X300 XJ6... Worth a punt for £1,600?
Discussion
A friend and I buy a lot of cheap cars together and split ownership...
Currently, another friend is offering us his 1996 X300 XJ with the 3.2 straight 6 for £1,600 - so £800 each.
It's done 89k miles and in photos looks to be in pretty good shape, especially the interior which is holding up well.
Apparently, it had full jag history up to about 70k.
What are these cars like to live with and what is there to look out for?
I've had a soft, wafty auto 'hole' in my stable ever since I sold my Crown Victoria so I'm thinking this could be my winter commuter...
Currently, another friend is offering us his 1996 X300 XJ with the 3.2 straight 6 for £1,600 - so £800 each.
It's done 89k miles and in photos looks to be in pretty good shape, especially the interior which is holding up well.
Apparently, it had full jag history up to about 70k.
What are these cars like to live with and what is there to look out for?
I've had a soft, wafty auto 'hole' in my stable ever since I sold my Crown Victoria so I'm thinking this could be my winter commuter...
Rust. Check for rust everywhere.
Frankly the 3.2 is a bit crap with an auto, it even got an old school non electronically controlled box vs the 4.0, and it needs lots of revs to move and even then it's pretty feeble. They can be a bit of fun as a manual but they're really not wafters as autos. I wouldn't be arsed with one.
Frankly the 3.2 is a bit crap with an auto, it even got an old school non electronically controlled box vs the 4.0, and it needs lots of revs to move and even then it's pretty feeble. They can be a bit of fun as a manual but they're really not wafters as autos. I wouldn't be arsed with one.
stickleback123 said:
Rust. Check for rust everywhere.
Frankly the 3.2 is a bit crap with an auto, it even got an old school non electronically controlled box vs the 4.0, and it needs lots of revs to move and even then it's pretty feeble. They can be a bit of fun as a manual but they're really not wafters as autos. I wouldn't be arsed with one.
Wot 'e said^.Frankly the 3.2 is a bit crap with an auto, it even got an old school non electronically controlled box vs the 4.0, and it needs lots of revs to move and even then it's pretty feeble. They can be a bit of fun as a manual but they're really not wafters as autos. I wouldn't be arsed with one.
Old XJs have a certain charm about them and the X300 is the most mechanically bulletproof of the lot but the gearbox is agricultural, performance is leisurely and the AJ16 six is as rough as a badgers arse at high revs. On the plus side they're a doddle to work on and parts are cheap.
The V8 engined XJ that replaced the X300 in 1998 is a much improved car all round bar it's slightly more flaky reliability and the ally bodied XJ launched in 2003 is on a whole different level altogether.
Ya pays ya money...
X300 interior is much nicer than the X308 though, I think.
Nice to hear someone else call out the AJ16 for being a total cement mixer at revs, I got shouted down for that on more than one occasion by the Nigels on the Jaguar forum with the "TURBINE SMOOTH IT IS" stuff, as if I'd called their wife a slag. It's an odd engine, it needs revs to give it's best but sounds like it hates high revs with all it's heart. At least with the 4.0 in normal wafting driving you can ride the torque and it doesn't need to go much above 2k RPM to go reasonably well.
The AJ6/16 is like an engine with the top end off a race car and bottom end off a canal boat, the V8 is a far more sophisticated and modern powerplant but I think at the point when they're all modern classics I'd much prefer a 4.0 X300 over an X308. It'd have to be another XJ12 though
Nice to hear someone else call out the AJ16 for being a total cement mixer at revs, I got shouted down for that on more than one occasion by the Nigels on the Jaguar forum with the "TURBINE SMOOTH IT IS" stuff, as if I'd called their wife a slag. It's an odd engine, it needs revs to give it's best but sounds like it hates high revs with all it's heart. At least with the 4.0 in normal wafting driving you can ride the torque and it doesn't need to go much above 2k RPM to go reasonably well.
The AJ6/16 is like an engine with the top end off a race car and bottom end off a canal boat, the V8 is a far more sophisticated and modern powerplant but I think at the point when they're all modern classics I'd much prefer a 4.0 X300 over an X308. It'd have to be another XJ12 though
Thanks for the responses, all - it's good to know what we're getting into.
