A lot of responses for the “what is the dumbest engineering design on the XK8/R , and rightly so.

But what about the converse ?

what is the most outstanding engineering feature of these cars ? With the obvious answer, “..it’s the styling”. And no argument from me on that score. Excepting that one might say that design is not same as engineering.

Be that as it may, is there a single engineering feature that you think makes the car really special ?

Z

 

To me it's the blend of road handling and comfort. Not quiet the precision of a Bmw, but far more comfort in the ride

 

These days of course "petrol heads" appear to be obsessed with how long it takes to refuel a car, whereas the XKR was built back when real car enthusiasts were more obsessed with these figures:-

370 BHP, 0-60 5.2 seconds

 

Just got back from Scotland doing about 1200 miles, great handling car on the twisty roads up there and it's super comfortable just floating over all the bumps in the road while having more then enough power to keep speeds up.With the windows closed the car is super quiet inside and a serious lack of road noise which is really nice. Might not be a perfect car but it's just a really nice car to be behind the wheel of.

 

Maybe it's not engineering, but I like the feeling of comfort and style. The leather, the wood (everyone comments on the wood), the carpet, the smell, the Alpine stereo and the feeling of being "coddled" in comfort. Of course, the fact that it has a V8 is remarkable when you see Lincolns around now with 2.0 turbos. The convertible top is very quiet and watertight, although I did have to get the hydraulics replaced, and it's almost 20 years old.

 

I admit I am struggling with pointing out a specific engineering feat related to the X100.

But in some ways that is what I liked about this car. It leveraged a lot of existing engineering used in earlier models and stuffed it into a design style that will be recognized for ages.

I did respect how they were able to get outstanding fuel economy in such a heavy performance touring car.

One of my favorite features (more reflective of the time period than an engineering choice): glass headlights

 

Don't forget the Engine, well, until the bean counter got hold of it.
Well documented they put plastic inside an engine, apparently let's get them out the door was their thoughts.
The engine is so smooth, a joy to feel.

 

I can speak for my wife's 2006 XK8 Victory Edition: Superb paint quality, superb leather quality, gorgeous elm wood dash, the 4.2 V8, and as previously mentioned, real glass headlamps....

These cars will always have that timeless shape....

 

I have to 2nd @rothwell post. Maybe no groundbreaking engineering, but a swell combination of many fine existing systems.

and Lordy, for being so small, it’s a heavy thing that still somehow moves right along with authority. When new, they were considered really quick, and rightly so, as @dibbit points out with the vital specs ( that matter).

Z

 

I love the style and the comfort. There's nothing else like it on the road. Even those that know nothing of cars seem to appreciate the X100.

 

Everyone seems to agree that these cars have a great blend of style, comfort, and performance.

other cars of this era may surpass the XK8’s/R’s in one of these categories. But is sorely lacking in the other(s).

The car has great balance.


Z

 

I will praise the engineers for the engine. This car was the first Jaguar with a V8 and it was a banger, only let down by the beancounters, issues that they were able to rectify in the 4.2 V8. These engines are stout, smooth, powerful and lightweight. If the tensioners are metal bodied 3rd gen units, and the engine survived high sulfur fuels or was fitted with steel cylinder sleeves from new, they are actually one of the more reliable parts of the car, provided that the cooling systems are well maintained.

The chassis is also well designed. I read somewhere in another thread that the chassis stiffness of the coupe rivals that of the McLaren F1.

 

I had to look it up because that sounds wrong but it's correct. Torsional stiffness for the McLaren F1 is 13,500 Newtons per degree and for the Jaguar XK it's 16,000.

 

are you sure that isn't the xk150 series xk/xkr?
wj

 

That's for the X100, the X150 is around 38,000nm I think. The Veyron around 60,000 and the Lotus Elise only 10,000 I think. It's probably a design consideration more then the stiffer the better though as I would imagine it depends on the situation the car is going to be in. Convertibles take a massive hit though which I think people already knew but probably not to the extent that they do.

 

My 2006 XKR is great to drive and the design is great. It runs fantastically and is super fun to drive. The XKR has 390 HP and a joy to drive. No need to worry about turns in the road and no one else can keep up with it. The design of the drivetrain and the beautiful interior is fantastic! Love showing off at car shows.

 

Very interesting and I believe it. I have a 2000 Coupe and even with 85k miles it is very tight; no rattles, squeaks, etc. Take a similar vintage Corvette with similar mileage and it's a mess.

I wonder what the x350 chassis is? I can jack up any corner of that car and the entire side of the car lifts, pretty unbelievable with a car that size.

 

The all aluminium construction is probably why the later cars are so much stiffer. My XKR always feels very rigid while driving. When I jack it up from one corner like you said that whole side will jack up no problem, it shouldn't even twist by a single degree going off the torsional rating.

 

For me, it’s the small intake mouth on the original XKR that is the most outstanding engineering feature !

You may think that is a strange choice, but the XK8 when fitted with a Supercharger overheated in every test because of lack of forced ventilation. Engineering demanded a bigger intake but designers at Whitley doggedly refused. Ultimately, it was all fixed by bonnet vents and a few recesses around the inner mouth.

It is a little-known fact that when the XKR launched, it had the smallest 'Grill area -to- Thermal Load' ratio of any car.

 

I would like to read more about this. Could you provide a source?