Hi there,

I was on Facebook earlier and came across a Mk1 3.4 MOD for sale in the US of A (despite the fact I live on the other side of the world!) and the seller claimed that it was one of 170 3.4 MOD Mk1s made. I know that Jaguar made waaaay more than 170 Mk1 3.4s with manual overdrives, but it got me thinking, how many were actually made and where did they end up. I tried googling it to no avail, so I thought I'd ask you guys.

I'd be particularly interested to see how many Mk1s, particularly 3.4 MODs were snapped up by Australian buyers in the 1950s.

Thanks for any assistance

 

According to Nigel Thorley's Jaguar - All the Cars (fourth edition) which is a reliable source, total production of the 3.4 Mark 1 was 17,280.

No details on the split of transmision types or sales by market but certainly looks like the advertiser has got his decimal point in the wrong place!

Graham

 

Just having a look at this and there are several different totals between 17280 and 17494.

If you go by the chassis numbers it is a total of 17494 of which 8945 were RHD this is from the Heritage Trust info, but I can't find a country breakdown.

So rather a lot more than 170 made, and I can't believe that only 170 of the 8945 RHD models ended up in Australia either !

 

Hi everyone, thanks for your responses.

It seems that everyone has the same suspicions as me that there were a lot more than 170 MOD 3.4s made. I might email JDHT to see if they can give me a definitive answer. I believe about a quarter of all RHD Mk1s ended up in Australia as we were one of Jaguar's major export markets, but I could be wrong.

 

Good idea, they must have the details somewhere.

There were probably a lot of £10 ticket Brits there in the 50's so a ready market I assume too.

 

There were a lot of British immigrants arriving in Australia in the 1950s but I doubt many of them could afford a Jaguar. Even basic cars were ridiculously expensive at the time, especially the locally made Holden. A Jaguar was at least twice the price, so probably only doctors, lawyers etc. bought them.

 

Sorry to resurrect an old thread.

Only 17K of the Mark I cars fabricated, yet I see lots of them being discussed. Is there a registry of surviving cars? Seems like a high survival rate looking casually at the number of posts on this and other forums and want ad's, etc.

Kind of the opposite of the old 2-Stroke SAAB is sold a few years back. They made lots of them, but only a few hundred survived.

I have an old Isetta and more than half of all the cars made still exist.

 

There appears to be no registry of surviving cars as far as I can tell, some clubs keep a register but these are limited to their members unfortunately.

JDHT do not hold a register, and the MK1 and MK2 are not as yet digitised, so the records can only be examined by hand and not searched by computer, so they cannot search records for numbers of cars or country of sale as yet.

 

Thanks,

I find it interesting how the survival rates for different cars varies so much. Often not in a way that makes any sense. Since Mark I Jaguars would require more dollars, pounds, yen, lire, etc to maintain, then I would expect fewer would still be around. Yet, i get the impression that plenty still exist. Perhaps they were cherished more? Probably not. Perhaps a lot were squirreled away for later restoration and are re-surfacing?

Just wondering.

I really like the car. It is fun to drive (even with the BW Auto) and seats more people than my TR-3A.

Steve

 

Greetings Nicholas from the next paddock north . . .

Sorry I can't provide definitive numbers, although I agree with Graham that Thorley's production data is generally regarded as most reliable . . . but I can shed some light on that era and especially as it relaters to Australian imports of what is now regarded as the Mk1 compact. Some of what follows was sourced from a "Wheels" Australia magazine in late 60s, where some 10 years after its appearance, the Jaguar Mk1 was rated their best value pre-owned luxury car . . .

• you are correct that the Australian market, at that time, punched well above its weight in terms of volume of Jaguars by population . . . the Mk7s on were first choice among professionals who had been denied so much during post-war rationing, and this was especially so among country medical, legal and bank managers;

• the compacts, starting with the 2.4L Mk1 changed all that . . . suddenly and despite higher costs than local (lesser) alternatives, a Jaguar was more affordable . . . farmers who had been banking a pound for every pound of wool, could now afford to emulate their bank manager, and rushed out to buy . . . I recall my first sight of a Mk1 was at the Sydney Royal Easter show in latish 50s and the crowds milling about the Jaguar stand were amazing;

• Jaguar, in those days, did far more than just feed off their 50s racing heritage - they backed it with real support locally and names like Bob Jane, the Geoghans and many others were household icons . . . they represented excitement and that appealed to the Oz psyche;

• the vast majority of Mk1s imported here were manual +o/d as autos were generally regarded very poorly - moreover, driving was still valued for the experience rather than the more modern concept of ease of use;

There were 3 significant factors that led to there being far more 2.4L Mk1s (as per my avatar & album pics) imported into Australia than the (later) 3.4L Mk1 variant . . .

