Jaguar S-type

The dis­tinc­tive style and per­for­mance that marks out Jaguars needn’t cost a for­tune to own. Here are five that of­fer the best value of the lot

Classic Cars (UK) - - News - Words Russ smith Pho­tog­ra­phy Char­lie magee

Look be­yond the ob­vi­ous icons of the revered E-type and XK and the en­try price to per­for­mance Jaguar own­er­ship is ac­tu­ally set pretty low. Yet you are still join­ing a smart and ex­clu­sive club, in which pow­er­ful and char­ac­ter­ful en­gines, a smooth ride and great style are pre­req­ui­sites. They’re ve­hi­cles of dis­tinc­tion too – no one ever mis­takes a Jaguar for any­thing else. The com­pany’s back cat­a­logue con­tains some sleep­ers – mod­els that of­fer all of the above, but also rep­re­sent re­mark­ably good value when mea­sured against their ri­vals or just plain logic. We’ve set­tled on five of them which do just that and are also show­ing early signs of price rises – which means now is the smart time to buy one and en­joy driv­ing it in the knowl­edge that you’ll also be smil­ing if you come to sell later. No one has ever come up with a sat­is­fac­tory ex­pla­na­tion for why an S-type Jaguar is around two-thirds the price of an equiv­a­lent Mk2. Cor­po­rate MKX fash­ion rear end aside, they are sim­i­lar in styling, rarer by a fac­tor of bet­ter than three-to-one, and with­out doubt the bet­ter car to drive. And I don’t care if that as­ser­tion does set the let­ter-writ­ers off. What the S-type also has in spades is street cred, thanks to it be­ing the screen vil­lain’s mo­tor of choice in any num­ber of movies and TV se­ries from the Seven­ties, when they were cheap, chuck­able and car­ried a sneery-mouthed hint of men­ace. Cue the theme tune to The Sweeney and check the stock­ing masks are in easy reach in the glove­box.

As any good wheel man will tell you, the best Jaguar S-types are those fit­ted with power steer­ing be­cause the sys­tem isn’t overlight but does al­low wheel-whirling to be re­duced from 4.7 to a much wield­ier 3.5 turns lock-to-lock. All the bet­ter for aim­ing at that in­con­gru­ous stack of empty card­board boxes you so of­ten en­counter when driv­ing on waste ground. The S-type we used for this test, pho­tographed above and owned by Michael Bal­lard, has it – and com­pared to unas­sisted S-types I’ve driven in the past it makes the car feel a whole gen­er­a­tion younger. I re­ally would rec­om­mend buy­ing one so equipped if you can.

Com­pared to most Six­ties cars – not just its Mk2 older brother – the S-type rides su­perbly on its E-type-based in­de­pen­dent rear sus­pen­sion. And though it might look a bit wal­lowy from the out­side if you start hooning about, from be­hind the wheel this Jag’s han­dling al­ways feels pretty sta­ble and neu­tral. They make great clas­sic tour­ing cars.

You’ll find lit­tle to com­plain about with the en­gine ei­ther. It’s the 3.8-litre, 220bhp ver­sion of Jaguar’s XK straight-six in this S-type – they were also sold with a 3.4 unit with 10bhp less for those who wanted to save £90 in 1964, not enough to stop the big­ger-en­gined ver­sion be­ing the more nu­mer­ous. It might be a car­bu­ret­tor and a royal wed­ding pa­rade of horses short of E-type out­put, but you never feel short-changed and the more you wind up the revs the bet­ter it gets; these were swift cars for their era.

Be­cause an S-type is sig­nif­i­cantly cheaper than a Mk2 Jag, you can still pick up a very pre­sentable ex­am­ple in the £15-20k range, and they are not hard to find. A quick glance in the

‘Com­pared to most Six­ties cars, the S-type rides su­perbly on its E-type-based in­de­pen­dent rear sus­pen­sion’

clas­si­fieds turned up a very orig­i­nal and well cared-for 68,000mile 3.4 in Scot­land of­fered for £15,850; and a nice old­er­restora­tion 3.8 with power steer­ing in York­shire for £19,950. But those prices have al­ready edged up around 10 per cent on where they were a year ago, and the gen­tly grow­ing de­mand is see­ing them shipped in from South Africa.

Three dif­fer­ent gear­boxes were of­fered in the S-type. Michael’s has the most pop­u­lar – the all-syn­chro­mesh man­ual with over­drive. Be­fore Oc­to­ber ’64 they had the older Moss four-speed. Many were also fit­ted with a Borg Warner three-speed auto, which suits the car’s na­ture. On the man­ual, check for worn syn­chros and ex­cess noise that lessens when the clutch pedal is dipped.

On any S-type it’s the body that dic­tates the buy­ing de­ci­sion. Val­ues are still nowhere near high enough for sig­nif­i­cant restora­tion to be any­thing other than a labour of love. That means that as well as rust you need to look care­fully at the stan­dard of past re­pairs, which will of­ten have been done on the cheap.

When Jaguar’s suave, pil­lar­less XJ5.3C V12 cruis­ers took a big leap in val­ues a cou­ple of years back, the gen­eral re­ac­tion in the mar­ket was ‘at last’ rather than be­ing any great sur­prise. A re­mark­ably short-run model for a Jaguar – due largely to the XJ-S bet­ter fill­ing the two-door coupé brief and killing them off – they’d sim­ply looked un­der-val­ued for the best part of a decade. On top of the looks, this is a gen­uinely rare car – dur­ing their two-year pro­duc­tion run just 1873 Jags were built with the V12 en­gine, along with another 399 that wore the Daim­ler grille and badges. And if you wish, there’s back-up from the more nu­mer­ous six-cylin­der XJ4.2C model, which had a run of just over 8100, again mostly with Jaguar badges. They com­mand about 10 per cent less than a V12.

Val­ues have plateaued for a while, but the in­di­ca­tions are that they are set to move up again. Their place in the world of great Jaguars is bet­ter un­der­stood and re­ally nice ones are hard to find for sale. Also, XJ-SS are start­ing to gain on them, and a V12 E-type 2+2 is once again more than dou­ble the price of an XJ5.3C.

Ac­cept­ing the bit of wind noise they are known for, these coupés also feel pretty special from be­hind the wheel. With its leg­endary in­de­pen­dent rear sus­pen­sion, the XJC feels won­der­fully poised; more ath­letic than its size would seem to sug­gest and soak­ing up any­thing the road sur­face lays be­fore it. Ev­ery bend you take feels easy and makes you think about go­ing back and try­ing a bit harder.

The en­gine is equally re­fined, in sound as much as man­ner. Smoothly sub­dued in com­par­i­son to a V8 or straight six, it is un­doubt­edly pow­er­ful but de­liv­ers its pro­duce with a whoosh rather than a kick – and it keeps on whoosh­ing ever faster un­til you run out of road or nerve. Only the brakes feel slightly un­der­whelm­ing, though to be fair I had most re­cently stepped from the XJR. More ac­cu­rate, per­haps, to say they are of their era, and that this is a pretty heavy car. That said, it ac­tu­ally doesn’t feel heavy from the driver’s seat, and it also works that magic trick that few large cars man­age to pull off – from be­hind the wheel it seems to shrink around you as you progress.

What it adds up to is a great GT – a car that makes you want to get back in and drive it a long way, quite fast, and prefer­ably with all the win­dows down. In that mode the XJC not only looks at its most stun­ning but also causes con­sid­er­ably less buf­fet­ing than I had ex­pected. Not to men­tion be­ing pleas­antly cool on a hot and hu­mid day, so you can wal­low in all that wood and leather com­fort with­out break­ing a bead of sweat.

I even en­joyed the steer­ing, which can be an over-as­sisted, un­der-com­mu­nica­tive dis­ap­point­ment in Jaguar sa­loons. I can find noth­ing to con­firm changes to the sys­tem used in the coupé – which is based on reg­u­lar XJ6 un­der­pin­nings – but it does feel meatier in this ap­pli­ca­tion.

Buy­ing one may re­quire a lit­tle pa­tience given their num­bers – there are even wanted ads for them – but they do turn up reg­u­larly

‘It feels won­der­fully poised. Ev­ery bend you take feels easy and makes you think about go­ing back to try a bit harder’

at clas­sic auc­tions. As with the S-type they need care­ful in­spec­tion be­neath the gloss to avoid buy­ing some­thing that could turn into a big project, be­cause even at prices that are higher than to­day’s a full-on re­build will be far from eco­nom­i­cal. Cer­tainly long-term the bet­ter you buy the more you’ll save.

As ever that means check­ing for the dreaded cor­ro­sion ev­ery­where – but par­tic­u­larly the floor­pans, around the rear sus­pen­sion ra­dius arm mounts and the front sub­frame. Parts sup­ply is gen­er­ally very good, although there are cur­rently some odd ex­cep­tions such as the front grille. They are un­avail­able new and be­ing made from frag­ile Mazak can­not be re­fur­bished.

Watch for low en­gine oil pres­sure, which shouldn’t drop be­low 20psi at hot idle, and be aware that these cars are of­ten a pain to start from hot. Some of that’s down to the orig­i­nal-fit­ment Opus ig­ni­tion sys­tem, but even in­stalling SNG Bar­ratt’s up­graded sys­tem (which you’ll find on a lot of these) rarely cures it en­tirely. It’s some­thing you have to live with.

I’ve lost count of how many times the XJ-S (or XJS as it be­came in the great de-hy­phen­at­ing facelift of 1991 that also brought smoothed-out body lines) has been touted at the ‘next big thing’. ‘Wolf!’ has been cried so of­ten in the last twenty years that you’d be for­given for ig­nor­ing yet another sug­ges­tion that it’s time to buy one.

But this time it re­ally is dif­fer­ent – we have fresh ev­i­dence. XJS prices are al­ready on the move, par­tic­u­larly for those mod­els that have been unan­i­mously de­creed as the most de­sir­able from the car’s 21-year port­fo­lio. Promi­nent among those is the 4.0 con­vert­ible, which is very much a best-of-all-worlds car. How­ever won­der­ful the V12 en­gine is, its thirst (av­er­ag­ing an mpg some­where in the teens) can­not be ig­nored. The six-pot 4.0 – es­pe­cially in the more pow­er­ful ’94-on AJ16 form we have in to­day's test car – has a lot less work to do in a near-200kg lighter car and all but matches the V12’s 0-60mph time. Yet drive it rea­son­ably at mo­tor­way speeds and you will eas­ily see 30mpg. It may be largely psy­cho­log­i­cal, given the av­er­age mileage of most clas­sics, but it does make the 4.0 feel that much more us­able.

Prices be­ing paid for XJSS are al­ready up around five per cent this year, with some of the more spec­u­la­tive prices be­ing asked rac­ing up­wards on a monthly ba­sis. Two with sim­i­lar mileage and his­tory to Richard Monk’s car, which we’re test­ing to­day, are cur­rently be­ing of­fered at £16,995 and £17,500, though shop around and you can still find them within our £15k top guide price. Let’s put those prices in per­spec­tive. The XJS 4.0’s nat­u­ral ri­val in clas­sic-buy­ing terms is the R107 Mercedes-benz 300SL, which has a sim­i­lar im­age, and with su­pe­rior Ger­man build qual­ity bal­anced by a sig­nif­i­cantly lower power out­put. Yet an SL will cost around 75 per cent more than a con­di­tion-matched XJS. That’s a gap that looks wider than it ought to be.

Both the Mercedes and the Jaguar are more GT than sports car in na­ture, ev­i­dent in the ma­jor­ity of XJSS be­ing or­dered new with au­to­matic gear­boxes by this stage of the car’s life. But it is at least a four-speed unit, and not a bad one at that. Flick the switch to ‘S’ for Sporty and that’s what you get – it holds onto lower gears as the en­gine spins up the rev range and gets prop­erly raspy, al­low­ing it to demon­strate a much more un­ruly bad-boy char­ac­ter than these Jags are usu­ally given credit for. I’d be tempted to leave the switch there for all but multi-lane cruis­ing.

With that as­pect plugged in you can start to ex­ploit the rest of the XJS’S abil­i­ties. In reg­u­lar use the steer­ing can feel a bit wafty and, well, lack­ing in feel. There’s also a quite pro­nounced bump/ thump from the front tyres on rougher roads. But hus­tle it into a cor­ner and the wheel weights up nicely and starts to have a two-way con­ver­sa­tion with you. It be­comes easy to cut a per­fect line and how­ever hard you try in the dry it seems im­pos­si­ble to un­stick those 225/60x16s – the sus­pen­sion is just too good at its job for that, be­ing quite un­flap­pable un­der stress de­spite fairly pro­nounced roll. It also helps that these later XJSS have much stiffer bod­ies than the ‘hy­phen’ mod­els.

The brakes, how­ever, seem less un­flap­pable, at least at first prod. There’s not the firm grab you ex­pect but a kind of lazi­ness

‘More GT than sports car in na­ture, ev­i­dent in the ma­jor­ity of XJSS be­ing or­dered new with au­to­matic gear­boxes’

of ac­tion built into the set-up to pro­mote smooth driv­ing. Full-on brak­ing re­sponse re­quires a deeper, harder shove on the pedal, at which point you dis­cover that there’s plenty of it.

Me­chan­i­cally these cars are pretty bul­let­proof as long as they’re not ne­glected. Brakes and sus­pen­sion bushes might wear out but en­gines and gear­boxes can be very long-lived. You just need to bud­get at least around £1000 a year to prop­erly keep on top of their main­te­nance – even if you only spend half of that some years.

The bod­ies were bet­ter pro­tected against rust than ear­lier mod­els too, but be­cause the youngest is now 22 years old it’s no longer a sub­ject you can ig­nore, and once again the real prob­lems, like the front cross­mem­ber, will need digging for well be­neath any ex­ter­nal bril­liance to which a car might have been buffed up.

It is an also old Brit with a lot of elec­tri­cally-pow­ered items on board, so make sure that they all work when called upon, es­pe­cially the pow­ered soft-top. Check the in­te­rior ‘tim­ber’ too – it most of­ten cracks on the con­sole, and none of it’s cheap to re­place.

Please ex­cuse any rep­e­ti­tion here as Quentin was tout­ing these bar­gain su­per-coupés in his Hot Tips col­umn just two is­sues ago. But the truth is that the XKR is so good and so at­trac­tively priced to­day that we’d have been sell­ing you short by leav­ing it out of this col­lec­tion of tempt­ingly priced Jaguars. For those who thought the XK8 was pretty but slightly un­der­whelm­ing, the XKR ver­sion – launched two years later – fi­nally made sense of Jaguar’s whole project to tap into all their E-type her­itage. It’s not that the XK8 was ac­tu­ally slow with 290bhp on tap, but its over­all weight, mod­ern ef­fi­cien­cies and sound-dead­en­ing made that par­tic­u­lar cat feel a lit­tle too do­mes­ti­cated.

What gave the XKR its claws was an Ea­ton su­per­charger, driven at twice en­gine speed, that boosted the four-litre AJ V8 to a far more mus­cu­lar 376bhp. The top speed was still of­fi­cially lim­ited to 155bhp (though we’ve heard of au­to­bahn-munch­ing own­ers who claim to have seen 170mph on the clock) but it dropped the 0-60 time from 6.5sec to 5.2, and re­ally la­dled on the midrange torque – a 35 per cent gain and at lower revs.

All that helped jus­tify these as 60-grand cars when new; now they are very much sub-£10k fod­der, un­less you want some­thing with low mileage and enough his­tory to im­press the An­tiques

Road­show team, or one of the later 4.2-litre mod­els. Even then you can ig­nore any­thing with a spec­u­la­tive ask­ing price above £15k – there are plenty of oth­ers out there wait­ing to be bagged for be­low that fig­ure. Like a 72,500-mile 2001 coupé spot­ted in the clas­si­fieds for £8500. Such low prices surely can’t last.

For once there is no price dif­fer­ence be­tween the coupé and con­vert­ible ver­sions – the lat­ter per­haps be­ing seen as a bit less hard­core and there­fore in less de­mand. Which may be why we par­tic­u­larly wanted to try the hard­top, and were treated to the bet­ter of the pair owned by XKR devo­tee An­drew Mc­quil­lan.

Gad­get Show fans will im­me­di­ately be im­pressed by the way the steer­ing wheel elec­tron­i­cally drops into your hands when you in­sert the ig­ni­tion key, fol­lowed – once pro­grammed – by the seat re­mem­ber­ing where you like it. Af­ter that the gad­gets be­come less ob­tru­sive and if any­thing, driv­ing it is some­how even more ana­logue than the XJS; though I sus­pect it may have been set up and pro­grammed to feel that way, I don’t care – the whole ex­pe­ri­ence is such a blast.

Per­haps the clever­est thing is how well-man­nered the XKR is when be­ing driven in an ev­ery­day man­ner – sure­footed, pretty quiet, long-dis­tance com­fort­able. Then, urged by the car’s owner, I un­leash the beast. Woof! The su­per­charger – un­no­ticed at 2500rpm – starts to whine, there’s a hard shove and the road sim­ply dis­ap­pears. It’s more like a turbo boost than a su­per­charger, based on other blown cars I’ve driven, some of which re­ally have too much low down and don’t re­ally mix with damp roads. But the XKR’S delivery, though still mind-bog­gling, feels more of a con­trolled, safe mad­ness. Luck­ily it has im­mense brak­ing power to match, and the 255/45 rub­ber on the rear’s 18-inch al­loys has grip to match and trac­tion con­trol if things do get too lairy.

‘More like a turbo boost than a su­per­charger, the XKR’S delivery feels like a con­trolled, safe mad­ness’

There were three dis­tinct phases of en­gine. Up to Oc­to­ber 1999 the 4.0 had Nikasil-lined bores which proved prone to wear. Many were re­placed un­der war­ranty with im­proved units which will have a ‘Gen­uine Jaguar Ex­change Prod­uct’ plate on the crank­case, and hope­fully some record in the car’s his­tory file. Af­ter that date they were steel-lined, which cured the is­sue, and fi­nally for 2003 ca­pac­ity was in­creased to 4.2 litres which raised power to a full 400bhp. These are good units but do lis­ten for noise from the tim­ing chain be­cause re­place­ment is a £1200 job, and check that 4.0-litre cars have the 4.2’s chain ten­sioner up­grade.

XKRS are now old enough to have suf­fered from the rav­ages of rot, so check un­der­neath – es­pe­cially around floor­pan-re­in­forc­ing plates, front in­ner wings and chas­sis legs – for any signs of cor­ro­sion kick­ing off. If you’re go­ing for a con­vert­ible, also check both the op­er­a­tion of the power hood, the con­di­tion of its win­dow seals, and the fluid level in the boot-mounted reser­voir. If it’s low that’s a sign of leaks in the hy­draulic sys­tem.

This XJR is the bar­gain bucket of our five-car se­lec­tion – but don’t take that the wrong way, I mean it only in price. In ev­ery other as­pect this is a su­per-sa­loon that reg­is­ters some­where on the ‘awe­some’ scale. To add fur­ther weight to that, on its launch in 1997 this was the most pow­er­ful Jaguar sa­loon ever, em­ploy­ing the same 370bhp su­per­charged 4.0 V8 found in the XKR – along with all the other tech­no­log­i­cal wiz­ardry that makes the coupé so ex­cit­ing. All that blunts it is the in­evitable ex­tra weight that a four-door five-seater sa­loon needs to carry. That adds up to 160kg – around ten per cent heav­ier than the XKR. Com­par­ing the two back-to-back it’s im­pos­si­ble not to no­tice that, but by any other mea­sure the XJR is a most en­gag­ingly quick and ca­pa­ble car in the mould of the much-revered Lotus Carl­ton, with an al­most iden­ti­cal power out­put. And just look how much one of those will cost you now.

There’s a lot more to this Jag than grunt, of course. Like the Com­puter Ac­tive Tech­nol­ogy Sus­pen­sion – CATS, can you see what they did there? – that uses bulk­head-mounted ac­celerom­e­ters to con­stantly fine-tune the damper set­tings to road con­di­tions and driver in­put. That means it can ride like Her Majesty’s limo one minute, then cor­ner like a Tour­ing Car the next. It’s an im­pres­sive trick but you should bear in mind that if the car ceases to per­form it, a re­place­ment set of those dampers will set you back around £1600 fit­ted.

Luck­ily it’s not a job that needs to be done fre­quently, though re­plac­ing worn sus­pen­sion bushes can be thanks to all the stresses gen­er­ated by the mon­ster 255/40VR18 Con­ti­nen­tals or Pirellis these cars wear. As with the XKR you need to take into ac­count the amount of tread on those in any buy­ing/bar­gain­ing de­ci­sions – lesser tyres just don’t cut it and you’re look­ing at £800-plus a set.

Such is the co­nun­drum with these cars: cheap to buy, ex­pen­sive to run. But there has to be a price to pay for the kind of en­joy­ment pro­vided by the XJR, a car that goes very fast, very eas­ily and very qui­etly. A deal of its ex­tra weight must be un­der­bon­net sound­proof­ing be­cause it you hear much less su­per­charger whine than in the XKR – over­all this is a more re­fined place to travel, as it should be. It has the same in­cred­i­ble brakes though.

Me­chan­i­cally there are the same his­toric en­gine is­sues as for the XKR. The only dif­fer­ence is that hav­ing a shorter pro­duc­tion life than the XKR, the XJR wasn’t around long enough in this form to get the 4.2-litre en­gine. While in the en­gine bay, take a look at the ra­di­a­tor. These are now both hard to get and cost around £400 – and due to the na­ture of their con­struc­tion can­not be recored.

In case you are won­der­ing, and per­haps have a pho­bia of self­chang­ing gear­boxes, the XJR was only sold with a five-speed au­to­matic – bought in from Mercedes-benz. As you might ex­pect they give lit­tle trou­ble as long as the fluid is changed reg­u­larly, but if you hear any (non-su­per­charger) whin­ing from the trans­mis­sion it’s a sign of wear and im­pend­ing large ex­pense.

The XJR’S po­ten­tially most de­bil­i­tat­ing prob­lem is cor­ro­sion, so that’s where your ini­tial at­ten­tion should be fo­cused when look­ing

‘There is a price to pay for the en­joy­ment pro­vided by the XJR, a car that goes very fast, very eas­ily and very qui­etly’

at one. The eas­ily spot­ted stuff is where the front wings join the sills. That’s also easy to re­pair, but if it has spread as far as the floor­pans you are prob­a­bly look­ing at the wrong car. Harder to see (and re­pair) ar­eas in­clude the front bulk­head, for­ward end of the in­ner sills and around the sus­pen­sion mount­ings. Of par­tic­u­lar note on these is around where the dampers mount to the in­ner wings. Fix­ing it means drop­ping the front sub­frame and will soon add up to bills for a cou­ple of thou­sand.

So there are a few po­ten­tial neg­a­tives, but the re­ward is great enough to make it worth seek­ing out one of the good XJRS that are out there in the hands of en­thu­si­asts, then look­ing af­ter it – which means heavy ap­pli­ca­tions of rust-proofer and ideally hav­ing a garage large enough to house it.

These cars look to be right at the bot­tom of their de­pre­ci­a­tion curve, with num­bers al­ready rel­a­tively low and still fall­ing more than just steadily – a third of them have dis­ap­peared from our roads in the last five years. It looks very much like the time to buy.

‘They all have that hard-to-de­fine Jaguar thing go­ing on, but each has some­thing dis­cernibly dif­fer­ent to of­fer’

Now I’ve driven, in­spected and chat­ted to the own­ers of the five cars we gath­ered to­gether for this test, each has more than jus­ti­fied its in­clu­sion. There’s some­thing here to suit most pock­ets, even if none of them can – or at least should – be run on a shoe­string.

They all have that hard-to-de­fine Jaguar thing go­ing on, which seems to in­volve a level of dual per­son­al­ity, but each one of them has some­thing dis­cernibly dif­fer­ent to of­fer. The S-type plays a strong nos­tal­gia card – I was raised on Seven­ties cop shows – while the XJ5.3C made me want to get back in and drive it at least as far as Provence, just to be sure I’d got the mea­sure of it.

I had sim­i­lar feel­ings about the XJS con­vert­ible, which has taken its owner on many for­eign jaunts, and I have per­sonal his­tory with own­ing an ear­lier XJ-S 3.6. Bi­ased? Maybe.

The XJR was mas­sively im­pres­sive and to­tally de­serves the com­par­i­son made with a Lotus Carl­ton – some­thing I’ve also driven and loved in the past. Not only that, the Jaguar is ridicu­lously cheap in re­la­tion. But then again, for what it of­fers, so is the XKR. At the end of a great day, that was the one I most wanted to take home – and I’m even hav­ing se­ri­ous thoughts about try­ing to wran­gle one into the Smith fleet. I just hope it can be achieved be­fore their prices start to run riot. Thanks to: The Jaguar Driver's Club

The 3.8 straight six proved more pop­u­lar than the 3.4 Post-septem­ber 1964 S-types have the all-syn­chro gear­box

...but V12 en­gine is a ma­trix to work on Great to drive, whether you're press­ing on or waft­ing pil­lar­lessly...

Ea­ton su­per­charger boosts the 4.0 V8 to 376bhp Wheel and seat ad­just au­to­mat­i­cally on key in­ser­tion

Su­per­charger whine is less au­di­ble than in an XKR The cabin is a haven of quiet re­fine­ment

Russ gives chase. The open-top XJS is great, but it’s one of the other Jags that he re­ally wanted to take home...

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.