

These days I run a Frogeye Sprite with a nice Ford engine (admittedly UK made) in it - 100% better than the A series it replaced. A V8 is a bit big for it!


roverman
Art Gertz
Winchester, CA.
(3089 posts)

Registered:
04/24/2009 11:02AM

Main British Car:
74' Jensen Healy, 79 Huff. GT 1, 74 MGB Lotus 907,2L

Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: roverman
Date: October 17, 2010 01:35PM

Richard, I suggest you troll for allies at "Jensen Healey Preservation Society". You should fit well there ,as they too hate engine swaps, and swappers, who use sound judgement and engineering. Perhaps your assumtion is, the factory installed it, it MUST be the best possible engine, for the car. You can't argue with a closed mind. Happy Trails, roverman.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/17/2010 01:47PM by roverman.


dinkitoy
noel foreshew

(6 posts)

Registered:
12/05/2010 07:31PM

Main British Car:


Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: dinkitoy
Date: December 06, 2010 07:56PM

Hi people,
Being the owner of a 1978 XJ 12 with a V12 and then a 355 Stage 3 Chevy SBC.justifably replacement motor
I cannot see the sense of being ripped off for 3 times the V12 motor rebuild against a roller cam Chev refit.
The Jaguar mob killed a great Daimler V8 4.5 litre Majestic motor...It was proved by the Jaguar factory technicians
to be far superior to the 4.2 litre 6 cylinder..
As for the car in the topic it is quiet commendable and bear in mind that the owner put HIS money where HE
wanted it..You cannot please Everybody in this life and why should he try??. Think..It may create a New experience.
All the best..Dinkitoy


qwaii
tom lilley
Haida Gwaii
(22 posts)

Registered:
09/24/2010 11:22PM

Main British Car:
1970 GT6 5.3l jaguar V12

Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: qwaii
Date: October 29, 2011 08:44PM

so what does that make someone who pulls out a perfectly good triumph 6 to install a jag v12 in a gt6?


if it's crazy,i'm all over that like a fat kid on a smartie.; )


BWA


(332 posts)

Registered:
04/13/2010 08:13PM

Main British Car:


Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: BWA
Date: October 29, 2011 10:31PM

Tom having read your project journal and seeing the level of your expertise I would classify you as a mad scientist that is producing a Frankenstein ( note this is a compliment!). I am sure that you have carefully thought out your plan on how to deal with the idiosyncracies of the Jag V12 engine. On this website there is an Austin Healy Sprite with a Jag 6 cylinder stuffed in it so why not up the ante and put a V12 in a GT6?
Hopefully you will have Frank ready for Halloween next year!!!



qwaii
tom lilley
Haida Gwaii
(22 posts)

Registered:
09/24/2010 11:22PM

Main British Car:
1970 GT6 5.3l jaguar V12

Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: qwaii
Date: October 30, 2011 12:24AM

my plan is actually to have it ready for spring '12.

i may make it,i may not...but that's the plan for now.

as for the ideosyncracies of the v12,i have way more experience in building stuff than running these motors.so i'm just kinda hoping everything will work out ok.
i've done some research,and while somewhat disturbing i'll not let some silly facts interfere with the fantasy of a trouble free hot rod i have running through my head.

and for the record,i think the car this thread refers to is just fine.i like the modifications,and it has a clean look to it.


jellison
Jon Ellison

(52 posts)

Registered:
04/27/2010 08:09AM

Main British Car:


Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: jellison
Date: November 07, 2011 06:23AM

Lovin the Viper Powered XJS (generally I hate these things - too many "pretending to RACE" in the UK!!!), :)

On the Saloon I'd have thought a more modern and lighter LS would have been better (and on EFi as std).


Wagonmaster505
Scott Elliott
Albuquerque, New Mexico
(4 posts)

Registered:
11/02/2012 08:17AM

Main British Car:
1976 Jaguar XJ6-L Chevy 350ci.

Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: Wagonmaster505
Date: November 02, 2012 08:35AM

Beautiful car. I have something similar, but you are inspiring me to do more.

Chevy 350CI.


302GT
Larry Shimp

(218 posts)

Registered:
11/17/2007 01:13PM

Main British Car:
1968 MGB GT Ford 302 crate engine

authors avatar
Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: 302GT
Date: November 12, 2012 10:49AM

If someone wants a justification for replacing the Jaguar 6 engine, especially in an XJ6, read this interesting article on the history of the XK engine: [www.jagweb.com]. The later engines had numerous serious problems caused by poorly thought out design changes and by worn out production equipment.


Moderator
Curtis Jacobson
Portland Oregon
(4483 posts)

Registered:
10/12/2007 02:16AM

Main British Car:
71 MGBGT, Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: Added to the gallery: a big, handsome Jaguar!
Posted by: Moderator
Date: November 12, 2012 11:34AM

Very interesting article, indeed. Thanks!
Goto Page: 12Next
Current Page: 1 of 2


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.