If this one wasn't so cheap, we'd not be looking at them so while the 3.2 in auto guise clearly isn't the combination to go for, it's that or nothing for us.
Not too fussed about speed, power or the lack of those things. Happy with a slow, agricultural slushbox. Bear in mind, the 3 Speed Auto in my 2008 Crown Vic (which this Jag would replace) dates back to the 60s... So I'm used to more antiquated machinery.
I am hoping it isn't too rusty. MOT history isn't too scary and it's only costing us £70 to add it to our multi car policy...
It's poverty spec, no cruise or heated seats etc but for £800 each, surely it could be a good winter hack for us if it's solid enough...
If this one wasn't so cheap, we'd not be looking at them so while the 3.2 in auto guise clearly isn't the combination to go for, it's that or nothing for us.
Not too fussed about speed, power or the lack of those things. Happy with a slow, agricultural slushbox. Bear in mind, the 3 Speed Auto in my 2008 Crown Vic (which this Jag would replace) dates back to the 60s... So I'm used to more antiquated machinery.
I am hoping it isn't too rusty. MOT history isn't too scary and it's only costing us £70 to add it to our multi car policy...
It's poverty spec, no cruise or heated seats etc but for £800 each, surely it could be a good winter hack for us if it's solid enough...
I've had my X300 since early 96, it was a launch car from Oct 94.
Mine's a 3.2 Auto Sport, so has the middle (Goldilocks) suspension setup.
The 3.2 is smoother than the 4L, but the 4L gets an electronically controlled gearbox and traction control whereas the 3.2 gets a purely mechanical gearbox. Smoothness has never been an issue at least in mine. Performance wise? well it ain't an XJR that's for sure but it would easily keep up with a colleagues 740 (BMW E38) and would easily pull away from a friends 735. LadyB8 had a E Class estate, a 320CDi which I guess is about 10% down on power and weighs more and it showed. So depends on what you're expecting in the way of performance. I never really felt it lacked any. Jaguar Steve commented in the past that with 5 adults it would sometimes drop out of top going up hills on the motorway, so does my XKR and that makes over 500BHP and doesn't have 5 seats.
I'd go and take it for a test drive if you can and see what you think.
I tested BMWs, Merc and Lexus as well as the Jag when I bought it and preferred the Jag. I still have it although it is currently SORN (long story) because I never found anything I liked more.
Go take a look
Mine's a 3.2 Auto Sport, so has the middle (Goldilocks) suspension setup.
The 3.2 is smoother than the 4L, but the 4L gets an electronically controlled gearbox and traction control whereas the 3.2 gets a purely mechanical gearbox. Smoothness has never been an issue at least in mine. Performance wise? well it ain't an XJR that's for sure but it would easily keep up with a colleagues 740 (BMW E38) and would easily pull away from a friends 735. LadyB8 had a E Class estate, a 320CDi which I guess is about 10% down on power and weighs more and it showed. So depends on what you're expecting in the way of performance. I never really felt it lacked any. Jaguar Steve commented in the past that with 5 adults it would sometimes drop out of top going up hills on the motorway, so does my XKR and that makes over 500BHP and doesn't have 5 seats.
I'd go and take it for a test drive if you can and see what you think.
I tested BMWs, Merc and Lexus as well as the Jag when I bought it and preferred the Jag. I still have it although it is currently SORN (long story) because I never found anything I liked more.
Go take a look
stickleback123 said:
X300 interior is much nicer than the X308 though, I think.
Nice to hear someone else call out the AJ16 for being a total cement mixer at revs, I got shouted down for that on more than one occasion by the Nigels on the Jaguar forum with the "TURBINE SMOOTH IT IS" stuff.
Well you and I both know it isn't.Nice to hear someone else call out the AJ16 for being a total cement mixer at revs, I got shouted down for that on more than one occasion by the Nigels on the Jaguar forum with the "TURBINE SMOOTH IT IS" stuff.
The dedicated Polishers of Walnut on the Jaguar forums probably know that too but they'll never admit it because they're convinced proper British Chaps and decent types only drive six or 12 cylinder Jaguars.
Just try mentioning the Ford takeover was one of the best things that happened to Jaguar - see what occurs then.
