Any Jaguar Mk2 owners here?
Discussion
Completely different cars from different eras really. A Mk2 is a car that can easily be transformed into a fast track car but you are looking at a smaller cabin and importantly a live axle. On the other hand a good XJ6 will take you anywhere on a magic carpet with its IRS set-up. And as well as being bigger inside it is one hell of a lot cheaper for a really good one.
Edited by lowdrag on Friday 31st March 12:58
Ive got both, What lowdrag says sums it up really. IMO the mk2's the better looking one (Just!) But if i had to cover any distance the S1 would be the one i would take (My current S1 is off the road but ive previously owned a lovely S1 4.2 manual) Compared to a good, Sorted S1 the Mk2 is a bit of a chore to drive (Especially with a moss box) but its all part of the Mk2's charm.
Edited by klunkT5 on Friday 31st March 15:41
I'm 6'4" and own a Mk2.
I've no issues on the comfort front for 100 mile trips to Goodwood and back and took the car down to Le Mans last year. There's certainly enough leg room.
Trust me it's far easier to get into a more roomy than my MG BGT V8!
Mine is a very early car (1960) and has a Moss box but once you get used to it it's fine. The Mk2 rides well (apart from a lack of lumbar support when going around sharper corners which tends to leave you clinging on to the steering wheel for dear life) and in 3.8 MOD guise (which mine is) there's plenty of mid range torque and it will still embarrass a lot of people driving newer 'so called' performance cars.
I've no issues on the comfort front for 100 mile trips to Goodwood and back and took the car down to Le Mans last year. There's certainly enough leg room.
Trust me it's far easier to get into a more roomy than my MG BGT V8!
Mine is a very early car (1960) and has a Moss box but once you get used to it it's fine. The Mk2 rides well (apart from a lack of lumbar support when going around sharper corners which tends to leave you clinging on to the steering wheel for dear life) and in 3.8 MOD guise (which mine is) there's plenty of mid range torque and it will still embarrass a lot of people driving newer 'so called' performance cars.
I avoided mentioning an S-type because I owned a 3.4 for a few years. Yes, a lovely car but I never really got to like it and somehow it was always the ugly duckling. It didn't have the precision handling of the Mk2 nor the svelte feel of an XJ6. It was an interim model but could never hold a candle to either the Mk2 or the XJ6. Damned cheap though.
lowdrag said:
I avoided mentioning an S-type because I owned a 3.4 for a few years. Yes, a lovely car but I never really got to like it and somehow it was always the ugly duckling. It didn't have the precision handling of the Mk2 nor the svelte feel of an XJ6. It was an interim model but could never hold a candle to either the Mk2 or the XJ6. Damned cheap though.
S-Type has always been my favourite really, probably stems from childhood impression and lots of rides as a kid in black Met.Police S-Type area cars as the old man was in the Met.Mk2s are lovely and the market knows this with a price to match.
For a lot less £s and most of the "naughty boy" image you could take a look at the S type or 420. Perhaps not quite so lovely in many people's eyes, but to some it's still classic Jag with decent pace, handling and plenty of room (in the front at least).
And yes I am biased.
For a lot less £s and most of the "naughty boy" image you could take a look at the S type or 420. Perhaps not quite so lovely in many people's eyes, but to some it's still classic Jag with decent pace, handling and plenty of room (in the front at least).
And yes I am biased.
Edited by pottman on Saturday 1st April 05:41
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff