What would you put a 3.6 AJ6 Jag engine in?

[300bhp/ton]

I've always loved the the last straight 6 Jags. If you happened to have a an AJ6 either 3.6 or the 4.0 laying about with a manual gearbox, what car would you put it in to make use of it?

[vixen1700]

Some sort of Allard recreation would be nice.

[Grey Ghost]

I have no engineering knowledge as to if it is possible but a nice Jaguar 4.0 straight six in a Caterham or Westfield chassis might be fun.

[mrtwisty]

In the Scimitar GTE (with a seized Essex v6) that's sitting in my garage begging to be turned into an unusual track car. Not sure if it'd fit too easily though...

[Cooky]

Have fancied one of these for ages

[300bhp/ton]

The Crack Fox said:

Are they relatively heavy engines ?

You know what, I have no idea. Would be curious to know how they compare to a BMW straight 6 like the 2.8 from a 328i.

I know the Jag's rather a mild state of tune. I've heard/read the with cams and head work the 3.6 will offer up 300hp+ over its stock 223hp.

[Cooky]

300bhp/ton said:

The Crack Fox said:

Are they relatively heavy engines ?

You know what, I have no idea. Would be curious to know how they compare to a BMW straight 6 like the 2.8 from a 328i.

I know the Jag's rather a mild state of tune. I've heard/read the with cams and head work the 3.6 will offer up 300hp+ over its stock 223hp.

My 4.0 AJ16 in the XJR is about 320 as standard, I have heard that 360 is quite achievable with a few minor tweeks

recon that'd be interesting in the Kougar/Allard

[anonymous-user]

I'd put a 3.6 straight in the bin, particularly if it's an early one from an XJS. They were better in the XJ40 but still pretty coarse and nasty. The 4 litre is a much better engine, and the later AJ16 is really very good. I've heard the 3.6 described as a concrete mixer, and it's not far from the truth.

Dave

[300bhp/ton]

dme123 said:

I'd put a 3.6 straight in the bin, particularly if it's an early one from an XJS. They were better in the XJ40 but still pretty coarse and nasty. The 4 litre is a much better engine, and the later AJ16 is really very good. I've heard the 3.6 described as a concrete mixer, and it's not far from the truth.

Dave

Umm wonderful insight there. Personally enjoyed the 2 we've had. Still a smooth pleasant engine compared to many, just not as smooth as past XK or Jag V12's.

[Snoop Bagg]

Cooky said:

Have fancied one of these for ages

Brilliant cars, nothing like the straight six wheel spinning through third and fourth. I suspect that of all the mistakes my dad (davel) has made, selling his Kougar was the worst biggest.

[balls-out]

Kouger's looks are too challenging for me. I think this is more like it

[300bhp/ton]

The Crack Fox said:

My auto XJ6 had the 3.2 AJ16 engine, something like 204 bhp IIRC, nice enough but I heard the manual box is crap. If it weighs loads then there's not much point is using it in something light and sporty.

The manuals always got a bit of a hard time. Not sure why really. Clutches where heavy so they didn't feel like driving a normal 1.6 litre hatchback. Gearbox itself was no probs. Gearchange maybe a little clunky, but I sort of prefer that in some ways. Made it feel more butch! I don't think there was anything actually wrong with them, just one of those things the media decided to hate so every man and his dog now repeats the same.

The Crack Fox said:

How about the Jag V12, with the supercharger gubbins from the XJR nailed to it, would that work ?

Technically the AJ6 is a far superior engine to the V12 and logic says it must be a heck of a lot lighter too.

You can supercharge the V12, it's been done lots. But most of it would have to be custom. The DOHC heads and intake are quite different on the AJ6. Most supercharged V12's ran two blowers, one per bank. But that's then double the cost and even more weight.

[James Dean]

300bhp/ton said:

I've always loved the the last straight 6 Jags. If you happened to have a an AJ6 either 3.6 or the 4.0 laying about with a manual gearbox, what car would you put it in to make use of it?

In a Jaaag obviously

[300bhp/ton]

mikele pirelli said:

300bhp/ton said:

dme123 said:

I'd put a 3.6 straight in the bin, particularly if it's an early one from an XJS. They were better in the XJ40 but still pretty coarse and nasty. The 4 litre is a much better engine, and the later AJ16 is really very good. I've heard the 3.6 described as a concrete mixer, and it's not far from the truth.

Dave

Umm wonderful insight there. Personally enjoyed the 2 we've had. Still a smooth pleasant engine compared to many, just not as smooth as past XK or Jag V12's.

I beg to differ too, my 4.0 AJ6 is no smoother or more powerful
than the 3.6 that went prior to it. It's got a bit more torque and that's
all.
It's an all alloy block and head, so it's not particularly heavy
( have you ever tried lifting a 3.0 Essex Ford ? )

My main gripe is that there isn't an aftermarket inlet manifold to
fit triple sidedraft 45 DCOE's.
Sorry... if the 3.6 was as coarse as that, I'd say it wasn't in
the best of fettle.
I saw an Opel Manta at a car show with one in it ! A quick car
in all likelihood.

My Dad's first Jag was a 3.6 auto XJ40 F Reg. Then a 6.0 93 plate V12. We also had a 2.9 auto XJ40, 3.6 manual XJ40 (which I wish we still had ), AJ16 4.0 X300 and a number of 3.2's and 4.0's as curtosy cars.

I can't really say I noted the 3.6 being coarse at all.

In this day and age I think a full EFI (Megasquirt) would be the way to go rather than 45's.

[vladcjelli]

If I recall, you quite liked these did you not?



Must be a way to use it in here?

Have you actually got the engine lying around ready?

[markh1]

What happened to that obscure american thunderbird or something or other you got hold of that you were going to do some work on? It was white if I recall and a bit challenged in the looks dept.

[thinfourth2]

For those of us not overly familair with jag engines is it an old one that looks like an engine or a modern thing that looks like a hoover trying to mate with a central heating boiler

[kamilb1998]

thinfourth2 said:

For those of us not overly familair with jag engines is it an old one that looks like an engine or a modern thing that looks like a hoover trying to mate with a central heating boiler

It's this one...

[MX7]

I saw a replica of a SS100 the other day, which looked quite good.

[cml]

Can't say it would be an ideal engine for a light sporty car - its really designed for smoothness and mid-range torque, however it can be tuned - see here for ideas

http://www.jagweb.com/aj6eng/

I've always liked the idea of a real Q car - tatty old 70/80s saloon with a big engine, you'll need a RWD with a fairly long bonnet though. Mmmm, Triumph 2000 on wolfrace wheels.