2001 Jaguar Xjr Supercharged Black W/black Leather Stunning Car No Reserve! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Junkyard Gem: 1984 Jaguar XJ6

The original Jaguar XJ first appeared in American showrooms for the 1969 model year, after an excruciatingly long development process that included a final-innings merger of Jaguar's parent company with a manufacturer of heavy-duty vehicles. And then Jaguar used that same basic platform for various iterations of the XJ until the last V12-engined cars hit the showrooms for 1992. Six-cylinder XJs switched to the new XJ40 platform for 1988, however, which makes today's Junkyard Gem one of the later Series 3 XJ6s to hit our roads. This one was in very nice condition when it arrived in this Denver self-service yard recently, so be prepared for pain if you're an XJ lover (no, not the other kind of XJ). Just over 100,000 miles on the odometer, which is just over 2,700 miles traveled for each year of this luxurious saloon's life on the road. Other than some damage that I'm nearly certain was caused by junkyard shoppers, the interior is just about perfect. Most of the upholstery looks new, the door panels are pristine, and the wood trim isn't cracked. The only obvious flaws are some cracks in the dash pad and a bit of fraying on some leather here and there. Of course, the sun's glare is a little harsher in the Western United States than it is in Coventry, so you must expect some interior damage. It lived in Texas for a while during the early 2000s. There's a University of Wisconsin sticker on the rear window, so this car may have done a few cross-country moves during its life. How much did it cost new? The MSRP was $31,100 for the 1984 XJ6, which comes to about $90,435 in 2022 dollars. I was driving a 1968 Mercury Cyclone that cost $200 in 1984 dollars when this Jag was new, and a new XJ6 seemed about as far out of reach to me as an intergalactic starship (though beater early-1970s XJ6s were well within my price range— if not my wrenching skill-set— at the time). Anyone who has heard "Dead Man's Curve" knows that you just don't mess with the curves on Sunset Boulevard or with a Jaguar straight-six (the XJ was in the early stages of development when the song came out, so the narrator of the classic teen-tragedy song wrecks his Sting Ray while racing an XKE). This one displaces 4.2 liters and made 176 horsepower when new. The V12-powered XJ-S coupe had 262 horses, but cost $34,700 ($100,900 today).

Jaguar F-Type Coupe proves sexy can't be disguised

Jaguar's new F-Type is a pretty potent little pouncer. And while we do love a good roadster, many of us at Autoblog are perhaps more excited about the upcoming hardtop version of Jag's stylish new entry-level sports car. Why? Because even here in heavily camouflaged prototype form, the thing looks really, really good - the sleek roofline blending rather nicely into the F-Type's shapely rump, allowing for better distinction of its pronounced hips over the rear wheel wells.
Mechanically speaking, the F-Type Coupe should be identical to its droptop sibling. That means the supercharged 3.0-liter V6 and 5.0-liter V8 engine lineup should carry over unchanged, though we've heard rumors about a four-cylinder application as well. There's also talk of hotter R, R-S or R-S GT models coming down the pipeline, and based on what we've experienced in things like the XKR-S, we certainly can't deny the allure of such a model.
It's unclear exactly when Jaguar will show the production F-Type Coupe (at the Frankfurt Motor Show, perhaps?), but the car is expected to go on sale sometime in 2014. Check it out in our latest spy gallery, above.

2016 Jaguar XF to hit 60 mph in 5 seconds, lead with cutting-edge infotainment

Since the second-gen XF's unveiling last week in an epic publicity stunt over London's Canary Wharf, the details on the new four-door have been rather scarce. That changes now, with the Jaguar revealing just about everything we could hope to know... aside from the price and fuel economy. As we covered in our original post, Jaguar has trimmed the weight for both rear- and all-wheel-drive variants by 132 pounds and 265 lbs, respectively. That means that, regardless of engine output, the two-wheel-drive model tips the scales at just 3,770 lbs, while the AWD XF slips in at 3,880. This was mainly done by way of aluminum construction – the 13th element constitutes 75 percent of the XF's structure – although ultra-high-strength steel also plays a role. Jag claims these elements not only reduce weight – which is almost perfectly distributed, with a "near" fifty-fifty ratio – but increases torsional rigidity by 28 percent. The new XF should be just as agile as the brand's namesake, thanks not only to the reduced weight and stiffer structure, but also to a new chain-driven all-wheel-drive system that's both lighter and more efficient than a traditional version. Impressive though that may be, the brand's Intelligent Driveline Dynamics system is the standout here. IDD manages the torque split, diverting power to the rear axle until it predicts, through factors like yaw rate, steering angle and lateral acceleration, when torque should be shifted to the front wheels. Moreover, the AWD system features Adaptive Surface Response, which takes the place of the old XF's winter driving mode. It monitors road conditions, modifying the behavior of the sedan's systems as needed. The second-gen sedan comes to the US in 340-horsepower and 380-hp variants – torque remains fixed at 332 pound-feet – courtesy of Jaguar Land Rover's familiar 3.0-liter, supercharged V6. The new XF's straight-line performance should be just as entertaining as it sounds, too. The rear-drive, 340-hp XF will hit 60 in 5.2 seconds, while the rest of the range can get there in 5.0. That marks a significant reduction compared to the first-gen V6 models, which used their 340 hp to sprint to 60 in a more leisurely 5.7 to 6.1 seconds. Regardless of output, the rear-drive XF will outrun both the BMW 535i and Mercedes-Benz E350 (we're still waiting on performance figures for the 329-hp E400, so Jag's RWD dominance may not last), which take 5.5 seconds and 6.5 seconds, respectively.