Bargain Jaguar - am I mental???
Discussion
Ive been toying with the idea for a good few months now and really like the idea of a nice tidy XJ40 or X300. For a little over a grand you can buy a very good XJ40 and for around 2k get a very nice X300. Best colour combo for XJ40 would be Regency Red and Oatmeal leather or Kingfisher Blue. They do more than my current car to the gallon so not really that bothered about economy. Just waft around without a care!!
Am I potty??
XJ40
http://carandclassic.co.uk/car/C148270/
X300
http://pistonheads.com/sales/1655136.htm
Am I potty??
XJ40
http://carandclassic.co.uk/car/C148270/
X300
http://pistonheads.com/sales/1655136.htm
falkster said:
Am I potty??
Yes, but you're not the only one, I'm having the same thoughts (the other 'sensible' choice being various mundane estates).BTW the second link is X308, not X300.
My biggest fear is that having a Jag as my only car wouldn't be too practical, can't imagine one with a roof box for example.
I love my XJ40. Cost £340 by the time i'd stuck 12 months ticket on it and it has needed nothing in 4 months and 2500 miles. Parts can be had cheaply from cars which have succumbed to tin-worm if necessary (i got a nice piece of bumper chrome for a fiver and a very good set of compomotive MO with 2 new kumho ecstas for £50). Personally prefer the looks of the '40 but i realise i'm in the minority. Smoother than any car i've experienced, it's a wonderful experience riding the wave of torque relaxing in total comfort.
They're tempting, but beware that something could go wrong with it at any minute, leaving you stranded and the car worth £200 in parts. They'd be an ideal 2nd car for some bargain Jaguar wafting action, but if you NEED a car (for work etc) or if you've got a budget of £1500 or something they're really, REALLY not a good idea. Have a browse around the Jaguar forums, even the guys there will admit that these cars (X308 in particular) are not reliable on long lived.
I was looking for a new at the end of last year. Was looking and thinking about what to get had the tick list down to.
Petrol
Auto
Comfy
RWD
Was looking at 330i or another A4 quattro (I know it is not RWD)…. Mate popped a XJ8 onto the list. next thing I got a 98 XJ8, 65k on the clock full Jag history for not a lot
No comparison ok the MPG is not quite as good as a 330i but done 7k miles in 9 months all is well. I did have concerns about the reliability of a “old Jag” but as I have a Saab as a back up was able to risk it. also the Jag was no use at all in the snow last winter.
I would say get one.
“far better to regret something you have done, than some thing you whish you had done”
Petrol
Auto
Comfy
RWD
Was looking at 330i or another A4 quattro (I know it is not RWD)…. Mate popped a XJ8 onto the list. next thing I got a 98 XJ8, 65k on the clock full Jag history for not a lot
No comparison ok the MPG is not quite as good as a 330i but done 7k miles in 9 months all is well. I did have concerns about the reliability of a “old Jag” but as I have a Saab as a back up was able to risk it. also the Jag was no use at all in the snow last winter.
I would say get one.
“far better to regret something you have done, than some thing you whish you had done”
Dick_Phallus said:
They're tempting, but beware that something could go wrong with it at any minute, leaving you stranded and the car worth £200 in parts. They'd be an ideal 2nd car for some bargain Jaguar wafting action, but if you NEED a car (for work etc) or if you've got a budget of £1500 or something they're really, REALLY not a good idea. Have a browse around the Jaguar forums, even the guys there will admit that these cars (X308 in particular) are not reliable on long lived.
Absolute twaddle. My x300 is my only car, cost just over 2k and I have put 20000 miles on with ease. The x300s in particular are utterly solid.Make sure you're looking at the X300 straight six (94-97), not the X308 V8 (97-). £2k versions of the V8 can be a money pit.
I paid £2,350 for my 95 X300 3.2 Sport five years ago. It has been my only car. It has been astonishingly reliable - I knew that they had a good reputation, but I did expect to end up at the side of the road occasionally. I had the AC compressor die (just drove it without AC until it was replaced), a top hose blew soon after I got it (perished rubber, cheap to fix), and the front brake piston failed last year (new calipers, discs and pads). Other than general servicing and consumables, this is all that has gone wrong with it in 5 years.
