I'm sorry if this is an old forum chestnut but indecision is wearing me down to the point where I might never buy my XK8......
For a given budget, say £10k ($16k) is it better to buy a cheaper older model and spend some of (not necessarily all) the difference on sprucing it up, or spend nearly the full amount on a newer one?
I know the mantra 'buy the best you can afford' but some of those sub £4k ($6500) XKs are just soooo tempting!
Is the assumption that a newer model ie >2002 will have less corrosion and potentially less problems (given a 100% FSH) a valid one?
I can do some mechanicals myself, excepting work under the car.

Many thanks for your thoughts.

 

I bought my '97 with the intention of doing all the repairs. I have a lift and Autoenginuity software for diagnostics, and my garage is in the basement and is comfortable year round. Both of my cars were owned locally, and are almost totally rust free.
Given your climate and not being able to work underneath, I would probably buy the newer car, unless you can find a car that was stored indoors and not driven in the winter.

 

Agreed. If you cannot work underneath the car, stick to a newer model. But I must say that if I felt I could not work underneath the car, I would not have purchased either one of our Jaguars. They would simply be too costly to maintain....

 

There is no such thing as a 'cheap' Jaguar!

Even in our UK climate, corrosion isn't anywhere near the major issue on the XK8/XKR that it was for 1970/80 era Jaguars. The front floors do go due to a design fault and aft of the rear wheels can suffer from long term salt baths but neither are too difficult to repair.

'Sprucing up' will always cost more than the difference between buying a vehicle that needs such work and a good one.

Mechanically, I would tend towards a post-2001 which is beyond the early tensioner and transmission issues.

Graham

 

I thought the metal tensioners came in 03, and so did the 6HP26 replacing the earlier 5HP24 (assuming XK8, XKRs had the W5A580 Mercedes box). Nikasil left after an engine build date in the last third of 01.

 

Get a 4.2ltr, most problems solved by then

 

Easy- buy the newer and spend the money now, or buy the older and put the money aside for repairs.

 

dont get a 4.0,because if you do you will then want the xkr 4.2 so go with the supercharge version straight off and you can sit there with a smile on your face whenever you drive it,2003 onwards coupe, re-mapped, limiter taken off,no rear boxes, kn filter and i am in my 70th year and they are out there for £10,000

 

I went with a 2001 MY based on looks and price. It has been relatively free of issues, but there have certainly been some. My medium mechanical skills and this forum have kept the costs down to what are for me more than acceptable.

Having said all that, I would buy a newer model if I had to do it over again. The odds always favor a newer car given a reasonable condition and prior maintenance on both.

Vote count: newer +1

 

Go with as new as you can..... However this is still not a sure thing, get a second opinion, talk to Tom at T L Jaguar very close to you based in Wokingham, he will be able to help you out

 

Correct.

My typo - should have been "a post-2003".

Graham

 

Buying a car like an XK8 for cheap would be like ordering hash in a 3rd world country...huge risk. The newer you go with lower miles, the lower the risk. I got a three year old 06 XKR with 23,000 miles under warranty and got an extended warranty. In the 30,000 miles since, I have spent $120 on unscheduled repairs (a bad LF ABS sensor). Thsi is about as good as any car gets and I like the lower risk, fretting about repairs all the time takes the fun out of it. A car with $300 Sc pumps and $2400 wheels can be scary.

 

While certainly the 2003+ model years dealt with the tensioner problem, the Mercedes 5 sp. tranny of the pre-2003 XKR cars is a stouter unit than the 6sp. ZF, so there are some tradeoffs. I happen to like the 2001-2002 years for the subtle differences in their looks. (The fog lights are pulled out a bit, the rocker panels are rounded like the XKE as opposed to the squared off lip of the later models, and the smaller 3 piece front grill). Having said that, I would buy the car with the least amount of mileage and in the best condition. And finally, a full, documented service history is invaluable, so this should be a serious consideration in the purchase or the avoidance of any car.

Finally, Nikasil engines are not necessarily a terrible burden (Porsches have them). If they've gotten through their early years, they'll be fine.

I vote for full service history, lowest mileage, best condition, color combo, not necessarily model year.

Mine (below) has certainly had its share of issues, but I bought a nearly perfect car 4 years ago with a full history for about $15000. At the time, it was $5-7000 below the market price, so I was prepared to spend that money that I saved to keep it running. I have put nearly 80,000 miles on it during that time, and as I am just nudging 140,000 miles, I can say it's one of the best purchases I have ever made.

 

Thanks all, you've cleared my mind.
The consensus seems to be newer/lower mileage, I had a feeling this was probably
the better option but I just needed to hear it from those who know more than I do!
So, the quest continues but I think as the UK currently sinking underwater it may take a little longer......

 

I'll be the voice of balance here, and say old/cheap. At least that way you'll know things were fixed right, and have a timeline for when they'll next be due.