Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Closed TopicStart new topic
> Jaguar E-type
PBB
post Aug 2 2004, 08:39 PM
Post #1


Aeternum vale
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,810
Joined: 6-March 04
Member No.: 636





The Jaguar E-Type was officially introduced to the world in March 1961 in Geneva, Switzerland. The reaction was immediate and enthusiastic. The styling was partly responsible; the sensuous shape still gets rave reviews. The list of mechanical features was, for 1961, stunning: a double overhead cam engine, fully independent rear suspension and four wheel disc brakes (inboard at the rear no less, an exotic touch usually found only on race cars) proved the E-Type to be an advanced automobile. The price ($5,595 (£1,830) for the roadster) made the E-Type an exceptional bargain; the comparitively crude Corvette cost less but offerings from Aston Martin and Ferrari were considerably more. The future of the E-Type as an automotive classic was secured.






The Jaguar E-type had muscle under its sensuous skin. The XK motor produced gobs of power with exceptional smoothness and sounds that were a delight for the senses. Whenever a list of the great automobile engines is compiled, the XK motor, along with Ford's flathead V8 and the Chevrolet small block, are almost always present.
As World War II was coming to an end, Sir William Lyons, the president and founding father of Jaguar, knew that commercial production would soon follow. He needed an engine and assembled a team of engineers to work on its design. The first iteration was called "XA"; "X" stood for experimental and "A" meant that it was the first in the series. The early designs were on paper only; the XE was the first to be built and tested. Things were well sorted out by the time of the XK design, hence the XK moniker.



The same basic motor (3.4 liters) first saw service in the XK-120 in 1948 and, with triple SU (Skinners Union) carburetors and 3.8 liters of displacement, was used in the XK-150S before the E-type. They were retired from volume production in 1987 in the XJ6 and still saw limited service in limousines produced until 1992. All told, XK Engines were in production for 44 years, a phenomenal record and a testimony to the integrity of the basic design.

The XK engine used in the Series I and II cars is an inline six cylinder unit, with double overhead camshafts, two valves per cylinder and a displacement of 3781 cc. (230.6 cubic inches) which was increased to 4235 cc in 1964. The heads are an aluminum alloy and the block was iron.

Although the factory rated the Series I engine at 265 hp., the figure is controversial and almost nobody believes it. Many insist that a more accurate figure is closer to 200 hp. and a few contend that it is even less!



Specifications

Overall Length . . . . . . 175 in. (Series I)
175.3 in. (Series II)
Wheelbase . . . . . . 96.0 in.
Width . . . . . . 65.2 in.
Height . . . . . . 48.1 in.
Track . . . . . . 50.0 in.
Curb weight . . . . . . 2,770 lbs. (Series I convertible)
2,900 lbs. (Series I coupe)
2,750 lbs. (Series II convertible)
3,018 lbs. (Series II coupe)
Body/Frame . . . . . . Monocoque/front subframe
Brakes . . . . . . Four wheel disks; inboard at rear
Front Suspension . . . . . . Independent; Unequal length A-arms; Torsion bars; tube shocks
Rear Suspension . . . . . . Independent; Lower A-arms; Half shafts; Trailing arms; Coil Springs; Tube shocks; Anti-roll bar
Steering . . . . . . Rack and Pinion
Turning circle . . . . . . 37.0 ft.
39.8 ft. (Series II convertible)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
White RSX
post Aug 2 2004, 08:43 PM
Post #2


Super Great Guitar Player!
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 9,006
Joined: 20-October 03
From: Moon, PA
Member No.: 132



Large and lumbering, a Triumph is a far better choice, but anyhow, still rock solid.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Aug 2 2004, 09:14 PM
Post #3


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



Ugh, lukewarm...I imagine the average E-type owner and I think of the most boring, stuffy, stuck-up twats on the face of the planet.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
White RSX
post Aug 2 2004, 09:17 PM
Post #4


Super Great Guitar Player!
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 9,006
Joined: 20-October 03
From: Moon, PA
Member No.: 132



Clark, you'd be almost dead on, except one thing, the most stuck up owners are Corvette owners.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Aug 2 2004, 09:20 PM
Post #5


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



Corvette owners are a special breed though...they're ignorant stuck-ups, not snooty stuck-ups like E-typers wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PBB
post Aug 2 2004, 09:29 PM
Post #6


Aeternum vale
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,810
Joined: 6-March 04
Member No.: 636



mellow.gif What a weak sauce reason to dislike a car.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
5LiterMustang
post Aug 2 2004, 09:32 PM
Post #7


Race Driver
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,531
Joined: 26-August 03
From: So Cal
Member No.: 14



I love this car.

i forgot the name of this show, but it was on TLC a while ago, and it was a documentary of a guy completely restoring one of these cars.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Aug 2 2004, 09:32 PM
Post #8


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



Again, PBB, you're getting "good" confused with "cool".

(although I don't think it's a particularly good car anyway)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DakianDelomast
post Aug 2 2004, 09:38 PM
Post #9


I will stand, or I will fall. But I will not sit.
******

Group: Members
Posts: 13,576
Joined: 4-September 03
From: Somewhere between Chicago and Indianapolis
Member No.: 58
Car: Miata & RX-7



QUOTE(PowerByBrower @ Aug 3 2004, 12:29 AM)
mellow.gif What a weak sauce reason to dislike a car.

Yeah clark's basing cool off of the owner group pisses me off too but hey, its his vote.

Anywho the E-Types are a rather timeless body style and I don't know about you guys but I happen to know of one very special E-Type owner who was the SCCA Vintage racing champion who drives an E-Type and I got to ride with him. From personal experience I can say that their straight 6s pull like any modern car and the coupés look like sex on wheels. Cool car to be sure.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Aug 2 2004, 09:42 PM
Post #10


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



I base my cool vote off of gut feeling, dakian; I merely try and explain it somewhat when I vote. But all analysis is after-the-fact.

And for the record, I think it's dumb that 90% of the cars on the cool wall make it to "cool" or "frozen". It's just...dumb.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DakianDelomast
post Aug 2 2004, 09:46 PM
Post #11


I will stand, or I will fall. But I will not sit.
******

Group: Members
Posts: 13,576
Joined: 4-September 03
From: Somewhere between Chicago and Indianapolis
Member No.: 58
Car: Miata & RX-7



We're still in the mode though where we're all posting cars we like and that are interesting to us. If you started making posts about the Toyota Corolla, the Camry, or the Honda accord, or hell even a Pontiac I promise you the uncool section would fill up rather quickly.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Aug 2 2004, 09:48 PM
Post #12


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



Well, you gotta admit that it's still dumb that nearly half of the cars are in the frozen subforum. I mean, wow, that certainly diminishes the strength of the "ice cold" vote..."cool", IMO, is cooler than the "meh" status it has been currently assigned.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PBB
post Aug 2 2004, 09:51 PM
Post #13


Aeternum vale
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,810
Joined: 6-March 04
Member No.: 636



Ahh yes but what about the "It really must be cold, I'm not smuggling TicTacs!" or "Look mommy! I can cut glass with my nipples!" votes? tongue.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Aug 2 2004, 09:53 PM
Post #14


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



No fooling us PBB, we all know what that means wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dukenukem
post Aug 2 2004, 09:58 PM
Post #15


**Snuggles**
******

Group: Moderators
Posts: 14,251
Joined: 13-November 03
From: Dallas, TX
Member No.: 166
Car: 2006 Subaru WRX STI



QUOTE(clarkma5 @ Aug 3 2004, 12:48 AM)
Well, you gotta admit that it's still dumb that nearly half of the cars are in the frozen subforum. I mean, wow, that certainly diminishes the strength of the "ice cold" vote..."cool", IMO, is cooler than the "meh" status it has been currently assigned.

That only means that were some really great pieces of engineering excellences made through the ages ..... but if a Camry or some Kia made through to Ice Cold then its time to retire to a monestry (sp?) in Tibet.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Aug 2 2004, 10:05 PM
Post #16


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



Look at the listing of subzero cars on the Top Gear cool wall:

QUOTE
Alfa 156 Facelift
Aston Martin DB9
Caterham R400
Fiat Punto
Ford GT
Ford Street Ka
Land Rover Defender
Mini Cooper S


8 cars, and they're not the most likely suspects in terms of "cool". I'm not saying we need to do the weird top gear thing, where "cool" is basically based on whether jeremy likes a car or not, but I think we should work to reserve "frozen" for truly special cars.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dukenukem
post Aug 2 2004, 10:06 PM
Post #17


**Snuggles**
******

Group: Moderators
Posts: 14,251
Joined: 13-November 03
From: Dallas, TX
Member No.: 166
Car: 2006 Subaru WRX STI



ok i get your point and just to make my stance clear 4 of those cars shouldnt be there.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clarkma5
post Aug 2 2004, 10:07 PM
Post #18


Talkin' the talk since 2003
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 28,271
Joined: 27-August 03
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 27
Car: 2004 VW GTI 1.8T



I would definitely agree to that...and it should be noted that two of those cars have since moved down the wall (the Mini and the Ford GT).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LoudPipe
post Aug 2 2004, 11:22 PM
Post #19


Grease Monkey
**

Group: Members
Posts: 495
Joined: 10-June 04
Member No.: 830



Back to the E-type... If you need to remove both engine and transmission to change the clutch the car MUST be ice cold
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dukenukem
post Aug 2 2004, 11:32 PM
Post #20


**Snuggles**
******

Group: Moderators
Posts: 14,251
Joined: 13-November 03
From: Dallas, TX
Member No.: 166
Car: 2006 Subaru WRX STI



QUOTE(LoudPipe @ Aug 3 2004, 02:22 AM)
Back to the E-type... If you need to remove both engine and transmission to change the clutch the car MUST be ice cold

that just means the car is a real pain in the ass tongue.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Closed TopicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 15th September 2019 - 06:38 PM
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here