Strange advice
#1
05-01-2018, 05:24 PM
Strange advice
A seller of a 1972 Jaguar XJ6 sent me a recent appraisal document (6 pages) from an company she had asked provide a market value for the car. This is from the USA. What struck me as very odd is this note.
I cannot believe they say that! I know in the past many XJs got Chevy V8s transplanted in them - every lazy mechanic recommended that. But the thing is they still do! You would not expect this weird kind of advice from an independent company.
Something to keep in mind next time you come across with anything from https://www.motortechappraisals.com
I cannot believe they say that! I know in the past many XJs got Chevy V8s transplanted in them - every lazy mechanic recommended that. But the thing is they still do! You would not expect this weird kind of advice from an independent company.
Something to keep in mind next time you come across with anything from https://www.motortechappraisals.com
#2
05-01-2018, 06:10 PM
Veteran Member
#4
05-02-2018, 01:14 AM
Veteran Member
More like historically accurate. I see nothing weird or ruinous about that truthful statement.
I think the appraiser is suggesting the engine is toast in a round about way.
The most expensive series 2 every sold was a well done chevy convert. Converts routinely sell for more than comparable origional cars.
There is nothing lazy about doing a convert. It's difficult to do them and even more difficult to do them well. Historically speaking many of the Jaguar engines of this period suffered from quality control issues. Some engines were built well and some engines were not and or had cracks and were beyond repair. Whether or not you got a good one was really a roll of the dice and many people were just not willing to gamble on their transportation.
I think the appraiser is suggesting the engine is toast in a round about way.
The most expensive series 2 every sold was a well done chevy convert. Converts routinely sell for more than comparable origional cars.
There is nothing lazy about doing a convert. It's difficult to do them and even more difficult to do them well. Historically speaking many of the Jaguar engines of this period suffered from quality control issues. Some engines were built well and some engines were not and or had cracks and were beyond repair. Whether or not you got a good one was really a roll of the dice and many people were just not willing to gamble on their transportation.
Last edited by icsamerica; 05-02-2018 at 01:19 AM.
#5
05-02-2018, 01:37 AM
Veteran Member
The following users liked this post:
Grant Francis (05-02-2018)
#6
05-02-2018, 10:19 AM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Posts: 6,796
Received 2,399 Likes
on
1,880 Posts
1. The only thing an appraiser can express is an opinion. Based on research in most cases. To e accepted or rejected. I've done a few. Mostly cars. But, in one case, a lady's ward robe!!! Smoke damaged.
I sought in house help there!!!,
In some cases, it costs less to covert to a V8, than to fix a damaged 6 and more so a 12!!! So, money is a valid reason.
Performance. Yup, The commonly used V8's can be "souped up" for less and get more than a 6 or 12.
Lazy??? No way. Parts chasing is more extensive. And engineering is needed, even with a great kit and instructions. The electric alone. Not just plug and play. Locate, cut, match, splice and solder....
A running conversion beats a dead original. A nicely done conversion beats a poor original. Not to say that there are not sloppy conversions, cuz there are.
My opinion is that "there is room under the tent for all".
I like my original DOHC. A lot. Intriguing. too bad, I was just getting acquainted with it when disaster ensued.
Carl
I sought in house help there!!!,
In some cases, it costs less to covert to a V8, than to fix a damaged 6 and more so a 12!!! So, money is a valid reason.
Performance. Yup, The commonly used V8's can be "souped up" for less and get more than a 6 or 12.
Lazy??? No way. Parts chasing is more extensive. And engineering is needed, even with a great kit and instructions. The electric alone. Not just plug and play. Locate, cut, match, splice and solder....
A running conversion beats a dead original. A nicely done conversion beats a poor original. Not to say that there are not sloppy conversions, cuz there are.
My opinion is that "there is room under the tent for all".
I like my original DOHC. A lot. Intriguing. too bad, I was just getting acquainted with it when disaster ensued.
Carl
#7
05-02-2018, 05:43 PM
Senior Member
Hi all,
Although I am not interested in a conversion I would have thought the closing sentence to be simply a statement of fact.
Now before the crys of the outraged resound through this forum allow me explain though much is self explanatory. America is the home of cheap, simple and eminently reliable horsepower. A massive industry and virtually a national cult exists around increasing the already substantial outputs of these cheap and cheerful power units.
Whilst, for various geographical, nationalistic, economic and social reasons, car manufacturers on the other side of 'the Pond' pursued alternative more esoteric ways of powering their cars, the US has largely followed the axiom 'too much capacity is barely enough.
It is therefore hardly surprising that when relatively high performance and complex cars like Jaguars arrived in the States and subsequently developed a reputation, real or imagined, for both reliability issues and complexity not to mention their somewhat alien nature to the average mechanic, that replacement with high performance home grown V8s became common practice.
which is better? A moot question. Living in Australia I think it would be a far cheaper option to have the original power plant rebuilt or replaced with a second hand engine but this might not be the case in the US.
I personally believe that a correctly maintained Jag engine should give excellent reliability providing it does not have any preexisting issues and parts prices are now not ridiculous, nevertheless poor reputations are hard to dispel.
Of course both in Australia and probably the rest of the world, a large lump of Detroit iron has a certain redneck cache. The Chev powered Jag becoming a supposed symbiotic fusing of the much aped English middle class restraint and the brash American 'can do'. An expression of the owners individuality, a statement of his worldly appreciation of the finer things of life whilst not quite letting go of the cultural bias towards the 'home grown'.
Personally, I think there is a host of European engines that many drool over, not least some identified by a prancing horse that are celebrations of over complexity, over price and under reliability in comparison to effortless and ultra reliable American muscle, a triumph of form over function.
just a few thoughts
regards
al
Although I am not interested in a conversion I would have thought the closing sentence to be simply a statement of fact.
Now before the crys of the outraged resound through this forum allow me explain though much is self explanatory. America is the home of cheap, simple and eminently reliable horsepower. A massive industry and virtually a national cult exists around increasing the already substantial outputs of these cheap and cheerful power units.
Whilst, for various geographical, nationalistic, economic and social reasons, car manufacturers on the other side of 'the Pond' pursued alternative more esoteric ways of powering their cars, the US has largely followed the axiom 'too much capacity is barely enough.
It is therefore hardly surprising that when relatively high performance and complex cars like Jaguars arrived in the States and subsequently developed a reputation, real or imagined, for both reliability issues and complexity not to mention their somewhat alien nature to the average mechanic, that replacement with high performance home grown V8s became common practice.
which is better? A moot question. Living in Australia I think it would be a far cheaper option to have the original power plant rebuilt or replaced with a second hand engine but this might not be the case in the US.
I personally believe that a correctly maintained Jag engine should give excellent reliability providing it does not have any preexisting issues and parts prices are now not ridiculous, nevertheless poor reputations are hard to dispel.
Of course both in Australia and probably the rest of the world, a large lump of Detroit iron has a certain redneck cache. The Chev powered Jag becoming a supposed symbiotic fusing of the much aped English middle class restraint and the brash American 'can do'. An expression of the owners individuality, a statement of his worldly appreciation of the finer things of life whilst not quite letting go of the cultural bias towards the 'home grown'.
Personally, I think there is a host of European engines that many drool over, not least some identified by a prancing horse that are celebrations of over complexity, over price and under reliability in comparison to effortless and ultra reliable American muscle, a triumph of form over function.
just a few thoughts
regards
al
Trending Topics
#8
05-02-2018, 05:48 PM
Senior Member
#9
05-02-2018, 06:50 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Tehama County, California, USA
Posts: 25,161
Received 8,935 Likes
on
5,285 Posts
The following users liked this post:
Alan Lindsay (05-02-2018)
#10
05-02-2018, 07:22 PM
Senior Member
To all of those who think that converting a JAGUAR to a GM drive train is an easy,cheap, lazy fix for a destroyed Jag engine, I can only ask, "when was the last time you personally converted a Jaguar to GM v8 power ? " Probably never. To those who have ,...tell us about all the adjustments / modifications that you did to engine, auto OD trans, and converting to GM fuel inject wiring etc.
Do you or have you ever owned a Jaguar with a toasted engine ? (you know blown head gaskets problem,,,,, Stake down kits,,,, Corroded engine studs,,,) as most of you know I can go through a rather large list of Jaguar failures. So if you want to save the really nice aspects of the Jaguar Series 1 2 3 and obtain reliability, better gas mileage- parts that are easily/quickly obtained you might do as some of us have done. Grab the bull by the tail and look him squarely in the eye - and do the conversion. Do it right ,..document everything - you will have a nice ride !!
