Its funny that within the next couple weeks you will see a few movies that are using XJS's... I saw one in a preview of "the Wolf of Wallstreet" with Decaprio and I know I saw a glimpse of one in another new movie. Oh boy, people are going to see how beautiful these cars are and you do not see these on the road... I get sick every day that I go in my garage, because I know, I can'nt drive it here in our terrible WI weather(salty roads). I love my XJS. LOL...

 

luvmyxjs did you say low and wide??

 

Pedestrians lasting memory



NOOOOOO I am not that nasty, just the thought of this "low and wide" had me chuckle for the moment.

 

Did someone say low and wide?

Yeah baby!!!!

 

Very nice!

 

It turns out that these two threads that we have going (this one and the one that started from a Mecum auction) are really entertaining. Rather than the usual strictly technical issues, they have given us an opportunity to express and to share the reasons and the joys of owning an XJS. I enjoy both, reading about fellow XJS owners experiences and feelings and also enjoy expressing my very own. All because these cars are truly unique compared to anything and that makes ownership priceless.

On a recent post I kept repeating the expression "low stance" (i.e. low and wide) because I see it as one of the car's best attributes and AllanG's picture is a perfect illustration of this. When I look at Ferrari's, Lambo's, Ford GT's, etc. I don't see tall and narrow cars, but I rather see low and wide "athletes" and I'm sure that it is this attribute what attracts the average citizen's attention the most when they see an XJS, even from behind.

Low and wide?
Yup, low and wide, no doubt....

Cheers,

 

Mine is special because it has a little metal ball instead of a brake booster.

 

So would I ....if I could only have one or the other.

In a way, though, that's not really saying much. The XJS and the E-Type are apples and oranges.

Cheers
DD

 

When I semi-.finish the final details on my motor (hopefully the weather will break long enough this weekend so I can finish that up), I'll be more than happy to "pop bonnets" with the E-Types. Then I'll line it up against them on any road they wish to race on

 

The IMCDb.org website has a good listing of movies that featured the XJS, albeit with just one picture of a single scene as reference. At least it gives the name of the movie with a pic, from where one can go and research the specific movie.

Enjoy,

IMCDb.org: Jaguar XJS in movies and TV series

 

On this subject, although this is not an E-Type thread, I want to run a quickie here on E Type vs. XJS performance that I ignore. Is the E-Type a performer? Are the handling and brakes in par with the equivalent competition's? Is the final series III V12 version necessarily a better performer than the earlier sixes? How does either of them compare with:
>> A pre HE XJS?
>> An HE XJS?
>> A 6.0L XJS?
>> An AJ6/AJ16 XJS?

I didn't start a new E-Type thread because this includes the XJS as in "vs. the XJS" comparison.

Is that, for some reason, I have it in my head that the E-Type was never about performance, in the manner as to compete vs. a Porsche 911, heck, or even vs. a Camaro for that matter. How far am I?

Cheers,

 

Yes, that's low and wide, nice for certain.
I like the way that front end looks, especially the projector headlights.
I do remember talking to you about the mod a while back.
Now I have HID headlights, with very carefully adjusted beam, but not projector.

Cheers,

 

About the Camaro comment, a clarification.
It's only about power, because the Camaro would never compete with anything in regards to handling.

Cheers,

 

not all the camaros handled so terrible. all depends on your driving style on how a car handles to you.
I like the xjs because it's just got such a unique look. and a v12.

 

I've had a lot of fast unique cars with superchargers, nitrous, turbo etc but non compare with the smooth v12 power and classy lines of the S. Even rodding around in the go-cart E type doesn't compare. The E may be faster but doesn't ride as well or feel as fast as a highway touring cruiser.

 

The fastest of the E-Types were competitive in their heyday......quicker than some of the others, not as quick as some of the others:

0-60 mph in about 6.5 to 7.0 seconds and about 15.0 seconds in the 1/4 mile. The claimed 150 mph top speed usually couldn't be repeated with true off-the-showroom-floor cars. The V12 cars really were not any quicker/faster than the best of the 6-cylinder cars....most road tests turned in roughly the same numbers as the better 6 cylnder cars.

All of the E-types I've driven have had quite powerful off-the-line acceleration....certainly much stronger than the typical tall-geared and much heavier XJS. A 6.0 V12 would probably come close; a 5.3 V12 with the usual 2.88 diff would be left choking on tire smoke.

Camaro? Which vintage? Most any of the models with the higher output engine options could easily keep up with E-types and XJSs and, in all reality, leave 'em in the dust. And don't underestimate the cornering/handling of them, either. Some are surprisingly good as far a solid axle cars go, depending on model and equipment. I've driven many that would easily keep up with an XJS or E-type thru the curves....as long as the road was reasonably smooth.

For a period of time I owned both my '88 XJS and a '92 Mustang GT. Apples and oranges in most respects but, actually, it was surprsing how well the lowly Mustang compared. It was certainly much faster accelerating at any speed (at least up to 100 mph or so), went thru my favorite curvy roads as fast or faster than the Jag, used 20% less gasoline, had stronger HVAC, no leaks, squeeks, or rattles, had really good seats.....not a bad car at all. Nothing like the Jag in the grand scheme of things but, still, a darn good little performer and fun to drive.

Cheers
DD

 

Back in the E-type's glory days...the mid sixties....its competition was primarily the Porsche 911 and the Stingray. The E-type was generally competitive, yes, but it gets complicated because E-types essentially never changed (except to become slower) and had virtually no build/option choices while the competition was always being updated and could be purchased with a slew of different engines/build configurations




Cheers
DD

 

According to someone I met from Jaguar themselves, their view was that the standard E Type could not live through the bends with an XJS. This is not surprising considering the track of the XJS is wider than the E Type's.

Neither was the E Type's high speed stability anything like that of the XJS. Malcolm Sayer's brief, specifically agreed with William Lyons, was that the XJS (being a genuine 150 mph car) had to ensure it did NOT display the high speed instability of the E type, nor suffer from its iffy brakes.

I am no E Type knocker, far from it, but the car was a generation older than the XJS, besides as Doug says, being an entirely different sort of car. What I have been struck by on this interesting thread, is how, seemingly for all of us addicts, the XJS was "one look and you are hooked". See what I mean:

 

"The XJS and the E-Type are apples and oranges" To be sure Doug. I would think that in certain circumstances an E Type is very difficult to live with. Whereas, the 6 cylinder XJS is a car for all circumstances and the V12, like the E Type, can be difficult in some circumstances (Tampa summertime rush hour traffic). I am soon to retire (age 62) and I'm toying with the idea of a black V12 convertible with a Ferrari tan leather interior...

 

Nice shot of a great looking car Greg. The angle of your photo illustrates one of my favorite visual features of the XJS, and, apparently, one of it's most controversial--the flying buttress. To me, that one feature makes the car look like it's being propelled at a high rate of speed, even when it's sitting still, as in your photo.