Quote:
Originally Posted by kiloran
S&C looked after my uncle's X100 XKR for a while, and my cousin's Griff. It's all their fault I have a Jag itch, uncle took me out in his E-Type when I was about 6 (mid 70s when they were dirt cheap).
As I understand it the 3.2 AJ16 shares a lot with the XJ40 (4sp non-electronic box, no nasty nikersil issues), I'm not really a fan of the styling of the XJ40. My V70 experience has left me permanently scarred by electronic gubbins buried in oily areas so I'm more comfortable with the old school approach taken by the 3.2. Other than the space being tight those engines look eminently serviceable.
It's likely to be a stopgap car to get us through the summer/autumn, with the aim of selling it for more or less what we paid for it, giving me time (and wheels) to scout around for a 940 for the winter.
|
Ah, you already know S&C then!
The 3.2 AJ16 was a development of the 2.9 AJ6 which depending on your viewpoint, could have been an overbored half of the old Jag V12 with a hurriedly put together head (again modified from the V12) or it could have been a detuned 3.6 AJ6.
Given the 2.9 was only a 12valve head and the 3.6 was a 24v, i'd go for the former explanation.
Yes, improvements were made for the 3.2 AJ16 but IMHO the 3.6 and 4.0 AJ6 and AJ16 respectively are better suited to the car.
However, if you're dead-set on an X300 a 3.2 may be the only straight 6 option. I can't remember if they offered a 4.0 straight 6 in it, i'm fairly sure the 4.0 in the X308 was a V8 in n/asp and supercharged forms.
Again, Jaguar was under Ford ownership from 1996 so all i said about quality dropping on Volvos from that time also applies to Jaguar.
Apart from the bits i've mentioned on the X300, there's not much to go wrong on them that won't also go wrong on an XJ40, i prefer the styling of the '40 because it was a new (but still Jaguar-esque) shape whereas the X300 tried to recapture the Series I/II/III shape and while it came close, it couldn't quite manage to pull it off for me. It's a matter of what you like though, if the 300 floats your boat, go for it but i'd suggest trying a 4.0 straight 6 if you can find one rather than the 3.2 - chances are it's more economical as well!