Discussion
a8hex said:
pixieporsche said:
I should have said from the outset I'm talking about the XK engine not the V8 engine fitted to the XK8. 
I thought you did, the title seemed perfectly clear, the XK Engine is an inline 6 cylinder beauty launch to an incredulous world in 1949. There was a proposed 4 cylinder version too but it never made it past the prototype stage.The modern XK8 and XK run AJ26... and onwards engines.
jith said:
Listen Sunshine, I suggest you show a little respect on here and don't tell me I'm talking bulls
t.
I worked on these cars when they were new, do you understand that? The description I gave was dead accurate, and the fault was finally admitted by the factory themselves. One of the cars I changed the engine on was only 6 weeks old and had no carbon build up whatsoever.
Just to enlighten your clearly limited knowledge, as already stated, there are 2 vacuum pipes, one from the top of the carb and one underneath the manifold; one advances the capsule, the other retards. The one underneath cannot be seen when looking into the engine bay, hence the reason they were frequently missed and damage done. The worst aspect of this was the fact that the pipe was hanging from the manifold unsecured, no clips, nothing, just a push fit, and could fall off very easily.
Now what did happen, is that some people thought that if you simply fitted a 4.2 distributor with a single advance that this would cure the problem. In actual fact it was totally unsuited to the 2.8 cam and piston set up. If you have a distributor with only one vacuum take off on the capsule it is the wrong distributor.
This engine is obviously sensitive to timing errors resulting in piston damage. Your piston was holed in the centre because that is where the hot spot is created by the spark plug during the pre-ignition interval. But the damage to your piston was undoubtedly caused by the crap YOU poured in the tank, and probably also because the engine was not properly set up in the first place.
J
First of all Grandad, respect isn't granted purely based on age. So you can take your outdated idea that I'm going to show you some based on that, and put it where the 'sunshine' isn't. I'm so glad that by the time I am as old as my car is now, idiots like you will be worm fodder.t.I worked on these cars when they were new, do you understand that? The description I gave was dead accurate, and the fault was finally admitted by the factory themselves. One of the cars I changed the engine on was only 6 weeks old and had no carbon build up whatsoever.
Just to enlighten your clearly limited knowledge, as already stated, there are 2 vacuum pipes, one from the top of the carb and one underneath the manifold; one advances the capsule, the other retards. The one underneath cannot be seen when looking into the engine bay, hence the reason they were frequently missed and damage done. The worst aspect of this was the fact that the pipe was hanging from the manifold unsecured, no clips, nothing, just a push fit, and could fall off very easily.
Now what did happen, is that some people thought that if you simply fitted a 4.2 distributor with a single advance that this would cure the problem. In actual fact it was totally unsuited to the 2.8 cam and piston set up. If you have a distributor with only one vacuum take off on the capsule it is the wrong distributor.
This engine is obviously sensitive to timing errors resulting in piston damage. Your piston was holed in the centre because that is where the hot spot is created by the spark plug during the pre-ignition interval. But the damage to your piston was undoubtedly caused by the crap YOU poured in the tank, and probably also because the engine was not properly set up in the first place.
J
I don't care how many 2.8's you repaired when they were new, if the 'facts' you're spouting were what you believed you probably killed as many as you repaired.
To help you with you delusions..
The later 2.8's had the 22D6 or 25D6 distributor and revised timing. Mine had the 25D6. It has ONE vacuum connection. It is NOT the wrong distributor, it is the correct item for the car. Don't believe me? Go look in the big red leather bound workshop manual for the Series 1 XJ6.
Here's an extract from an article by Roger Bywater on the 2.8 and its failures:
"The first obvious signs that the XK was becoming fragile must have been when 2.8 XJ6s began burning pistons. Strangely, a hard driven 2.8 would run for ever, and the Jaguar test fleet in those days would have been hard driven in the belief that it was the sure way to find a weakness, yet customers found that after a few weeks of gentle motoring in town, a full throttle burst to get up to motorway speed could "smoke" a piston in very short order. The reasons for it are somewhat obscure and there are varying opinions on the matter but my understanding is that extra piston dwell around TDC on account of the shorter stroke might have played a part allied to a humped piston crown that came into close proximity with the hot exhaust valve. In essence, if the geometry is such that the piston is unduly slow in accelerating away from TDC then pre-ignition can be more easily promoted by soft deposits laid down in the combustion chamber during light load operation. The official name is "Deposit Induced Pre-ignition" and there can be a narrow margin between survival and failure for the brief time it takes for the deposits to burn off. Unfortunately, in the case of the 2.8 the condition could, on occasions, last long enough to melt a piston."
Enough for you? There were also numerous articles from Jaguar put out around the same time about it. Go see the JDHT, they might still have some stuff in the archive.
As for my engine - I know it was poor fuel caused my deposits... but with 4 star no longer available at every filling station you take what you can. You don't expect Shell fuels to cause a dead engine. My engine was in good condition for the age of the car, with no problems. I made a habit of compression testing, leakdown testing and getting the ignition analyser on it regularly, as I liked to drive my car a lot, and I liked it healthy.
As for where the hole was, it was bound to burn a hole on the crown of the piston, when that's the hottest point. It's nowhere near the spark plug as thats off to one side, and its not even angled towards the crown. Shows how long it is since you had an XK cylinder head on the bench, I suppose. It was also on the No 6 cylinder, which doesn't bear out your theory of it being near a vac hose does it? Oh dear..
Now lie down, take your medicine and f
k off. Edited by richw_82 on Monday 16th May 16:17
richw_82 said:
First of all Grandad, respect isn't granted purely based on age. So you can take your outdated idea that I'm going to show you some based on that, and put it where the 'sunshine' isn't. I'm so glad that by the time I am as old as my car is now, idiots like you will be worm fodder.
I don't care how many 2.8's you repaired when they were new, if the 'facts' you're spouting were what you believed you probably killed as many as you repaired.
To help you with you delusions..
The later 2.8's had the 22D6 or 25D6 distributor and revised timing. Mine had the 22D6. It has ONE vacuum connection. It is NOT the wrong distributor, it is the correct item for the car. Don't believe me? Go look in the big red leather bound workshop manual for the Series 1 XJ6.
Here's an extract from an article by Roger Bywater on the 2.8 and its failures:
"The first obvious signs that the XK was becoming fragile must have been when 2.8 XJ6s began burning pistons. Strangely, a hard driven 2.8 would run for ever, and the Jaguar test fleet in those days would have been hard driven in the belief that it was the sure way to find a weakness, yet customers found that after a few weeks of gentle motoring in town, a full throttle burst to get up to motorway speed could "smoke" a piston in very short order. The reasons for it are somewhat obscure and there are varying opinions on the matter but my understanding is that extra piston dwell around TDC on account of the shorter stroke might have played a part allied to a humped piston crown that came into close proximity with the hot exhaust valve. In essence, if the geometry is such that the piston is unduly slow in accelerating away from TDC then pre-ignition can be more easily promoted by soft deposits laid down in the combustion chamber during light load operation. The official name is "Deposit Induced Pre-ignition" and there can be a narrow margin between survival and failure for the brief time it takes for the deposits to burn off. Unfortunately, in the case of the 2.8 the condition could, on occasions, last long enough to melt a piston."
Enough for you? There were also numerous articles from Jaguar put out around the same time about it. Go see the JDHT, they might still have some stuff in the archive.
As for my engine - I know it was poor fuel caused my deposits... but with 4 star no longer available at every filling station you take what you can. You don't expect Shell fuels to cause a dead engine. My engine was in good condition for the age of the car, with no problems. I made a habit of compression testing, leakdown testing and getting the ignition analyser on it regularly, as I liked to drive my car a lot, and I liked it healthy.
As for where the hole was, it was bound to burn a hole on the crown of the piston, when that's the hottest point. It's nowhere near the spark plug as thats off to one side, and its not even angled towards the crown. Shows how long it is since you had an XK cylinder head on the bench, I suppose. It was also on the No 6 cylinder, which doesn't bear out your theory of it being near a vac hose does it? Oh dear..
Now lie down, take your medicine and fk off.
This is to the whole forum, and especially the mods. One of the reasons I do not frequent this site as often as I used to, and I know that other engineers of similar experience to myself feel the same, is because of this type of utterly crass, ignorant, would be "expert", who assumes superior knowledge because they've tinkered with their cars, or they've read a few articles in a magazine.I don't care how many 2.8's you repaired when they were new, if the 'facts' you're spouting were what you believed you probably killed as many as you repaired.
To help you with you delusions..
The later 2.8's had the 22D6 or 25D6 distributor and revised timing. Mine had the 22D6. It has ONE vacuum connection. It is NOT the wrong distributor, it is the correct item for the car. Don't believe me? Go look in the big red leather bound workshop manual for the Series 1 XJ6.
Here's an extract from an article by Roger Bywater on the 2.8 and its failures:
"The first obvious signs that the XK was becoming fragile must have been when 2.8 XJ6s began burning pistons. Strangely, a hard driven 2.8 would run for ever, and the Jaguar test fleet in those days would have been hard driven in the belief that it was the sure way to find a weakness, yet customers found that after a few weeks of gentle motoring in town, a full throttle burst to get up to motorway speed could "smoke" a piston in very short order. The reasons for it are somewhat obscure and there are varying opinions on the matter but my understanding is that extra piston dwell around TDC on account of the shorter stroke might have played a part allied to a humped piston crown that came into close proximity with the hot exhaust valve. In essence, if the geometry is such that the piston is unduly slow in accelerating away from TDC then pre-ignition can be more easily promoted by soft deposits laid down in the combustion chamber during light load operation. The official name is "Deposit Induced Pre-ignition" and there can be a narrow margin between survival and failure for the brief time it takes for the deposits to burn off. Unfortunately, in the case of the 2.8 the condition could, on occasions, last long enough to melt a piston."
Enough for you? There were also numerous articles from Jaguar put out around the same time about it. Go see the JDHT, they might still have some stuff in the archive.
As for my engine - I know it was poor fuel caused my deposits... but with 4 star no longer available at every filling station you take what you can. You don't expect Shell fuels to cause a dead engine. My engine was in good condition for the age of the car, with no problems. I made a habit of compression testing, leakdown testing and getting the ignition analyser on it regularly, as I liked to drive my car a lot, and I liked it healthy.
As for where the hole was, it was bound to burn a hole on the crown of the piston, when that's the hottest point. It's nowhere near the spark plug as thats off to one side, and its not even angled towards the crown. Shows how long it is since you had an XK cylinder head on the bench, I suppose. It was also on the No 6 cylinder, which doesn't bear out your theory of it being near a vac hose does it? Oh dear..
Now lie down, take your medicine and f
k off. The worst aspect is, that they don't have the education or common decency to put across their arguments without personal abuse or foul language.
Speaking for myself, I would appreciate an instant ban from the forum on anyone who gets personally insulting like this; it absolutely ruins the tone of the forum.
The strange thing is, I never, never have this problem in person in my workshop. All my customers and other visiting engineers come here to discuss and exchange knowledge and ideas. I have a great relationship with all my customers and many have become friends.
When did I last have a 4.2 XK engine in my workshop? Well this went out just last week after a gearbox rebuild and various other problems sorted.
Is that XK enough for you Rich?
Oh, and Rich. You are welcome to come up here and talk about Jaguars and any other car you like. The address is in my website. But if you do so without a civil tongue in your head, you'll discover very rapidly that I'm not a pipe and slippers grandad.
Have a nice day.
James.
jith said:
This is to the whole forum, and especially the mods. One of the reasons I do not frequent this site as often as I used to, and I know that other engineers of similar experience to myself feel the same, is because of this type of utterly crass, ignorant, would be "expert", who assumes superior knowledge because they've tinkered with their cars, or they've read a few articles in a magazine.
The worst aspect is, that they don't have the education or common decency to put across their arguments without personal abuse or foul language.
Speaking for myself, I would appreciate an instant ban from the forum on anyone who gets personally insulting like this; it absolutely ruins the tone of the forum.
The strange thing is, I never, never have this problem in person in my workshop. All my customers and other visiting engineers come here to discuss and exchange knowledge and ideas. I have a great relationship with all my customers and many have become friends.
When did I last have a 4.2 XK engine in my workshop? Well this went out just last week after a gearbox rebuild and various other problems sorted.
Is that XK enough for you Rich?
Oh, and Rich. You are welcome to come up here and talk about Jaguars and any other car you like. The address is in my website. But if you do so without a civil tongue in your head, you'll discover very rapidly that I'm not a pipe and slippers grandad.
Have a nice day.
James.
JamesThe worst aspect is, that they don't have the education or common decency to put across their arguments without personal abuse or foul language.
Speaking for myself, I would appreciate an instant ban from the forum on anyone who gets personally insulting like this; it absolutely ruins the tone of the forum.
The strange thing is, I never, never have this problem in person in my workshop. All my customers and other visiting engineers come here to discuss and exchange knowledge and ideas. I have a great relationship with all my customers and many have become friends.
