Engine and gear box from X Type he mentioned earlier in the thread.

 

X-type has transverse engine and trans. Different configuration. Non Starter

S-type with V6 had manual trans. Not heavy duty enough for V8 and different engine/trans housing bolt pattern.

 

A customer of the place I get my Jag's fixed is supposed to have a 2005 XJR in manual (was converted) says the owner of the shop. The shop did not do the work.

 

PM this guy see how he went

 

There are different sets of criteria when dealing with a manual or automatic setup and automatic-only. This is because AT will never drop the clutch or power-shift. As such, you don't need to build measures to dampen spikes in moment (rotatum) and so on. So if you do a conversion, you can't just connect it to a driveshaft and expect it to last - your differential will fail, your driveshaft links will fail and so on. So if you are dealing with AT-only car you also have to harden the rest of driveline and/or add flex disks to driveshaft.

For example. My MT F-type, an early production version that was going through growing pains as JLR was figuring out MTs, had a differential replaced under warranty after one of the early iterations of clutches with too-rapid pickup overloaded its bearings. This is on OEM setup with Jaguar engineers not getting it right the first (few) times.

 

I only partially agree with what you wrote. Since one will likely put in a 6 speed TR-6060, TR-3160 or T56 you mate to the manual transmission's robust output shaft, then tell a company like "The Driveshaft Shop" that you want a custom driveshaft that will handle 800HP. On the X100s you don't have to have donuts/flex discs so you are able to directly bolt the differential's 4 bolt input flange. The X100s are plenty strong to handle a manual transmission. No reports of differential problems on the LSX manual conversions.
On the later DEW98 based XKs (Like S-types) Jag went with a 3 bolt input flange and flex coupler. This would have to be swapped out or an adapter made to eliminate the flex coupler for a standard u-joint or CV joint. I do not believe that the 2008 version of X-150 differential is as stong as the X100, and you might have to swap in the Ford 8.8/Mark VIII differential. (Then you could put in a Torsen LSD)

 

Update: For the time being I have gone with the Maserati. Loving the manual transmission with the sound of that "Ferrari" NA V8!

Oh and that interior!

 

Well that's a disappointment ^^^

Mike one thing I'm struggling to comprehend is how could a manual Aston vantage not be your cup of tea but I'm gathering its older maserati coupe 4200 you bought fits your criteria

 

That is what I was thinking; the 4200 is a far cry from an Aston Martin. I've driven a GranSport a lot; my friend had one finest condition examples in the US.

 

I understand where you are coming from. Dynamically a Vantage will be superior to a stock 4200. But then I drove a sorted 4200 manual and my perception about the car changed. It seems skyhook is the culprit. The one I drove didn't have skyhook and had the suspension just redone with coilovers instead and it's a huge improvement. I liked it and bought it.

But in the end of the day it was a combination of things which led me to go for it. The main thing is, if I wasn't getting exactly what I wanted and would go for a compromise, I might as well go for the more affordable compromise. I don't love the Vantage looks. The Vantage was not my choice. It would be a back up just the same.

But I liked the way the sorted 4200 GT drove. It has a more charismatic engine than the Vantage. The engine is more special. The engine sounds better, even looks better when you open the hood.

Then the nail in the coffin was that, from the most important angle, the one which I'm always seeing, the Maserati just trumps the Vantage in a non contest kind of way. I'm talking about the interior. The Maserati is just such a nice place to be. It feels more special. More of a sense of occasion. I never liked the Vantage interior. It was always a weak point for me. I don't know. It always reminded me of a Honda or Toyota interior, especially from a design point of view.

So with the combination of all the above and when you factor in the Maserati costs less, it was a no-brainer. Better sounding and more special engine, better sense of occasion and nicer looking interior, good driving for what it is, a GT, and lower priced than the Vantage. I like the looks too. Not totally in love but neither was I with the Vantage.

I have not regretted so far.

 

Even though a 4200 GT Aston Martin is a really nice car, it still isn't a Jaguar with a manual tranmission. Perhaps the title of the thread should be changed so future readers wont need to read this thread only to be saddened that this thread ran into a dead end and ended up being a debate between the Vantage and 4200 GT

 

Well, was the thread or even the idea really that popular to break hearts? I don't think so. I spent most of thread being told why I shouldn't try to do it, should just accept the paddles or buy an Aston or another car. So I don't think anybody cares really.

Besides I have not completely given up on the idea. Hence why on my update I said for the time being I have gone with the Maserati.

 

No need to give up, but actually getting a manual trans will be very expensive. If you're willing to spend big then just do so and report back

 

Getting an already MT car over doing conversion is unquestionably a more sensible approach. Obviously, other people in this thread were all to happy to spend your money on a risky project that would have left you $50K into a $20K car.

 

As has been discussed, the mechanical installation of a 6-speed transmission is straight forward, and not too expensive. The hard part is how to deal with the electrical: ECM/BCM CAN signals...

Aftermarket ECMs are getting better and better at interfacing with a donor cars electrical, but one still needs to do a lot of backwards signal/code processing. Although an ECM can be made to be universal running any engine, there is way too much work to figure out how to get everything working. For vehicles with high production volumes companies like HP tuners figure it out and consumers benefit. But for an owner of any Jaguar, with an automatic, perhaps 20 people might be interested in the swap. It isn't worth the cost for a car that is worthless in 10 years. (Think X100 LS engine swaps. Andrew/Jaguar Specialties put a lot of energy into his CAN converter, to J1850 code. He appears to have no way yet to crack the X150 CAN controllers.)

 

Interesting thread. Indeed, the challenge here is in the electronics and communication, something that requires specialized software (expensive) and experience in automotive CAN (extensive) to resolve. We spent a year+ with an Auto-CAN consultant getting the basic X100/X308 format in place, and (luckily) we were successful. And there have been several updates since adding more capability. The process was not made any easier by the fact that Jaguar (unlike the big 3) do not open their CAN up to users, so our process had to be backwards engineered to even get in the door to see what could be done...

On X150, there has been very little interest in LS conversions so we have spent virtually no time looking into it (I get maybe 5 calls a year). I think that's primarily because the 4.2 solved many of the 4.0's engine issues and the 6 speed automatic cured what ailed the 5HP24. Nonetheless, I'm certain that if we decided to go into this, go LS for X150, it could be done, with similar results to the LS-X100. We'd just go through that process again, although I have a feeling it would go much faster this time.... We haven't "cracked" the X150 because no one is asking for it....

One last comment - our X100/X308 interface is not J1850.... that's a very old format essentially abandoned by GM in 2004 or so as all of their cars went to pure LAN/CAN. Had we standardized on J1850 to communicate with the LS ECM's, we'd be locked out of virtually every 2005 and later GM controller... The way our interface is set up, any GM LS will work with us, and conceivably, any aftermarket controller as well....

Thanks
Andrew
Jaguar Specialties

 

Perhaps I am confusing older S-type ECM control with XK8. Doesn't XK8 use an early CAN protocol for the engine and J1850 PWM for the body control via standard Ford SCP on a serial databus?
I know that X150s are a full CAN bus implementation. (High speed CAN Bus, Medium Speed CAN bus, and MOST Network.)
GM CAN is a different implementation than CAN used in our Jaguars.

I forget all the CAN standards as fast as I can read them. Don't think about it enough for it to go into long term memory,

 

J1850 (aka SCP) is Ford (& Jaguar et al).

GM used VPW. Not the same as J1850.

 

This is the link I keep bookmarked and go to every time I need a refresher on the CAN protocols.
https://www.cnblogs.com/shangdawei/p/3570546.html

Now a days, GM uses their GMLAN, I believe under J2534 Protocols

 

Glad to hear that you are sorted for now

Funny, my X150 purchase was kicked off when I saw a 4200 Skyhook advertised nearby. They would not give me a date for a test drive so I didn't take it further, also put off by the reputation of the Skyhook reliability and the cost of the usual spare parts such as brake discs. No manuals turned up anywhere near me Today, there are only 3 for sale in Germany on Mobile.de

Shock! 5 years later, that same 4200 is still for sale. Same photos, same mileage, slightly higher price. Something very fishy there!

https://suchen.mobile.de/fahrzeuge/d...l?id=262795125