I think at heart I'm still stuck in the 80s on the music front!

Shame that mainly-male car forums give women a hard time. I get the feeling that a lot of forums could actually be more pleasant place if there were more women members and some of the guys were "forced" to be a little less harsh!

Anyway, back on thread, what was the difference in the tank volumes again?

 

There's GR Auto Gallery near 54th and Broadmoor; which is a bit further away; right up the street is a shop that has standard cars and more eclectic (vintage Vettes, modern Jaguars, neat exotics):

https://www.motormallofgr.com/

I will say I just went to GR Auto Gallery last Friday and there was some neat stuff but the car I wanted to check out had been sold. They had an old Lincoln Town Car with ugly velour and everything and it brought back so many memories of my former Town Car lol. They have an Autozam there right now, a X150 XK coupe, a neat 996 Turbo, lots of vintage stuff (a beautiful packard convertible my dad was taken with), and up front they have 2 550 Spider replicas, a Testarossa, a recent Viper, a C8 and an Amphicar. It's always fun to check stuff out there.

 

I don't believe there actually is one, hence the comment when I posted the link to the video.

I checked a few XK brochures and the workshop manuals when I heard him mention it as I wasn't aware of that and they all said that the tank has the same usable volume of 70.6 litres so I think he is wrong.

 

It would have surprised me if they bothered with such a change. Maybe he confused a greater range due to the lower official fuel consumption of the later cars?

 

He should have reached for the documents before reaching for the camera.

From the Workshop Manuals - 4.2 first and 5.0 second:





Consistent capacity since introduction. There are 10 fuel tanks listed in JEPC across the VIN range but these changes are shown as superseding and not as alternatives.

Graham