Jaguar XJS

GFX707 · 21 Mar 2007 at 10:14

Anyone like these? For some reason I have some perverse attraction to these cars....I want to get one for my next car, that or a Porsche 944. Anyway, I have heard ridiculous mpg accounts for this car, like SEVEN mpg for some guy in London (probably had the V12) and also tales of the usual 1980s Jaguar stuff, electrical problems etc. so I would have to get one post-1990 to make sure it was all above board.

The only thing I don't like about them is that gearstick....shudder. Has anyone seen the convertible? Drool....

[TW]Fox · 21 Mar 2007 at 10:15

Whats the point when you openly state your driving style wouldn't stress a 1 litre Panda?

GFX707 · 21 Mar 2007 at 10:16

They look nice. How often do you take your car up to 155?

Lashout_UK · 21 Mar 2007 at 10:18

The straight six is the winner - go for a 3.6 or 4.0, will see you in good stead.

Otherwise, just watch for rust, rust, more rust and chronic rust. That's why they're so cheap, that and they can be horrendeously expensive to keep on the road and maintained. A straight six one will return 20-25mpg in daily use.

If you buy a good one, it'll be great. Buy a nail and it'll be horrible.

Manuals are few and far between but they are out there.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/JAGUAR-XJS-XJ-S-1987-3-6-Manual-VGC-Must-be-seen_W0QQitemZ200091067753

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/jAGUAR-XJS-3-6-Manual-Coupe_W0QQitemZ290095805221

Or an automatic V12 to crush your wallet.....

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/1994-JAGUAR-XJS-6-0L-V12-FACELIFT-British-Racing-Green_W0QQitemZ150103468158

GFX707 · 21 Mar 2007 at 10:20

Yes, I am already paying for an XJ6 - has been expensive so far....have you had one personally lashout_UK?

1CE · 21 Mar 2007 at 10:21

Hey there,

Got an XJS 3.6 (Straight 6) manual sitting on the drive, needs a new clutch though

, lovely cars, interior is very nice too

Got some go in them too!

GFX707 · 21 Mar 2007 at 10:22

Do yours have back seats or just a little parcel rack thing?

1CE · 21 Mar 2007 at 10:23

yes it has back seats, not a lot of room though and the centre rear seat is just an odd bulge lol..

GFX707 · 21 Mar 2007 at 10:24

Ever driven/been driven in an XJ6? If yes, what does the engine sound like in comparison with your I6 one?

thepharcyde · 21 Mar 2007 at 11:04

Only other thing to be mentioned, my dad had the 5.3 V12 XJ6 and despite many trips to the garrage leak oil.

daveyj27 · 21 Mar 2007 at 11:06

[TW]Fox said:
Whats the point when you openly state your driving style wouldn't stress a 1 litre Panda?

Because he likes them?

Lashout_UK · 21 Mar 2007 at 11:16

have you had one personally lashout_UK

No - I did a lot of research into them and even went as far as looking at a few local examples last Easter though as it was a distinct possibility as a next car. Had a look over a gorgeous postbox-red auto 3.6, really was a fantastic bit of machinery

GFX707 · 21 Mar 2007 at 11:21

There's one down the road from me and every time I pass it (in my XJ6) I think if only it had 4 lights on the front instead of those frog-eyes I'd take it over mine in a heartbeat....the interior kind of looks like a mini version of the XJ6 though....what does everyone think of the "flying buttresses"?

edit: It does have 4 lights on the front....droooool.

richolmes72 · 21 Mar 2007 at 11:54

I'd be tempted by one - if it wasn't for the fact that the equivalent age XJ6 in the same condition is about a third of the price - similar internals with the same 6 cylinder engines - similar mpg and performance. More dated dash and no J-gate, smaller and less practical.

Looks are important - but apart from the convertible (which is expensive), i'd probably not choose one over the equivalent XJ.

Tomsk · 21 Mar 2007 at 12:03

I had a 5.3 V12 XJS.
Engine and transmission were fine, but the rest of the car was falling apart.
A leaking fuel tank didn't help it's fuel consumption either.
It is still the fastest (acceleration and top speed) car I've ever owned.

Later models have fully galvanised bodywork and should be more rust resistant. They can be identified by looking at the rear side windows - the early ones look like the one 1CE has got, later ones are more rounded and don't have the vinyl.

Celebration and very late 4 litre versions have the AJ16 engine which is slightly more powerful.

I like the flying buttress. Much better than a hatchback or a larger sloping rear end.

Lashout_UK · 21 Mar 2007 at 12:10

A late US spec one but still.

Lashout_UK · 21 Mar 2007 at 12:15

panthro · 21 Mar 2007 at 12:18

I would take a 994 Turbo or S2 over an XJS any day.

simisker · 21 Mar 2007 at 12:22

The flying buttresses are what makes it such an iconic car.

Trouble is, they also help make it such a notorious rust-attractor [See also the boot-lids of XJ40s].

Ironically, the buttress-less convertible is one of the most elegant soft-top designs ever, in my opinion.

Are you aware of the stunning work/cars they do at http://www.kwejaguar.co.uk/ ? They've nearly finished a massive restoration/enhancement to an ex-Keith Richards TWR XJS at the moment.

IT Insider · 21 Mar 2007 at 12:23

mmmmm, XKS.......still does something for me everytime I see one.

As said above, the 3.6 and 4.0 engines are great units when looked after - they can consume a bit of oil but a good engine should in my books.

The V12 is a guzzler pure and simple - if you can afford a 8miles to the gallon car then go for it!

944 - thats not a porsche - thats a VW!!!!!!!