S type review

[Bingo]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kk7cMqTTjso

[cass3958]

One of the better videos on the S Type. The guy knew a bit but mentioned the rear IRS cage being big and taking up room then opened the boot and pointed at the hump saying he thought that was where the fuel tank was?
I also noticed that there was no tool box in the boot which is strange as this is a Heritage museum car.
Other than that, beautiful colour and only 45k on the clock. Nice car and sounded fantastic.

[John Quilter]

So was the DG250 gearbox working correctly or not? He did not point out very clearly the intermediate speed hold feature.

[cass3958]

So was the DG250 gearbox working correctly or not? He did not point out very clearly the intermediate speed hold feature.

I don't think he used the intermediate hold whilst driving he just pulled away in low then pushed it into drive when he got to 4500 rpm. He possibly had it in intermediate hold whilst in drive which was holding it in second but my car has the BW35 and I do not have the I/H so not sure how it works.

[Glyn Ruck]

Enjoyable review. Why don't they get people that really know the cars. Fuel tank ~ snort! They're in the rear wings mate. He talks about the IRS but doesn't understand where the bridge piece is mounted SMH.

They have certainly stood the test of time. The nose is pretty. One of the great features. I prefer it to the 420. If one looks at comparative pricing it would seem most agree today,

[cass3958]

I just do not care for the 420. Too boxy at the front end. If you had to point at cars that changed the style of car design from luxurious curves to square boxes then it has to be around the time of the 420 and 420G. Mid to late 1960s. Think about the Rover P5b morphing into the P6b. Rolls Royce moved from the Silver cloud to the square box of the Silver Shadow. Lotus went from the Elan and Lotus 11 to the Eclat. Loads more examples but it was around the time of the 420 that Jaguar went from curves to relatively flat panels. Could be put down to production costs, aerodynamics or designers wanting to change things up but they lost me. Ever seen a square fronted plane?

[John Quilter]

I have no problem with the 420 styling and if I had my druthers would prefer it over the S for the wider more spacious engine bay, possibly better cooling system, provision for factory AC, better steering box and brakes. Downside, less wood in the interior. But I'm not trading in my 1965 S, family owned for 56 years.

[cass3958]

John as I have a late 1968 S type it shares a lot of things with the 420 such as the better PAS system but I think we should stick to the looks and the 420 just does not do it for me just as the S type's looks do nothing for Mk2 owners I suppose.

[Glyn Ruck]

I don't like the Mk2 tail. Never have & never will. Now an XK150 ~ quite a different story. It's like I prefer the Aston DB6 Kamm tail to the DB5

The good old S type has stood the test of time. You can't give away a 420 in SA. All the 4.2 block cracking etc. confirmed by Fraser Mitchel at 7 out of 10 on Jaguar Forums.

Written by an engineer in the UK & copied into Jag Tasmania's Club Magazine.

https://www.jagtas.org.au/torque/techto ... ine-block/

c487-leftside-remote.jpg (103.24 KiB) Viewed 571 times