Mk. 1 or Mk. 2?
Discussion
mph said:
I've owned both. Currently running a 3.4 Mk1 which I really like. I've just bought a 3.8 Mk2 but haven't driven it yet so it will be interesting when I'm able to do a back to back comparison.
The Mk1 certainly has rarity in it's favour, I seldom see another one, even at shows, whereas the Mk2 is relatively commonplace.
The Mk1 seems to have been the underdog for many years but people are now starting to realise it's rarity and classic appeal.
It's also lighter and faster than the equivalent Mk2 - In fact according to period road tests it's faster off the mark than the XK140.
My car at Croft Circuit.
That is really very lovely indeed!! Stunning and ticks all the boxes for me. The Mk1 certainly has rarity in it's favour, I seldom see another one, even at shows, whereas the Mk2 is relatively commonplace.
The Mk1 seems to have been the underdog for many years but people are now starting to realise it's rarity and classic appeal.
It's also lighter and faster than the equivalent Mk2 - In fact according to period road tests it's faster off the mark than the XK140.
My car at Croft Circuit.
Rather boringly, I agree with everything you say! I've always preferred the Mk. 1 but it's been hard to find others to share the enthusiasm
The 50's racing heritage, the shared components with the XK 140/150 (dash board and steering wheel to name but two!). I've heard the arguments about the Mk. being the "better" car because it doesn't have the 'crab track' whereby the rear wheel base is narrower than the front etc and supported by the undoubted truth that the Mk. 2 is a development of the Mk. 1. But that's like saying the series 3 E-type is better than the series 1 or 2. I suppose it all depends on someone's interpretation of 'better'.
I can only endorse what jith said... I'm dead envious as well now!!!
Thanks for posting anyway mph said:
Just to balance the books, here's the Mk2.
Nice enough in "Golden Sand" or similar and another "real" classic, but all a bit 60's for me. A bit too sheepskin car coat, chrome horn ring, bakerlite 2 spoke steering wheel and golf clubby for my taste. Wouldn't mind betting Arthur Daly had a Mk. 2 in this colour before moving on to XJ 6s and Sovereigns though 
mph said:
You're right it is Golden Sand with a dark tan interior. Not everyone's cup of tea but I like it and it makes a change from the usual colour schemes.
Looking at both cars it's amazing how different in appearance and character they are given that it was basically a facelift.
Now that they're both old "classic" cars it's simply a matter of which you prefer and the Mk1's more old-fashioned appearance and quaint interior is probably in it's favour.
Back in the day though the Mk2 must have been one of the most successful modernisation jobs of all time.
My dad had a Mk2 when I was a young lad and it's the first car that made a real impression on me.
Mk2 Interior
Nothing wrong with that dark tan interior. Looking at your picture, I actually prefer it to the red interior most often selected with Golden Sand.Looking at both cars it's amazing how different in appearance and character they are given that it was basically a facelift.
Now that they're both old "classic" cars it's simply a matter of which you prefer and the Mk1's more old-fashioned appearance and quaint interior is probably in it's favour.
Back in the day though the Mk2 must have been one of the most successful modernisation jobs of all time.
My dad had a Mk2 when I was a young lad and it's the first car that made a real impression on me.
Mk2 Interior
Whilst I do prefer the Mk. 1 from outside and with it's "quaint"
interior, that Mk. 2 interior with its upwards slanting dash and row of toggle switches really is a lovely thing! Assuming it's a 3.8 driving the manual box with overdrive, in Golden Sand with (painted) wires is as close to my perfect spec as you couild get.The only improvement for me would be chrome wire wheels.
Golden Sand and Silver Blue Metallic (I think called "Opalescent Silver Blue" on a 1966 3.8 S-type I had) are the two colours I think best suited the Mk. 2.
Yes, what a step forward from the "Mk. 1" and it certainly rejuvinated the "Jaguar Sporting Saloon" market of the day. 36,740 Mk. 1s were built bewteen 1956 - early 1960. Then 85,000 odd Mk. 2s were built between 1959 - 1967, the last year of production during which they were of course designated Jaguar 240 and 340.
Of that near 37,000 Mk. 1s, I believe less than 100 remiain in the UK today. Here are some of them I came across a few weeks ago!
You may have someting when referring to your dad's Mk. 2 being the first car that made a real impression on you. In 1959 aged just 10, I went with my dad to H. R Owen to collect his brand new Mk. IX, the first car that made a proper impression on me. When I look at the "Mk. 1" of the same 1959 vintage I see just a smaller version of that same car. It's a comforting familiarity in many ways, right down to the tool kit!
jith said:
nikman, what a strange coincidence. It would appear we are almost the same age. And when I was twelve I went with my dad to buy his first Jag, a MK IX. This is it two years later, after my young brother's christening when I was fourteen, (that's me 3rd from the right with the Brylcreem hair!):-
The nostalgic memories of that car are so powerful. It was quite superb and was rare being a manual version with overdrive. At the age of sixteen I learnt how to set plugs and points and tune twin SUs on this car!
My first Jag was a MK1 at the age of 19. I truly wish I had kept it as it was a wonderful car to drive and made all the right noises.
J
What a fantastic picture jith, and you certainly had the Brylcreem Bounce!! 
The nostalgic memories of that car are so powerful. It was quite superb and was rare being a manual version with overdrive. At the age of sixteen I learnt how to set plugs and points and tune twin SUs on this car!
My first Jag was a MK1 at the age of 19. I truly wish I had kept it as it was a wonderful car to drive and made all the right noises.
J
I wish I had a picture of our Mk. IX. There's probably one buried deep in one of the boxes of old family b/w pics of the time. By the way, ours was Indigo Blue with the paler blue below the chrome side trims. Although in b/w, looks like yours could be the same colour scheme! Ours was automatic with "Intermediate Speed Hold" which was operated form the side to side toggle switch, exatly the same as your overdrive switch.
I particularly remember how much wood veneer was in the car, those beautifully made picnic tables, the luxuriously thick carpet and the lever that opened the air intake just in front of the windscreen. I remember you could start the engine from under the bonnet as the starter solonoid has a rubber shield covering a button inside.
Perhaps most of all I remember the tool kit with it's Tecalemit Grease Gun, the plug spanner with it's "Tommy bar", the yellow Lockheed tin containing a length of tubing for beeding the brakes and most of all the feeler guages which I too learned to use at about 14 or 15! Does this look familiar to you?...
Even more coincidentally, I had my first Jag when 18 or 19. A 3.8 Opalescent Pale Blue S-type with dark blue leather and chrome wires. But I don't have the same fond memories of it that you do of your Mk. 1 and therein lies what I believe to be the difference between a car with soul and another without.
a8hex said:
Not only did the supplied tool kit allow you to remove the cylinder head, the owners manual told you how!
The owners manual for my XKR is probably 5 or 6 times thicker than the one for the XK150 but almost everything beyond how to open the drivers door or where to add petrol just says "get your qualified Jaguar technician to do..."
Perhaps a good definition for a classic car is one where the user manual was written the liability avoidance intern in the legal department.
That's very true. I'd started to forget how much more hands on people were those days. The owners manual for my XKR is probably 5 or 6 times thicker than the one for the XK150 but almost everything beyond how to open the drivers door or where to add petrol just says "get your qualified Jaguar technician to do..."
Perhaps a good definition for a classic car is one where the user manual was written the liability avoidance intern in the legal department.
But "modern" cars are designed in such a way and use so many plug-in ECUs etc, that without the expensive diagnostic equipment relevant to your car to hand, there's not much left to do yourself. It's also true that purely mechanical components are generally more reliable these days so you're unlikely to be changing that dynamo or starter motor or cleaning plugs and points, fitting a new coil or dizzy cap because the old one had a hairline crack that would catch you out on damp mornings!
In those days most Jaguar buyers would go aroiund with a box of spanners. Today's new Jaguar buyers are more likely to be found with a box of facial wipes!
jith said:
nikman said:
Today's new Jaguar buyers are more likely to be found with a box of facial wipes!
Oh, nikman, there's a joke in there somewhere!J
But there's also some truth in it.Really moving story about your younger brother finding that picture and bringing it to you without realising the full significance and that it was the day of HIS Christening. Yes, he's clear to see in your Grandmother's arms and I wouldn't mind betting that's your Mum in the striped top and your Dad in a suit!
You're right, such stories and pictures can vividly transport you back to a bygone era when choices were simple, expectations were manageable and everyone lived more or less by the rules.
If you can remember back to when there was no fast food, all food was slow and cooked at home where you ate it at the dining room table with your Mum and Dad and can remember headlight main beam switch being a metal button on the floor and the ignition switch on the dash board next to the starter button, then there's still hope for us all!!
mph said:
Some pictures for a direct comparison. I feel the Mk 1 looks more sporting.
I've just been for a drive in the Mk2. It has to be borne in mind that these are fifty year old cars and while both are in very good condition there's no way of telling how closely they represent an original and standard car.
The Mk1 steering is heavier at low speeds but feels much more precise and positive on the move. The Mk1 feels more nimble. The Mk2 feels a bit softer and more modern. Amazingly both (Moss) gearboxes are excellent.
Two fantastic images - thanks for posting them. I've just been for a drive in the Mk2. It has to be borne in mind that these are fifty year old cars and while both are in very good condition there's no way of telling how closely they represent an original and standard car.
The Mk1 steering is heavier at low speeds but feels much more precise and positive on the move. The Mk1 feels more nimble. The Mk2 feels a bit softer and more modern. Amazingly both (Moss) gearboxes are excellent.
I don't think I've ever seen the two together like that for direct visual comparisons.Interesting too to hear back to back driving impressions. I had a Moss box on an early Series 1 E-Type which I assume is more or less the same box as in these. Synchro on 2nd, 3rd & 4th but not on 1st gear which like all non-synchros was referred in those days as a "crash gear"... or "crash gearbox" if there was no synchro on anything IIRC. No problem at all once familiar with the box.
Great contribution to the thread, bang on topic! Thanks again! My preference is still, maybe even more (!), for the Mk. 1. But the Mk.2 is also a lovely thing in it's more "modern" way I suppose.
Edited by nikman on Sunday 24th May 23:19
DBSV8 said:
Now that the Wife is giving me stick for no space for the kids in the E type
or no space for her in the Lotus , I'm Now looking for a mark 2
Interestingly a very good friend has this lovely mark 2 3.4 in the same colour that my E type was originally Opalescent Silver blue. It really is in pristine condition , one owner car
[URL=http://s68.photobucket.com/user/DBSV8/media/DSCF0058.jpg.html][IMG]
http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i17/DBSV8/DSCF00...
love this colour or Desert sand
That IS lovely!! What are you waiting for? Buy it or I will! or no space for her in the Lotus , I'm Now looking for a mark 2
Interestingly a very good friend has this lovely mark 2 3.4 in the same colour that my E type was originally Opalescent Silver blue. It really is in pristine condition , one owner car
[URL=http://s68.photobucket.com/user/DBSV8/media/DSCF0058.jpg.html][IMG]
http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i17/DBSV8/DSCF00...
love this colour or Desert sand
DBSV8 said:
he's not selling , he got the bargain of the century for that car. he bought it in the condition you see from a private sale , before all the Classic car dealers could get their grubby mits on it and stick 20k on top of the price he paid for her !!
right place and right time
Yep, right place, right time is the key to these. When you started to descrbe it as pristine condition, one owner etc I must've assumed you were describing something that was for sale. Anyway, looks as though we both missed out then right place and right time
I'm not one for replacing original bits with non-original but even that wood rim Mota-lita stering wheel is right for it. I've no idea how much he paid, whether it started with a 3,4 or a 5 it's almost irrelevant as you just couldn't walk away and leave it.
DBSV8 said:
nikman said:
DBSV8 said:
he's not selling , he got the bargain of the century for that car. he bought it in the condition you see from a private sale , before all the Classic car dealers could get their grubby mits on it and stick 20k on top of the price he paid for her !!
right place and right time
Yep, right place, right time is the key to these. When you started to descrbe it as pristine condition, one owner etc I must've assumed you were describing something that was for sale. Anyway, looks as though we both missed out then right place and right time
I'm not one for replacing original bits with non-original but even that wood rim Mota-lita stering wheel is right for it. I've no idea how much he paid, whether it started with a 3,4 or a 5 it's almost irrelevant as you just couldn't walk away and leave it.
klunkT5 said:
Great to see ours havent got wing mirrors aswell, They look awful with them fitted BTW mines used and thrashed daily and does'nt get washed alot.
Well, that you think those paddle-like things you have sticking out from your front side window frames look better than "in period" wing mirrors is a personal opinion and of course there's no right or wrong, it's just subjective. There will be preferences for both no doubt and the same may apply to your belief that the rear wheel arches finished like that with the 'spats' removed present the best view. BTW mines used and thrashed daily and does'nt get washed alot.
Edited by klunkT5 on Saturday 6th June 23:33
Edited by klunkT5 on Saturday 6th June 23:34
But unless I'm missing something, telling everyone that your 51 year old car is thrashed daily and doesn't get washed a lot, speaks volumes although perhaps not quite conveying the message you intended!
klunkT5 said:
If the bottom fell out of the classic car market tommorow i would laugh my tits off at the thought of all the classic car investors getting their fingers burnt again like they did in the late 80's especially Aston owners
I just can't understand someone who IS invested in the classic car market, whether they like it or not, finding losing value in their posessions, and those of others to be amusing. Nuff said I think! However I'm not sure what all this is about Aston owners getting their fingers burnt. No proper market goes in a straight line. There are always peaks and troughs but the trend us usually in one direction for a sustained time, particularly when rarity plays a part. Not forgetting that one man's burnt fingers is another man's opportunity, anyone buying a DB5 ANYTIME in the 80's would have seen this last month for their coupe...
OR at more than double that £530,000 (+ buyers premium) for their DB5 Vantage Volante...
jith said:
Well I would do exactly the reverse. My workshop is full of low mileage, unused cars with seized brake calipers, door locks, piston rings, etc, etc.
These cars were made to be driven, and in the case of the 3.8, driven hard. Properly maintained they will be far healthier than an unused car.
J
"Thrashing" the car and not washing it regularly OR not using it until seals dried out and moving parts seized were NOT the two choices!These cars were made to be driven, and in the case of the 3.8, driven hard. Properly maintained they will be far healthier than an unused car.
J
Here and in much of the rest of Europe, I've driven around a million miles in many different cars including a 1961 3.8 Series 1 E-type (flat floor/Moss box), 1969 Lotus Cortina, 1966 S-Type Jaguar, 1966 MGB (105,000 miles), 1966 stage 6 tuned MGB GT (Janspeed head, twin choke Webbers, c/r factory box etc etc) that had been successfully sprinted and hill climbed before I put in back on the road, 1963 DB4 Series 5 with Vantage/SS engine, 1966 Porsche 911 (70,000 miles), 1998 TVR Chimaera 450 (38,00 miles and counting!) and at least 5 Mercedes (one of them 235,000 miles).
All of these were used if not daily then every few days. All of them totally reliable and all of them indicated triple digits on their speedos every time the law or the track made it possible. But I just can't imagine being motivated to post an identifiable picture and publically declare that I thrashed any one of them and rarely washed it! That was the only point - nothing to do with leaving them sitting around until they seized up as a preference!
corporalsparrow said:
Big mistake looking at this thread.
Now I want a Mk1 as a race car.
No sooner said than... http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/j... done! Now I want a Mk1 as a race car.
Gassing Station | Jaguar | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff