Ah, I see, so the retaining clip doesn't hold the cable shell fixed as I thought, as it is described in the pdf it is intended to slip when you press the pedal, so you never can over tighten the cable (without the slight slack of course).

So all you need to have is the thickness of the tool (and put something with that thickness on that spot), pull the cable shell fully out (the 14 notches) and fix the retaining clip, and just press the pedal to the metal (carefully), and the cable shell gets pulled in a couple of notches.

 

Yes (sort of).

I am guessing that there is some ratcheting mechanism that allows movement of the cable one way but not the other when the clip is installed and the pedal is finally pressed. This was very similar to the mechanism that was used in my last car and the procedure was identical--(1) take slack out of the cable by pressing some button and moving a mechanism that was on the cable and then (2) press the pedal to the floor. When I did step (2) on that car you can actually here the ratchet mechanism that re-adjusted an over-taut cable. In fact, those that omitted step (2) always complained that their engine idled too high after step (1) due typically to going too far with the initial adjustment. The solution was always to follow the procedure and do step (2).

So I am guessing there is some similar mechanism with the Jaguar system--all we need is some brave soul to take it apart and look.

Doug

 

I checked it and you can indeed pull out the cable all notches, put the retaing clip back, and floor the pedal, it will skip over the retaining clip then and settle. So you can't overtighten it (but you still need to put something in with the thickness of the tool).

 

I guess after way too many posts, I am finally vindicated and the mechanism works EXACTLY the way I inferred originally . By the way, I wouldn't bother trying to track down the official Jaguar tool since you can probably figure out for yourself approximately how much slack to build in. Of course if the tool were readily available and cheap, that would obviously be more accurate.

Doug

 

Darn. I guess the extra power was just my imagination. I guess h20boy's fancy OBDii tool was just imagining that the throttle was only opening 80%, too. I guess in the video I posted the throttle was really hitting the stop even though it appeared to stop a good 1/2 inch before it was supposed to. Everyone adjust your cables back to their original positions, that extra power is all in your head.

 

What we have here (in the words of Strother Martin) is a failure to communicate IF the throttle cable was too slack and you are only getting 80% open, of course you are doing the right thing by adjusting the cable so you get 100% open--what is the mystery in that???

If you only installed 7 sparkplugs instead of 8, isn't it obvious the car will run as it should with 8?? Putting in that 8th sparkplug would not be considered a performance enhancement by most people and you are not getting "extra power" except to the extent that you would be restoring lost power due to the lack of the spark plug.

I think it comes down to a semantics problem here. You seem to consider the process of correctly adjusting the cable to be a performance improvement which it sort of would be IF the cable was not right in the first place. I consider it routine maintenance to restore power that was lost due to incorrect adjustment. Same engine/same power, except that now you will be getting 100% of that power when flooring the pedal instead of 80%. Fiddling around with the cable any further will not get you 110% or 120% of the power--it defaults back down to 100%.

I encourage everyone to spot check their cable to see that it is opening the throttle body 100% so that you get 100% of the advertised power when you floor the pedal.

Doug

 

LOL!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnO9Jyz82Ps

 

Reverend, which are you, Luke, or the Warden? I'm sad that mine needed no adjustment. When pressed to the floor, my throttle was wide open. Perhaps that is because it is low mileage, and neither the previous owner, nor I have pushed the pedal to the floor with great frequency. When I have people come up next to me and challenge me to a race, as one did yesterday, I just smile and drive along comfortably. I guess age and maturity makes you that way, because I haven't always been this way.

 

COMMUNICATION - The last great frontier !!!

Cheers:

 

But go right ahead and adjust it anyway. According to the Rev this will result in a real performance improvement! But first slacken it to 80% and drive around for a while, then return it to the 100% position. Wow--real improvement!

Doug

 

To the Rev, and others, the adjustment was an "improvement" in the performance of the cars that they bought. (which had stretched cables) Your point is that they have merely restored the original performance, but to them, it was never "original" because they never realized that it was there to begin with. Why don't you two call a truce? We see very little of this sort of back and forth on this forum, which is VERY rare for internet forums, and a big reason that I, and I am sure, many others, like to visit. Thanks. (I guess, once again my mellowness with age is showing)

 

I have no problem calling the truce, and I never disagreed with the fact that adjusting an overly slack cable is necessary to result in proper and full opening of the throttle.

I was only trying to eliminate the type of problems I have seen on other forums when people would start playing around with their throttle body cables. Many would start by tightening the cable to remove the slack and, of course, the car now drove better. Then they would figure that if they tightened it more it would be even better and a lot of owners would end up with a situation where the car wouldn't start or the engine would idle at 2000 rpm, etc. This was because few bothered to actually figure out what was happening when they did this adjustment and/or they did not follow through with all of the steps.

Doug

 

"If we can just tighten this cable enough, we can get this thing down to running a 3.8 sec 0-60!" That is what has kind of amazed me about people who buy these cars. (XK8's) My best friend had one back in 2002, and, at that time, it was one of the quicker cars around, but not what you would call a "really fast car". (except for top end, but, who can drive around at 155 mph?" From all accounts, this car runs the 0-60 in the low to mid 6 sec range, which is a quick car, but not FAST. My friend totaled that Jag, and then bought a 300 Chrysler with a Hemi, which is probably just as fast, if not faster up to probably 110 mph. Since 2002 and so forth, now you have mid range Acura's and such that run in the mid to low 5's in 0-60, and so, the XK8 is even less FAST as the years go by. Personally, I am past the phase of my life where I have to go around racing people on the street, but, it seems that a lot of people are buying these cars and thinking that they are some sort of hot rods that they can go around racing everyone with. They were not engineered for that when they came out, and over the years, technology has made them slower and slower in comparison to the vehicles that are currently being produced. If you want a Jaguar hot rod in 2010, a 1997-2006 XK8 is not your car, you need a 2010 XKR.

 

Hey Kevin--although we have hijacked this thread somewhat sideways I have exactly the same sentiments. Since these cars are not really all that fast off-the-line compared with what is available today (even in moderately priced mainstream sedans), I go through great lengths to discourage drivers next to me at a stop light from wanting to drag. I typically accelerate away from lights slowly and pretty much avoid quick-change maneuvers that might attract the attention of some street ricer or anyone else with a truly hot car. Ditto the reason I avoid painting the calibers red or other visual doo-dads. I am quite happy with the fact that, in terms of performance, these cars are pretty good but nothing to write home about but in terms of pure appearance and class, they are near the top.

Doug

 

I agree with Doug. If I want to go out and embarrass ricers, I jump into the '71 LT-1. When I want to just have fun and/or be seen in the sexiest car in town (which is most of the time), I grab the XK8.

 

Truce??? I didn't even know we were arguing! On the other forum I go to regularly, this discussion would have gotten both of us banned for being too gay! LOL!

 

Well then Sam, that should show you the difference between this forum and that one. Does it not?

 

Totally off topic, but I find this a bit offensive. Your repeated gay references (lesbians on the posts about headrests and another posts) are not needed. How is this a gay topic and how could is possibly be too gay? Or could this topic be too black? Or too Puerto Rican?

 

Oh, hey... I'm sorry Orlando. I didn't mean to offend you. I'm completely in favor of you guys being allowed to get married and openly serve in the military and I'm even in favor of gay adoptions. I'm completely open-minded when it comes to that stuff. I'm more of a bowling alley and beer kind of guy, so I sometimes tend to offend the wine and cheese types. It's not intentional.

 

...its not about wether you drink beer or wine, i drink both and then some. It's about understanding what you are saying. And don't assume that I fall into your "you guys" group either.

Now back to the topic at hand....