When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
What's the difference between a 420, 420G, Mark X, MK 10, D-Type, and S-Type??
I'm looking to buy one of these for a project and summer local driver but first need to get educated on the differences. After doing a quick scan online they all look like the same car. Can anyone explain the differences? Thanks.
Hi Tom999W,
The D-type was a race car from the mid 1950's.
Mark 10 & MK X are the same car.
The mark X from 1961 to 1964 had the 3.8L engine. In 1965 it received the 4.2L engine. In 1966 it became the 420G when the 420 (small saloon) came out.
The Mark X/420G are large saloons - about 202 inches in length. The 420G also received the safety interior I believe.
The S-type (3.4s or 3.8s) are small saloons - about 187 inches in length.
It came with a 3.8L engine (3.8s) for NA and 3.4L (3.4s) or 3.8L (3.8s) for the rest of the world.
It was based off of the MK2 but the trunk was lengthened to accommodate the independent rear suspension.
The 420 (1966-1968)/ Daimler Sovereign (1966-1970) were based off of the S-type.
Major differences were different front end design, safety interior to satisfy USA safety standards and 4.2L engine.
Ok, thanks very much for the information. So I'm ascertaining that the 420, 420G, Mark X and MK 10 are all mostly the same body but with different engines and subtle body styling changes from year to year. And the D-Type and S-Type are totally different body styles altogether. Would that be a correct assumption? I got the D and S names off of Jaguars for sale on Facebook Marketplace, where alot of vehicles for sale are mis-named due to the limited car model options on the computer nerd-oriented (not car-oriented) facebook website. In the ads they looked like Mark X/420 cars but we're listed as S and D Types.
So I'm ascertaining that the 420, 420G, Mark X and MK 10 are all mostly the same body but with different engines and subtle body styling changes from year to year. And the D-Type and S-Type are totally different body styles altogether. Would that be a correct assumption? .
Hi Tom,
Let me try again.
The Mark10/Mark X/420G are the same basic car but with update for different model years. Be it engine capacity interior updates etc. It is a large car, think Ford Galaxy or Chevy Impala size. They all look the same except for minor changes.
The S-type and 420 are sister cars like a Camaro and Firebird. The S-type rear end is styled after the Mark X/420G rear end. The 420 front end is styled after the Mark X/420G front end. From the A-pillar back the sheet metal is the same between the S-type and the 420. Same underbody but different engines, interior details and different front end sheetmetal. The size is between a Chevy Nova and Chevelle.
Note that a modern Jaguar saloon called the S-type was introduced at the Birmingham Motor Show in 1998. This had common parts with the Lincoln LS, and has nothing at all common with the 1963 car except the style of the later car hints at the earlier model.
Jaguar's Sedans - 1955-1970 --- Mark I/II - Mark X (10)/420G - S-Type - 420
Tom --- I first fell in love w/Jaguars as a child when I discovered a Mark I/II sedan buried in my neighbor’s “barn”. [Incidentally – we lived in Brookline, MA, a densely populated half-suburban / half-urban town near Boston w/zero agrarian character where one wouldn't expect a barn… yet they had a cool, stone barn that to any curious, invasive 8-year old, was “barn” enough for me.] Essentially, at 8 years old, I decided that – when I could get my own car – it would be that Jag.
In deciding which if any mid-sized Jag saloon sedan you might want from the 1960s, I find it's easiest to look at it from an evolutionary perspective – and then consider three factors:
1. Which one has the looks that get to you… without compromising too much on engineering and tech advances?
2. How easy is to find parts, panels and such?
3. Price.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In my early Jag infatuation years, it was all about the aesthetics. Like (I suppose) most of us on this Forum, there is just something about the lines of classic Jaguar that seduce our eyes. So my focus below will be on the visual design element differentiations, as all of these models are pretty darn good, mechanically… for their time. That said, when it strikes me, I'll highlight a few cool engineering advances.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
MARK I / MARK II – the Mid-Sized Sedan Revolution
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The initial great run of numerous mid-sized Jag saloons ran from 1955 through 1968 (when the XJ6 was introduced). The first “one” was technically two models: the Mark I (1955-59) and the Mark II (1959-1967). This was the car whose looks lured me to Jag. These cars had a surprisingly long run, especially considering that Jaguar continued to release new (and often directly competitive) models with engineering upgrades, styling differences, and more “modern” sensibilities. But to my eye, the Mark I/IIs were the quintessential post-WWII rounded, small-to-mid-sized English saloon touring car. Their lines were – and are – so perfectly British. I've dropped in a few pics: the most identifiable characteristics are the sloping hood/bonnet, with the classic, downward-curved oval grille, and the graceful, sloping trunk/boot lid (with a decent but admittedly modestly-sized trunk). I won't go into how luxurious and gorgeous the interiors were, with their nearly-bespoke Connolly leather interiors and extraordinarily walnut burl wood trim… that’s for another post.