I tend to look upon mine as a competitor to a Chevrolet Impala SS with V8 4 speed auto, but with a classy comfortable interior, a smooth ride and great timeless styling. And it seems to fill that role.
"When" you do the conversion ...all depends on how much patience you have with your stock engine. Personally when I had the Jag engine in the car, I was always hesitant to drive it beyond the city limits, where I could find a reasonably priced flatbed truck to tow it home. It came home several times on the flatbed. Pain in the butt !! Why own it if you don't trust it to get you home. I simply do not have the extra time in my life to be inconvenienced by failures. Mine runs nice now, trust it implicitly.
Its not harsh... its the truth. The only reason I kept the car, was.. I felt there was hope for it,.. if it was converted to a GM drive train. Glad I did it. Don't care how much it is worth,...I like it.
As someone once said "90% of the Jaguars are still on the road - the other 10% made it home" lol
There !! I kicked the hornets nest. Put on your helmet...
Do you or have you ever owned a Jaguar with a toasted engine ? (you know blown head gaskets problem,,,,, Stake down kits,,,, Corroded engine studs,,,) as most of you know I can go through a rather large list of Jaguar failures. So if you want to save the really nice aspects of the Jaguar Series 1 2 3 and obtain reliability, better gas mileage- parts that are easily/quickly obtained you might do as some of us have done. Grab the bull by the tail and look him squarely in the eye - and do the conversion. Do it right ,..document everything - you will have a nice ride !!
I tend to look upon mine as a competitor to a Chevrolet Impala SS with V8 4 speed auto, but with a classy comfortable interior, a smooth ride and great timeless styling. And it seems to fill that role.
"When" you do the conversion ...all depends on how much patience you have with your stock engine. Personally when I had the Jag engine in the car, I was always hesitant to drive it beyond the city limits, where I could find a reasonably priced flatbed truck to tow it home. It came home several times on the flatbed. Pain in the butt !! Why own it if you don't trust it to get you home. I simply do not have the extra time in my life to be inconvenienced by failures. Mine runs nice now, trust it implicitly.
Its not harsh... its the truth. The only reason I kept the car, was.. I felt there was hope for it,.. if it was converted to a GM drive train. Glad I did it. Don't care how much it is worth,...I like it.
As someone once said "90% of the Jaguars are still on the road - the other 10% made it home" lol
There !! I kicked the hornets nest. Put on your helmet...
#11
05-03-2018, 12:15 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Posts: 6,796
Received 2,399 Likes
on
1,880 Posts
I saved my car. when the DOHC expired, it was in the vicinity of Jaguar Heaven A very reals and bountiful source of parts for most cats!!!
But, it came home the long way on a flat bed. great tow guy,
After much musing and a lot of research, the conversion path beckoned. Somewhere in my "stuff" the white paper that I wrote might exist.
After a lot of travail, my dear departed's beloved Jaguar returned to the road.
I enjoy it and term it as "English elegance with an Italian flair and American power".
Carl
But, it came home the long way on a flat bed. great tow guy,
After much musing and a lot of research, the conversion path beckoned. Somewhere in my "stuff" the white paper that I wrote might exist.
After a lot of travail, my dear departed's beloved Jaguar returned to the road.
I enjoy it and term it as "English elegance with an Italian flair and American power".
Carl
#12
05-03-2018, 05:41 PM
Veteran Member
Lengthy experience of Jaguar quality over my 14 years of Series 3 ownership taught me that for a very, very, long time, Jaguars were a complete confidence trick. Quality from the 70s onwards was a total joke so I can well understand why so many Americans junked the original engine and installed reliable US V8 power. When Ford sent Bill Hayden to inspect the Jaguar factories he was absolutely appalled at what he found. Ford must have spent something approaching the US defense budget on renewing the production facilities. Second-hand machinery installed in 1948 was still in use in the 80s !!
Of course the XK engine was a very fine engine when introduced in 1948, (built on that same used equipment, BTW), and served the company well for over two decades, but once the enlargement to 4.2 litres took place the engine went steadily downhill. The really dreadful engines start from the long-stud block.
If you want the best Jaguar engine, then it surely has to be the AJ16 but nobody in the US is going to swap-out a failed XK for one of these when the local V8s are so plentiful and good with a huge support infrastructure absent for the AJ16.
Of course the XK engine was a very fine engine when introduced in 1948, (built on that same used equipment, BTW), and served the company well for over two decades, but once the enlargement to 4.2 litres took place the engine went steadily downhill. The really dreadful engines start from the long-stud block.
If you want the best Jaguar engine, then it surely has to be the AJ16 but nobody in the US is going to swap-out a failed XK for one of these when the local V8s are so plentiful and good with a huge support infrastructure absent for the AJ16.
#13
05-03-2018, 06:30 PM
Senior Member
It is with greatest reluctance and sadness that I'm forced to agree with much of your post although, perhaps I would not be quite so harsh ( or should I say honest).
personally we have had a wonderful run from our three jags ( two still current). They have been worked mercilessly as my wife's business cars and given great reliability and service. Yet I understand why they received such withering criticism from many disappointed owners. I'm left constantly with the words on my lips when confronted with a problem 'what the hell were these clowns thinking when they designed this or that?' Imagine the disappointment and anger of a proud new owner of Jaguar in the seventies having an electrical window switch disintergrate in one's hand, worse still, with the window in the down position during a rain storm!
Mind you the X300 is just superb and all our cars have not just provided safe comfortable mobility but also great pleasure. Perversely my fondest memories are for our now departed Series III Soverign which was less reliable yet exuded a certain intangible charm that the X300 battles to reproduce.
The 'pig in the poke' at this stage is the forth car, a recently aquired 1978 Daimler Double Six I'm currently restoring. Whilst not having delved too deeply into it's tangled maze of mechanics it is obvious that all the criticism of Jags has come home to roost in this model. Not to be discouraged I'm still confident that it will emerge from it's oily chrysalis into a beautiful butterfly, a very fast one at that.
Ironically, of the Jaguar problems I have experienced ( there really hasn't been that many) the engines have proved very reliable. Mind you they are generally only subjected to very long runs at highway speeds with regular servicing.
Whilst it might be heresy to mention on this forum it surprising that in comparison to my sixties Humber, a rather obscure middle class English saloon, the Series II Jag has a veneer of luxury and very advanced mechanics yet behind trim the Rootes product is infinitely ahead of it in terms of hidden quality and build integrity.
Fear not, I am am still a great Jaguar fan. Can a car have personality? Objectively no, of course not, it is a collection of inanimate parts yet their 'quirkiness' does somehow nurture a feeling of individuality and connection to at least some of their owners, obviously demonstrated by the members of this form.
Al
personally we have had a wonderful run from our three jags ( two still current). They have been worked mercilessly as my wife's business cars and given great reliability and service. Yet I understand why they received such withering criticism from many disappointed owners. I'm left constantly with the words on my lips when confronted with a problem 'what the hell were these clowns thinking when they designed this or that?' Imagine the disappointment and anger of a proud new owner of Jaguar in the seventies having an electrical window switch disintergrate in one's hand, worse still, with the window in the down position during a rain storm!
Mind you the X300 is just superb and all our cars have not just provided safe comfortable mobility but also great pleasure. Perversely my fondest memories are for our now departed Series III Soverign which was less reliable yet exuded a certain intangible charm that the X300 battles to reproduce.
The 'pig in the poke' at this stage is the forth car, a recently aquired 1978 Daimler Double Six I'm currently restoring. Whilst not having delved too deeply into it's tangled maze of mechanics it is obvious that all the criticism of Jags has come home to roost in this model. Not to be discouraged I'm still confident that it will emerge from it's oily chrysalis into a beautiful butterfly, a very fast one at that.
Ironically, of the Jaguar problems I have experienced ( there really hasn't been that many) the engines have proved very reliable. Mind you they are generally only subjected to very long runs at highway speeds with regular servicing.
Whilst it might be heresy to mention on this forum it surprising that in comparison to my sixties Humber, a rather obscure middle class English saloon, the Series II Jag has a veneer of luxury and very advanced mechanics yet behind trim the Rootes product is infinitely ahead of it in terms of hidden quality and build integrity.
Fear not, I am am still a great Jaguar fan. Can a car have personality? Objectively no, of course not, it is a collection of inanimate parts yet their 'quirkiness' does somehow nurture a feeling of individuality and connection to at least some of their owners, obviously demonstrated by the members of this form.
Al
The following users liked this post:
yachtmanbuttson (05-04-2018)
#14
05-04-2018, 11:36 AM
Senior Member
Per the Gospel of Leyland:
"6 shall be the number thou shalt count to and the number thou shall count to shalt be 6. 8 is right out, unless thou then proceed to 12."
I guess this makes me a hypocrite. Meh, do what makes you happy and ignore the rest. Everyone is in a different situation in life and have differing motivators and expectations from their property. I believe DD said it best that "every engine/manufacturer will have their own issues." Just because you put in a SBC doesn't mean that parts won't fail on it.
I am truly grateful for purists. An originally maintained vehicle is always the creme de la creme. A 1932 Model A in original form is something to behold, and at the same time, one that has been chopped, beefed up chassis, bright paint with a shiny Hemi is also admirable.
"6 shall be the number thou shalt count to and the number thou shall count to shalt be 6. 8 is right out, unless thou then proceed to 12."
I guess this makes me a hypocrite. Meh, do what makes you happy and ignore the rest. Everyone is in a different situation in life and have differing motivators and expectations from their property. I believe DD said it best that "every engine/manufacturer will have their own issues." Just because you put in a SBC doesn't mean that parts won't fail on it.
I am truly grateful for purists. An originally maintained vehicle is always the creme de la creme. A 1932 Model A in original form is something to behold, and at the same time, one that has been chopped, beefed up chassis, bright paint with a shiny Hemi is also admirable.
#15
05-04-2018, 12:16 PM
Veteran Member
Just to mention, in case people think I don't like Jaguars any more, I'm now running my 2nd X350 since 2010. The XJ Series 3 I once had was a 1980 and my current car, (and the previous X350), knocks the XJ Series 3 into a cocked hat for quality. However, it has to be said that the Series 3 had a magic carpet ride that has been sadly lost with modern Jaguars.
Jaguars really improved from the X300 series with its AJ16 engine, and then went downhill again with the V8 engine with its Nikasil cylinder liners and plastic top timing chain tensioners. Needless to say, there are a number of issues with the X350/358, one being the very short life of some of the suspension bushes, and the air spring bushes. The life of these is shamefully short, but the rest of the car makes up for this.
Jaguars really improved from the X300 series with its AJ16 engine, and then went downhill again with the V8 engine with its Nikasil cylinder liners and plastic top timing chain tensioners. Needless to say, there are a number of issues with the X350/358, one being the very short life of some of the suspension bushes, and the air spring bushes. The life of these is shamefully short, but the rest of the car makes up for this.
#16
05-04-2018, 01:06 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pacific Northwest USA
Posts: 24,739
Received 10,749 Likes
on
7,100 Posts
Meh, do what makes you happy and ignore the rest. Everyone is in a different situation in life and have differing motivators and expectations from their property. I believe DD said it best that "every engine/manufacturer will have their own issues." Just because you put in a SBC doesn't mean that parts won't fail on it.
The car hobby is big. There's enough room for many different flavors, so to speak.
And, yes, even SBCs can have problems and failures, of course. We're all free to choose our own poison
. I spent 30 years working at Chevy/GM dealership parts and service departments ....and raised a family on a single income and put the kids through college, if you get my drift Cheers
DD
Last edited by Doug; 05-04-2018 at 07:25 PM. Reason: sp
#17
05-04-2018, 05:14 PM
Senior Member
Hi all,
I was much amused with the slightly modified Monty Python reference.
Owning a 4 lt XK8 I am totally in accord with Frazer's comment about the 8 cylinder engine.
As I suggested in an earlier post in this thread, I am left in staggered disbelief by some of illogical or simple poor design and manufacturing choices made by automobile manufacturers. What could possibly motivate a ( presumably) highly trained design engineer to specify plastic cam chain tensioners that objectively did not work.
I am not quite a Luddite, of course new materials and techniques are constantly being introduced into auto engineering, otherwise we would still be driving souped up Austin Sevens. Surely however when bold new steps are being taken, like designing plastic parts for super-critical engine components, one would initially over design them, test for absolute reliability and even then ensure a fail safe in the design such that if it did begin to deteriorate it would not, at least initially, destroy the entire engine of a very expensive car.
I realise that manufacturers are always looking for cost and weight savings but they are of little benefit if the car self destructs before 100,000 km. I pre-emptively changed my XK8 chain tensioners at 90,000 although there was no symptoms of impending catastrophe, only to find all the tensioners on the verge of total collapse.
If I could give Jaguar and other manufacturers a little uncalled for advise, how about ensuring the basics of design is robust and long lived before specifying an increasingly bewildering array of unnecessary equipment and functions, not least, a few less bells, chimes and warnings that invariably end up as nuisance value?
As for Nikosil bores, really! What were they thinking? And they bang on about the weight saving. A few less kilograms is irrelevant when the car is dropped into the compactor's jaws prematurely because one of the world's great car manufacturers couldn't work out the corrosive properties of H2SO4.
I understand the cars a built to sell rather than use but, as we see with the quality issues of Series Jags still reverberating through the motoring world nearly 50 years after the event, a bad reputation is very hard to dispel.
Well, I've vented my spleen on that one and the XK8 is not even part of this forum but I do hope my ravings do demonstrate how as the buying public we are often seduced by baubles of junky and often irrelevant gimmicks but are sold short on reliable and sturdy engineering
regards
After all that the XK is still a great car
Al
I was much amused with the slightly modified Monty Python reference.
Owning a 4 lt XK8 I am totally in accord with Frazer's comment about the 8 cylinder engine.
As I suggested in an earlier post in this thread, I am left in staggered disbelief by some of illogical or simple poor design and manufacturing choices made by automobile manufacturers. What could possibly motivate a ( presumably) highly trained design engineer to specify plastic cam chain tensioners that objectively did not work.
I am not quite a Luddite, of course new materials and techniques are constantly being introduced into auto engineering, otherwise we would still be driving souped up Austin Sevens. Surely however when bold new steps are being taken, like designing plastic parts for super-critical engine components, one would initially over design them, test for absolute reliability and even then ensure a fail safe in the design such that if it did begin to deteriorate it would not, at least initially, destroy the entire engine of a very expensive car.
I realise that manufacturers are always looking for cost and weight savings but they are of little benefit if the car self destructs before 100,000 km. I pre-emptively changed my XK8 chain tensioners at 90,000 although there was no symptoms of impending catastrophe, only to find all the tensioners on the verge of total collapse.
If I could give Jaguar and other manufacturers a little uncalled for advise, how about ensuring the basics of design is robust and long lived before specifying an increasingly bewildering array of unnecessary equipment and functions, not least, a few less bells, chimes and warnings that invariably end up as nuisance value?
As for Nikosil bores, really! What were they thinking? And they bang on about the weight saving. A few less kilograms is irrelevant when the car is dropped into the compactor's jaws prematurely because one of the world's great car manufacturers couldn't work out the corrosive properties of H2SO4.
I understand the cars a built to sell rather than use but, as we see with the quality issues of Series Jags still reverberating through the motoring world nearly 50 years after the event, a bad reputation is very hard to dispel.
Well, I've vented my spleen on that one and the XK8 is not even part of this forum but I do hope my ravings do demonstrate how as the buying public we are often seduced by baubles of junky and often irrelevant gimmicks but are sold short on reliable and sturdy engineering
regards
After all that the XK is still a great car
Al
#18
05-04-2018, 05:57 PM
Senior Member
Hi all,
I was much amused with the slightly modified Monty Python reference.
Owning a 4 lt XK8 I am totally in accord with Frazer's comment about the 8 cylinder engine.
As I suggested in an earlier post in this thread, I am left in staggered disbelief by some of illogical or simple poor design and manufacturing choices made by automobile manufacturers. What could possibly motivate a ( presumably) highly trained design engineer to specify plastic cam chain tensioners that objectively did not work.
I am not quite a Luddite, of course new materials and techniques are constantly being introduced into auto engineering, otherwise we would still be driving souped up Austin Sevens. Surely however when bold new steps are being taken, like designing plastic parts for super-critical engine components, one would initially over design them, test for absolute reliability and even then ensure a fail safe in the design such that if it did begin to deteriorate it would not, at least initially, destroy the entire engine of a very expensive car.
I realise that manufacturers are always looking for cost and weight savings but they are of little benefit if the car self destructs before 100,000 km. I pre-emptively changed my XK8 chain tensioners at 90,000 although there was no symptoms of impending catastrophe, only to find all the tensioners on the verge of total collapse.
If I could give Jaguar and other manufacturers a little uncalled for advise, how about ensuring the basics of design is robust and long lived before specifying an increasingly bewildering array of unnecessary equipment and functions, not least, a few less bells, chimes and warnings that invariably end up as nuisance value?
As for Nikosil bores, really! What were they thinking? And they bang on about the weight saving. A few less kilograms is irrelevant when the car is dropped into the compactor's jaws prematurely because one of the world's great car manufacturers couldn't work out the corrosive properties of H2SO4.
I understand the cars a built to sell rather than use but, as we see with the quality issues of Series Jags still reverberating through the motoring world nearly 50 years after the event, a bad reputation is very hard to dispel.
Well, I've vented my spleen on that one and the XK8 is not even part of this forum but I do hope my ravings do demonstrate how as the buying public we are often seduced by baubles of junky and often irrelevant gimmicks but are sold short on reliable and sturdy engineering
regards
After all that the XK is still a great car
Al
I was much amused with the slightly modified Monty Python reference.
Owning a 4 lt XK8 I am totally in accord with Frazer's comment about the 8 cylinder engine.
As I suggested in an earlier post in this thread, I am left in staggered disbelief by some of illogical or simple poor design and manufacturing choices made by automobile manufacturers. What could possibly motivate a ( presumably) highly trained design engineer to specify plastic cam chain tensioners that objectively did not work.
I am not quite a Luddite, of course new materials and techniques are constantly being introduced into auto engineering, otherwise we would still be driving souped up Austin Sevens. Surely however when bold new steps are being taken, like designing plastic parts for super-critical engine components, one would initially over design them, test for absolute reliability and even then ensure a fail safe in the design such that if it did begin to deteriorate it would not, at least initially, destroy the entire engine of a very expensive car.
I realise that manufacturers are always looking for cost and weight savings but they are of little benefit if the car self destructs before 100,000 km. I pre-emptively changed my XK8 chain tensioners at 90,000 although there was no symptoms of impending catastrophe, only to find all the tensioners on the verge of total collapse.
If I could give Jaguar and other manufacturers a little uncalled for advise, how about ensuring the basics of design is robust and long lived before specifying an increasingly bewildering array of unnecessary equipment and functions, not least, a few less bells, chimes and warnings that invariably end up as nuisance value?
As for Nikosil bores, really! What were they thinking? And they bang on about the weight saving. A few less kilograms is irrelevant when the car is dropped into the compactor's jaws prematurely because one of the world's great car manufacturers couldn't work out the corrosive properties of H2SO4.
I understand the cars a built to sell rather than use but, as we see with the quality issues of Series Jags still reverberating through the motoring world nearly 50 years after the event, a bad reputation is very hard to dispel.
Well, I've vented my spleen on that one and the XK8 is not even part of this forum but I do hope my ravings do demonstrate how as the buying public we are often seduced by baubles of junky and often irrelevant gimmicks but are sold short on reliable and sturdy engineering
regards
After all that the XK is still a great car
Al
#19
05-04-2018, 05:57 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Tehama County, California, USA
Posts: 25,161
Received 8,935 Likes
on
5,285 Posts
The following users liked this post:
Alan Lindsay (05-04-2018)
#20
05-04-2018, 06:00 PM
Veteran Member
In the US you never saw the MG Rover 4-cylinder 'K' series engines. Introduced in 1988, this was, and remains, a brilliant design. With aluminium head and block with 4 valves per cylinder and a racing-type exhaust manifold, it was producing 104 bhp from 1.4 litres when everybody else was in the mid-80 bhp, but suffered a major flaw that wasn't corrected until early in 2002
.
We had a 1995 car with the 1.8 litre and it blew a head gasket. The engine is renowned for it. Yet this was their main petrol engine fitted to all the MG Rover cars. Early engines had plastic, yes, plastic dowels for locating the cylinder head to the block !! Despite the head gasket problems, senior management would not authorise expenditure to fix it until the early 2000s, when the engine was finally modified. Literally months later the company went bust and was bought by the Chinese who shipped the production machinery back to China. They carried on producing the modified engine, calling it the 'N' series, and guess what, I have one in my MG TF !!
.
We had a 1995 car with the 1.8 litre and it blew a head gasket. The engine is renowned for it. Yet this was their main petrol engine fitted to all the MG Rover cars. Early engines had plastic, yes, plastic dowels for locating the cylinder head to the block !! Despite the head gasket problems, senior management would not authorise expenditure to fix it until the early 2000s, when the engine was finally modified. Literally months later the company went bust and was bought by the Chinese who shipped the production machinery back to China. They carried on producing the modified engine, calling it the 'N' series, and guess what, I have one in my MG TF !!