Why are 2+2 E-Types so (relatively) cheap?

[benjj]

Am I missing something here? The 2+2 V12s look very well priced, a tempting long distance family cruiser compared to the coupe or drophead.

Is it purely aesthetics or something else?

Obviously I'm not a Jag man but at these prices (20-25k) am very tempted...

[gr88]

RUST

and more rust.....

Jaguar didnt paint the inside of their monocoques . They rust and are difficult to repair. The cost of a repair is more than the car is worth.....

Even dry state cars rusted - from the top down (condensation rose in the box sections rusting the top of the boxes)

[benjj]

Oh, ok, interesting, thanks.

As the restorer or an early 70's French car I really don't think I could take another rotbox for a while.

[Spellbound]

Hi
V12 coupes can be good fun, but are absolutly shocking on fuel if you are not used to them. some argue that the V12 wheel arches and grille make 2+2 body look better, maybe that's true. The V12 really needs to be out of the car to work on, and is much more time consuming to repair that the six. ideally it comes out through the front with the bonnet, radiator and top rail removed.

However you have to decide whether you want a sports car or a fast grand tourer, because the V12 is very much the latter, and does not in any way feel as chuckable as even a series 2 . Only my opinion but i think the jewel in the e type range is the series 2, i would rather have a series 2 4.2 coupe, even a left hand drive one if the final drive ratio has been sorted.

Happy hunting!

Peter

[chrisw75]

I happen to like my series 3 V12 2+2. The fuel bills aren't even worth thinking about, and in an ideal world I'd like a series 2 4.2 coupe, but the 2+2 is a great car. She tours well, has been converted from LHD back to RHD.. but a lot of people dislike them, and don't value them as cars.

[vpr]

Personally the V12 is the only E 2+2 that works asthetically for moi.

They do suffer rust but no worse than anything else from that era....possibly better

[AndrewW-G]

Personally, I prefer the hard top E types over the roadsters, so lower values can only be a good thing

[ruhall]

The V12 is more of a cruiser, as the OP says. As to values, it's probably fair to say that raodsters of any make/model are generally worth more when older than the tin-tops, as seen with Astons,Mercs et al.

That doesn't necessarily mean that they are better cars; often, in my opinion, they don't drive as well as the fixed head versions. Market forces etc..

I've always thought that the FHC E's look better than the roadsters, although the 2+2s are more opinion dividing. At the end of the day, I'd be happy with any of them.

[lowdrag]

The general concensus on E-type values changes with fashion. It's always the roadsters that have the highest value, but even then it swings betrween the early flat floors to recently the S1 4.2 and before petrol went through the roof the V12 for a while. In the FHC coupés, the early 1961/67 cars are most valuable, and it is the general opinion (I didn't say mine before you react) the line of the 2+2 is considered ungainly, having a more upright screen permitting but two wipers and a roof line that doesn't quite make it. In decending order of value, the S1 2+2 is highest, the S2 not liked at all and is shaded by the V12 on values.

But that doesn't really matter if you need the space and want an E-type. You are benefitting from the general perception, and a good car will be a thing of pleasure. Me? I'd go for a S2 since it has better cooling and better brakes while not breaking the bank at the petrol station.

[interloper]

Its got to be down to the looks and perceived lack of purity hasn't it? The 2+2 looks really awkward when parked next to the earlier (and less spacious) coupe.