When did I last have a 4.2 XK engine in my workshop? Well this went out just last week after a gearbox rebuild and various other problems sorted.
Is that XK enough for you Rich?
Oh, and Rich. You are welcome to come up here and talk about Jaguars and any other car you like. The address is in my website. But if you do so without a civil tongue in your head, you'll discover very rapidly that I'm not a pipe and slippers grandad.
Have a nice day.
James.
I still can't get my head around why you can't accept being wrong. Engineer of experience or not, the service manuals suggest you are wrong. The 2.8 engine numbers say you are wrong. Ex-Jaguar engineers suggest in articles and technical papers that you are wrong. I'm not claiming superior knowledge, or to be an expert - just that you are incorrect. In error. Misinformed. WRONG.
Deal with it.
The Series 1 of mine is now getting supercharged using an XJR-6 engine, which is hardly 'tinkering' - just becuase I don't run a garage doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about. I suppose your type of expert is one who ignores parts manuals, workshop manuals, and instantly takes a condescending tone when talking to others? Not really someone who is approachable is it?
I'm really glad this is not a forum run by you. If it were it would become the wasteland that is several other Jag forums populated by your kind of 'expert', with mods stamping on anything that challenges their opinions. I admit, you don't have to use foul language to insult someone, but sometimes it makes you just feel better. You insulted me, and you're still trying. You can't insult someone and not expect it back. For instance, where do you get off demanding 'respect' from strangers? Are you a wannabe gangster?
Amazing too how you suggest from that one swear word that I don't have an education - I could have sworn I did - it must be another thing that I'm in error about. Again, very insulting, yet you speak of common decency?
I've seen your website, and those pictures of the E-type show a nice car. May I ask why you are not showing the E-type off on there, or is it because it would put such great projects such as Honda Civics, and Citroen Xsaras to shame? Or maybe that's one of your visitor's cars?
I've no intention of coming near your place of business. Glasgow is a boring dreary place anyway, I've visited before, and its unlikely to change. It ranks high up on my list of things not to do which includes having teeth pulled and keyhole scrotal surgery. You're miles away and a waste of (decent) petrol to get to, which is better spent on a more enjoyable drive somewhere. Or my upcoming Le Mans trip. Or beer.
Your subtle threats in your last post only mean that one or both of us would end up in jail should I visit - 'cause I don't take attitude like yours from anyone. You could throw me out of your premises, but there's a good chance if you didn't keep your manners about you I'd insert my XJ6 up your left leg.
Anyway, grab your pipe and slippers and come up with an answer. I'd be interested to hear why one Scottish based garage owner is right and everybody else isn't. I'd also like the part number of this mythical twin vacuum distributor. You've got about... ooh four hours or so, as I'm going to enjoy the Derbyshire countryside in my XJ6 for a bit.
Cheerio,
Rich
Thank you all for the advice so far
I've managed to take from this that I ought to not bother with the 2.8.
Glad to see that there are people taking some great projects on here, too!
I also feel a little more equiped in what to look for, too now. There seems some lovely Series I cars about at about £3500 at the moment. Perhaps I won't have to spend the earth to get a nice car. It's criminal really, a decent MGB is more coin ... 
Anyway, not to complain it looks like I'll certainly beable to get myself into Jaguar ownership.
Rich, may I email you? I'm only just down the road and would love to see your cars and talk XJ6 with you.
I've managed to take from this that I ought to not bother with the 2.8.
Glad to see that there are people taking some great projects on here, too! I also feel a little more equiped in what to look for, too now.
There seems some lovely Series I cars about at about £3500 at the moment. Perhaps I won't have to spend the earth to get a nice car. It's criminal really, a decent MGB is more coin ... Anyway, not to complain it looks like I'll certainly beable to get myself into Jaguar ownership.
Rich, may I email you? I'm only just down the road and would love to see your cars and talk XJ6 with you.
richw_82 said:
Sure, drop me an e-mail. The thingy on here should work, I've just checked it and it's correct and active.
It's a work one, so I'll only answer between 8am - 4pm.
Regards,
Rich
I've sent you an email. It's a work one, so I'll only answer between 8am - 4pm.
Regards,
Rich
Please let me know if you don't get it - check your junk / spam! My email is a live.co.uk one and I think they are liable to get caught in spam filters!pixieporsche said:
Thank you all for the advice so far
I've managed to take from this that I ought to not bother with the 2.8. Glad to see that there are people taking some great projects on here, too!
I also feel a little more equiped in what to look for, too now. There seems some lovely Series I cars about at about £3500 at the moment. Perhaps I won't have to spend the earth to get a nice car. It's criminal really, a decent MGB is more coin ...
Anyway, not to complain it looks like I'll certainly beable to get myself into Jaguar ownership.
Rich, may I email you? I'm only just down the road and would love to see your cars and talk XJ6 with you.
Providing you're aware of the 2.8 engine concerns there's nothing wrong with any of the smaller engined XJs and like for like you'll find them a lot cheaper to buy (I'd much rather have a good 2.8 or 3.4XJ than a rough 4.2 anyday) - apart from the fact you'll need to have a drive and maybe readjust your perceptions a little. 2.4, 2.8 and 3.4 litres sounds a lot nowadays and implies you'll get really high performance but actually that's not the case in such a heavy car. The reality is similar or even less acceleration than an average modern Eurobox and truly terrifying fuel consumption if you drive one hard.I've managed to take from this that I ought to not bother with the 2.8.
Glad to see that there are people taking some great projects on here, too! I also feel a little more equiped in what to look for, too now.
There seems some lovely Series I cars about at about £3500 at the moment. Perhaps I won't have to spend the earth to get a nice car. It's criminal really, a decent MGB is more coin ... Anyway, not to complain it looks like I'll certainly beable to get myself into Jaguar ownership.
Rich, may I email you? I'm only just down the road and would love to see your cars and talk XJ6 with you.
I had a very carefully set up and slightly modified S3 3.4 manual XJ for several years and occasionally found it's lesiurely performance very frustrating. Lots of Grace, not all that much Space and very little Pace. To put this in perspective I also had a 1.1 Renault 5 as a daily hack and at the time drove literally dozens of different cars including various Jaguars each week. In the real world there was hardly any difference in performance between the R5 and XJ and most 1.6 or two litre family cars would have left the 3.4XJ standing.
All other things being equal there's quite a bit of difference in both performance and fuel consumption between the manual and automatic cars too, and two things you can easily do to improve both - get rid of the automatic choke and fit an electric cooling fan.
Have a look on CarsandClassics and jagads, there's often quite nice looking examples for sale there.
Whatever you do above everything else it's essential to buy the very best one you can find, and that may well mean looking at the smaller engined cars - so do have a longish drive and see what you think.
Edited by Jaguar steve on Tuesday 17th May 06:18
Steve, thank you for the advice
I've not driven a modern car in abour 3 years now and never want to again, I find them hateful things with no visibility! Running a P6 V8 I'm expecting around the same level of performance.
I'm not restricting myself to a Series 1 or a 4.2 but thats my ideal goal!
I look at car and classic frequently! Theres hardly anything on Jag ads - is that usually the place they come up?
I've not driven a modern car in abour 3 years now and never want to again, I find them hateful things with no visibility! Running a P6 V8 I'm expecting around the same level of performance.
I'm not restricting myself to a Series 1 or a 4.2 but thats my ideal goal!
I look at car and classic frequently! Theres hardly anything on Jag ads - is that usually the place they come up?
pixieporsche said:
Steve, thank you for the advice
I've not driven a modern car in abour 3 years now and never want to again, I find them hateful things with no visibility! Running a P6 V8 I'm expecting around the same level of performance.
I'm not restricting myself to a Series 1 or a 4.2 but thats my ideal goal!
I look at car and classic frequently! Theres hardly anything on Jag ads - is that usually the place they come up?
Jagads is the shared classified site for Jaguar World magazine and the Jaguar Enthusiasts Club. The JEC are revamping their website - last time I tried to use it it was rubbish and perhaps not the best site to reccommend at the moment. There's usually far more Series 1/2/3 cars in the JEC magazine - 18 in fact last month. Had a go at scaning the pages in for you but they are a blury mess. PM me with your address and I'll stick the relevant pages in the post if you'd like them.I've not driven a modern car in abour 3 years now and never want to again, I find them hateful things with no visibility! Running a P6 V8 I'm expecting around the same level of performance.
I'm not restricting myself to a Series 1 or a 4.2 but thats my ideal goal!
I look at car and classic frequently! Theres hardly anything on Jag ads - is that usually the place they come up?
Now, at the risk of upsetting the Series car fans - this saddens me a bit too as I'm one myself, 14 years after selling mine I still miss it in some ways - have you thought about an X300 (1994-1997) or a X308 (1997-2002) XJ? They are far, far better made, more durable, perform much better and have significantly improved fuel economy, and most importantly are a lot cheaper to buy than a good Series 1/2/3 car.
You still get the classic Jaguar shape, lots of wood and leather and chrome, and an acceptable ride quality. And you know it'll start in the morning too.. Just a thought.
jith said:
Listen Sunshine, I suggest you show a little respect on here and don't tell me I'm talking bullst.
I worked on these cars when they were new, do you understand that? The description I gave was dead accurate, and the fault was finally admitted by the factory themselves. One of the cars I changed the engine on was only 6 weeks old and had no carbon build up whatsoever.
Just to enlighten your clearly limited knowledge, as already stated, there are 2 vacuum pipes, one from the top of the carb and one underneath the manifold; one advances the capsule, the other retards. The one underneath cannot be seen when looking into the engine bay, hence the reason they were frequently missed and damage done. The worst aspect of this was the fact that the pipe was hanging from the manifold unsecured, no clips, nothing, just a push fit, and could fall off very easily.
Now what did happen, is that some people thought that if you simply fitted a 4.2 distributor with a single advance that this would cure the problem. In actual fact it was totally unsuited to the 2.8 cam and piston set up. If you have a distributor with only one vacuum take off on the capsule it is the wrong distributor.
This engine is obviously sensitive to timing errors resulting in piston damage. Your piston was holed in the centre because that is where the hot spot is created by the spark plug during the pre-ignition interval. But the damage to your piston was undoubtedly caused by the crap YOU poured in the tank, and probably also because the engine was not properly set up in the first place.
J
All xk engines of this era were set up lean, no matter whether they were 2.8 or 4.2 etc. so we can discount that as a casual factor, only a contributing one.t.I worked on these cars when they were new, do you understand that? The description I gave was dead accurate, and the fault was finally admitted by the factory themselves. One of the cars I changed the engine on was only 6 weeks old and had no carbon build up whatsoever.
Just to enlighten your clearly limited knowledge, as already stated, there are 2 vacuum pipes, one from the top of the carb and one underneath the manifold; one advances the capsule, the other retards. The one underneath cannot be seen when looking into the engine bay, hence the reason they were frequently missed and damage done. The worst aspect of this was the fact that the pipe was hanging from the manifold unsecured, no clips, nothing, just a push fit, and could fall off very easily.
Now what did happen, is that some people thought that if you simply fitted a 4.2 distributor with a single advance that this would cure the problem. In actual fact it was totally unsuited to the 2.8 cam and piston set up. If you have a distributor with only one vacuum take off on the capsule it is the wrong distributor.
This engine is obviously sensitive to timing errors resulting in piston damage. Your piston was holed in the centre because that is where the hot spot is created by the spark plug during the pre-ignition interval. But the damage to your piston was undoubtedly caused by the crap YOU poured in the tank, and probably also because the engine was not properly set up in the first place.
J
Similary the vac hose coming off I would class as contributing, that could happen to a 4.2 as well although I would accept that it may be easier to miss on a 2.8.
Similarly crap in the tank and being badly set up could equally apply to the 4.2.
The casual factor is a combustion/piston issue peculiar to the 2.8 which Jaguar knew about and, during the time I was there, were trying to correct. How succesful they were I can´t remember.
I know one of my apprentice colleaugues was tasked with driving a 2.8 XJ6 up and down the M1/45 taking his foot on and off the throttle pedal in an effort to replicate. He succeeded and broke down about 40 miles from Browns Lane, another apprentice was passing in a Ford Popular and started to tow the XJ6 back (rather slowly I might add!). They got to within 15 miles and were seen by a Jag senior manager who was horrified by the image, he then towed the car the rest of the way.....
Jaguar steve said:
Now, at the risk of upsetting the Series car fans - this saddens me a bit too as I'm one myself, 14 years after selling mine I still miss it in some ways - have you thought about an X300 (1994-1997) or a X308 (1997-2002) XJ? They are far, far better made, more durable, perform much better and have significantly improved fuel economy, and most importantly are a lot cheaper to buy than a good Series 1/2/3 car.
You still get the classic Jaguar shape, lots of wood and leather and chrome, and an acceptable ride quality. And you know it'll start in the morning too.. Just a thought.
You still get the classic Jaguar shape, lots of wood and leather and chrome, and an acceptable ride quality. And you know it'll start in the morning too.. Just a thought.
I intend to find out just how good a Series car fitted with the later engine is, as I know the AJ6 was tested as early as in the Series 2.
I like old cars - if it don't start in the morning, I'm not using that one, got others 1 out of 4 old cars should go ... Seriously though, I've ran old cars as my only means of transport for ages, never had any real bother and I can (have a go at) fixing them myself.
Nothing against the X300/308 they look nice just faaaaar too new for me!
I like cars with character. I like the fact that I have to start my P6 with the *exact* amount of choke or it won't like it, the MGB I have to "catch" with the throttle - it's a very simple car running a dynamo (sp?) crash first, no servo assisted brakes (still stops well though), the BV8 pretty much always behaves itself and the 944 cranks over for ages ... friends think they'll be walking home and then it fires!
They're all very different to drive too, the Rover is very relaxed but you have to be careful in the wet! The B Roadster feels old-fashioned, the BV8 is a joy for anyone who likes sports cars and the 944 is very heavy, quick and perfect for taking the B-Roads quickly!
Each one has a different character and I love that.
Seriously though, I've ran old cars as my only means of transport for ages, never had any real bother and I can (have a go at) fixing them myself. Nothing against the X300/308 they look nice just faaaaar too new for me!
I like cars with character. I like the fact that I have to start my P6 with the *exact* amount of choke or it won't like it, the MGB I have to "catch" with the throttle - it's a very simple car running a dynamo (sp?) crash first, no servo assisted brakes (still stops well though), the BV8 pretty much always behaves itself and the 944 cranks over for ages ... friends think they'll be walking home and then it fires!
They're all very different to drive too, the Rover is very relaxed but you have to be careful in the wet! The B Roadster feels old-fashioned, the BV8 is a joy for anyone who likes sports cars and the 944 is very heavy, quick and perfect for taking the B-Roads quickly!
Each one has a different character and I love that.
richw_82 said:
Jaguar steve said:
Now, at the risk of upsetting the Series car fans - this saddens me a bit too as I'm one myself, 14 years after selling mine I still miss it in some ways - have you thought about an X300 (1994-1997) or a X308 (1997-2002) XJ? They are far, far better made, more durable, perform much better and have significantly improved fuel economy, and most importantly are a lot cheaper to buy than a good Series 1/2/3 car.
You still get the classic Jaguar shape, lots of wood and leather and chrome, and an acceptable ride quality. And you know it'll start in the morning too.. Just a thought.
You still get the classic Jaguar shape, lots of wood and leather and chrome, and an acceptable ride quality. And you know it'll start in the morning too.. Just a thought.
I intend to find out just how good a Series car fitted with the later engine is, as I know the AJ6 was tested as early as in the Series 2.
Not that late, though the idea of a V8 supercharged XJ Coupe is very appealing. Current project is XJR-6 into Series 1, and when that's done 3.6 AJ6 and 4 speed auto into a Series 3.
Now I'm going to have to go and get the Coupe idea out my head before I spend more money on ebay...
Regards,
Rich
Now I'm going to have to go and get the Coupe idea out my head before I spend more money on ebay...
Regards,
Rich
fareaster said:
jith said:
Listen Sunshine, I suggest you show a little respect on here and don't tell me I'm talking bullst.
I worked on these cars when they were new, do you understand that? The description I gave was dead accurate, and the fault was finally admitted by the factory themselves. One of the cars I changed the engine on was only 6 weeks old and had no carbon build up whatsoever.
Just to enlighten your clearly limited knowledge, as already stated, there are 2 vacuum pipes, one from the top of the carb and one underneath the manifold; one advances the capsule, the other retards. The one underneath cannot be seen when looking into the engine bay, hence the reason they were frequently missed and damage done. The worst aspect of this was the fact that the pipe was hanging from the manifold unsecured, no clips, nothing, just a push fit, and could fall off very easily.
Now what did happen, is that some people thought that if you simply fitted a 4.2 distributor with a single advance that this would cure the problem. In actual fact it was totally unsuited to the 2.8 cam and piston set up. If you have a distributor with only one vacuum take off on the capsule it is the wrong distributor.
This engine is obviously sensitive to timing errors resulting in piston damage. Your piston was holed in the centre because that is where the hot spot is created by the spark plug during the pre-ignition interval. But the damage to your piston was undoubtedly caused by the crap YOU poured in the tank, and probably also because the engine was not properly set up in the first place.
J
All xk engines of this era were set up lean, no matter whether they were 2.8 or 4.2 etc. so we can discount that as a casual factor, only a contributing one.t.I worked on these cars when they were new, do you understand that? The description I gave was dead accurate, and the fault was finally admitted by the factory themselves. One of the cars I changed the engine on was only 6 weeks old and had no carbon build up whatsoever.
Just to enlighten your clearly limited knowledge, as already stated, there are 2 vacuum pipes, one from the top of the carb and one underneath the manifold; one advances the capsule, the other retards. The one underneath cannot be seen when looking into the engine bay, hence the reason they were frequently missed and damage done. The worst aspect of this was the fact that the pipe was hanging from the manifold unsecured, no clips, nothing, just a push fit, and could fall off very easily.
Now what did happen, is that some people thought that if you simply fitted a 4.2 distributor with a single advance that this would cure the problem. In actual fact it was totally unsuited to the 2.8 cam and piston set up. If you have a distributor with only one vacuum take off on the capsule it is the wrong distributor.
This engine is obviously sensitive to timing errors resulting in piston damage. Your piston was holed in the centre because that is where the hot spot is created by the spark plug during the pre-ignition interval. But the damage to your piston was undoubtedly caused by the crap YOU poured in the tank, and probably also because the engine was not properly set up in the first place.
J
Similary the vac hose coming off I would class as contributing, that could happen to a 4.2 as well although I would accept that it may be easier to miss on a 2.8.
Similarly crap in the tank and being badly set up could equally apply to the 4.2.
The casual factor is a combustion/piston issue peculiar to the 2.8 which Jaguar knew about and, during the time I was there, were trying to correct. How succesful they were I can´t remember.
I know one of my apprentice colleaugues was tasked with driving a 2.8 XJ6 up and down the M1/45 taking his foot on and off the throttle pedal in an effort to replicate. He succeeded and broke down about 40 miles from Browns Lane, another apprentice was passing in a Ford Popular and started to tow the XJ6 back (rather slowly I might add!). They got to within 15 miles and were seen by a Jag senior manager who was horrified by the image, he then towed the car the rest of the way.....
nice to talk to someone who, like myself, was there at the time. Not being pedantic, but I take it you mean causal factor rather than casual?
When you refer to them being set up lean are you talking about the grade of needle or the fact that they were tuned lean simply by adjustment?; because I found the latter almost always applied. I would adjust the carbs to run slightly richer and the cars always drove better. I don't mean over-rich mind, just a shade.
The engine I referred to earlier that had failed in only 6 weeks had the lower vacuum pipe disconnected and lying on the top of the oil filter. What I found unacceptable about this was the fact that there were no clips or brackets to support the pipe, and the fact that the outcome was so drastic as regards engine failure made it all the more so.
I agree that the vacuum pipe could also fail or become disconnected on the 4.2 as well, but it did not go and melt a hole in the piston because of it!
On all the 2.8s I worked on with piston failure, only 1 had melted the piston down the side due to partial seizure, the rest all had holes in the centre in the vicinity of the spark plug hot spot.
We eventually got some bulletins through advising the fitment of brackets to the lower inlet manifold studs to support the lower vacuum pipes, and I noticed that as production
progressed the brackets were fitted from the factory. Personally I glued the adaptors onto the manifold! We were also advised that ignition timing settings were absolutely crucial and had to be rigidly observed: as if we didn't know that already!
I would have love to have seen this engine developed properly, but the BL disease ended any prospect of that.
J
Hi J, yes I did mean causal, should read my posts more thoroughly before pressing the submit button. The grade of needle would be developed by engineering and each engine adjusted individually when the engine when was first run at Radford and then again before sign off in the test and rec department. All I can say is that when developing the needle care would be taken to ensure that there was no over fuelling throughout the operating range because of the detrimental impact on emissions which was becoming more and more important at that time but at the same time avoiding too lean as this could damage the engine. Trying to find the sweet spot became increasingly difficult and prompted the switch to the more accurate Stromberg for some markets. Production would have been under pressure not to screw up the emissions by setting it up too rich and a slightly richer tweak outside the factory would improve performance at the expense of emissions - bit like a remap these days.
Gassing Station | Jaguar | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff