Well your air/fuel mix was always wrong and poisoning everyone but hey that's not really the point when thinking of ONE car.

But on the main point I wasn't missing it. I do want things like ABS - oh, and an autobox - and I want codes. You may be different. But I posted what made sense to me.

 

Mmm! Not quite how I remember my early motoring years!

 

100% agree here. I also have ZERO interest in a X100 which doesn't have some sort of Jaguar engine in it.

Again agree about the straight 6. Like I said, somehow a step backwards because of power. But it would still make sense because it's a Jaguar powerplant. If I'm not wrong, the original X100 prototype, which went on to become the X100 and DB7 had the straight 6 as well.

Do you really think it would be cheaper? I'm not sure. DB7 Vantages don't really sell for that much, do they? I know the DB7 GT fetches higher prices because it's much more rare. But buying a DB7 V12 and dropping it in a X100 would probably be quite the undertaking. If a simple conversion to manual can cost as reported up to 12 grand, a V12 job like that has to be a lot more. I think mostly like the best one could do is end up with the job done for the same price as a DB7 Vantage. But cheaper I'm not sure.

Are you saying that based on some research you did? If so, do tell please.

 

Hi Mark99, I don't want to hijack my own thread. But I asked you before in another thread and you must have missed it. What color is your car? It's beautiful.

 

Come on, just play along.

Or we will end up talking about converting X100 to electric cars. It's a totally hypothetical project. Why care about emissions?

And it's fine that you like codes and computers. But the thread is exactly about getting rid of that.

 

But I guess you still got my meaning?

Make it simpler.

 

To be honest, I got rather fed up with the 'simplicity' of the carburetor cars and purposely bought my X100 to move my technical knowledge and skills onto the next stage. I invested in some computer software and a scanner, downloaded every bit of Jaguar technical info I could find and started reading and practising. Best fun I'd had in the garage in years and neither the XK8 (10 years) nor the X Type (13 years) have ever let me down.

Modern complexity plus careful maintenance = reliability

 

OK, understood. So I guess the spirit of the thread is not for you then.

The goal was basically a modern analog car or modern classic car of sorts. Throw out all the tech which just weighs it down and breaks down and keep just the basic machine.

 

40 years old, simple technics, no abs or airbags, so no lights,
but at 200 km/h i become scared..................

 

I hated the problems on cars with carbs, not to mention their lousy heaters, useless wipers, poor suspension, terrible radio (if you had one), no recirc so you were coughing with fumes from other cars and so on. Count me out.

 

Ah! The good old days.

 

I have 4 carburettors each on two of my motorcycles; ALL Keihin, so very nice stuff. I still have to fiddle with them more than any electronic fuel injection system I've ever had. I can synchronize quad carbs on bikes and have done multicarb setups on cars, and they're just not as good even on their best day as electronic fuel injection.

I've worked on cars with VERY antiquated technologies thanks to my dad. Most ideas were at least good in some era; and mechanical sympathy goes a long way. Some technologies were replaced simply because the new option was more reliable with lower cost and less maintenance. I much prefer electronic ignition over points. I like that a base Corvette now has 450 REAL horsepower and a 20/30 MPG; where my dad's 63SW put out more like 260-280HP (rated at 340HP) and got low teens for MPG.

I'm actively negotiating on 2 2006 Aston Martin DB9 Volantes (might buy neither, but at most one) and I think they're an interesting "end of an era" vehicle. I think I could realistically own one for a decade and drive it regularly while DIYing it. I've been watching them for two years and I think we're near the bottom of depreciation, at least close enough that the time I'll own it will see it not change relatively much.

 

Nah. Just pipe dream on the V12 swap. Just having fun. You're right. Swaps are never simple, especially with all the computers to get to talk to each other.

 

I was a "muscle car guy" from late 70's (when nobody wanted them) and into the 1980's I was collecting them for cheap and because they were cheap, I was daily driving '71 'cuda convertibles and 440's with 3 2bb carbs... then I ordered a new '86 Mustang 5.0L with the new fangled multiport EFI.


It was a revelation: huge power band, started instantly, responded seamlessly to mods without tuning, great mpg. I gradually stopped driving carbed 13 mpg monsters and drifted toward EFI and Turbocharging because they were faster and were actually easier to work on and repair.


Then the world magically discovered these wonderful, old school "Muscle Cars" I had been collecting over the years, offering me 3X to 5X what I had in them. Needless to say I let most of them go to new owners and took the cash.


On the X100, I like the cruise control, I like active sealing side windows, I like the Key fob remote, I like the Climate control, I have calculated how few "different" ignition keys there actually are (you don't want to know '97 US owners) so I like the idea of Transponder keys. Some of the things that make X100's complicated are things I like.


Now the idea of a stripped down, retro X100 with a high revving weber carbed or ITB V8 (or 3 weber carbed L6) with a manual trans would be super cool, a stripped version would probably make me want to drive it less, not more, and I want to drive mine more.

 

All this talk of carburetors and emissions but the point of the thread is being missed. For the record, I would not exchange the electronic injection for a carburetor in a X100. This is not what I said. As I mentioned in the opening post, this was just a random example to try to make it easier to understand what I was driving at. I tried giving a few examples along the way but most are missing the point and some started driving at the right point but then strayed.

I'm not sure if the point is being totally missed, ignored or just not interesting enough. But I did try to explain it in several different ways.

I will put a list together later with some things I would do to bring the car more back to basics and try to steer the thread in the right direction.

Maybe then others will come in with their own ideas, if they understand the point of the thread a bit better.

 

I am helping a buddy restore a 1971 Porsche 911T, at the same time I am doing winter upkeep on my 2004 XK8. Working on tjhe Porsche is pretty straight forward, not to many mysterys. The whole electrical system in the Porsche has about as much wiring as the drivers door in the Jag. Wind up windows, manual transmission, carburetors to adjust, points and condensors, AM radio, and it is work to drive and hit all the gear changes. For a few backroad sprints the Porsche is a hoot, but on my 1200 mile trip to Myrtle Beach from Canada I don't really want to give up all of the comforts the XK8 provides. Tryinf to imagine the Porsche feeling in the XK8 and it doesn't quite work.

 

You know, what I would like, is probably the opposite in some ways.

I would like to somehow have the XKR shed nearly a thousand kg. Convert every body panel and chassis component to carbon fibre or aluminum, add an LSD, and swap to a manual transmission. Maybe I would also change the CATS shocks for Koni FSD shocks.

Most of that is prohibitively expensive, but my goal is weight loss.


What I think someone on the forum with the know how should get to doing is to create autocad files for all those small plastic bits which are prone to fail from both the interior of the car and the exterior, and have them ready to be 3D printed should supply wane significantly.

 

Actually you have the correct idea. You are closer to the spirit of the thread than most.

Sure the carbon fiber body and aluminum chassis would be totally re-engineering the car and prohibitively expensive. But replacing CATS with the Koni FSD is exactly the spirit. Computer controlled suspension is just something else to break down, cause trouble, expense and weigh the car down. The manual transmission is also within the spirit of the thread. It's mechanical only. Simpler and more robust.

But I somehow think it wouldn't be that simple to just ditch CATS? The car would probably complain that CATS was out and give all sorts of warning. Maybe even cause other systems to malfunction? This is the annoyance of computer cars.

But this is exactly the spirit of the thread. I definitely don't need CATS. A nice simple suspension would be just fine.

 

It's usually easy to remove CATS without further hassles.

 

Other people have easily removed the CATS and replaced them with the Bilstein shocks from the base XK8s. The Koni FSD are an upgrade from those Bilsteins. They are "Frequency Selective". These dampers have both a soft and firm setting but it is not computer controlled. Instead, it is controlled by the frequency of the bumps on the road surface. At faster speeds, during cornering, these dampers will be firm to reduce body roll, but will revert to it's softer setting at slower speeds. I have these on my other car and they work great. The ride is neither harsh, nor spongy.


Edit: My explanation about the FSDs may be too simple, so here's a couple links:
https://www.koni.com/Cars/Products/Performance/FSD/
https://www.koni.com/Cars/Technology/FSD/