XK - Coupe vs. Convertible
#61
#63
I'm going to underscore what a couple of others have posted.
I've been a "vert" guy most of my life. Have had previously a 98 SL500, a 91 RX-7 (under-rated convertible), a 90 Mustang GT convertible (don't care what anyone says, ugly with the top up but BITCHIN with the top down), and a 69 Camaro.
Three things:
First-- given that it's my daily driver, one of my favorite things about the XK's is they still do a soft top. Love the hardtops, but they simply eat up too much trunk space. When I was looking around I quickly realized that I had to have a soft top, and that narrowed my list considerably. Also, a soft top with a glass rear window (my one beef with my SL).
Second: resale value. Assuming you live, as you do, in a nice climate, convertibles sell easier. Period.
Third: TIRES. TIRES. TIRES. Did I mention tires? So I bought my 2010 XKR convertible with 9,000 original miles. Obviously, still had the original Dunlops. Since it's my daily driver, fast forward a year and I'm over 20k miles. The rears were bald. I mean racing-slick, almost-see-the-cords bald. I did a lot of research (and going down the rabbit hole of "best tire for XK" threads on this forum is a never-ending research vortex), and decided on Continental Extreme Pro Contact DWS 06 (dry-wet-snow, their all-season option) for my replacements.
Unbelievable difference. Un-****ing-believeable difference.
A slight bit less responsive, but SIGNIFICANTLY smoother.... and SIGNIFICANTLY quieter. Like drive it out of the shop and "WOW" quieter.
My own two cents about "OEM" tires: the manufacturer's decision on OEM tires is primarily based on the best deal. Think: it's HUGE for a tire manufacturer to be the original on a high-end car, as that will lead to a lot of easy sales in the future based on people wanting to replace with the original tires. (It's also a prestige thing for that tire brand) Tiremakers fight for those OEM contracts. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if Dunlop gave Jag the original tires for free.
I've been a "vert" guy most of my life. Have had previously a 98 SL500, a 91 RX-7 (under-rated convertible), a 90 Mustang GT convertible (don't care what anyone says, ugly with the top up but BITCHIN with the top down), and a 69 Camaro.
Three things:
First-- given that it's my daily driver, one of my favorite things about the XK's is they still do a soft top. Love the hardtops, but they simply eat up too much trunk space. When I was looking around I quickly realized that I had to have a soft top, and that narrowed my list considerably. Also, a soft top with a glass rear window (my one beef with my SL).
Second: resale value. Assuming you live, as you do, in a nice climate, convertibles sell easier. Period.
Third: TIRES. TIRES. TIRES. Did I mention tires? So I bought my 2010 XKR convertible with 9,000 original miles. Obviously, still had the original Dunlops. Since it's my daily driver, fast forward a year and I'm over 20k miles. The rears were bald. I mean racing-slick, almost-see-the-cords bald. I did a lot of research (and going down the rabbit hole of "best tire for XK" threads on this forum is a never-ending research vortex), and decided on Continental Extreme Pro Contact DWS 06 (dry-wet-snow, their all-season option) for my replacements.
Unbelievable difference. Un-****ing-believeable difference.
A slight bit less responsive, but SIGNIFICANTLY smoother.... and SIGNIFICANTLY quieter. Like drive it out of the shop and "WOW" quieter.
My own two cents about "OEM" tires: the manufacturer's decision on OEM tires is primarily based on the best deal. Think: it's HUGE for a tire manufacturer to be the original on a high-end car, as that will lead to a lot of easy sales in the future based on people wanting to replace with the original tires. (It's also a prestige thing for that tire brand) Tiremakers fight for those OEM contracts. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if Dunlop gave Jag the original tires for free.
Last edited by pk4144; 08-23-2016 at 11:34 PM.
#64
Oh, and: in all my convertible experience, the only cash outlays were to have the tops professionally cleaned now and then (the 'stang had an AWESOME white top, but I'll never get a white convertible top again), the plastic windows replaced (twice!) in the SL, and those horrid front hydraulic locking cylinders replaced on the SL.
Knock wood here... but I've never had mechanical problems on any of the tops. And they all had motors.
My probably-obvious point: I may be biased, but... get the convertible!!
Knock wood here... but I've never had mechanical problems on any of the tops. And they all had motors.
My probably-obvious point: I may be biased, but... get the convertible!!
Last edited by pk4144; 08-23-2016 at 11:52 PM.
#65
Oh, and: in all my convertible experience, the only cash outlays were to have the tops professionally cleaned now and then (the 'stang had an AWESOME white top, but I'll never get a white convertible top again), the plastic windows replaced (twice!) in the SL, and those horrid front hydraulic locking cylinders replaced on the SL.
Knock wood here... but I've never had mechanical problems on any of the tops. And they all had motors.
My probably-obvious point: I may be biased, but... get the convertible!!
Knock wood here... but I've never had mechanical problems on any of the tops. And they all had motors.
My probably-obvious point: I may be biased, but... get the convertible!!
You do know that the glass rear windows have a nasty habit of falling out if not monitored and repaired don't you. If not, there is a good thread currently running on this subject. I check my window weekly as a result.
#66
Come on Rob... "nasty habit if falling out"???? You sound like a local news station blowing things WAY out of proportion here. There are maybe a handful of the many thousands of cars made with that problem who knows how they were treated but the result is that it ian extremely small number. If by habit you mean less than 1% then we're on the same page. You may want to get meteor insurance and zomby apocolypse insurance too
Last edited by Leeper; 08-25-2016 at 09:50 AM.
The following users liked this post:
kj07xk (08-25-2016)
#67
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Naperville, Illinois USA
Posts: 4,649
Received 1,975 Likes
on
1,326 Posts
#68
Come on Rob... "nasty habit if falling out"???? You sound like a local news station blowing things WAY out of proportion here. There are maybe a handful of the many thousands of cars made with that problem who knows how they were treated but the result is that it ian extremely small number. If by habit you mean less than 1% then we're on the same page. You may want to get meteor insurance and zomby apocolypse insurance too
Well you have to admit it is nasty when it falls out and the dealer wants to soak you for a new top.
As for numbers, you are correct I don't have any studies to refer to. Obviously it will depend on how often the owner puts the top up and down. However the number of comments in threads about repair and replacing the top suggest your 1% is way too conservative.
I think anyone buying a used convertible should be aware of the issue. It is just another check point to inspect in the process. If, like me, a buyer is not a DIY guy; repair can be expensive.
#69
Yah I saw that thread. Given that it seems that the rear windows are glued in place originally, it seems to me that an adhesive fix would be do-able, and the photos in that thread were helpful. I actually forwarded it do the guy who replaced the windows in my old SL (if you need a convertible top guy in the LA/So Cal area, let me know), and he seemed confident that a repair really wouldn't be that difficult. Besides, if the Jaguar remedy is to replace the WHOLE FRIGGIN TOP, why not at least try the repair?
Anyway, my top seems fine so far.
Anyway, my top seems fine so far.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)