2004 Jaguar Xj8 Mint Condition! Fully Serviced! Low Miles! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Junkyard Gem: 1977 Jaguar XJ-S

The Jaguar XJ-S was big, powerful, swanky, and expensive, just the sort of luxury coupe a high-roller in the late 1970s craved. Unfortunately, these temperamental cars needed plenty of regular maintenance, and many of them suffered from neglect once they left the hands of their original owners. I see plenty of V12 Jaguars during my junkyard journeys, but it still gives me a twinge of sadness when I see another one parked among the ordinary Jettas and Grand Vitaras in the import-cars section of a big self-service wrecking yard. Here's a forlorn-looking, V8-swapped '77 in a San Francisco Bay Area yard. Chevrolet small-block V8 swaps were very common with the Jaguar XJs of the 1960s and 1970s, since an ordinary 350 would make power similar to that of the 326-cubic-inch V12 and parts obtainment was much easier. Still, swapping in a reliable-if-oil-leaky Detroit V8 didn't solve all the Jag's reliability woes: the Prince of Darkness retained a powerful grip on this car's soul. The patina on this car suggests decades spent forgotten in an outdoor storage area somewhere. There's a AAA map of California from the 1980s inside. This car listed for $20,250 when new. That's about $87,500 in inflation-adjusted 2018 dollars, but still $5,000 cheaper in 1977 dollars than a new Mercedes-Benz 450SLC (and a grand more expensive than a new Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham). Nobody in their right mind would have been willing to pay to restore this car, but we can hope that it provides some good parts to Jaguars that are still on the road. Related Video: Featured Gallery Junked 1977 Jaguar XJS View 16 Photos Auto News Jaguar Automotive History

Jaguar F-Pace leaps into crossover segment [UPDATE]

UPDATE: Jaguar has issued a statement indicating that the F-Pace cargo volume specified in the original official press release, was incorrect. In short, the correct figure is 33.5 cubic-feet, not 23 cu-ft, and we've updated the text. Here's the statement: "The previous draft of the release we issued incorrectly identified cargo volume in the Jaguar F-PACE using a figure that was not calculated using the US Market standard SAE methodology. The correct specification for rear load space volume in the 2017 Jaguar F-PACE with the second row seats up is 33.5 cu.ft., not 22.95 cu.ft." It's been two years since Jaguar showed off the C-X17 concept crossover at the Frankfurt Motor Show, giving us a deep metallic blue taste of what the world would look like with a leaping-cat in it. Here we have the production result, the 2017 F-Pace, coming to dealerships in Spring 2016. It will be offered in four trims - Premium, Prestige, R-Sport, and S - with three engines. Two supercharged V6 engines come at launch, one with 340 horsepower, the second with 380 hp, both shifting through the same ZF eight-speed transmission from the sedan range. Some time after that a 2.0-liter Ingenium diesel will join the lineup, offering 180 hp and 317 lb-ft. To get in, the price for that eventual diesel is will be $40,9907, while the V6s start at $42,390 and $56,700. If you liked the look of the C-X17 then there's nothing to put you off the F-Pace. The illuminated intakes from the concept are gone and the fender vents have a slightly different graphic, but otherwise you'll find Waldo before you'll find significant exterior changes. The body is one third aluminum, tweaked with high-strength steel, magnesium, and composites creating torsional stiffness numbers that match the new XF. Wheels go from 18 inches to 22 inches, hung at the ends of a double-wishbone setup in front, an integral link suspension in back, and monotube dampers all around, over a wheelbase that's 113 inches. Short overhangs front and back that mean a maximal approach angle of 25.5 degrees, a max departure angle of 25.7-degrees. The standard instrument binnacle is two analogue dials flanking a TFT display, the upgraded unit is a 12.3-inch virtual instrument cluster. It sounds like the interior trim will go as high up as you want it - something has to justify the $14,310 price difference between the V6 models - with "available leather" on the low end, aluminum mesh and satin grey ash at the other end.

Jaguar solution to keyless start could save lives

UPDATED: An earlier version of this story indicated the Jaguar keyless start function was meant as a safety feature, when in fact, it is meant as a convenience one and will not work as described if automatic stop/start is not engaged. Today, The New York Times published an article about more than two dozen deaths related to drivers accidentally leaving their cars running, closing their garages and later succumbing to carbon monoxide that flooded their homes. The reason has been identified as "keyless start" features, or proximity entry and push-button start, where owners don't need to physically handle a key or fob to gain entry into the vehicle or start it. It is the latest, and deadliest, issue raised with this system after those related to security and simple inconvenience (for instance, leaving the car at a valet or car wash with the fob in your pocket). From my personal perspective, The New York Times had a rather harsh "evil carmakers" tone throughout the article. This is not a matter of a known faulty component, as with the GM ignition switch recall. This has as much to do with user error where people leave their car without pressing the "off" button and without noticing the engine is still running. About half of the cars in question are produced by Toyota and Lexus, brands that have offered keyless start longer than most. They are also brands with high rates of elderly owners, who seemingly made up a majority of reported deaths and injuries. One fire department in Florida even started a campaign alerting those in the area of the dangers of leaving your car running when it noticed a correlation between an increase in cars equipped with keyless start and calls related to carbon monoxide poisoning. I see several contributing issues at play, most of which go well beyond this particular issue. First is insufficient training of owners by dealers and/or owners not paying close enough attention during this training. Cars are complicated, but you should at least know how basic functions work. Second, woefully inadequate driver training in this country. Third, and with apologies to the AARP, insufficient testing of elderly drivers and/or insufficiently low standards for elderly drivers. If you don't know you have to shut the car off or cannot hear that an engine is running, perhaps you shouldn't be driving. Fourth, re-examining keyless start systems.