Jump to content

Jag mk2 - bad idea?


Recommended Posts

Hi all 

I'm going to see a 3.4 auto tomorrow. 

Mostly for window shopping but then price is within the easily tempted bracket. 

How difficult are these cars to live with and work on? I haven't spent a cent at a garage for years, I would like to keep it that way. 

A friend has just bought a dirt cheap xj6 and the access to anything mechanical is a nightmare. Another mate got his e type back from the garage the other day and the bill was around 15k (it did need a lot of work to be fair)! 

This car is unrestored and a runner but a bit tatty. Bit of rust but nothing serious according to the seller and he's treated the rusty bits. According to him, it really just needs a respray to get the car up to scratch. 

Thanks in advance for your words of wisdom! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure I’d bother 

big heavy  cars to work on and as Bob says rust.  the type you can’t see is the expensive version.  Got to be better classic saloon “family” orientated cars out there. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I ran MK2s as road cars for many years through 70s and 80s and also raced them, They can be a rot box, check front cross member under the grill and right out across under the front wings with whats known as the crows feet areas, check the chassis rails where they dip under the floor behind the front subframe. Check front wheel arches and closing panel behind the arch, check the sills and all four jacking pints. Check the rear spring boxes as theyre 1/4 elliptical springs and those boxes are really difficult to repair correctly. Check where the Panhard rod meets the right hand rear wheelarch, check below the rear seat pan inside (lift the rear seat squab) check in around the rear window inside as the headling gets soaked, check the bottom of the boot lid.  Check all four door bottoms and the centre line of the bonnet where the chrome strip goes, check the glass filter bowl for the fuel system as sediment in there will mean the tank is going flaky inside. Check gearbox operation as theyre a bit of a slush box and changes can be snatchy, check the "Speed hold" works (this holds it in 2nd gear for greater acceleration through bendy roads) have a good listen to the engine if theres loud tappety noises thats often tappet buckets on the move. Oil pressure should be around 40 at normal cruising and shouldnt drop below 20 at tickover. Also the brakes need looking after properly as theyre Dunlop calipers and do suffer from rust and seizing one side so can cause uneven braking or in worse case scenario breaking the disc also when apply brakes with the engine running you should be able to hear a hiss from the servo exhaust and when turning the engine off there should be about three or four pumps of the brakes before the servo tank exhausts itself (if not it can often be the servo tank rotted out, its located under the front of the front right wheel arch and does get a lot of wet around it ) Finally check the seats for dry and split leather (unless its a very late one in which case it may have Ambla seat covers) and the wood work as that suffers from damp too.

Good luck, when theyre right theyre a great car

Stuart.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bob, Roger, Hamish and especially Stuart. I'm not going to test drive the car tomorrow, just look it over and hopefully sit in it but I'll keep your pointers handy.

A mk2 has been on my wishlist for a while. I can't really afford one right now but if things go as planned, in a couple of years it should be doable. For a great opportunity, I'll find a way to make it work. So said every car mad tortured soul. I'm hoping to be underwhelmed tomorow so I stop dreaming about the Mk2 and move on to a more realistic hunt.

I'm looking for a classic family car, not in any hurry. I want to use it anytime we outnumber the TRs seats and even better if it can swallow a surfboard or two. Madame is thinking about buying a classic mini so we've got small covered. And the Land Rover has large and barge down pat.

Merc W123 estates are hard to come by but fit the bill in terms of looks, comfort and practicality. A triumph 2500 estate would be another fun choice but I think even rarer than the merc.

I realise that a tatty Mk2 is probably more costly to buy and run than a mint W123 or 2500.

Thanks again

E

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EliTR6 said:

Bit of rust but nothing serious according to the seller and he's treated the rusty bits. According to him, it really just needs a respray to get the car up to scratch. 

What was it that Mandy Rice-Davies said?

"Well, he would say that, wouldn't he."

Charlie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to agree with everybody here. I bought an S Type (original one, based on Mk2) 30+ years ago, looked fine, cheap, started. It was a wreak, needed thousands spending. On the driveway for a while which then resulted in a bust up with 'erindoors. Sold into the trade, 3 weeks later I got a parking ticket FFS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please don't do it unless you really know the car and the costs ^_^

Now, a Triumph 2000 Mk1 or Mk2 would be nice . . . . . . . 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Eli,

How as a family man can you cater for your family and enjoying classic motoring?
In days gone by I would put my kids in the back, no problem, not today.

Very little choice Lotus Plus 2s, Triumph stag, 
Most of us have at least Two cars, one just for us and another for the family.

 

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the V8 Daimler 2-1/2  - 1964 black with chrome wires, biscuit leather interior and walnut dash.  Gorgeous car which not only sounded fabulous but otherwise had an unforgettable aroma (I spend days feeding the leather of those seats) and otherwise served as a very elegant wedding car locally (which effectively subsidised its running costs). However the 140 bhp engine with auto box wasn't enough for fun acceleration and the live axle suspension ruined the car's handling.  Body roll and screeching tyres are very inefficient.  Unfortunately after replacing the suspension rubbers with poly-bushes, the car rode on its suspension rather than it it, so even an straight but undulating road would get her in a tizzy.   Wonderful to burble around in but not a driver's car.