The best thing is that it has a cam chain, not a belt, so servicing is cheap -think £250 for a major 60,000 mile service at an independent, and less when it's just a change of fluids.
It starts every day, without hesitation. It is more than adequately powerful, and it puts a smile on my face every day. Sure, fuel consumption is not equivalent to a Fiesta. But on the whole, taking into account depreciation, servicing and maintenance, I'd say that, depending on your mileage, it will work out cheaper to run.
XJ40 (91-94) is similar to the above, but the older AJ6 (as opposed to the X300's updated AJ16) engine is a little less reliable - but a good one will be great.
Go for it.
I paid £2,350 for my 95 X300 3.2 Sport five years ago. It has been my only car. It has been astonishingly reliable - I knew that they had a good reputation, but I did expect to end up at the side of the road occasionally. I had the AC compressor die (just drove it without AC until it was replaced), a top hose blew soon after I got it (perished rubber, cheap to fix), and the front brake piston failed last year (new calipers, discs and pads). Other than general servicing and consumables, this is all that has gone wrong with it in 5 years.
The best thing is that it has a cam chain, not a belt, so servicing is cheap -think £250 for a major 60,000 mile service at an independent, and less when it's just a change of fluids.
It starts every day, without hesitation. It is more than adequately powerful, and it puts a smile on my face every day. Sure, fuel consumption is not equivalent to a Fiesta. But on the whole, taking into account depreciation, servicing and maintenance, I'd say that, depending on your mileage, it will work out cheaper to run.
XJ40 (91-94) is similar to the above, but the older AJ6 (as opposed to the X300's updated AJ16) engine is a little less reliable - but a good one will be great.
Go for it.
jbi said:
Have you driven a LS400?
give one a shot, you might be surprised. Cheap and probably the best built car of the 90's.
Supremely reliable
Its really the Jag I want but clearly not a status thing as its a very cheap car. I should really get a 740 or an A8 but like I said its the Jag.give one a shot, you might be surprised. Cheap and probably the best built car of the 90's.
Supremely reliable
Dominicc01 said:
Make sure you're looking at the X300 straight six (94-97), not the X308 V8 (97-). £2k versions of the V8 can be a money pit.
I paid £2,350 for my 95 X300 3.2 Sport five years ago. It has been my only car. It has been astonishingly reliable - I knew that they had a good reputation, but I did expect to end up at the side of the road occasionally. I had the AC compressor die (just drove it without AC until it was replaced), a top hose blew soon after I got it (perished rubber, cheap to fix), and the front brake piston failed last year (new calipers, discs and pads). Other than general servicing and consumables, this is all that has gone wrong with it in 5 years.
The best thing is that it has a cam chain, not a belt, so servicing is cheap -think £250 for a major 60,000 mile service at an independent, and less when it's just a change of fluids.
It starts every day, without hesitation. It is more than adequately powerful, and it puts a smile on my face every day. Sure, fuel consumption is not equivalent to a Fiesta. But on the whole, taking into account depreciation, servicing and maintenance, I'd say that, depending on your mileage, it will work out cheaper to run.
XJ40 (91-94) is similar to the above, but the older AJ6 (as opposed to the X300's updated AJ16) engine is a little less reliable - but a good one will be great.
Go for it.
Thats brilliant, thanks!! I paid £2,350 for my 95 X300 3.2 Sport five years ago. It has been my only car. It has been astonishingly reliable - I knew that they had a good reputation, but I did expect to end up at the side of the road occasionally. I had the AC compressor die (just drove it without AC until it was replaced), a top hose blew soon after I got it (perished rubber, cheap to fix), and the front brake piston failed last year (new calipers, discs and pads). Other than general servicing and consumables, this is all that has gone wrong with it in 5 years.
The best thing is that it has a cam chain, not a belt, so servicing is cheap -think £250 for a major 60,000 mile service at an independent, and less when it's just a change of fluids.
It starts every day, without hesitation. It is more than adequately powerful, and it puts a smile on my face every day. Sure, fuel consumption is not equivalent to a Fiesta. But on the whole, taking into account depreciation, servicing and maintenance, I'd say that, depending on your mileage, it will work out cheaper to run.
XJ40 (91-94) is similar to the above, but the older AJ6 (as opposed to the X300's updated AJ16) engine is a little less reliable - but a good one will be great.
Go for it.
king arthur said:
Dick_Phallus said:
They're tempting, but beware that something could go wrong with it at any minute,
This is different to any other car how exactly?falkster said:
king arthur said:
Dick_Phallus said:
They're tempting, but beware that something could go wrong with it at any minute,
This is different to any other car how exactly?I don't think you're potty! The XJ40 and X300 are great cars and if sensibly chosen, either will be a good and reliable everyday car.
I have an XJ40 and much prefer them to the X300. For me, the X300 looks and feels a little too "Ford"; the styling is too derivative and the interior feels less special - more akin to an X-Type than an old school Jag. It's silly details really like the exterior door handles which look a bit Mondeo to me. The X300 is an excellent car though, newer, and more popular - on PistonHeads at least where some seem to dislike the XJ40.
Either car can be a completely reliable everyday car and fully practical as your only car, if you don't mind the fuel consumption. Mine has been almost fault free in the 9/10 years I have owned it. My father had it before me and it never stranded him. I am confident I could get in it now, drive it to Milan, leave it there 2 weeks then drive it back without issue. I trust it completely.
The X300 is very similar mechanically to the 93/94 battery-in-boot XJ40s, the chief difference being an update to the engine (XJ40=AJ6, X300=AJ16) which is slightly smoother and more powerful, and even more robust.
Both the AJ6 and AJ16 are extremely reliable and long lived units, and far stronger than the later V8. Well over 200,000 miles is not unusual. Oil pressure senders can go flaky on them, but real oil pressure problems are almost unknown. The X300 just has a switch and the dial registers to the mid position if there is oil pressure. Timing chains don't give problems, and the whole bottom of the engine is hugely strong. It will outlive most cars.
Valve guide seals can wear causing a little smoke at startup, but provided there is no smoke whilst driving, this is not generally a cause for alarm.
The automatic gearbox is a ZF4HP22 in the 3.2 (and 3.6) and a ZF4HP24 in the 4.0 and is the same unit in both the XJ40 and X300. It is a reliable and long lived unit.
These are heavy cars and are hard on suspension bushes. Any XJ40 or X300 should ride smoothly and quietly with no bangs, knocks, creaks, squeaks, chirps or wallowing! Check for uneven tyre wear too.
On the XJ40 the main problem is rust. On your budget you should be able to get one without rust problems though.
93/94 cars are generally the best, but you MUST check the bulkhead on these - there is a design fault which can lead to serious rust here on these years only. By no means all have it, and it is not hidden and is difficult to disguise. Rule out a car with lots of rust here.
Bonnet and boot lids rust on earlier cars, but are cheaply available.
Look for rust along the join between the sills and the floor on both sides (but particularly the passenger's) and along the front of both front footwells. Look for rust on the sill ends and on the bottom of the front wings. A little visible rust here will hide more underneath. Another area is round the fuel filler flap. Sunroof panels can rust too.
Aircon will need more than a regass (probably!!)
The XJ40 seems to have earned a reputation for electrical problems which is most unfair to all but the early digital dash cars. 93/94 battery in boot cars are especially reliable.
I won't comment on the X300, since I know a lot less about them and this is already an essay, save to say check the rear arches on the early cars. They can rust badly here and it is not a trivial repair.
I hope I haven't put you off! You have a sensible budget, plenty to buy a nice car and if bought with your eyes open an XJ will be a reliable and practical car which is lovely to drive round in.
Which model would I get? - Cool though they are, I would avoid the digital dash cars (3.6 and 2.9 litres). They have a lot more electrical problems.
Of the cars with a traditional dial dash, the 2.9 whilst undoubtedly smooth, is a slow wheezy thing whose engine is a bit fragile and struggles to keep up with traffic. I'd avoid it unless it is crazy cheap for its condition.
The 3.2 is much better - the twin cam is a far stronger engine and it is fast enough and very smooth and slightly more economical. I have one of these, and would not discount a nice one as they are fine cars.
The 4 lire is the one to go for though. It is significantly faster and only slightly less economical.
Spec wise, the Sovereign gets all the toys, with Daimler and XJR an even higher level of spec, the Daimler even having picnic trays on the rear seats which are rather cool. 93/94 saw thde introduction of the 3.2S and 4.0S which have a lowered suspension and sportier interior. The V12 came out in this time. They use too much fuel to use every day.
