My father in law is buying a 1997 Jag XJ6 with a 3.2L engine. Any thoughts on this? It has done 100000 miles and according to What Cars valuation tool, seems to be about the right price (

If it's the V8 one it'll be very nice. Feels a bit cramped inside because the dash is very close with long footwells. Goes very well for a 'base' model. I borrowed one from work a few years back when my car was being repaired. Odd shade of green that one though.

Oh, and a cool button on the remote to switch the headlights on or off.

Is it an XJ6 or XJ8?

1997 is changeover year I think. If it's a six the engines are bullit proof but lack the refinement and spread of torque that the eight has. The eight has the power, torque and refinement but had a few reliability issues to start with.

If it has full history it should be OK.

Cheers

Lee

XJ8 is lovely, if not the best thing to throw about on small A roads with a smoke in one hand.

Would like one again, beacuse it felt right inside.

Suspect the engine will be fine, sounds like alot of m-way miles. Of course with no disrespect you don't or should I say it's harder to kill a big capacity engine in a cruiser class vehicle.

I have not seen it yet, I think it is the XJ6. I think he is due to pick it up on Friday, so I will let you know. Owning a Jag has been his dream for years and now he is retired he is taking the plunge. He does not like the newer Ford Jags, preferring the big older ones.

I have not seen it yet, I think it is the XJ6. I think he is due to pick it up on Friday, so I will let you know. Owning a Jag has been his dream for years and now he is retired he is taking the plunge. He does not like the newer Ford Jags, preferring the big older ones.

If it's an early X300 XJ8, and he's intending to do short journeys, I'd suggest he leaves well alone.

Also, I'd avoid mentioning to him that in 1997, Ford had already owned Jaguar for 8 years...

But that's no bad thing. Even the X-Type doesn't have that much in common with Ford (except perhaps the diesel version). And Ford money has meant that the cars have been developed properly.

Interestingly, the later XJs that your father-in-law dislikes have less Ford switch gear than the one he's looking at now...

I know Ford owned Jag in 97, but the XJ6 was a design going back to before Ford, where as as far as I know the current models are based on a Ford Mondeo with retro look Jag body work??? I am no expert on Jags so I stand willing to be corrected.

As for how he will use it, it will not be his only or even main car, this is a purchase just to full fill a dream. In this day and age of 86p a litre petrol a 3.2L car which is almost has heavy as a tank could hardly be looked on as practical.

The X-TYPE shares some floorpan components with the Mondeo, and the same diesel engine. Everything else is different. The 2.5 and 3.0 X-TYPEs are 4wd, and have VVT V6 engines: these aren't Ford engines!

The XK is loosely based on the XJS, but 'loosely' is the operative word. The S-TYPE originally shared some chassis components with Lincoln, but that's not really the case any more. Jaguars are far more unique than the VAG group of cars, for instance.

Ford bought Jaguar in 1989. A 1997 XJ is very much a 'Ford' Jaguar, and was partially developed in Ford's Dunton plant. The V8s were built in a Ford factory. However, that's a very poor reason to dismiss a car: without Ford, there wouldn't be a Jaguar car company in existence at the moment.

If it's an XJ6, he should be OK. If it's an XJ8, look up 'nikasil' on the internet.

XJ8 is lovely, if not the best thing to throw about on small A roads with a smoke in one hand.

I seriously thought an XJ6 for a while as a second car - but the potential costs of something going wrong along with the above comment swayed me - to an MX5 - - try small B roads - part of my daily commute

Well I finally got to see and drive the Jag. It is an XJ6, so I guess it does not have the engine worry that someone mentioned above. It is a nice car but it is amazing just how much kit that was confined to cars like the XJ6 is now found in common cars.

She was very smooth, but while powerful lacks the kick ass power of the vRS. I don't like and never would like automatic gear boxes so I could never see the Jag as a drivers car. Saying that it is my father-in-laws dream and it is not a bad car all told.

The X-TYPE shares some floorpan components with the Mondeo' date=' and the same diesel engine. Everything else is different. The 2.5 and 3.0 X-TYPEs are 4wd, and have VVT V6 engines: these aren't Ford engines!

The XK is loosely based on the XJS, but 'loosely' is the operative word. The S-TYPE originally shared some chassis components with Lincoln, but that's not really the case any more. Jaguars are far more unique than the VAG group of cars, for instance.

Ford bought Jaguar in 1989. A 1997 XJ is very much a 'Ford' Jaguar, and was partially developed in Ford's Dunton plant. The V8s were built in a Ford factory. However, that's a very poor reason to dismiss a car: without Ford, there wouldn't be a Jaguar car company in existence at the moment.

If it's an XJ6, he should be OK. If it's an XJ8, look up 'nikasil' on the internet.[/quote']

You fogot to add that the S-type is shares it's floorplan with a Lincoln somethingorother

You fogot to add that the S-type is shares it's floorplan with a Lincoln somethingorother

Navigator, I think.......

Phil

You fogot to add that the S-type is shares it's floorplan with a Lincoln somethingorother

No I didn't, read it again...

I said 'chassis components' rather than 'floorpan', though, which is more correct.