I then had a 3.8 ltr., manual with O/D, S-type, 1966., again with wire wheels, biscuit leather again, complimentary Wilton wool carpets and walnut dashboard and cappings, wool headlining etc., but of course also benefiting from IRS and a decent sized boot.  She was in bright red and affectionately known as 'Flirt' .  The 3.8 manual + O/D made the car very much more fun to drive (..still a very heavy car though), and the IRS was ten times better than the Mk.2's live axle setup (even though that had been professionally refurbished by a Jag specialist).  The S-type handled so much better better, felt very much more secure, and the ride quality and lesser noise transmission were also in a different league.  Beautifully lady in red elegance but racy too.  However, I sold each because telltale signs of bubbling under the paintwork appeared, and so I would have faced the potential cost of repairs and respray.  As one clever-dickie in the J.E.C. said to me "you bought the best you could not afford".  I didn't enjoy the club because I could not afford their preferred airs n' graces lifestyle,  and yes it's true - Jaguars are out of my league. 

Still, I do love Jaguars.. 

By the way., I was completely above board with the buyers, who accepted the risk. The first chose to strip and repaint, and the latter kept the car in a heated garage and only uses it in dry weather. 

The 3.4 ltr.,  is said to be the best engine of them all, long enough legs and better spinning, smoother and all together sweeter than the 3.8.   But imo the manual with overdrive is the only way to enjoy it as a great driver rather than limousine.  

Should I find a rich wife., I'd let her buy me a 3.4 XK150 or another S-Type (that had already been taken down to bare metal and professionally restored). 

Pete.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Peter V W said:

Hi Eli,

How as a family man can you cater for your family and enjoying classic motoring?
In days gone by I would put my kids in the back, no problem, not today.

Very little choice Lotus Plus 2s, Triumph stag, 
Most of us have at least Two cars, one just for us and another for the family.

 

Peter

Hi Peter, do you mean safety wise? 

It's always a concern but driving responsibly, keeping on top of maintenance, fitting seat belts, being on the look out for hazards, keeping lots of space between vehicles and adapting my speed help. Most trips are 5mi to work and nursery school or 20mi to see my parents, maybe 40mi to see the in laws. Small towns and 50mph speed limit on quiet country roads, I rarely feel scared around here even on the motorbike. Perfect conditions to run a classic car. 

The real worry is will the family enjoy the experience? And what about longer trips? 

I've got a recent golf for days when the weather is bad or I just need to bomb down the motorway to get somewhere. The classics are for trips where I can afford to take more time or to arrive late. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, MilesA said:

If only I had known. A friend has just sold this: https://www.carandclassic.co.uk/auctions/1966-jaguar-mk2-RnMxkg It's going to Canada.

The only reason I don't own it, is absence of garage space!

PS Stuart - he would absolutely agree with you about Club...

Miles

 

Hi Miles 

I was following that auction. Looks like a great car, just a couple of years too soon for me! 

Cheers 

E

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bfg said:

 yes it's true - Jaguars are out of my league. 

Still, I do love Jaguars.. 

Should I find a rich wife., I'd let her buy me a 3.4 XK150 or another S-Type (that had already been taken down to bare metal and professionally restored). 

Pete.

Hi Pete, thanks for the stories. Sounds like a recipe for heartbreak! 

E

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Bfg said:

 

I then had a 3.8 ltr., manual with O/D, S-type, 1966., again with wire wheels, biscuit leather again, complimentary Wilton wool carpets and walnut dashboard and cappings, wool headlining etc., but of course also benefiting from IRS and a decent sized boot.  She was in bright red and affectionately known as 'Flirt' .  The 3.8 manual + O/D made the car very much more fun to drive (..still a very heavy car though), and the IRS was ten times better than the Mk.2's live axle setup (even though that had been professionally refurbished by a Jag specialist).  The S-type handled so much better better, felt very much more secure, and the ride quality and lesser noise transmission were also in a different league.  Beautifully lady in red elegance but racy too.  However, I sold each because telltale signs of bubbling under the paintwork appeared, and so I would have faced the potential cost of repairs and respray.  As one clever-dickie in the J.E.C. said to me "you bought the best you could not afford".  I didn't enjoy the club because I could not afford their preferred airs n' graces lifestyle,  and yes it's true - Jaguars are out of my league. 

 

Pete.

Cobblers, a properly setup MK2 will out handle an "S" type any day of the week thats why theyre raced unlike the "S" I had a 3.8 MK2 as a road car for 10yrs and that would out run and out handle a Police 3ltr MK1 Granada as proved on several occasions ;)

Stuart.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

9 minutes ago, EliTR6 said:

Hi Pete, thanks for the stories. Sounds like a recipe for heartbreak! 