• the view among Aussies that "slush boxes" were inferior to m+od, as noted above, and the performance of the 2.4L was more than adequate for Australian road conditions in those days;

• the 2.4L was immediately available (although to order) but the 3.4L was scarce and had a long supply lead time;

• the Brown's Lane fire (1957) hit Jaguar production at a critical time during the larger engined car's development . . . Lyons sensed the mood for a total modernization into the Mk2 . . . so the fire had a far more devastating impact on 3.4L Mk1 production than the 2.4L which was already exporting strongly.

As that "Wheels" article pointed out, the Mk2 saw an almost total reversal from the more predominant smaller engined Mk1 . . . suddenly, the 2.4L option was overwhelmed by the 3.4L and even later, 3.8L variants. Given that background of our local scene some 60 years ago . . . I wonder which is now the rarer car here . . . a 3.4L Mk1 or a 2.4L Mk2?

Best wishes,

Ken

 

Figures taken from Nigel Thorley's book, essential reading by the way, indicate total production of 37,397, of which 16,250 were 2.4 RHD, 3742 were 2.4 LHD. Also, 8945 were 3.4 RHD and 8460 were LHD.

 

but the MK-1 name never existed, it was called "2.4 Liter Saloon", or something like that.

so if you start asking around about "MK-1", (a name used by enthusiasts after the fact, never by the factory), you will get what you ask for.

Having said that, the un-official name for the 1963-1968 3.4 and 3.8 'S', was "MK-3 UTAH" when it was being developed, and now, we enthusiasts call it the "S type" after the fact, a name that never existed either.

 

Broadly agree Jose . . . certainly regarding "Mk1" never being a factory description. Apart from the engine size being indicated in the grille-top medallion, I can't even recall any chrome script on the boot lid . . . only the word "JAGUAR" impressed into the reverse light glass.

However, perhaps clarification is needed about the 60s S Type. I have never seen or heard reference to "Mk3 Utah"; perhaps a local US invention? What is certain is that, apart from engine size still in grille top medallion, the boot carried the chrome script "JAGUAR" followed under by either "3.4 S" or "3.8 S".

I have included a pic of the factory produced Service Manual which clearly shows the "S" designation. The term "S Type" was certainly being used in Jaguar documentation back in the day . . . to the extent that when Jaguar introduced the late 90s "S-Type" the hyphen got an intentional emphasis.

HTH,

Ken

 

cat_as_trophy,

it was a UK invention, found in the following UK article:

https://www.aronline.co.uk/cars/jagu...jaguar-s-type/

 

in the 1960's, in California, the distributor for Jaguar, Rolls Royce, and other expensive British cars, I believe it was "British Motors", included a Service Manual with the Jaguar MK-2 and 3.* "S" . I have one that came with my S similar to the one in the picture you posted.

 

While I agree he factory did not authorize the "Mk1" moniker it does never-the-less pop up from time to time in official documents. Technical bulletins from 1959 and later do refer to the MK1. It appears that they were trying to make a distinction from other 3.4L cars of the period. I personally always use the 2.4 or 3.4 Saloon description but must confess that I always follow that with AKA MK1!

 

Jaguar has always had confusing model names, take for example the XJ-40 which everyone including the sales corps calls "XJ-6" when in fact it was never advertised as XJ-6, and since the early "stealthed" test cars, it was always called "The All New XJ-40".

not to mention that before the MK-1 or "Small Saloon concept", there were other, much larger models called "3 point something Saloon", in the 1940's and 1950's, like the MK IV, the MK-V, the MK-7, the 8, the 9, and the X. But there was never a MK-6.

I'm out of here, this is confusing.

 

Sorry Jose but Jaguar did refer to the XJ 40 in several sales catalogs and other places as the XJ6.

 

This is not correct, as George says. All the sales literature I have for this model refers to it ONLY as "XJ6" (or by higher model designation: Sovereign, or Vanden Plas - and eventually as XJ12) but never as "XJ40".

 

I have a VHS video which shows the XJ40 being tested in the roads of Europe with camouflage and it is referred to as "The All New XJ40".