Would you get a late series XJS 4.0L convertible or a early XK8 convertible? Yes I know about the valve tensioner issue in the early V8, but pretend that already got fixed. They are both out there with around 100K on the ticker. I had never driven 4.0L and just now came back from test drive of 96 vanden plas which felt heavy and sluggish. I don't expect a late XJS 4.0 would feel like the 83 V12 I loved a lot, and I know the early 4.0V8 XK8 feels much faster then this vanden plas. So just wondering what people in this sub-forum think?

 

Personally, I would take an XK8 coupe over both cars. But, I would take the XK8 convertible over the XJS. I own a 1994 XJS 4.0. Nice car/cruiser, but heavy and sluggish.

 

Rwolak thank you for your input. Yes some coupes can be had too and I adore them but my brother has a victory edition from right before the big facelift and I don't want us having the almost same car. Is your XJS 4.0 a coupe or convertible? What grief if any have you had with it? .

 

Hi Thomash

What Year XK8 were you thinking of getting?

 

I have a 93 xjs convertible with the 4.0 and a 97 xk8 coupe obviously with the 4.0 v8. I love driving both, but they are definitely two completely different cars. The xjs is definitely smaller on the inside than the xk8. The power delivery is completely different too. I'll say the xjs feels more sluggish, but I wouldn't call it "really slow" for a car of it's age. I've driven slower for sure. it's one of those where it kinda just wooshes along and feels like it will just keep pulling. The xk8 has more low end grunt and will take off pretty decently. Again, for a car it's age. Let's face it, a newer civic would thrash either one. When new 0-60 was right about 7sec and it did the 1/4 mile in about 15sec! However, you look much cooler in the xk8! It was never designed to be a race car anyway. If I only had the ability to have one? Hmmmmmm............ Nope! Not choosing! I love them both for different reasons 😁😁😁

 

My car is a 2+2 convertible. It has about 119k miles and runs great. The only issue with the car, if that’s what you want to call it, is that it seems very sensitive to battery voltage. If voltage drops below about 12.04v, the auto door locks get sluggish and the CEL lights. Both are easily fixed by charging the battery. The CEL is reser by disconnecting the battery ground and reconnecting it. I did replace both front calipers, rotors, and pads because one caliper froze. Other than that, regular oil/filter changes and gas. Suspension work had been done before I purchased the car. This is the 3rd. Jag I’ve owned. I had an ‘83 XJ6 and an ‘88 XJS V12 coupe. All of them were reliable with normal maintenance. I have read that the old Lucas electrical systems were “bug” prone but I never experienced that. Maybe it’s because my cars are always garaged kept and self maintained.

BTW, I’m looking to move on from my current 1994, so if you’re interested PM me and we can discuss. I live outside of Philly.

 

As Timeisrelative said they are "two completely different cars". I own 2 XJS's and had a 2003 XKR a few years ago. On paper, the XKR is a much better machine but I never felt comfortable driving it. Nothing specific. We just weren't a good match. (like some women I have known ;-)).

Anyway, my point is, go drive them and see which one fits you better.

 

. I think you're looking at this the wrong way. I think you should buy the best car that you can find that meets all your needs. For me that would be a late XJS 4.0 inline 6 with the vacuum brake survo. This is the best and Finest no compromise XJS which may be hard to find simply because not many were made. Once your drive one of these as I have its hard to go back to an earlier car. The XJS is also a classic with its basic shape dating back to time 70s.

The XK is an excellent value but there are risks with the 1st gen modern electronics and transmission. Some of the really early ones used a transmission which is very expensive to repair. The shape is clearly from the modern era so the classic element isnt there. Its just a old used car at this point.

 

😱😱😱Shut your mouth! Heathen! Lol! I'll put the looks of the 28 year old early Xk8 up against most any new car. It was, and still is, a beautiful car.😊😊😊😊😊

 

first gen XK8 trans is terrible, car is just not worth owning. go XKR or go home

 

Much easier than the tensioners, its dead simple to swap in an upgraded valve body so long as you do it before the main pressure relief valve wears enough to crack the A-drum. There's solutions from Transgo and Sonnax. Just make sure you plan to do the tensioners AND valve body upgrade both right away if buying an XK8 with 100K miles.

 

put them both together in a carpark . the only one people will will be looking at is the xjs

 

Don't all modern cars of last 60 years have vacuum brake servo? Not sure what you mean here. I do appreciate your points about style and legacy. One thing in favor of XJS is it was first jaguar I fell in love with. Even though mine was 83 I figure much about a later one will be familiar for better or worse.

 

I knew of valve tensioner issue but not this valve body thing in the trans. There is a good guy here in tucson who can handle both these if I go that way. Thank you for that info pdupler!

 

What trans is in the late XJS 4.0 and what bad behaviour might it exhibit? The XJ6 vandenplas I drove yesterday did not seem to go into lockup after 4th or OD. At 50 mph it was turning 2K which seems a bit high. Is there supposed to be a lockup at the end and what RPM is expected at 50 MPH in a convertible XJS 4.0? So far I cannot find any of these cars within 150 miles of my house so that is why all this speculation and brain-picking. Thank you.

 

it locks up in the mid 50s

 

I have a v12 1990 xjs and an xk8 2002 (recently a 2000 motor was placed with 37k miles) and an 2003 SC XKR... Still a lot of work to do on the XKR so I can't comment much in it although there is a lot shared between the xk8 and xkr... And still very different cars... I LOOOOVE the XJS. Simply love it.

The XK8 isn't fast per se, and as mentioned, newer cars will give it a run for it's money. They are wonderful touring cars tho. I have had days on looooong stretches of state highway, top down, the engine and transmission (when everything is working right) are a pure pure (and silent) joy.

No one looks at the XK8/XKR the way they look at the XJS (not even close) and the XK8/XKR are not 28 yrs old. They are barely breaking the 20yr mark at this point.

But, I'll say this - on both the XK8 and XKR, the CAN bus system, with all the modules, sensitivities and miscommunication between the modules is a sad disaster. Getting a grasp on these systems is not easy.... The ABS system when it goes sideways is never ending. The willingness (and I say willingness at this point) of the car to go into some fault driving mode, Restricted Performance, limp mode etc are set and a level of ridiculous tolorace... An air leak of any sort will have you crawling home. When things go wrong, good luck. More, some of the engineering choices in materials for important suspension components of the car just make noooooo sense. And, sadly the front subframes are all kinda damaged at this point and are (growingly) a suspension point that are going to be failing in more and more of them as the milages creep up and time passes.

​​​​​​I'm not sure what to say. Very different cars and very different to diy work on and repair, too... I think I would go XJS way. That's just me.

 

Oops! My bad! I typo'd the 28 year for the xk8! Yes mines a 97my built in 96 so it's basically a 24 and a half year old car. Still, I think it really depends on the age of the people looking at the cars as to which one they prefer. At work I've had 3 guys say they really like the look of my xjs, but I've had almost everyone that I talk to say they prefer the looks of the xk8. I've definitely gotten more thumbs up with the xk8. Like I said though, I love both of them and don't really care about what others say. Lol

 

The last two yeas of the facelift XJSs, 95, 96 were fitted with vacuum booster type power brakes of the kind most modern cars employ. The ones earlier, were fitted with a pressurized type system using a pressurized accumulator ("bomb") and a pump to produce the pressure. Also called Electro Hydraulic brake booster. Alfred Teves founded the system or ATE as it is called. It's not the easiest system to work on or bleed so many enjoy the improvement of the last two model years fitted with the simple vacuum booster. That's what was meant.

 

So is this earlier system like a citroen or bentley setup? In that pressurized fluid goes everywhere and does everything? I had also asked about what tranny is in these last 6 cyl XJS cars. Are they prone to doing bad things? One place I read said they are borg warner? That does not seem right. Thank you for clarification on the brakes.