E

That's love for you ! :rolleyes:  And I do love Jaguars ..and given half the chance a beautiful woman too, but can I afford them ?  or more important to you is ; Can you afford them ? 

Tbh their mechanicals are no more complicated or difficult to work on than a TR, except perhaps for the rear inboard brakes of the IRS models are a pain to get to. Six cylinders and ohc are not problems but those engines are heavy. And an annoyance is not being able to drop the sump without first lifting the engine (or perhaps dropping a front sub-frame ..Stuart ?).  But again their mechanicals are robust and very reliable, so that once sorted - then they are good to go for years and years. Their manual gearbox and overdrive is comparable to a TR.  Similarly, cooling, carburettors, and electrics / electrical components.

On the whole I don't think there much to choose between the cost of Jaguar versus Triumph parts or their availability either.  Both have extraordinary good support infrastructures even 50+ years later, and that competition keeps prices 'reasonable'. 

Body wise and structurally I reckon Stuart hits the nail on the head.  Jaguars were incredibly good value when new, and yet their build quality was pretty good. However, the vehicle lifespan was never anticipated to be so long and water ingress inevitably gets into every corner and sits there.  Their steel is half as thick again as on a TR., but then the body is monocoque and so things like sills are crucial.  Because the body and wings are not bolted-on,  getting in to protect / maintain / repair underneath and around the edges is very much more difficult, and that's reflected in full restoration costs, but possibly no more so than any other quality car of the later 60's through to the 80's.  How much would it cost to strip a Mercedes, or a Triumph 2.5 down to bare metal and to correct the savages of time ?  Of course one has to bare in mind that many a prior owner of a Jag was running it on a tight budget and street parked, whereas examples of many other saloon cars can still be found as family owned and always garaged.     

Interior wise a saloon car has headlining and four doors with chrome window surrounds, latches and walnut trim, so more work than any 2-door rag top, but on the whole Jaguars used the highest quality leather, carpets, timber, chrome, etc., etc.  And door hinges were robust.  Almost nothing on a Jaguar is lightweight  If you buy a Mk.II you don't need to change the seats just to make the car comfortable.  My cars both had seats that were like hard cardboard when I bought them, but once cleaned and repeatedly fed they became supple again. Even the 50+ year old carpets cleaned up and looked fabulous.  I wonder how many TR's have their original carpets.?

Undoubtedly to most of us the Jaguar Mk.II has a fantastic style of maverick masculinity, whereas the S-type moved from that to feminine elegance.  And in my experience the Mk.II doesn't compare with the S-Type's overall chassis and suspension package. My experience of the S-type's IRS led me to really want a TR4A rather than TR4, but that aside I believe the TR4 has a better chassis and is a truer-to-the-spirit sportscar.  The Mk.II's handling is maverick but not in a good way.

Given the budget I would encourage you to buy a Jag.  I bought the best I could afford, and that left me without the resources to do much more. I've done the same with my TR.  In reality, unless you're very fortunate, then you need to have half as much again in reserve.    So do take a lot of time to see and compare different cars. Enjoy the shopping, but beware that it is so easy to fall in love with the first classic Jaguar you see. 

You already know what to look for because in reality it's no different to most other cars. 

Happy days,  Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, stuart said:

Cobblers, a properly setup MK2 will out handle an "S" type any day of the week thats why theyre raced unlike the "S" I had a 3.8 MK2 as a road car for 10yrs and that would out run and out handle a Police 3ltr MK1 Granada as proved on several occasions ;)

Stuart.

I'm glad to agree to differ in opinion. 

The Mk.II was a lighter car and I'd guess had a shorter wheelbase, and for track use I'd guess the suspension is easier to set up to keep its tyres mostly on the ground, but I feel on everyday roads with potholes, road markings and subsidence on corners.. the S-type if equal attention was paid to its set up - would command better control and overall better handling.    

The S-type was an interim model replaced by the XJ6, which had almost the same IRS., and they saw notable success in racing circles. 

Pete.

 

Edited by Bfg
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stuart said:

Cobblers, a properly setup MK2 will out handle an "S" type any day of the week thats why theyre raced unlike the "S" I had a 3.8 MK2 as a road car for 10yrs and that would out run and out handle a Police 3ltr MK1 Granada as proved on several occasions ;)

Stuart.

So, is the MK2 a car for 'Snobs'   :P:)

 

Roger

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, RogerH said:

So, is the MK2 a car for 'Snobs'   :P:)

 

Roger

Definitely not, back in the day it was the getaway car of choice for many a villain

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MilesA said:

If only I had known. A friend has just sold this: https://www.carandclassic.co.uk/auctions/1966-jaguar-mk2-RnMxkg It's going to Canada.

The only reason I don't own it, is absence of garage space!

PS Stuart - he would absolutely agree with you about Club...

Miles

 

Do you know whereabouts in Canada?  I might see it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please familiarise yourself with our Terms and Conditions. By using this site, you agree to the following: Terms of Use.