Talk:Jaguar XJS

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Untitled[edit]

Technical especifications engine 5.3 L HE V 12

Picture[edit]

Does anyone have a picture of the car looking at the front corner(One of the best profiles for most cars IMHO), both of the ones in the article show only the back of the car.

--Silver86 04:09, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a pic of my 1988 XJ-S, not the best one I am afraid it needed a wash and the bottom of the door is showing a little rust bubbling, but it is the only photo I have of it that shows the front like you want and unfortunatly I have it locked away in my garage now awaiting some repair to the bodywork rust, and a respray. http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/goldendragoon/XJSwikipic.JPG Golden Dragoon 01:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Here's one of my 1991 (US model) XJS Classic Collection V12

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-fEcNIy4PV3c/T6VxWqg7DoI/AAAAAAAAAEs/wGuERMJk-uE/s720/100_1305.JPG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eurosportfan (talk • contribs) 02:24, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

inboard rear brakes[edit]

I believe the transition to outboard rear brakes was in the middle of the '93 model year.

the Equalizer[edit]

He didnt drive an XJS. He drove a saloon jaguar/daimler - maybe a soveriegn, or maybe a daimler double six. Yes, The Equalizer drove (sic), drove a US Spec Jaguar XJ12 Sovereign (Daimler name not used in US as it's associated with heavey trucks, apparently!)
LewisR (talk) 09:19, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

XJ-S picture and Userbox[edit]

Added a front-quarter view of a 1985 Jaguar XJ-S, with the 5.3L V12 HE engine. Also made a Userbox:

This user is the proud owner of a Jaguar V-12 XJS  

. For the code, click here JGHowes talk - 00:33, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pity the userbox features the ugly twin headlights, and the car is a rather horrible colour, but still even with the colour and the lights the XJ-S still manages to look great. It is in my opinion one of the nicest looking cars in the world. Golden Dragoon 18:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

XJS Today section[edit]

The last lines of this section say: "The old "Lucas Jokes" are more applicable to a 60's MG than an '80's XJS. Potential owners are encouraged to visit Jag-Lovers for considerably more information." For those not in the know (like me) it would be good to clarify:
-"Lucas Jokes"
-Jag-lovers (is this a website, a store, a country, what? I'd go if I knew!)
Crocadillion 16:12, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

www.jag-lovers.org Golden Dragoon 20:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine "Lucas Jokes" refers to Lucas electrical components used in numerous British cars which had a poor reputation for reliability. For instance the distributor failing, or headlights wearing out quickly and becoming very dim (the old sealed-beams on my 1989 Mini where barely any better than candles when i first drove it at night, i upgraded to halogen very hastily) 86.158.27.179 (talk) 23:21, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Performance[edit]

In the section which begins the 1980s you say it was the fastest automatic car in the world with 0-60mph in 5.7s and 168mph. I have never seen a standard car get anywhere near that. The cars built around 1981 seem to be about the quickest ones with 0-60s usually taking around 7.5s with a top speed around 155mph. The best I have seen for a standard car was 0-60mph in 6.5s and 157mph which Autocar tested in 1980/81 and this was probably one of those 'special' cars which the press sometimes get loaned when a new car is launched or in this case a high efficiency model 192.91.75.30 08:39, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those were the official figures, which were allways assuming the best conditions, no head wind and possibly going down a large hill ect.. lol, quite simply in those days it was more than common for car makers to simply lie about things like this. In this day and age though the car makers have to actualy test the claims. Golden Dragoon 20:26, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed this whole sentence. The post-1981 HE version delivered 299 PS; performance figures as given by the factory and quoted by Automobil Revue in 1982 are: top speed - ca. 240 km/h (150 mph); 0-60 mph - ca. 8 seconds. I don´t know where you have produced these figures and the claim of being the fastest automatic in the world - a 928S auto was sure as fast/quick; this just for the sake of correctness, I´m not interested in this performance fetish. And even the XJR-S 6.0 (318 PS) was quoted by the factory as "approaching 160 mph" and with a 0-60 time of 6.5 seconds, by the way. --328cia (talk) 06:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Automobil Revue of Switzerland tested a 1982 XJS HE manual: 238 km/h (148 mph), 0-62 mph 7.5 seconds. --328cia (talk) 06:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I distinctly remember, as a car-mad small Mr Larrington, reading Autocar's road test when the car was first introduced in 1975; they recorded a two-way average of 155 mph over a flying kilometre of autobahn. Mr Larrington (talk) 13:54, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jaguar press ads in the early Eighties did claim that the XJ-S HE was the fastest automatic-transmission car in the world at 155mph. The Jaguar Heritage Trust still makes that claim. https://www.jaguarheritage.com/jaguar-history/1980s/ Porsche, in 1984, claimed their 928S manual, at 146mph on 234bhp, to be 'the fastest street legal production car sold in the US,' which it wasn't. The detuned US-spec XJ-S HE had 263bhp, the UK version 295bhp. And, of course, the 928's famous air-conditioned glovebox -- pretty much the only thing the 928 is remembered for -- may have cost a bit of power. But, basically, the Porsche was slower. Even the manual version. Khamba Tendal (talk) 19:03, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