There is a one model forum for the XJ40 with a lot of information on the model www.xj40.com . I'm sure there must be a similar site for the X300 too.
David
I have an XJ40 and much prefer them to the X300. For me, the X300 looks and feels a little too "Ford"; the styling is too derivative and the interior feels less special - more akin to an X-Type than an old school Jag. It's silly details really like the exterior door handles which look a bit Mondeo to me. The X300 is an excellent car though, newer, and more popular - on PistonHeads at least where some seem to dislike the XJ40.
Either car can be a completely reliable everyday car and fully practical as your only car, if you don't mind the fuel consumption. Mine has been almost fault free in the 9/10 years I have owned it. My father had it before me and it never stranded him. I am confident I could get in it now, drive it to Milan, leave it there 2 weeks then drive it back without issue. I trust it completely.
The X300 is very similar mechanically to the 93/94 battery-in-boot XJ40s, the chief difference being an update to the engine (XJ40=AJ6, X300=AJ16) which is slightly smoother and more powerful, and even more robust.
Both the AJ6 and AJ16 are extremely reliable and long lived units, and far stronger than the later V8. Well over 200,000 miles is not unusual. Oil pressure senders can go flaky on them, but real oil pressure problems are almost unknown. The X300 just has a switch and the dial registers to the mid position if there is oil pressure. Timing chains don't give problems, and the whole bottom of the engine is hugely strong. It will outlive most cars.
Valve guide seals can wear causing a little smoke at startup, but provided there is no smoke whilst driving, this is not generally a cause for alarm.
The automatic gearbox is a ZF4HP22 in the 3.2 (and 3.6) and a ZF4HP24 in the 4.0 and is the same unit in both the XJ40 and X300. It is a reliable and long lived unit.
These are heavy cars and are hard on suspension bushes. Any XJ40 or X300 should ride smoothly and quietly with no bangs, knocks, creaks, squeaks, chirps or wallowing! Check for uneven tyre wear too.
On the XJ40 the main problem is rust. On your budget you should be able to get one without rust problems though.
93/94 cars are generally the best, but you MUST check the bulkhead on these - there is a design fault which can lead to serious rust here on these years only. By no means all have it, and it is not hidden and is difficult to disguise. Rule out a car with lots of rust here.
Bonnet and boot lids rust on earlier cars, but are cheaply available.
Look for rust along the join between the sills and the floor on both sides (but particularly the passenger's) and along the front of both front footwells. Look for rust on the sill ends and on the bottom of the front wings. A little visible rust here will hide more underneath. Another area is round the fuel filler flap. Sunroof panels can rust too.
Aircon will need more than a regass (probably!!)
The XJ40 seems to have earned a reputation for electrical problems which is most unfair to all but the early digital dash cars. 93/94 battery in boot cars are especially reliable.
I won't comment on the X300, since I know a lot less about them and this is already an essay, save to say check the rear arches on the early cars. They can rust badly here and it is not a trivial repair.
I hope I haven't put you off! You have a sensible budget, plenty to buy a nice car and if bought with your eyes open an XJ will be a reliable and practical car which is lovely to drive round in.
Which model would I get? - Cool though they are, I would avoid the digital dash cars (3.6 and 2.9 litres). They have a lot more electrical problems.
Of the cars with a traditional dial dash, the 2.9 whilst undoubtedly smooth, is a slow wheezy thing whose engine is a bit fragile and struggles to keep up with traffic. I'd avoid it unless it is crazy cheap for its condition.
The 3.2 is much better - the twin cam is a far stronger engine and it is fast enough and very smooth and slightly more economical. I have one of these, and would not discount a nice one as they are fine cars.
The 4 lire is the one to go for though. It is significantly faster and only slightly less economical.
Spec wise, the Sovereign gets all the toys, with Daimler and XJR an even higher level of spec, the Daimler even having picnic trays on the rear seats which are rather cool. 93/94 saw thde introduction of the 3.2S and 4.0S which have a lowered suspension and sportier interior. The V12 came out in this time. They use too much fuel to use every day.
There is a one model forum for the XJ40 with a lot of information on the model www.xj40.com . I'm sure there must be a similar site for the X300 too.
David
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff