Jag XJ Sport Any Good ?
Discussion
That would be one of the squarer 'XJ40' models then? As opposed to an 'X300'? X300 came out in '94 so it could be either, it would be easier to give advice if we knew exactly what it was. Confusingly, the 'Sport' tended to have the smaller engine (it was intended to appeal to a younger audience, and is mostly a trim package on an otherwise low spec model) which would be the 3.2litre 'AJ6' (or AJ16 if an X300) 24v straight 6 on that car. But, again, it could be a 4 litre.
For either car there's lots of advice on here (and I'm sure others will be along soon), just have a look through.
See here:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Does yours look like the blue one with all the big pics at the bottom, or the grey one with the smoked indicators a bit further up?
For either car there's lots of advice on here (and I'm sure others will be along soon), just have a look through.
See here:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Does yours look like the blue one with all the big pics at the bottom, or the grey one with the smoked indicators a bit further up?
Edited by varsas on Friday 6th January 08:22
In 93-94 it would be an XJ40, with a squarer front end, probably rectangular headlights.
In November 94 you get the curvier X300, which in Sport form is the great saloon car of all time.
Both will have straight 6's, putting cylinders in rows of 6 is the only way to do it.
The XJ40 has the AJ6 engine, while the X300 gets the improved AJ16.
On the X300 Sport you'll find that most have the 3.2 engine, although the 4L was also available. The 4 is torquier and probably more economical while the 3.2 is even smoother. The 4 gets an electronically controlled gearbox, which may account for the better economy.
I'm not 100% certain on the XJ40 Sport model. It was available with both the 3.2 and 4L variants of the engine though.
(Sorry I was interrupted writing my posting, I'd started it before the other reply and finished afterwards)
In November 94 you get the curvier X300, which in Sport form is the great saloon car of all time.
Both will have straight 6's, putting cylinders in rows of 6 is the only way to do it.
The XJ40 has the AJ6 engine, while the X300 gets the improved AJ16.
On the X300 Sport you'll find that most have the 3.2 engine, although the 4L was also available. The 4 is torquier and probably more economical while the 3.2 is even smoother. The 4 gets an electronically controlled gearbox, which may account for the better economy.
I'm not 100% certain on the XJ40 Sport model. It was available with both the 3.2 and 4L variants of the engine though.
(Sorry I was interrupted writing my posting, I'd started it before the other reply and finished afterwards)
varsas said:
a8hex said:
(Sorry I was interrupted writing my posting, I'd started it before the other reply and finished afterwards)
Someone on PH agrees with me shock!varsas said:
Confusingly, the 'Sport' tended to have the smaller engine (it was intended to appeal to a younger audience, and is mostly a trim package on an otherwise low spec model) which would be the 3.2litre 'AJ6' (or AJ16 if an X300) 24v straight 6 on that car. But, again, it could be a 4 litre.
At least with the X300 the Sport gets different suspension settings, and in keeping with the Goldylocks' principle I think they are the best compromise. All suspension systems are a compromise between ride comfort at handling characteristics. Jaguar had three levels of suspension for the X300. The Sovereign settings (also used on the standard cars) I found a little on the soft side. The XJR settings were, I found too firm - it didn't give that Jaguar ride you expect (the V8 XJR rides better). Then you get true perfection, the Sport models settings (also used in the Executive, I think) which give a much better ride than the XJR whilst not wallowing like the Sovereign, it is really only in rapid S bends where the cars weight becomes apparent.a8hex said:
varsas said:
a8hex said:
(Sorry I was interrupted writing my posting, I'd started it before the other reply and finished afterwards)
Someone on PH agrees with me shock!varsas said:
Confusingly, the 'Sport' tended to have the smaller engine (it was intended to appeal to a younger audience, and is mostly a trim package on an otherwise low spec model) which would be the 3.2litre 'AJ6' (or AJ16 if an X300) 24v straight 6 on that car. But, again, it could be a 4 litre.
At least with the X300 the Sport gets different suspension settings, and in keeping with the Goldylocks' principle I think they are the best compromise. All suspension systems are a compromise between ride comfort at handling characteristics. Jaguar had three levels of suspension for the X300. The Sovereign settings (also used on the standard cars) I found a little on the soft side. The XJR settings were, I found too firm - it didn't give that Jaguar ride you expect (the V8 XJR rides better). Then you get true perfection, the Sport models settings (also used in the Executive, I think) which give a much better ride than the XJR whilst not wallowing like the Sovereign, it is really only in rapid S bends where the cars weight becomes apparent.my mate had an N reg 3.2 Sport and well remember when checking for its tyre pressure setting it said something like to use for Sports style driving to set the tyres at the higher pressure - good old fashioned British simplicity
my neighbour's son now uses the same 3.2 Sport model as my mate had (when he's not in his daily Rover P5B) and comfirm what I remember from my mate's and other Jags - back end fun in the wet and car struggles in the snow
my neighbour's son now uses the same 3.2 Sport model as my mate had (when he's not in his daily Rover P5B) and comfirm what I remember from my mate's and other Jags - back end fun in the wet and car struggles in the snow
The XJ40 Sport was available in both 3.2 and 4.0-litre forms but the former was more common. I have seen one or two 4.0 Sport XJ40s but I'm sure I read that only a few hundred were made and not many remain.
Nice to hear all the love for the X300 Jaguar XJ Sport 4.0, I've got one and think it is wonderful.
Nice to hear all the love for the X300 Jaguar XJ Sport 4.0, I've got one and think it is wonderful.
A 93/94 car is likely to be an XJ40 although could be an early X300. The XJ40 Sport or 'S' as they were badged. The 4.0S XJ40 cars are quite rare these days as only 802 were ever made; with 3,117 3.2S models being made.
The key thing to look out for on these mostly is rust, with early X300s sometimes rusting worse than XJ40s.
On 93/94 XJ40 cars the things to look out for rust wise is the bulkhead and sills.
The X300 cars like to rust on the floor-sill join, bulkhead and rear arches.
Mechanically both models are pretty much bullet proof, and should go north of 300k miles with regular servicing with no issues.
The key thing to look out for on these mostly is rust, with early X300s sometimes rusting worse than XJ40s.
On 93/94 XJ40 cars the things to look out for rust wise is the bulkhead and sills.
The X300 cars like to rust on the floor-sill join, bulkhead and rear arches.
Mechanically both models are pretty much bullet proof, and should go north of 300k miles with regular servicing with no issues.
80quattro said:
Here's my XJ40 3.2S that I parted company with last summer. I really enjoyed wafting around in it, probably the tamest 200 odd bhp car I've ever driven ! The main reason I opted for an XJ40 was my Classic insurer wouldn't cover an X300.
Had my X308 on classic cover through Peter Best.Jag...Sport...
I tried to buy a 4.0ltr Sport identical to 80Quattro's but it turned out to be a heap of rubbish I bought a 4.0 ltr Sovereign instead.
Introduce yourself on XJ40.com, Kambil, DavidB and the other Jag lads are on there, it's a great community and loads of friendly advice.
I tried to buy a 4.0ltr Sport identical to 80Quattro's but it turned out to be a heap of rubbish I bought a 4.0 ltr Sovereign instead.
Introduce yourself on XJ40.com, Kambil, DavidB and the other Jag lads are on there, it's a great community and loads of friendly advice.
80quattro said:
Here's my XJ40 3.2S that I parted company with last summer. I really enjoyed wafting around in it, probably the tamest 200 odd bhp car I've ever driven ! The main reason I opted for an XJ40 was my Classic insurer wouldn't cover an X300.
So far as I'm aware, the main difference is the alloys, which you can see on this great example. The Sport alloys are quite sought after for non-sport cars, since they do look great.Obviously don't expect anything remotely resembling sport in the way the car drives, but from what I remember the great thing is they don't spoil the ride quality in order to try to justify the Sport tag!
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff