When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Since we know that avoiding a Marelli meltdown is fairly easy I see no reason to specifically avoid a Marelli car.
However, I also wonder why someone would actually *prefer* one. I don't see any particular advantage (in ownership, repair, or driving) to the Marelli system.
Cheers
DD
The reason I prefered one is actually quite more than technologically...
The engine bay looks tidier with the Marelli system, as you see more intake and less plastic. I also prefer the idea of only one bank failing resulting in a possible limp home mode. On top of that, every car i had with one standard coil, broke down regularly. So for me it makes me feel more capable of moving no matter what happens...
The reason I prefered one is actually quite more than technologically...
The engine bay looks tidier with the Marelli system, as you see more intake and less plastic.
Fair enough, although the Lucas amplifier on the inlet manifold is only about the size of a pack of cigarettes!
I also prefer the idea of only one bank failing resulting in a possible limp home mode.
Even though limping along with one failed/failing bank is * exactly * what causes the notorious converter meltdowns and even car fires?
On top of that, every car i had with one standard coil, broke down regularly.
Broke down regularly becuause they had only one coil, and it regularly failed? That's certainly an odd pattern and doubly so if it occured on several cars, especially if they were older ones where coils often last for decades. But if that's you're experience then, yes, I understand your rationale.
How many true Marelli failures have there been that have been documented by Jaguar? Not many... Some people here make it sound like every Jag with the Marelli ignition is going to start on fire. NOT true. How many owners have had problems with the Lucas cars? Many. It all comes down to properly maintaining your vehicle. It truly drives me crazy, LOL because I have had dozens of collector cars on top of many others and people always play the blame game on why a car has problems. Proper maintenance will prevent most break downs. If you really research the Marelli ignition, then you will find out there have been very few fires. They have been cars that have not been properly maintained. Like Doug mentioned, I would not let this prevent you from buying a clean car...
How many true Marelli failures have there been that have been documented by Jaguar? Not many...
Yes, at the corporate level Jaguar did a superb job of denying there was ever a problem . Actually I think the vast majority of failures occured long after warranties had expired so Jaguar had even less concern.
The sad part is that, really, all Jaguar had to do was edit handbooks and repair manuals to include a blurb...bold print, red ink.... about periodic inspection of the ignition system. Bingo, end of problem !
Most people were not/are not aware that failure to inspect and maintain the system would have such serious consequences. How could they be? They were never told.
Some people here make it sound like every Jag with the Marelli ignition is going to start on fire. NOT true. How many owners have had problems with the Lucas cars?
Yes, but not all 'problems' are the same. Problems with the Lucas CEI sysem do NOT include very expensive replacements of cat converters, smoldering carpets, and engine compartment fires
They have been cars that have not been properly maintained.
Yeah, we know that now. But years ago we didn't know that *very particular* attention must be given to the ignition system. That's the problem.
I've been enjoying this little discussion a lot, but it looks pretty heavily weighted in favour of these '89 (or plus a half) cars. As the owner of an Australian delivered '85 (big year for the XJS in Australian Motorsport!) car, I've been looking to get an owners manual that I am currently missing.
Bringing it back to topic, I've been offered a set of '88 owners documentation. What are the differences between cars of these years? I'm guessing there won't be a whole lot of difference, but have no idea when or how many versions of owner documentation Jaguar Australia issued.
I know the V12s have a lot of people by the heart and guts, but you really ought to go for a blast in a 4.0 manual. It's a different beastie altogether, nimble and peppy.
I've been enjoying this little discussion a lot, but it looks pretty heavily weighted in favour of these '89 (or plus a half) cars. As the owner of an Australian delivered '85 (big year for the XJS in Australian Motorsport!) car, I've been looking to get an owners manual that I am currently missing.
I have the original manual that came with my vehicle. Trust me when I say it's more of a "general" information booklet with lots of "Addendums" added in for specific things that my vehicle has. For example, did you know that you should keep your tyres properly inflated? Or that the light switch has different settings to turn on/off various lights on your vehicle? It's true, and all in the manual! You're not missing much, as it definitely does not go into anything really helpful that you don't already know or can figure out yourself.
I do want to try a V-6 XJS, though. I imagine that they feel much lighter without the 750+ LB engine taking up the entire bonnet! Out of curiosity, is it faster on take-off than the V-12? Less cylinders, but a lot less weight too. And while I'd like to DRIVE a convertible, I like the flying buttresses way way too much to give them up.
