What is the truth about the S-Type chassis?
Discussion
Current S-type.
I've phoned Jaguar twice, the first time I spoke to someone "in the know" and he said the chassis is ALL Jaguar engineered, but Ford likes to keep it quiet. The second time after reading in Autocar that the chassis is Lincoln, I spoke to someone else and he said it is Lincoln/Ford/Jaguar. On Wikipedia its down as a Ford/Jaguar chassis. What are the facts, PLEASE?
I've phoned Jaguar twice, the first time I spoke to someone "in the know" and he said the chassis is ALL Jaguar engineered, but Ford likes to keep it quiet. The second time after reading in Autocar that the chassis is Lincoln, I spoke to someone else and he said it is Lincoln/Ford/Jaguar. On Wikipedia its down as a Ford/Jaguar chassis. What are the facts, PLEASE?
Edited by cerbman on Sunday 11th February 11:38
Edited by cerbman on Sunday 11th February 11:40
The truth:
The early S-Type up to 2002.25 MY with the original interior and Lincoln LS (and for that matter Ford Thunderbird) have much in common.
The subframes, wishbones, uprights, bearings, hubs, brake discs, calipers are the same.
The bushings differ between the models - for chassis tuning reasons. Springs & dampers were also completely different, plus the Jag had the CATS damper system. The Lincoln LS sport had a passive rear steering system.
When the S-Type received it's significant upgrade (new interior, 6 speed ZF) it also got a totally unique chassis.
The front suspension became based on the X350 (there are also some differences, such as busings) and was a huge improvement over the original's.
Additionally the rear suspension got totally new geometry and a new subframe, with two of the bushings more outboard and larger. Again, common to X350 in concept, differing in bush tuning.
The early S-Type up to 2002.25 MY with the original interior and Lincoln LS (and for that matter Ford Thunderbird) have much in common.
The subframes, wishbones, uprights, bearings, hubs, brake discs, calipers are the same.
The bushings differ between the models - for chassis tuning reasons. Springs & dampers were also completely different, plus the Jag had the CATS damper system. The Lincoln LS sport had a passive rear steering system.
When the S-Type received it's significant upgrade (new interior, 6 speed ZF) it also got a totally unique chassis.
The front suspension became based on the X350 (there are also some differences, such as busings) and was a huge improvement over the original's.
Additionally the rear suspension got totally new geometry and a new subframe, with two of the bushings more outboard and larger. Again, common to X350 in concept, differing in bush tuning.
The Lincoln team designed most of the LS & S-Type, Jaguar had input but probably not as much as they wanted. Originally the LS was to be a 180,000 a year car - a BMW fighter in the USA and a Scorpio replacement for Europe. When Volvo was purchased the LS wasn't sold in Europe, just the US, Middle East & Japan, so the volumes were a lot lower. I still think it's a pit that the LS didn't make it to Europe - it was a very good car.
Does it matter that some of the steel pressings & brackets, etc were designed by FNA/Lincoln? I dare say there was hell of a lot more besides. Theres a lot of very good knowledge and skill over there that a small company like Jag wouldn't have inhouse. Also to amortise the development costs of a brand new car, Jaguar almost certainly could not have gone alone. Jaguar will have had a lot of impact on the design, i.e. the all-round aluminium double-wishbone & hubs suspension is very jaguar-ish! (Actually having said that I don't think any Jaguar had aluminium suspension before but I may be wrong though) The engines are definitely Jaguar, even the V6 with it's steel bottom-end and new cylinder heads with direct-acting bucket valvetrain and narrower valve angles creating a compact combustion chamber.
It's perhaps quite telling that FNA/Lincoln has abandoned the platform in this form. Certainly many other reasons why, but it's definitely not a cheap chassis to make! Besides since it's release there has been very significant development over the years by Jaguar including brand-new transmissions, double bulkhead for NVH isolation, redesigned front suspension, new interior, and of course an absolutely amazing new Diesel Engine!
Gavin, there seems to me to be a contradiction in what you are saying which may be causing some of the confusion. Can you clarify it for us?
You said that the Lincoln LS and the S-Type started on the same US-engineered platform. Then from MY 2002 on the S-Type was re-engineered by Jaguar including the front suspension and was much better. This is borne out by any of the motoring magazines which say to a man that the older S-Type was rubbish but the redesigned one is excellent.
Then you go on to say what a terrific car the Lincoln LS was (this is the one with the rubbish suspension, note)and why wasn't it sold in the UK.
If I might go on to add my own take on this matter, the Americans like soft cruisers for long straight roads and their idea of performance is to drop in a big engine. Consequently their concept of suspension is inappropriate for European conditions. Nevertheless the Texicans retain this delusion that one day we are all going to see the light and buy their cars. However, every US design you find across here including Chrysler PT, Crossfire, Mustang, Dodge, Corvette is a relatively cheap eccentric niche purchase, and technically crude. No wonder they got Ralph Nader.
I've got an X350 XJR which is everything you could want and then some. Who designed that, is the real question.
You said that the Lincoln LS and the S-Type started on the same US-engineered platform. Then from MY 2002 on the S-Type was re-engineered by Jaguar including the front suspension and was much better. This is borne out by any of the motoring magazines which say to a man that the older S-Type was rubbish but the redesigned one is excellent.
Then you go on to say what a terrific car the Lincoln LS was (this is the one with the rubbish suspension, note)and why wasn't it sold in the UK.
If I might go on to add my own take on this matter, the Americans like soft cruisers for long straight roads and their idea of performance is to drop in a big engine. Consequently their concept of suspension is inappropriate for European conditions. Nevertheless the Texicans retain this delusion that one day we are all going to see the light and buy their cars. However, every US design you find across here including Chrysler PT, Crossfire, Mustang, Dodge, Corvette is a relatively cheap eccentric niche purchase, and technically crude. No wonder they got Ralph Nader.
I've got an X350 XJR which is everything you could want and then some. Who designed that, is the real question.
Edited by cardigankid on Saturday 24th February 10:39
A person at Jaguar said the chassis is ALL Jaguar engineered
A Jag expert on another site says the S is all Jaguar
A person at Jaguar said it is Lincoln/Ford/Jaguar.
Autocar says its Lincoln
Gavin says its Lincoln
On Wikipedia its down as a Ford/Jaguar chassis.
Though most admit that the facelift of 2002 was Jaguar.
I'm thinking of changing my XJ8 for an S-type R and I don't want to think that it will be less of a Jaguar engineered car than my XJ.
And there is more to a Jaguar than switchgear, IMHO
A Jag expert on another site says the S is all Jaguar
A person at Jaguar said it is Lincoln/Ford/Jaguar.
Autocar says its Lincoln
Gavin says its Lincoln
On Wikipedia its down as a Ford/Jaguar chassis.
Though most admit that the facelift of 2002 was Jaguar.
I'm thinking of changing my XJ8 for an S-type R and I don't want to think that it will be less of a Jaguar engineered car than my XJ.
And there is more to a Jaguar than switchgear, IMHO
if I wasn't already pretty well jagged up I would be thinking the same. Sounds like a really impressive machine. And good value.
Without wishing to discourage you, try one of the current XJR's. With a new one announced there will be some good value there as well, and what a machine.
Without wishing to discourage you, try one of the current XJR's. With a new one announced there will be some good value there as well, and what a machine.
Edited by cardigankid on Saturday 24th February 20:09
It was a brand-new car not based on anything before. No Granada, no Taurus, no Crown Vic, no Mustang and definitely no sodding Town Car.
It was an engineered by both Ford North America (Lincoln is simply a brand) and Jaguar. A concept design would have been specified and agreed by both parties and then there would have been the division of workload for the detailed productionisation of shared components and systems. I do not know what the split was in terms of responsibilities.
People always forget how small Jaguar were (and still are) and it is highly unlikely that Jaguar at the time had sufficient technical resource, manning, and ultimately money to do everything alone. If they were alone Jaguar would almost certainly had to sub-contract work out to 3rd party engineering consultancies. Trust me on this, using 3rd party engineering consultancies are always expensive and the quality of work is extremely variable. Ford's North American PD facilities and expertise are excellent only ignorant and snobbish perceptions prevent people from seeing that.
The Lincoln LS was a move by FNA to push the Lincoln brand upmarket as a genuine technically advanced alternative to the equivalent BMW/Merc/Lexus/Infiniti/Acura. A gamble that, despite by many accounts being a very good car, ultimately one that didn't pay off (OK but ultimately bland looks, poor marketing, lack of patience, purchase of Volvo, perhaps the Lincoln badge's lack of kudos for the price)
Gavin (who I know worked on the 'S' type) said "things that make a Jaguar a Jaguar are controlled by Jaguar" which doesn't just include switchgear but also suspension, engines, fundamental chassis geometry and attributes, as well as the softer airy-fairy bits like overall design looks and interior.
Autocar and for that matter any car-magazines or car-journalists in general know sweet FA about development of cars. They can write very well and their reports can seem very compelling, but they are not (or very rarely are) engineers and it is very easy for them to get the wrong end of the stick or not fully understand what they are reporting. At worse their embellishments can be utterly fictitious, after all big stories sell.
The 'S' type is an excellent chassis. OK they didn't get it completely right from the start, but if you know anything about engineering you will know how hard that is to do from a clean sheet design. It was however good enough to be tweaked and developed into the chassis it is today, if you don't believe me just drive one.
Cheers
Phil
It was an engineered by both Ford North America (Lincoln is simply a brand) and Jaguar. A concept design would have been specified and agreed by both parties and then there would have been the division of workload for the detailed productionisation of shared components and systems. I do not know what the split was in terms of responsibilities.
People always forget how small Jaguar were (and still are) and it is highly unlikely that Jaguar at the time had sufficient technical resource, manning, and ultimately money to do everything alone. If they were alone Jaguar would almost certainly had to sub-contract work out to 3rd party engineering consultancies. Trust me on this, using 3rd party engineering consultancies are always expensive and the quality of work is extremely variable. Ford's North American PD facilities and expertise are excellent only ignorant and snobbish perceptions prevent people from seeing that.
The Lincoln LS was a move by FNA to push the Lincoln brand upmarket as a genuine technically advanced alternative to the equivalent BMW/Merc/Lexus/Infiniti/Acura. A gamble that, despite by many accounts being a very good car, ultimately one that didn't pay off (OK but ultimately bland looks, poor marketing, lack of patience, purchase of Volvo, perhaps the Lincoln badge's lack of kudos for the price)
Gavin (who I know worked on the 'S' type) said "things that make a Jaguar a Jaguar are controlled by Jaguar" which doesn't just include switchgear but also suspension, engines, fundamental chassis geometry and attributes, as well as the softer airy-fairy bits like overall design looks and interior.
Autocar and for that matter any car-magazines or car-journalists in general know sweet FA about development of cars. They can write very well and their reports can seem very compelling, but they are not (or very rarely are) engineers and it is very easy for them to get the wrong end of the stick or not fully understand what they are reporting. At worse their embellishments can be utterly fictitious, after all big stories sell.
The 'S' type is an excellent chassis. OK they didn't get it completely right from the start, but if you know anything about engineering you will know how hard that is to do from a clean sheet design. It was however good enough to be tweaked and developed into the chassis it is today, if you don't believe me just drive one.
Cheers
Phil
A Ford Design Engineer who worked on the cylinder heads and cooling system of the Jag V6 diesel, which for a short period of time at least was the worlds most advanced passenger car diesel and even when the competitors caught up it still sets many benchmarks like base engine NVH.
Edited by wheeljack on Sunday 25th February 03:16
Phil is correct in his assessment.
It would be worth pointing out that Lincoln LS project was a magnet for most of the top talent within Ford North America Engineering - and since working on the project many of the key suspension and vehicle engineering guys went on to do the Ford GT. It's also a measure of the talent that a number of Ford North America Engineers worked on the V6 diesel in the S-Type and Peugeot 607.
It would be worth pointing out that Lincoln LS project was a magnet for most of the top talent within Ford North America Engineering - and since working on the project many of the key suspension and vehicle engineering guys went on to do the Ford GT. It's also a measure of the talent that a number of Ford North America Engineers worked on the V6 diesel in the S-Type and Peugeot 607.
So did they update the Lincoln when they updated the S-Type? And if Ford US engineers are so brilliant (and I hope they are, given what they are in charge of) what is their excuse for the Mustang? I am unlikely ever to be in a position to buy a Ford GT but would you have one in preference to a Lamborghini or a Ferrari, purely in engineering terms. Big mistake selling Aston.
Also I would have thought that Motor Industry pros would have realised by now that you cannot push a brand upmarket, while you can certainly push one downmarket.
Also I would have thought that Motor Industry pros would have realised by now that you cannot push a brand upmarket, while you can certainly push one downmarket.
Edited by cardigankid on Sunday 25th February 12:12
cardigankid said:
---------8<--------------------
Also I would have thought that Motor Industry pros would have realised by now that you cannot push a brand upmarket, while you can certainly push one downmarket.
Edited by cardigankid on Sunday 25th February 12:12
Not sure that's true
VW ?
Skoda ?
BMW, when I was a kid BMW made bubble cars.
All Japanese manufactures?
But your right that moving a brand down market is easy.
cardigankid said:
So did they update the Lincoln when they updated the S-Type?
They did do updates on the Lincoln but it is unlikely they were all the same as the S type and it has now gone out of production. It is worth pointing out since it's release Jaguar alone has developed a double bulkhead structure, new transmissions, aluminum bonnet, new interior, etc these are very significant changes. The XF will be all theirs too.
cardigankid said:
And if Ford US engineers are so brilliant (and I hope they are, given what they are in charge of) what is their excuse for the Mustang? I am unlikely ever to be in a position to buy a Ford GT but would you have one in preference to a Lamborghini or a Ferrari, purely in engineering terms. Big mistake selling Aston.
Now come on that is a little uncalled for! Not all engineers are brilliant over there but there are significant number that are. You have to judge the Mustang on the context of its target market i.e. a cheap thrills 20000 dollar rwd car. It does the job it was designed to do very well. There is a lot of truth in the old saying "engineering is doing for a dime what any fool can do for a dollar". Give these engineers a few extra dollars and see what they can do! As for the Ford GT, could you give me 10 page engineering evaluation of why a Lambo or Ferrari is significantly better? Evo seemed to like it enough to be car of the year, and despite Clarkson's gripes with the alarm/immobiliser and general practicalities (and also his usual embellishments for effect!) he seemed to love it. Given the time it took from go-ahead to production and the fact they've never done anything like it before they did an amazing job. A few years more development and it would probably more than a match for the italian stuff. cardigankid said:
Also I would have thought that Motor Industry pros would have realised by now that you cannot push a brand upmarket, while you can certainly push one downmarket.
It's really very hard indeed, but not impossible. It certainly takes a lot more patience than the usual Anglo-American executive has. I think it was Ferdinand Piech who said "if we knew how hard building Audi up to luxury brand was 30 years ago when we started, we probably wouldn't have bothered!"
Edited by wheeljack on Sunday 25th February 15:12
Gassing Station | Jaguar | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff