I admit that I have not really kept up with the newer Jags much.

The other day a newer XJL went by and an acquaintance who is not a "car guy" said "that car has a Ford engine."

I asked him how he knew that, he said he read it in Consumer Reports. Is this BS or is Tata using Ford derived engines in the new Jags?

I know that Ford put the Jag designed 4.0 V-8 in their Lincoln LS a while back but don't know about the source of the new 6's and other engines.
Vector

 

Having just replaced a 5.0L supercharged engine in a 2010 XKR recently, just before I bought it from the previous owner, whose extended insurance paid for it, my mechanic and I were surprised to see FoMoCo stampings on most of the engine components. I believe the engines are Jaguar designed, but still use Ford sourced components. Does that make it a Ford motor? I guess it depends upon your definition.

 

Depends which engine you are talking about....

The 5.0L and the new 3.0L S/C V6 are Jaguar designed (no shared parts with other Ford engines AFAIK), but they are assembled in the Ford Dagenham Engine Plant. They have a separate workshop specifically for the Jag engines. Yes the parts have FoMoCo on them, the parts are sourced via the Ford supply chain.

The old V8's were done the same way.

The old V6 was developed from the Ford Duratec (well actually, that's what it is) can't be 100% sure but I think those engines might have been assembled in the US and then shipped to the UK.

The 2.2L diesel and 2.0L petrol seen in the XF (and some XJ's, oops...) are more/less straight from Ford.

Then there is the 3.0L diesel V6, which is derived from the older 2.7L diesel, this came about as a joint design with Ford & Peugot, it is known as a Ford/PSA engine.

Jaguar Land Rover is building a new engine plant in the UK, so the Ford connection will be reduced, but there is no escaping that Ford owned Jaguar for 18 years...

 

its all about the money and development costs!

you do know that Ford engineers are smart also!

 

I never really cared if someone was "smart," I would prefer that they be "effective" at what they do.

I have known some people who you would think couldn't tie their own shoes, but they can come up with a brilliant solution to a problem while the rest of us are still scratching our heads wondering what to do.

I have also known some university types that are "smart" in my line of work but very egg headed when it comes to the field applications of their knowledge.

Vector

 

Ford has engine plants in INDIA also.

Ford changed jaguar forever, mostly for the better!

some say,blame it on the UK labor unions, or B/L (Lucas),etc.

 

cambio51, so will the new engine plant be an India owned and operated company using UK labor ?

 

I wouldn't put it quite like that.

Tata owns JLR, finances JLR, but the company is run independently, at least that's what people say.

The new engine plant is owned by JLR, so ultimately it's owned by Tata.

I don't quite understand the question about the workers though, what are you getting at? The plant is located in England, so there will be British people employed there, no doubt people from other nations too.

 

i suppose that India learned a lot after 99yrs occupation by Britain, odd how things change!

i suppose nothing lasts forever!

Ford changed Jaguar (JLR) forever,(for the better), and i'm sure that TATA will change things even more,(hopfully for the better).

 

Quick correction the AJ133 5 litre is made within the Ford Plant within Bridgend in Wales. That's where the AJ33, Aj27 etc were made also. The AJV8s are wholly designed by Jaguar in the UK.


The AJ30 and AJ35 (in the Lincoln LSs) were designed in the UK and assembled in the USA- they were de-featured to meet Fords aggressive cost requirements and the cylinder head casting quality to my eye was never quite as good as the Jaguar ones.


Ford did ALOT of good for Jaguar- they introduced good robust quality processes and a methodical Product development plan. Quality comes from process and a methodical rigour, not from passion, although innovative design and excitement come from passion.

 

Yes Bridgend, of course Count. Dagenham is where the diesels are assembled...

 

count i like your MCI bus project!

i owned a 1948 GMC Greyhound bus converted motor home(6-71 detroit
diesel).

factory service manuals said average MPG should be 9-11 mpg, i owned it for 5yrs and it did average 10mpg, n ow my 2002 motrohome diesel averages 7-8mpg wondering why the drop in mpg when it has a lightyrs modern tech Cummins engine , both have no problem running 70mph for hours on end?

also if i had the money(i'm retired), my plan would be the XJS with an AUDI V12 diesel with a 4L80E trans.

factory stock 500hp,700torque(remap 650hp, 850torque), factory stock twin turbos, direct injection, twin I/Cs. wouldnt need to take the engine apart.
very reliable and i'm betting 30mpg at cruise.

may not be cheap , but unusual for sure, i'm always out of the box, different generation!

 

I have an old soul- although I'm probably 20-30 years from retirement I would love to become a snow bird/nomad now!