I have the original manual that came with my vehicle. Trust me when I say it's more of a "general" information booklet with lots of "Addendums" added in for specific things that my vehicle has. For example, did you know that you should keep your tyres properly inflated? Or that the light switch has different settings to turn on/off various lights on your vehicle? It's true, and all in the manual! You're not missing much, as it definitely does not go into anything really helpful that you don't already know or can figure out yourself.
I do want to try a V-6 XJS, though. I imagine that they feel much lighter without the 750+ LB engine taking up the entire bonnet! Out of curiosity, is it faster on take-off than the V-12? Less cylinders, but a lot less weight too. And while I'd like to DRIVE a convertible, I like the flying buttresses way way too much to give them up.
If you find a V6 XJ-S buy it instantly! It is a one-of-a-kind
Eskr, from my understanding, the inline 6 doesn't give up much to the V12 until 80+mph.
I agree with you regarding the flying buttresses. Still, prices are so cheap in Houston that I've been considering another XJS in a different color, and perhaps even a convertible. Hell, I've even looked at a couple lumped with corvette engines. Just to have experienced the full XJS spectrum.
Regarding the manuals, Jaguar had the mindset that vehicles belonged to a range, and subtle differences from year to year were relatively inconsequential. For example, the XJ6 Series III manual remained much the same from what was it - 81 to 87? I don't believe there was ever a specific reference to model year in the entire run. Perhaps addenda were made where needed.
Great advice all round. Thanks guys. The owners manual is more a "nice to have", as there are no functions of the car that I think it will explain to me that I'm not already aware of.
Incidentally it's probably a bit unfair to compare a manual 6-cyl to the auto V12. As the owner of a manual V12 (ok, just a Toyota 5-speed conversion) I can't imagine that a manual 3.6 or 4L would keep pace over any distance... unless I lunch first gear with all that torque! Dave
the whole model-year think is purely a US of A concept.
It started way back in the 20s as far as I know, by GM, trying to get market share from Henry, whose T changed very little in about 20 years. It probably reached it's peak in the 50s and 60s - look at all the GM Chevrolet models for example. It even makes 'pop culture' with songs about specific year models.. As an aside, I find it fascinating that in 2 decades of radical engineering advances, two models at polar extremes of the price spectrum barley changed - the Model T and the Rolls-Royce Sliver Ghost (properly called the Rolls Royce40/50 horse power)
Anyway, back to XJSes.. again a long model run, 22 years I think, with changes along the way. But to an English company, the model year thing was not in their consciousness (but this may have driven their US agents crazy?)
Anyway, back to XJSes.. again a long model run, 22 years I think, with changes along the way. But to an English company, the model year thing was not in their consciousness (but this may have driven their US agents crazy?)
my 2 cents..
Eventually things change, though.
If you look at Jaguar service and parts literature from (at least) the 80s-onward they reference 'model year' fairly often, but not consistantly or exclusively. Sometimes down to quarter year increments, like '1988.25 model year'. For example, my XJS parts catalog (RTC9900CA publication) refers to model year quite often......but also uses VIN breaks as well.
Yet my Series III XJ6 and XJ12 tech literature makes no mention of model year at all, ever!
QUOTE=Mkii250;1039561]The earlier the better for me. Pre-HE with the woodless interior and flat head engine. And one of the few 4-spd manuals if possible [/QUOTE]
I totally agree with you and also fortunate of me that I am the happy owner of one with those characteristics.
Last edited by Javier Mena; Aug 20, 2019 at 11:41 AM.
I do know first hand that having the proper spark plug gap is very important NOT having a meltdown with the rotor of distributor cap. My plugs were gaped wrong and fried the rotor.
1994 Facelift coupe with AJ6 engine. The airbag steering wheel is not a big deal. No glovebox is also no big deal. Outboard brakes, bosch electronics, I think it came with better gearing which is why it shifts and moves well for a 25yr old car.
I like those early HE years. Before ABS or those heavy power seats in '88. 16CU is nice so '86 - '87 is ideal, but retrofitting the 16 opens up '81-'87. Simple as can be and yet modern amenities. No nanny-state silliness other than the bumper mess.
I have coupes covered. Would be interested in the right convertible though. Love those flying buttresses, but open air is great too.
Cut it right, and these coupes would make a great spyder.
You're not missing much, as it definitely does not go into anything really helpful that you don't already know or can figure out yourself.