93 convertible xjs manual transmission.[edit]

If 1994 marks the first year a 5 speed was imported to the US, I am at a loss to explain the car in my garage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.77.195.121 (talk) 03:05, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably an aftermarket alteration. ozkidzez91 (talk) 14:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mark IV[edit]

A friend has an XJS (1992) described as a Mark IV. No mention of a Mark IV in this article. Anyone got a clue? Stephen Kirrage talk - contribs 09:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Overall problems with the article[edit]

I edited this article on May 24, 2009, but my name came out as an IP Address, which I'm kind of frustrated with. Anyways, the transition between generations is kind of confusing and the article definitely needs some more information on the subject. I am not an owner of a Jaguar XJS nor do I know anyone who is, so I am of no help to the issue. If there is someone who could help, I (and I am sure many others) would very much appreciate it. WaddleDee72 (talk) 04:29, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This tends to happen most obviously with entries that draw enthusiastic contributions from a large number of people. If you have time to impose a more rigid structure (without losing all the good info and source data that's lurking in there) you'll be doing everyone a service. The good news is that entries with a good structure and plenty of sub-headings in the right places tend to retain a certain coherence better (than the more rambling entries) through several subsequent edits by subsequent enthusiastic contributors. And the longer you leave a rambling entry unreformed, the more rambling it becomes. There are even people who will plan to add something useful, but then hold off from so doing because the entry is so formless that they feel adding information would merely be adding to its soup-like qualities. And (of course) it's easier to impose a structure BEFORE all that useful / interesting extra "information on the subject" has been added. But I guess the bad news is that even where you do impose a structure, (1) it's not easy and (2) other folks will think your structure is "all-wrong" and (3) it will need redoing in a month or twenty. And it's very easy to start reforming an entry and to give up in despair or boredom half-way through, which rather undermines your original objectives. But if you feel strongly about this and have the time, please do it. Before anyone else adds to the scale of the task. Success. Charles01 (talk) 06:04, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of XJS with Spoiler[edit]

Hi, I was looking at this page and I noticed that none of the pictured XJSs have a rear spoiler. My father owns such a beast, a 1991 facelift 4L model, so when I get a chance I'll grab a pic and put it up. Also, I changed "LA" to "Los Angeles" as the abbreviation is confusing for non-USA readers (such as myself).

Oops forgot to sign my post. ozkidzez91 (talk) 14:25, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stretched coupe?[edit]

http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/3337/xjslwbbyglenformlimited.jpg
I was recently flipping through a book on the XJS and saw a version of the car that was stretched, the extra length (circa 10 inches?) was added for the rear passengers and resulted in longer rear side windows. At first glance, to a layman, it looks like a regular XJS. Lynx created it and only one was built, apparently. Anyone ever heard of this? --76.115.67.114 (talk) 04:08, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lynx Eventer and Performer[edit]

In the "1980s" section is a sub-section on "Lynx Eventer and Performer". I am bringing this section to the talk page to discuss if this aftermarket company belongs in this article about the XJS. Thoughts? 72Dino (talk) 15:04, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It has no place in the article and I'd be glad to see it deleted. --Biker Biker (talk) 22:46, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jaguar XJS. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:33, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jaguar XJS. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:21, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ignition system ,where can you have a key made for my xjs sedan 1994 edition[edit]

Where can I have a key made for my 1994 Jag 174.215.149.158 (talk) 21:56, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jaguar_XJS&oldid=1207779823"