Need opinion on a 1995 Jaguar XJ6

Bacara

Bacara

Active member
im about to get my first car, and i found a 1995 Jaguar XJ6 for a very nice price, has anyone owned it, or know someone who has. Its 2000 for it with 90,000 miles, and im not ignortant, at least for a 16 year old, and know something is wrong with the car probaly, but i having my brother who is 36, whos taken apart every part of truck and replaced every look at it before buying it with my own money. Im also a decent auto guy with basic knowledge, and i know the auto shop teacher who will either have other students repair any potential problems, or help me personaly. This is very good deal which is why i wont your guys opinons.
 
ok, but ive read review about this jag that was very positive about reliability, when ford took over they focused on reliablility and quality, but is his jag a 95? thank you
 
Bacara said:
ok, but ive read review about this jag that was very positive about reliability, when ford took over they focused on reliability and quality, but is his jag a 95? thank you
Click to expand...
His was older, but I've still heard mixed reviews about the XJ6s from that era.
 
I`d say go for it, I owned several in the late ´80s when they supposedly were unreliable, and they were ok. The only problem was (and why so many broke) constructioin inherent: They were not, like e.g. Japanese or modern continental European cars, made to go on high revolutions for a long time. The design philposphy there was to reserve those for short maneuvers like overtaking etc.

If you watch your water and oil and run it on max 75% revolutions for extended periods of time you should be fine enginewise, and apart from that the jag is a great and rewarding car!

Rattler
 
It will either be a good car or a bad car, but its your first so I knwo how bad you want it, just remember that being in the US make a Jag part cost a hellofa lot
 
wolfen said:
It will either be a good car or a bad car, but its your first so I knwo how bad you want it, just remember that being in the US make a Jag part cost a hellofa lot
Click to expand...

im in no rush, people that rush to buy cars are just plain idiots, a guy i know bought a truck, payed way to much for it in the first place and two weeks later, the transmission started to slip and just fall apart and needed to be rebuilt, thats 2000 dollars. Everyone gives him s@!# about it tooThats why i wont opinions of people that have owned cars and are far wiser than me, but becuase it was owned by ford at this time the parts arent to bad, ford changed most electronics in the car, the weak point of the car early on. I just wont a car thats reliable, economical, comfortable, rides nice, and has a nice, mellow style to it, not the rice burners that most of the guys drive these days, also im from wisconsin, and am planning a trip out west to look at schools, for me a luthier school in colorado, with a bunch of friends, so a larger car was another consideration toward the jag.
 
Actually some rice burners are pretty good, I had a 89 Toyota pickup with a 22R engine and a 4 speed manual, I literally beat the hell out of it and the only thing that ever went wrong on that old truck was the front main seal, and about 3 clutches over the 300,000 miles I put on it. but then I also bought a 89 Chevy S-10 Blazer with a 4.3 auto 4WD and at 325k it will still yank a H2 out of a ditch :)
 
My mother isn't a particularly harsh driver, but she puts 25k-30k a year on her car and on rural roads. She used to have a Ford Contour sedan (Mondeo Mk. II to you folks in Europe) and it absolutely couldn't handle it. Transmission died at 90k, Timing mechanism at 100k, plus it had a habit of being unable to accelerate. Now she's got a Toyota RAV4, she's put about 130k on it and it runs like new. I absolutely despise Toyotas but that car is good for another 200,000 miles.

And why would you want to yank an H2 out of a ditch? Leave the d*mned thing there! :D
 
The Other Guy said:
My mother isn't a particularly harsh driver, but she puts 25k-30k a year on her car and on rural roads. She used to have a Ford Contour sedan (Mondeo Mk. II to you folks in Europe) and it absolutely couldn't handle it. Transmission died at 90k, Timing mechanism at 100k, plus it had a habit of being unable to accelerate. Now she's got a Toyota RAV4, she's put about 130k on it and it runs like new. I absolutely despise Toyotas but that car is good for another 200,000 miles.

And why would you want to yank an H2 out of a ditch? Leave the d*mned thing there! :D
Click to expand...

I yank H2's out of ditches because the people who buy them think they are getting a really good suv, in reality what they are getting is a pickup truck frame with a different body on it and a solid axle, when I yank them out I am useing a truck that is only half the size of the H2 :) so they get the embarrassment factor. Besides I have LSD's front and back on the Blazer, H2's are open differentials, the only vehicle I have ever seen that's worth crap with open differentias is a Jeep
 
wolfen said:
Actually some rice burners are pretty good, I had a 89 Toyota pickup with a 22R engine and a 4 speed manual, I literally beat the hell out of it and the only thing that ever went wrong on that old truck was the front main seal, and about 3 clutches over the 300,000 miles I put on it. but then I also bought a 89 Chevy S-10 Blazer with a 4.3 auto 4WD and at 325k it will still yank a H2 out of a ditch :)
Click to expand...

no a rice burners is a honda civic coupe, with a 5 inch exhaust tip, on a otherwise stock exhaust system, thats sounds like a bunch of farts. They put body kits on them to look like a "race car". They will also have a sound system that is worth more than the car. This is not to be confused with a true tuner car, these can be infact very fast and a hell of alot of fun to drive. It doesnt even need to foreign, ive seen cavaliers that are really ricey. Having a fast import car is one thing, but to modifiy a car to make it look fast is ricy. Also to people that think subaru impreza wrx's are ricers, they go from 0 to 60 in 4.7 seconds with a 300 hp engine in a subcompact, also they are not coupes either.
 
Last edited:
Bacara said:
no a rice burners is a honda civic coupe, with a 5 inch exhaust tip, on a otherwise stock exhaust system, thats sounds like a bunch of farts. They put body kits on them to look like a "race car". They will also have a sound system that is worth more than the car. This is not to be confused with a true tuner car, these can be infact very fast and a hell of alot of fun to drive. It doesnt even need to foreign, ive cavaliers that are really ricey. Also to people that think subaru impreza wrx's are ricers, they go from 0 to 60 in 4.7 seconds with a 300 hp engine in a subcompact, also they are not coupes either.
Click to expand...


Personally I don't consider those cars, I'd like to shoot the drivers who have their radio up so dam loud I can't hear the hole in my muffler anymore, and the next one of those that makes a left hand turn against a red light while I'm going straight might want to have his life insurance paid up to date cause I ain't slamming my brakes on anymore for those little pos cars.
 
Last edited:
My father has a VW Jetta with a 1.8 Liter Turbo 4 cylinder. He loves it when some dude in a 20 year old Camaro tries to pass him; the little VW may not have as big of engine but it's lighter and can outrun those things. 30 mpg is nice too :)

WRXs are amazing, but in order to lose weight they compromise the interior; half the time it feels like those things are just going to fall apart.
 
The Other Guy said:
My father has a VW Jetta with a 1.8 Liter Turbo 4 cylinder. He loves it when some dude in a 20 year old Camaro tries to pass him; the little VW may not have as big of engine but it's lighter and can outrun those things.
Click to expand...

That's because the VW is European :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
sunb! said:
That's because the VW is European :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

thats not true, a 2010 chevy corvette ZR1 is a fast and handles just as well as a ferrari, but more comfortable, has a big truck for a small car, let alone a two seater, and rides nicely, givin its a high end sports car, oh for about half the price. Also to me i like the looks better too. I love european cars, im looking at either a jaguar or a porsche, but people that say that all american cars are inferior are ignorant. Also that corvette gets 26 mpg, NO sports car of its performance can even come close to touching that.
 
Last edited:
Bacara said:
Also that corvette gets 26 mpg, NO sports car of its performance can even come close to touching that.
Click to expand...
Get yourself a MB 200 SEL/6.3 from ´68 then... :) It is not a sports car, but beats the Corvette anytime up to 50, despite being a saloon (I owned one, so this is first hand info):

http://mb300sel63.com/pdfs/MB%20300SEL%206.3%20data.pdf

http://bringatrailer.com/2009/04/19/hot-rod-sedan-1971-mercedes-300sel-63/

Video, inside you are better off than in a jag, and 14 secs on the quarter mile handling like glued to the track:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4M4tRf0eoo

Rattler
 
Last edited:
Bacara said:
no a rice burners is a honda civic coupe, with a 5 inch Borla Exhaust Tip, on a otherwise stock exhaust system, thats sounds like a bunch of farts. They put body kits on them to look like a "race car". They will also have a sound system that is worth more than the car. This is not to be confused with a true tuner car, these can be infact very fast and a hell of alot of fun to drive. It doesnt even need to foreign, ive seen cavaliers that are really ricey. Having a fast import car is one thing, but to modifiy a car to make it look fast is ricy. Also to people that think subaru impreza wrx's are ricers, they go from 0 to 60 in 4.7 seconds with a 300 hp engine in a subcompact, also they are not coupes either.
Click to expand...

i personally don't enjoy cars like those because you cant freely drive them as opposed to normal cars. driving these cars gives you the subconscious thinking that mishandling it might affect the different customizations you did to your car.
 
Last edited:
My neighbor had a XJ6, I think it was a '94 or so. Comfortable car, nice to ride in. It's ridiculously heavy, though. It literally got the same mileage as a Hummer 1 and had two gas tanks.

Edit: You're right, I was off by a whole decade. He had an '84.
 
Last edited:
with two fuel tanks, probably earlier model (XJ6 2 tanks version built 1968 til 1987 IIRC, Van den Plas/Double 6 - 12 cylinders - til 1992), heavy is good in a crash (impulse is mass x velocity > higher mass, less impulse -decceleration- on your bones).

Here a user report (translated from German, but you will get the gist, NOTE; The first sentence lacks the "*NOT*" in the translation, i.e. "How can someone *not* advice the purchase of this legend...."):

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=es&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.autoplenum.de%2FAuto%2FJAGUAR%2FXJ%2FTest-JAGUAR-XJ-6-Mark-I-4-2-1968-id19662.html&sl=de&tl=en

Rattler
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top