Jaguar steve said:
stickleback123 said:
X300 interior is much nicer than the X308 though, I think.
Nice to hear someone else call out the AJ16 for being a total cement mixer at revs, I got shouted down for that on more than one occasion by the Nigels on the Jaguar forum with the "TURBINE SMOOTH IT IS" stuff.
Well you and I both know it isn't.Nice to hear someone else call out the AJ16 for being a total cement mixer at revs, I got shouted down for that on more than one occasion by the Nigels on the Jaguar forum with the "TURBINE SMOOTH IT IS" stuff.
The dedicated Polishers of Walnut on the Jaguar forums probably know that too but they'll never admit it because they're convinced proper British Chaps and decent types only drive six or 12 cylinder Jaguars.
Just try mentioning the Ford takeover was one of the best things that happened to Jaguar - see what occurs then.
And yes I do drive a V8.
a8hex said:
Whilst there is no doubt that the Ford take over was the best thing to happen to Jaguar since the early 60s it still doesn't change the fact that the only reason for arranging cylinders in rows of 4 rather than 6 is because you can't afford to do it properly
And yes I do drive a V8.
I do like a straight six, but the AJ6 was always a disappointing engine and the AJV8 was (early fragility aside) a blinder right from the start.And yes I do drive a V8.
I certainly agree with you about flat and V 4 and 6 engines; if you're going to dick around with two cylinder heads, a mile long timing chain/belt, twice as many cams and manifolds, and all that bulk then stop f
king around and make it a V8 at least. I watched a teardown of that crap flat four in the GT86 and it's an absolutely ridiculous thing for four cylinders and 200bhp.stickleback123 said:
I do like a straight six, but the AJ6 was always a disappointing engine and the AJV8 was (early fragility aside) a blinder right from the start.
I certainly agree with you about flat and V 4 and 6 engines; if you're going to dick around with two cylinder heads, a mile long timing chain/belt, twice as many cams and manifolds, and all that bulk then stop fking around and make it a V8 at least. I watched a teardown of that crap flat four in the GT86 and it's an absolutely ridiculous thing for four cylinders and 200bhp.
Running a Flat Six just now and I honestly dont know what to make of it as an engine in comparison to the V8s . It certainly pops and bangs better than my old SVR as by 2019 Jaguar had significantly turned down the volume . In a Porsche you always wonder about the pops and bangs possibly being terminal so I am changing my underwear frequently I certainly agree with you about flat and V 4 and 6 engines; if you're going to dick around with two cylinder heads, a mile long timing chain/belt, twice as many cams and manifolds, and all that bulk then stop f
king around and make it a V8 at least. I watched a teardown of that crap flat four in the GT86 and it's an absolutely ridiculous thing for four cylinders and 200bhp.
This is the thing with Jaguars and I dont think it gets enough mention . These aluminium cars can be run on a comparative shoestring when you consider other equivalent cars . Inevitably we all scratch a particular itch but the Jaguar V8 is a wonderful unit .
Jaguar steve said:
Well you and I both know it isn't.
The dedicated Polishers of Walnut on the Jaguar forums probably know that too but they'll never admit it because they're convinced proper British Chaps and decent types only drive six or 12 cylinder Jaguars.
Just try mentioning the Ford takeover was one of the best things that happened to Jaguar - see what occurs then.
Could never understand your disdain for a bit of walnut nor its polishers Steve , I can only assume you frequent IKEA The dedicated Polishers of Walnut on the Jaguar forums probably know that too but they'll never admit it because they're convinced proper British Chaps and decent types only drive six or 12 cylinder Jaguars.
Just try mentioning the Ford takeover was one of the best things that happened to Jaguar - see what occurs then.
I completely agree with you about the V8 and indeed Fords ownership of Jaguar . I well remember them on Jaguar Forum complaining
about Transit Steering Locks and the Switchgear on the X350 . I would think back to earlier Jaguars and the weighted Indicator Stalks
and the authoritative clicks of the Joseph Lucas Indicator Relay . Sadly they often lasted longer than the actual car which was rusted away
within a decade and barely 50,000 miles .
Gassing Station | Jaguar | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff