My question is this, in the UK I have seen a lot of car programs and reviews of the Jaguar F type recently. And in all instances it is hailed as the successor to the E type. Whilst it is a good car with a superb sound, it looks great. But in all reviews there is no mention of the XK8/R which in my opinion looks closer to the E type than the F type.

 

The XK8 here in my corner of the world, OHIO. I do not see many of the 97 model year change. I honestly thing folks had bought them new, once out of warranty or close ditched them for the next flavor of the day mainly because of maint issues that I think these cars have. My brother bought several non Xk8 jags and 3x he got ride of his before the warranty went out sighting that he did not ant to own one out of warranty and he had plenty of $$ to afford to do so. I think this is why the Xk8's drop like a bomb in value, MAINT ISSUES rather it happens or not.

 

and the cost to fix those maint issues.

 

Don't forget, that the XKE was a maintenance pig, when it came out too. They were selling for next to nothing, once the owners got jammed a few times, for stripped hubs, carb tuning, head gaskets from overheating, and the ever popular floor rotting out, from a convertible top that kept everything out, but water behind the seats. Now it is hard to get a good one at 10 times what they sold for new, and it is almost always equipped with an electric radiator fan. As always, the well taken care of, and mechanically sound examples of a sports car will command top dollar. It will probably happen after I am dead, like those who have gone before me, owning E types, Ferrari Daytonas or any 12 cylinder front engine Ferrari, Sunbeam Tigers, and whatever you see going across the block at Barrett Jackson. At one time, they were all turds looking for someone with the passion to keep them going. If you are looking for XK8s and other Jags as daily drivers, without putting the effort into them, you are going to be in a push rod Corvette forum, before you know it. I can speak from experience. Everyone has a Corvette, and Mustang, but you are lucky to be able to count on one hand the number of Jags you see, in a week. I parked in front of an XJS roadster today, and we struck up a conversation, like we had known each other all our lives. It's a fraternity, that not many folks have the effort to belong to. I look at XKEs and XK8s as more rolling works of art, than daily drivers. That is what my X Type and 928S are for. Pretty much bullet proof mechanicals, if you service them, and sweet looks. After I get my XK8 undealerized, it will be reliable and good looking too. I am probably going to buy a few more of them, and see what the market does, as the newer Jags price themselves into the stratosphere. They aren't hard to work on, once you find out what the factory did to screw you, and parts are not that expensive now either........Be cool....Mike

 

" Everyone has a Corvette, and Mustang, but you are lucky to be able to count on one hand the number of Jags you see, in a week."

BINGO, but hell a week? A month around me.

 

Not sure how many of you saw "The Art of: Jaguar" on the Ovation Cable Network. In any event, it airs again this Wednesday 5/27 at noon. Additional airdates: 6/3, 6/11. Check your local schedules for exact times. Shows XKE's, XK8's, etc., and Ian Callum talking about design, but mostly it's a commercial for the F-Type.

 

When the XK8 was designed and introduced it was considered by Jaguar as a XKE successor, The XKE over the years went from a sports car to a GT. Jaguar introduced the XK8 with plenty of fan fare as a modern day XKE and so did the automotive press.

 

I owned 2 XKEs a '68 roadster and a '64 race prepped badly treated hard top. I also have both an 2014 F-type and a 2004 XKR convertible now. If you took care of the XKE and could get over the Lucas electrics (may they burn in hell) the car was actually very reliable. In fact the twin Stromberg carburetors that replaced the triple SUs with the 1.5 car were a dream to maintain though you did lose horsepower (granted the '64 had side draft Webber carburetors which were a ton of fun to keep balanced).

Our XK8/Rs are very similar to a better looking Series III 2+2. But a purist Jaguar was a roadster, 2 seat configuration, with a tiny trunk much more like the F-Type and the XK180 prototype F-Type. If you are truly talking the XKE that folks thought was the best looking in the world you are talking a Series 1 roadster and the XK8/R really missed that boat. Now the front of the car does look close which is also why I bought it and I'm currently looking at either putting a Series III XKE 2+2 body (with the top off) or a XK180 body on mine just to make it really unusual (with the E-Type at least I'd still have a convertible top-I found one of these done in Europe and it sold for around $100K). Will see, but for an XKE purist you start with the series 1 and in concept the F-Type is closer than our XK100s. Obviously if I do either of these things I'll post the result (I may just buy a Tesla X and call it a day).


So I'd go XKE Series 1, 2 2+2, 3 2+2 (skip the XK-S) and go to XK8/R, or XKE Series 1, 2, XK 180, F-Type. The F-Type is more of a reset to the earlier concept.

 

It is simply marketing from Jag to try to make people want to buy the F type, regardless of whether it is true or not.


"The F type, the spiritual successor to the E type" just sounds better than,


"The F type, the car that came after the spiritual successor of the E type".


Clearly the F type looks noting like the E type and the XK does, but that does not matter to the Jag marketers.


I think it is cynical and find BS marketing like this a big put off and detracts from what is a fantastic car.

 

At least it shows they've learned their alphabet.

On a more serious note, the XK8/XKR was a successful product of the Ford era. Had it not been for Ford, the XJ41 project would have been shelved yet again. Tata want to break that connection to remind the media and the market of Jaguar's golden period. Even non Jaguar or non car enthusiasts immediately recognise the iconic E-Type and all it's associations.

The F-Type is a great car but I don't think it will be revered in 50 years time the way the E-Type is today. It's most certainly not a ground breaking design in the way the E-Type was in the 1960's.

Jaguar aren't alone in this approach. Volkswagen have done exactly the same with the Bentley GT and the Bentley R Type Continental of the 1950's completely ignoring the hugely successful Bentley Continental R of the 1990's.

Graham

 

Unlike the E-Type, I doubt you'll ever find an F-Type in MoMA.

 

Our 100 XK8/R's were obviously designed to pick up on the looks of the XKE's and that was a stated goal, just as the current Mustangs, Camaros and Challengers pick up on the looks of the originals from the sixties.

The fact is, however, as noted, the XKE started out as a two seat sports car, not a GT car, which it evolved towards over the years.

The current F type is, in fact, an extension of the XKE, not in looks, but in category, meaning a two seat sports car. In respect to that category it was designed to fit into, it has more in common with the original XKE than our cars do as our cars were never designed to be true sports cars. The F types are beautiful cars and I am sure they are superior in handling and performance over the XK8/R line but I don't think that they have the sort of timeless, classic look that our cars have.

 

I think in 20 years or so when what XK8's are left on the road, when seen younger folks, are ganna be like WHAT IS THAT, THAT IS SWEET. The car is rare as it is, it is off the radar for most of the car going community. Give it another 15-30 years of that and it will be a REAL eye catcher then.

 

It will not even be that long since I frequently have people stop me and compliment on the looks of the car. So the car may be "ignored" by snobby car aficionados but it is certainly never ignored by the average Joe.

Doug

 

I just took my car in to have the rear bumper painted, and a crowd formed around it, including 2 Corvette drivers. Everyone loved the car, and I had to explain to the Corvette guys that it was not a true sports car, in it's factory configuration, but has a high speed, and can be made to handle. They really liked the leather, wood, and the chrome I put down the front fenders to the headlights, like the real E types.. I do enjoy having a trunk, that more than a spare tire fits in, but I think the designers missed the target, as far as paying homage to the E type. There is plenty of trunk room, to have accommidated a sloping lid, and smaller tail lights. If I could figure out how to bend X Type bumper chrome, my XK8 would have bumperettes, on all 4 corners. I know it's a little over the top, but it would only be an experiment, with the thousands of X Types, that were abused and being scrapped, a pair shouldn't cost too much.....Be cool....Mike

 

The current line of new Jaguars all look good and some sound great. But from 2005 onwards did take on a too modern standardized look, like the Aston Martin. Black leather and plastic. I believe the XK8/R from 1996 to 2005 did capture a modern take on a classic look. There seems to be no wood in new Jaguars (XK8/R) post 2005. That being said I dont recall any wood in the E type but more on the classic examples of the old 1960s Jaguars and even modern x types. I think the wood and light coloured leather is a lovely combination which sets the car off as a very luxurious place to be. I believe the combination of wood and leather are the hallmarks of a lovely car to be in, in the British summertime. what say you chaps (and ladies of course!)?

 

I can't tell the diff with jags 06 and newer in most cases unless I can see the badges.

 

The problem/fear I have is that the electronic complexity of these cars will not survive the desirability of the design. The XKE was introduced 54 years ago and is sorta restorable given adequate funds. How many security control modules, door modules, body modules, seat modules, instrument panel modules, air bag modules, transmission modules, and last, but not least the engine control modules do you think will be available or rebuildable when the '97 model year reaches 54 years. To assume a '97 will be restorable in the year 2051 is a big assumption both on the availability of electronics and the capability of owners of that time to drive, or even be allowed to drive without computer assistance.

Fortunately, I do not have to worry about that time.

 

I do agree with that fear but look back at cars 50 years, they prob said the same thing then. While they have many electronic parts today on them there many places, and more to grow out of this technology age that will be able to fix these components i think, I HOPE. Though in 50 years I won't be hear.

 

You didn't address the premise that you will not be allowed to drive without computer assistance.