My MCI gets about 7-9 mpg. It has a Detroit Diesel 8v-71. I love that engine. It's a manual transmission but I've gotten used to it. at high altitudes it loses power which is why sometimes I wish I had the 8v71 TA turbo charged unit with an even taller rear end to get the fuel economy back.

The MCI is so simple and easy to work on.

Part of the problem with a modern Cummins ISL or CAT engine is the requirement for emissions compiance makes diesels (more than petrols) not so good on fuel economy.

 

count all of what you say, i like!

me and wife spent 11 yrs running wild all over the USA and canada, RV life so relaxed and encredable, went to Bonneville couple times, Daytona race track(sports car races ALMS) dozen times, open hyway races 3 times, many drag races, YUP, i miss it! plus many state parks etc. the people are wonderful and the stories told.

and any diesel should be turbocharged, i used to operate a diesel service garage,in Daytona FL. 27yrs.

quick story; guy brought his MCI 8-71 turbo in for work , lot of miles,so he decided to leave it and said overhaul it, just coudnt make the top speed he needed , so i rebuilt engine, along with larger injectors, and my personal expertice was two/stroke tuning GM/Detroit diesels.

jacked the govenor all the way(without runaway), retimed injectors slight advance.

he came payed me and picked it up,for trip from Daytona to NY, interstate I-95, said coming back,middle of night, held it at full output for hours, Darn,speedo only went to 85mph, but never came off it,he estimated at least a 100mph or more!

and nothing sounds more sweet than a screamin jimmy at max rpm, 2/stroke fires every time the piston goes DOWN! sounds like a 16 cylinder!

 

count question; i'v read that the AJ133 is a V8 block, and the AJ126 is a V6 block same external demintions, fit in the same mounts and same transmission block patterns, to be able to interchange engines with out a complete redesign of platform?

what say on that info?

 

Ron, I'm sorry I missed this question. I work too much for my own good!


I'd left Jaguar before the new AJ126 V6 was commissioned but recently I have a guy who now works for me who left Jaguar later. He tells me that the transmissions bell housing pattern and block external dimensions are indeed the same.


I couldn't talk extensively about interchangeability but it would seem, superficially at least, that the new V6 should be interchangeable with the Aj133.

 

thanks count, seems that you have a lot of irons in the fire!

good luck with any of your endeavors.

you know after looking at the Ford modular engines, you can see the Jaguar influence in them, Ford came out with them after buyout of Jag.

 

The original plan was that the Modular be fitted to the X100/XK8 and the AJ26 to be cancelled. Thanks to guys like Dave Sczupac who fought hard for the case of Jaguar having its own engine.


Ford were always in the roller finger follower camp with valvetrain arguing lower friction.


We were always in the Direct acting camp and showed that the friction of DAMB (direct acting mechanical buckets) was lower at higher engine speeds and at low speeds if you got it right- could be manageable and the combustion chamber angle could also be lower. You see this in the Jaguar AJV6 vs the Ford Duratec - which has a deep angle.


Its obvious that wiser minds at Ford finally prevailed however as the latest Cyclone V6 went to DAMB also.


In addition- with the early Jaguar AJ133 there are the same bore centres as the Ford Coyote V8 (5 litre 413 Bhp engine fitted to last Mustang) and some interchangeability. There was a plan that in the top models of the Ford engine- they could use the Jaguar GDi heads and other equipment. This was done in fear of Ford killing off the AJ133 programme (work with them rather than against Ford-as they had already killed our own bespoke V6 in the X type/S type). Finally Jaguar got acquired by Tata and I don't know how much interchangeability remained between the AJ133 and For Coyote. I know that they still share the same bore centres...

 

Okay let's say Ford and Tata keep holding hands, how about a Jaguar version of the 5.2 flat plane crank (VODOO) V8? Normally Aspirated 500hp and 400ftlbs torque, 8000 rpm revability? Let Jag put a blower on it...

 

interesting how technology changes but stays the same.
my 1st intro into Direct acting bucket valvetrain, i operated an engine shop in Daytona FL., and job came in,it was a 1931 USA Dusenberg engine overhaul, inline straight 8, and studing the cylinder head , 4 valves , Direct act buckets, DOHC, central spark plug, a pentroof shape(quite deep by todays standards), but for the fuels available worked out well,

also centrifugal supercharged vertical, must have been advanced for the time period!
today most new engines seem to use DAMB train! like you say high revs are more normal and small displacement type engines , i cant believe we have soom 3 cylinder turbo motors showing up!
thanks ,,Ron