Jensen Interceptor Mk3 YYY691M
Discussion
When I had the lighter in weight Mk II with the slightly smaller (but more powerful) version of the engine, I would get at most 16MPG on a run (18 if I was LYING)* , 12 MPG a lot, and below 10 MPG in town. I also once had a very late fuel injected Mk III, but the fuel injection did not seem to make a lot of difference, as that car was heavier and had aircon. The Mark II handled better than the Mark III, but whether because of weight, or because of wear to components, or because of different setup, I do not know.
*All men lie about two things. One of those things is MPG.
*All men lie about two things. One of those things is MPG.
Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 6th July 13:28
I spotted a chap in an Interceptor SP at a car show the other day, so popped over to chat with him. I guess every SP owner gets sick of talking about MPG with random classic enthusiasts!
Anyway, what was interesting was that he had owned more than one Interceptor and reckoned that the SP was not measurably faster than the regular Interceptor, despite the excessive thirst. In his opinion the Six Pack carburettor was not all that effective in releasing the latent BHP and better swapped for something else. I think he now had 4 x twin downdraft Webers on his.
Anyway, what was interesting was that he had owned more than one Interceptor and reckoned that the SP was not measurably faster than the regular Interceptor, despite the excessive thirst. In his opinion the Six Pack carburettor was not all that effective in releasing the latent BHP and better swapped for something else. I think he now had 4 x twin downdraft Webers on his.
LotusOmega375D said:
I spotted a chap in an Interceptor SP at a car show the other day, so popped over to chat with him. I guess every SP owner gets sick of talking about MPG with random classic enthusiasts!
Anyway, what was interesting was that he had owned more than one Interceptor and reckoned that the SP was not measurably faster than the regular Interceptor, despite the excessive thirst. In his opinion the Six Pack carburettor was not all that effective in releasing the latent BHP and better swapped for something else. I think he now had 4 x twin downdraft Webers on his.
Sheeeeezzzz........so now he has now fitted something that uses even more fuel Anyway, what was interesting was that he had owned more than one Interceptor and reckoned that the SP was not measurably faster than the regular Interceptor, despite the excessive thirst. In his opinion the Six Pack carburettor was not all that effective in releasing the latent BHP and better swapped for something else. I think he now had 4 x twin downdraft Webers on his.
Definitely more power and way better throttle response though
I'm surprised he can fit the 4 x 44IDF Weber kit under the standard bonnet of an Interceptor, as the Mopar 4 x 44IDF setup is quite tall, so would think it would need a substantial bonnet bulge?
LotusOmega375D said:
I spotted a chap in an Interceptor SP at a car show the other day, so popped over to chat with him. I guess every SP owner gets sick of talking about MPG with random classic enthusiasts!
Anyway, what was interesting was that he had owned more than one Interceptor and reckoned that the SP was not measurably faster than the regular Interceptor, despite the excessive thirst. In his opinion the Six Pack carburettor was not all that effective in releasing the latent BHP and better swapped for something else. I think he now had 4 x twin downdraft Webers on his.
After working on US Chryslers for over 40 years, I can say without a doubt that the six pack set up was far from being correctly set up. Mainly because there are only a handful of people that have sufficient knowledge to get them in tune. When correct, they will give better mpg than a 4bbl, as well as quite a few more horses. Somewhere around 60 is about right.Anyway, what was interesting was that he had owned more than one Interceptor and reckoned that the SP was not measurably faster than the regular Interceptor, despite the excessive thirst. In his opinion the Six Pack carburettor was not all that effective in releasing the latent BHP and better swapped for something else. I think he now had 4 x twin downdraft Webers on his.
I am now waiting for the internet warriors that have no knowledge whatsoever on the subject to refute this... :-D
LotusOmega375D said:
I don't think it had an extra bonnet bulge, just the vents. Maybe I was wrong about the current Weber set up, but he had definitely swapped out the Six Pack carburettor and replaced it with something that he assured me performed better.
Carburettor(s)....so its replaced them, not it 
........... (entering into typical PH pendant mode )Many years ago a mate of mine had a 440+6 'cuda with a 727 and that was a beast, but he certainly knew his way around RB motors.
Hello All! Not much really to update but again, thanks for all positive comments and suggestions..
A few pictures taken today;
Motor was running when I took this. Was a little lumpy when first fired up so plugs were changed and is lovely and smooth now.
All it needed after being laid up was fresh fuel, battery charged and up it went. Battery has even held a charge!
Interior is in pretty good order although it obviously needs a good clean, unfortunate fag burn on rear seat..
Tailgate is the worst area found so far..
Noticed the vinyl roof has been painted, can just see the original tan in the corner..
There are a few electrical issues to sort, nothing major- bad earths, washers not working, heater fan etc.
Brakes are very spongey but no obvious signs of leaks anywhere. Fluid looks all stewed though so will get changed and all bled up and see if it improves.
As suggested by a previous poster, will probably try and get it MOT'd shortly and if successful get it on the road as it is and just run it around locally for the rest of the summer!
Thanks,
Rich
A few pictures taken today;
Motor was running when I took this. Was a little lumpy when first fired up so plugs were changed and is lovely and smooth now.
All it needed after being laid up was fresh fuel, battery charged and up it went. Battery has even held a charge!
Interior is in pretty good order although it obviously needs a good clean, unfortunate fag burn on rear seat..
Tailgate is the worst area found so far..
Noticed the vinyl roof has been painted, can just see the original tan in the corner..
There are a few electrical issues to sort, nothing major- bad earths, washers not working, heater fan etc.
Brakes are very spongey but no obvious signs of leaks anywhere. Fluid looks all stewed though so will get changed and all bled up and see if it improves.
As suggested by a previous poster, will probably try and get it MOT'd shortly and if successful get it on the road as it is and just run it around locally for the rest of the summer!
Thanks,
Rich
Well done Sir, there was a yellow interceptor that I used to walk past everyday on the way to school (a long time ago now) it was always parked nose in, what a fanstastic rear those cars have with that large wrap around window, I would certainly have one of these in my dream garage next to a Gordon Keeble :-)
mk1coopers said:
Well done Sir, there was a yellow interceptor that I used to walk past everyday on the way to school (a long time ago now) it was always parked nose in, what a fanstastic rear those cars have with that large wrap around window, I would certainly have one of these in my dream garage next to a Gordon Keeble :-)
Plus one on the Keeble, it's the only old car I'm interested in. Chassis number 57 used to be in our family. I tried to buy it back 4 years ago, but it ended up in Holland.Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff