2000 Jaguar Vanden Plas Supercharged / British Racing Green / Cashmere / 92k Mi on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Jaguar Classic's 3.8-liter engine block costs nearly as much as a new Jetta

Jaguar is helping collectors restore its vintage models by resuming production of the 3.8-liter six-cylinder engine block it built between 1958 and 1968. Called XK, the straight-six originally powered half a dozen models (including the famous E-Type), and its modern recreation costs nearly as much as a new compact sedan. Wearing part number C22250, the cast-iron block is built to the original's specifications by Jaguar's Classic division, and it comes with a 12-month warranty. Sourcing a used block would likely be markedly cheaper than ordering a new one from the factory, but enthusiasts who value originality above all will appreciate the fact that it comes certificate of authenticity. Customers who send the company proof of vehicle ownership can even retain the serial number from the engine they're pulling out, though an asterisk will identify it as a replacement. Jaguar built the XK engine for several decades, but the 3.8-liter variant only remained in production for 10 years. It powered cars like the surprisingly quick XK 150 roadster, the stately Mark IX and early examples of the E-Type, though its displacement grew to 4.2 liters in 1964. As of this writing, only the 3.8-liter XK is available new. If the E-Type you're painstakingly restoring deserves nothing less than the best, or if you think a 3.8-liter block makes an awesome coffee table, you'll need to send Jaguar a check for GBP14,340 including taxes, a sum that represents approximately $17,800 at the current conversion rate. Enthusiasts will also need to source pistons, connecting rods, a crankshaft and a complete cylinder head, among many other parts, so the cost of a full rebuild will lie well beyond the $20,000 threshold. For context, Volkswagen charges $18,895 for an entry-level Jetta. Related Video:

Jaguar's Callum refutes two XJ bodystyle rumor

Not long ago, we relayed word from Edmunds that Jaguar was planning to split its next-generation XJ sedan into two bodystyles - one model that continued the ambitious design approach fostered with the current X351-based model, and another, more upright model to better appeal to China's conservative design sensibilities.
We expressed some cynicism in the idea, noting that such a strategy "might catch more profits for the marque, but it might also represent a setback to design head Ian Callum's vision for a thoroughly modern Jaguar portfolio." Callum has been quite insistent in his belief that Jag needs to be a forward-thinking brand in terms of design, and the two-model strategy seemed to conflict with that idea. We tried to get some comment from Callum at that time, but were unable to reach him.
As it turns out, our cynicism was well-placed. Autocar says that while the next XJ will continue to have two wheelbases, Callum has denied the two-model talk, saying flatly: "I can't see us doing two bodystyles. The cost would be enormous and the message inconsistent. You have to believe in what you produce and to do two bodystyles would undermine that."

Jaguar F-Pace Luggage Test: How much fits in the cargo area?

The Jaguar F-Pace has been around for a while now, and perhaps it's just me, but it feels like it's been forgotten. That's a shame. This was the first time I've driven the F-Pace since the first drive event in Montenegro and therefore the first time I've really driven it in anything resembling normal conditions. And man, is it ever good, at least the R-Dynamic S you see here with the P400 engine. This is right up there with the Porsche Macan and Aston Martin DBX in terms of SUVs that are legitimately great to drive. The steering alone ... chef's kiss. But I'm here to talk about cargo capacity, so enough of that driving impressions stuff. The F-Pace is bigger than compact SUVs like the Mercedes GLC and BMW X3, but it's smaller than a GLE or X5. It's fairly similar to the Lexus RX in that way, which I just-so-happened to have luggage tested last week. Perfect timing, then! The specs say that it has 26.6 cubic-feet of space behind the back seat. I have a sneaking suspicion that volume represents a measurement from the floor to top of the seat back, or roughly the cargo cover. That's not just because what I found in the course of doing this test but because the F-Pace was reported to have 33.5 cubic-feet when it was launched back for 2017. That number seems more applicable to what you'll find in other SUVs. Either way, that's kinda why I do these tests to begin with! Here is the cargo area. It is quite deep and wide with an acceptable lift-over height. The F-Pace originally had a sliding rail system running the length of the cargo area along each side, but Jaguar has apparently replaced that with the fixed tie-down points you see here. There is a rigid cargo cover in place, which is probably good for NVH, but rubbish for cargo hauling. As a result, I will be testing with and without this cover in place. As with every Luggage Test, I use two midsize roller suitcases that would need to be checked in at the airport (26 inches long, 16 wide, 11 deep), two roll-aboard suitcases that just barely fit in the overhead (24L x 15W x 10D), and one smaller roll-aboard that fits easily (23L x 15W x 10D). I also include my wife's fancy overnight bag just to spruce things up a bit (21L x 12W x 12D). All of the bags fit underneath the cargo cover, so that pretty much confirms that whole thing about the current cargo volume representing floor to seat back. Now, the fancy bag is a wee bit squished, but it still totally fit.