Jaguar Mark 1
Jaguar Mark I
Jaguar Mark II
Jaguar Mark II
These Mark I/IIs were the first true post-way Jag saloon cars. Yes – there were the stately, almost giant, and surprisingly speedy Marks VII/VIII-IXs (the “poor man’s Bentley”), the first Jag saloons with integrated fenders and – late in the run – power brakes and steering. But – while surprisingly good-handling for a large car – they were a transition pre-WWII Jag from an engineering point of view (frame-built; no “live rear end”; not always disc brakes; etc.). I actually love them – and own a 1960 MK IX… but I can never recommend one for the simple reason that finding parts for them is often nearly impossible.
In contrast, the Mark I/II was a mini-revolution: a modern, sprightly, mid-sized saloon that handled remarkably well. Jaguar fans had never seen the likes of it – and it remained very popular nearly throughout its run. It was the first Jag sedan with unibody construction, and it boasted standard 4-wheel disc brakes – optional power steering and overdrive – live rear ends – up to three versions of the advanced Jaguar XK6 I6 engine (the 2.4 liter, the 3.4 liter, and – for the Mark II only – the 3.8 liter) – lots and lots of glass for substantially improved fields of vision – an ergonomically far superior instrument layout that remained the standard for all Jaguar sedans until the XJ series II of 1973.
As you can likely tell, these are my favorite of this run of mid-sized Jag sedans. They are quite collectible, and therefore parts are widely available. Ones that need restos are not over-priced.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
MARK X (10) / 420G – The Mega-Sedan
-------------------------------------------------------
In 1960, the Mark X (Mark 10 – later the 420G) arrived, in theory, a modernized, low-slung behemoth that succeeded the Mark VII/VIII/IXs. While there were many engineering improvements over its big-sedan predecessor, the Mark IX (many of which it borrowed from the newly-issued, awesome E-type – see the factory promotional film at https://www.macsmotorcitygarage.com/...jaguar-mark-x/), and it had a surprisingly long run (10 years). But, IMHO, it felt too heavy for the then-current technology at Jag (I've found it to a bit lumbering and cumbersome) – and it had a rep for mechanical unreliability. Its aesthetics were a bit of a cross from a cool 1950s look and a sleek post-1960s look. It was stately, but one couldn't quite call it sexy… let’s say flashy at the start of its run… and stodgy by 1970.
From your perspective, the most critical aesthetic evolution was that the Mark 10 / 420G introduced the new looks at the hood and the trunk: the hood was flatter and wider, with a mostly square grille that evolved directly into the rectangular grille of the XJ6 --- and the trunk was also flattened out and widened, creating a truly giant trunk. Both of these changes reflected the longer/lower/wider trend gripping both the U.S. and the UK at the time. I'm not a big fan, but lovers of the Mark X / 420G correctly note that the car is a true bridge between the rounded, majestic body-stylings of the 1950s and the sleek lines of the late-1960s and beyond.
Jaguar Mark X (10) / 420G
Jaguar Mark X (10) / 420G
Mark Xs / 420Gs can be purchased for very reasonable prices – and while direct parts are not quite as widely available as its peers – many of its parts are interchangeable with other Jag sedans. But these tend to require a lot of fixing and upgrading. Not my recommended option.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
S-TYPE – a Bridge (but not too far)
--------------------------------------------------
In 1963 – about two-thirds into the run of the Mark I/IIs – Jag introduced the S-Type. In a lesson learned from Detroit, the folks at Jag realized they weren’t offering folks any real choice between the uber-luxe Mark X and the still sporty but more modest Mark II. Thus, the S-Type was developed as a technically more sophisticated version of the Mark II (with elements of the Mark X), offering buyers a more luxurious alternative without the size and expense of the Mark X. Mechanically, it was a blend with no revolutionary components (it used a down-sized version of the Mark X’s independent rear suspension to replace the Mark 2's live rear axle, but kept most of the same engine options). To over-simply, it cornered better than the Mark II, but was a tad slower due its increased weight.
The most noticeable changes were in the body: to over simplify, they matched the beautiful front and hood of a Mark II with the lower, wider rear and trunk of a Mark X. To my eyes, this is an interesting evolutionary step – very attractive; but neither fish nor fowl. That said, I far prefer it to the Mark X or the next car, the 420. The front end is still gorgeous – and the interior is downright superb. I would never kick it out of bed for eating crackers. Models are generally available at reasonable prices – and parts are widely available.
Jaguar S-Type
Jaguar S-Type
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
420 – Goodbye to the Classic Look
-------------------------------------------------
In 1966, only 3 years after the release of the mid-priced S-Type, Jag released the “420”… essentially marking the end of the S-Type (although it did muddle along for another two model years). More critically, it ended the run of that classic front end common to the Mark Is, Mark IIs and S-Types – which is my all-time face of all Jags. To oversimplify, the 420 was exactly what it sounded like, a mid-sized version of a Mark X (which then re-badged as the “420G”). If the Mark X (420G) was out of your price range, or you (like me) found it a bit too bulky but otherwise liked its styling and far roomier boot, than the 420 was for you: vs. the S-Type, it had more luxury, more back seat room, an engine bay large enough to handle the superior triple-SU carbs, more power, etc., etc. I'm not partial to its looks, and – while those advantages would have surely meant a lot to contemporary buyer – for the classic car enthusiast, the model is simply… less classic. All that said, when in proper mechanical and aesthetic condition, it is a beaut to drive – with a magnificent interior.
Jaguar 420
Jaguar 420
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Transition to XJ6
------------------------
Over the next several years, this 15 year run of post-WWII mid-sized saloon cars came to their evolutionary conclusion in the XJ6, first released in 1968. By the end of 1970 – they were all gone – but thousands of each one remain… your choices are boundless. Good luck.
Great, thank you everyone very much for the fantastic information. I'm shooting for a Mark X/ MK 10/ 420G or a 420. I'm assuming that technology and reliability factors have improved over the ten year production run, but will shop for the one that is most within my price range and is also geographically closest to pick up with a trailer as opposed to having to ship.
Tom - my gut is that if you're set on one of those two, you would be best off with a straight 420. You can get great deals, and - styling to one side - the consensus among the engineering cognoscenti is that mechanically the 420 was the best of the lot.
One further thing, Mark X and Mark 10 are pronounced the same way. Jaguar used Roman numerals on their models but some people write the names with Arabic numerals instead.
The three most important things to look for are rust, paint condition, and interior condition. Mechanicals are straight forward to fix. An otherwise perfect car with a blown engine will be a lot easier and cheaper to put right than a rust bucket that runs and drives. We expect Jaguars to have luxurious interiors with all that wood and leather, but restoring that takes a lot of time and money, far more than the car is worth.
All of the above I think, but in my own words having owned several of them.
The Mark10 (or 420G) was what I think of as the quintessential Jaguar Jaguar. Styling-wise the first of the double-headlight classic front, and the rear if you want to go down that far.
The S-Type was an update of the Mk2 to Mk10 styling, except they ran out of money and only updated the rear! We had to wait for the 420 (as distinct from the larger 420G) for them to update the front as well. In the meantime the S-Type was a bit more luxurious inside, and notably had the Independent Rear Suspension scaled down from Mk10 or E-Type, compared to a Mk2.
I Love Them All! The S-Type is considered by some to be a compromised orphan (only half-did the changes), which for me only means they didn't update the front grill at the time.
My 60-yr-old spinster neighbour never liked my S-Type. That's because I came home drunk one night with a tricky manouvre into my carport and she claimed I hit her wall. Which I denied as you do...except she had the centrepiece of an S-Type grill in her hand! It cost me $130 in 1970's dollars to replace just the centre grill. Where's the sympathy?
So, the Mark10 (which I owned before my S-Type) was too large in my opinion/memory (and even Sir William Lyons admitted it was too large). I especially remember the width of the doors, you could sleep inside those doors!
Imagine my surprise when I purchased a 2008 X358 and managed by chance to meet up with my old original Mk10. They look similar in size! Depends what one gets used to, nowadays I see earlier XJ6 or Mk2 as being quite small. But there is a difference. I cannot bring myself to park my Mk10-sized X358 (which to me is still a classic car) in a supermarket carpark! Or not without staying in the car whilst my wife shops.
I got so excited remembering my 1965 S-Type, that I recently bought a 1/18 scale model in the colour I had. Cheers
Yes, ChrisMills, with the original S-type you got a MK-X rear end grafted on to a mk-2, but you also got the independent rear suspension as a part of the package. All in all, not a terrible trade off, eh?
Yes, ChrisMills, with the original S-type you got a MK-X rear end grafted on to a mk-2, but you also got the independent rear suspension as a part of the package. All in all, not a terrible trade off, eh?
I wanted a four door sedan and liked the look of the 1960's Jaguars. The MKII has a big following as it was more mass produced, commonly raced, and in cops/robber movies. For me I was new to the Jaguar brand so to me the S type looked better to me than the MKII as the rear looked more proportioned and technically the independent rear suspension with four wheel disc brakes was one of the main reasons I choose the S-type. They often sell a little less so that was another reason, a better price tag with better design.
Keep in mind the Jaguars no matter which model you choose can be more expensive as a build. Key parts that are expensive is the wood restoration is what makes the cars and to me is best done with an experienced person to get that nice show quality look they are known for. My build was a restomod and the only thing I would have done differently is rip all of the Lucas electrical and replace with all modern, I did about half that way and I should have put Lava Shield on the full firewall and trans tunnel when I stripped the engine bay and tunnel when the car was a shell as those are now too much hassle for a daily driver to redo...
12-10-2021, 08:59 PM
What's the difference between a 420, 420G, Mark X, MK 10, D-Type, and S-Type??
