Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Flybrian

I want this car

Recommended Posts

But its from the sixties and from England, so you know its cool.

Jaguar Mark X!

English luxury...

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

With American style...

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

And American size...

Posted Image

Posted Image

I really want one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better start saving now. I don't even want to know how expensive that is.

Isn't it sad seeing this car and looking at the Jaguar today. Then, it was a brand that was the best of the best in terms of luxury. Now, it's...well.. made up of rebadged Fords and somewhat bland styling. Fortunately, the new XK is freakin hot but it doesn't really look like a Jaguar. Looks more like an Aston Martin.. not a bad company to emulate.. but you get what I mean.

Edited by Cadillacfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that is wood ! I think this car evolved nicely into the early XJ6 & XJ12. Its kinda like the grey poupon kind of car though........................I flip them f@#kers off every chance I get........................... :lol:

This is just what you want for passing Prius drivers and locking up the brakes, "then by gosh we'll see how much money they are saving on gas"............... :lol:

**if I spelt grey poop-on wrong.............D I L L I G A F ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest YellowJacket894

Geeze, the Jag S-Type wants to be a Mark X sooo bad.

If you do buy one Fly, you'd better hope that the seat of your BVDs aren't set on fire by electrical problems.

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's cool. Love the interior. The forward-leaning exterior looks like it's in motion, even while parked. Was this the first Jag to start this styling tradition for their big sedans? The newest XJ certainly does pay homage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can go back further on the styling and see how Jag slowly evolved from the same kind of look. Periodically speaking. Even the old XK120-150's "fixed head coupes" and the Mark IX and the 3.4 & 3.8 Sedans of the 50's

I just as glad we car guys had Williams Lyons and Malcolm Sayer as we had Harley Earl, Virgil Exner and Bill Mitchell. They all made our world such a beautiful place.

Mark IX

Posted Image

3.8 Sedan

Posted Image

Edited by Flybrian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno... "Jag" has this reputation, but upon cursory examination, the rep falls down hard in the details!

Mark X Pros: Exterior has fluid, almost athletic lines, and it almost has a semi chopped look ala the 300: slab-sided fuselage, proportionally smaller greenhouse height, and this I like.

Cons: Again- the details- they're NOT 'luxury'. Exposed rubber backlight gasket? 'Poverty caps' with painted steelies? Exposed glovebox door hinges? Interior is blue/grey but the steering wheel is black?? Shift quadrant on the column? Pedals could've come out of a VW of the era. And what's with the key in the middle of the dash? How is it luxurious to see a worn, jingly bunch of random keys scraping the dashboard as a driver or passenger? Should I continue?.... These features are on par with --say-- Ford of the early '50s, not a luxury car of the '60s.

Look: I know it's the '60s and it's british and that means we're supposed to overlook all these things (and more), but the fact of the matter is, compared to domestic luxury marques of the same period, Jaguar was far behind class leading in everything except reputation... which was based on what again?

BTW- do we know for a fact how much of that wood is real and how much is fake?

I like the lines of the car fine, and I could live with & enjoy the interior, as long as I didn't have to pretend it was a luxury car. But:

>>"Then, it was a brand that was the best of the best in terms of luxury."<<

Perhaps on the British stage, but then again, no. On the international stage, no way in hell.

Now, the Mark IX: did Jag & Rolls/Bentley share the same designers & coachbuilders, because damn the resemblance is amazing. Really looks the 'luxury' part, tho; old world classy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

178202[/snapback]

During ?1942? to 43 or 44 England under bombardment from Germany

In 1957 Jaguar plant & tooling totally destroyed in fire

In 1960 Jag bought Daimler

Mark X released in 1962, what you got from 62 to totally show this car up ?

All wood yes, laminate most likely, I have a photo here that shows book matched.

Pedals not your style, OK but how did they work ? The best pedals I ever ran were on a 64 Brit and no they did not go down through the floor like a VW.

Keys, wrong place but its not the end of the world either, as in, Im sure I could pick Caddys and Buicks apart to, most likely loaded with early plastic and steel dashboards with nice fancy paintjobs. Potato/potato. I doubt a Jag owner would have keys a jingling on the dash, they would have had one of those big chains hanging from their belts like a good ol boy...............with huge fancy animal key fob made of gold :rolleyes:

Jaguars rep in England vs America was as Cadillacs rep was in America vs England, no one makes excuses for either nor is forced to overlook anything due to location, logical people would recognize that perhaps there was different trends, desires, expectations, and plan of attack from two different cultures. This is a charming interior and by no means is low budget moulded high production

Slab sided fuselage ? Id say the sides look more like a torpedo, the look that GM used in the 90's, mainly on the gawful LeSabre, a car thats solely responsible for my not enjoying the look of this car and the XK6 & 12 so much anymore.

Shifting on the column..............?? I must have missed something but as best I recall the wealthy and old school felt that was proper for a lux car and that the "stick" was for young sporty puppys.................Column shift was common in Domestic into the 70's for standards and always on automatics.........hell until mid 80's & 90's. Perhaps these origional Jag owners would critize a Caddy for having a bench seat ?

Ford never had anything "on par" with this car in the 50's let alone 62. What ? The Galaxy 500 ?

"Jaguar was far behind class leading in everything except reputation... which was based on what again?" I guess you'll never know if you continue to refuse to accept or learn anything outside your box, dont get me wrong I have friends that feel like you, no matter what, they will refuse to learn anything or listen or try anything different. But instead will just look for what they can pick apart...........most of them are into Chevy muscle cars.............................need I continue ?

Pretend its a Luxury car ? "Perhaps on the British stage, but then again, no. On the international stage, no way in hell." ................your beginning to sound like the media you so often question....................need I continue ?

Jag, Rolls, Bentley somehow seem to come off a bit like Olds, Buick, Cadillac. Then thats from a country thats not much larger than Florida.................godang them for not having all the resources in that little island population to keep up with the "big boys" if one really feels they did not keep up. After all only having their tiny Island bombarded into oblivion less than 20 years earlier, no big loss..................then lets see, a complete total loss fire in 1957 just 5 years before this car was released............no biggy. I believe in 57 GM was working on the 63 Stingray, hmm.............sounds like Im making excuses, no, not at all , just the facts. Id say they did damn good to produce this car by 62 the E type by 61.

Myself I prefer not to keep the door closed and never accept or enjoy anything that comes from outside your circle. This was the British idea of what a luxury car should be. They were also slow and somewhat financially incapable to accept change..............sound fimiliar ?

Would you be happy if Jaguar and Ferrari went the way of Tucker ? If so then what would you have to complain about ? Would this be a more beautiful world ? Well at least I get it. Thank you Jaguar for producing this car and all others before and since, not bad for a bunch of low budget grocery getters wagon builders.... :rolleyes:

Posted Image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>"what you got from 62 to totally show this car up ?"<<

I'd put a '62-64 Pontiac GP up against this car no problem. The attention to detail is far & above what I see in the above pictures.

Maybe that's not fair; comparing pictures to reality (I've owned 7 '64-66 F/S Pontiacs), but what I see is glaring to my eye. The thick black rubber backlight gasket is not refined and not befitting of a luxury vehicle. Same goes for exposed hinges and the like. The bare raw construction of a luxury car is not supposed to be visible & obvious. There's certainly no grace or charm in it.

My '64 GP: no exposed window gaskets, no exposed hinges, no fat woven windlace weatherseals, a design & color-coordinated steering wheel, pedals (yes: suspended, for about the 9th year or so) with a touch of design instead of almost industrial rubber pads... it's just a far better designed & built machine AT LEAST in these areas. No- it does not have as lofty a rep, but maybe it should.

>>"Keys, wrong place but its not the end of the world"<<

No it's not, and if it was the only thing I saw I never would've posted, but these are the details that can make or break a car in a competitive market. Keys should not rest/rub/scratch against the middle of the dash when they can be either column-mounted or mounted low on the dash to preserve the finish/appearance of the car. It's simple practicality. Can't cost anything more to mount it at the bottom edge of the dash instead of scraping the painted wood finish off, and I strongly doubt it would impede apon any 'expectations/desires' of british motorists.

>>"Shifting on the column.....?? Column shift was common in Domestic..."<<

Not column shift; I said shift quadrant. The gear selector indicator, you know: P-N-D-S-L-R. Last car I saw that had one on the column that pops into mind was a '70s Maverick. Just about every upscale marque had it in the dash by the mid '50s.

>>"your beginning to sound like the media you so often question"<<

No; the media deals in perception, ill-researched (if at all) 'facts' and outmoded stereotypes. If I did the same I would bring up quality issues, rust issues and the notoriously-awful electricals. Or I could've make assumptive judgments on the 'quality of materials' merely from a pic. I did none of these things. My comments are all inarguable facts: the features I listed are right there in the pics.

The design is nice, the interior overall is nice and yes: to a degree-charming. But it's no where near where the class leaders in this segment --or even numerous non-luxury makes-- were.

I guess what I'm saying is: as a Jaguar- it's nice. As a 1962 it's a stark anachronism.

Edited by balthazar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Brits are and were heavily steeped in tradition. I actually believe they probably wanted the hinges exposed. I also doubt they had huge key rings dangling, most likely just a single key hung on a rack for the Chauffeur. The hub caps was most likely another tradition because the E type came with knock off chrome wire spokes. I suppose a Cadillac came with alloys or something ? All this crap your throwing at the car doesnt make it not a luxury car as you stated. I didnt ask for your preference I asked what showed this car up. Wheres the class leading Cadillac ? They actually called this wood work cabinetry, no suprise, thats what it is. Therefore I would guess thats what was expected. From what I have researched that was handcrafted Walnut and included Walnut tables on the back of the front seats with vanity mirrors. I suspect this car as with most Rolls and Bentleys had chauffeur driven in mind. More English tradition much less common in America with oil barrons in Texas running a big fat set of longhorns on the hood...................... :lol:

Well perhaps this is no more class leading than a Cadillac but it did have a little 3.8 DOHC inline six engine producing 265 hp. It did have fully independant suspension, it did have four wheel disc brakes.....................Im sure Cadillac trumped all that with class leading engine, suspension and brakes................tables in the back seat...........and enought Walnut to make a hutch............

but surely all this still'll equals.............. " These features are on par with --say-- Ford of the early '50s, not a luxury car of the '60s."

exposed window seals........BFD did they seal or did they rust the window channel? I suppose they should have hid their poor workmanship with gobs of pop on mismatched stainless ?

I love fat woven windlace, its something I miss. Is it possible the Brits also saw this as proper, its more detail rather than just rubber.

Bad electronics.............so you heard.............nothing that ever plagued a Domestic ?

Well I continue to pretend a Jaguar is a luxury car and you continue to pretend a Pontiac is a luxury car. Ill understand reality and you continue to live in your narrow minded bubble. Form over function right ? Didnt domestic luxury from this era have plastic tissue dispensors.......... :hissyfit:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No: domestics had painted & chromed steel tissue dispensers, the ones I have for a '57 Pontiac & '59 Buick are. Jaguar even offer one in this era or is it tradition to have a crumpled wad of loose tissues in the glove box?

Yes: Cadillac had alloys- the first in the industry: '55 Eldorado: Sabre Spoke. No poverty caps available.

Yes: Cadillac had Walnut tables in the back, and footrests, by the early '60s in the S60S and earlier in the Series 75. In a '68 ad, Cadillac claimed 167 different interiors (trim, color, options, models). I'd guess Jaguar had about.... 12.

Cadillac had 270 HP by '55 and 345 by '59. I'm sure Cadillac's brakes & suspension were far more competitive with Jag's than Jag's interiors were with Cadillac's. And I'd put the brakes of Buick against Jag's discs anyday. Oh wait; we already know the outcome.... because it's a "Jag", right? Because Buicks are for old farts who can't drive, right? :lol:

Cadillac pioneered LSA independant front suspension so Jaguar & the rest of the industry could use it.

I didn't even go with Cadillac because it's so grossly one-sided. I also did not get into mechanicals (deflection)- I stuck with the interior of the Jag alone. In that instance a Pontiac will compete nicely, regardless of the 'image' or 'perception' of a "Pontiac".

Having no A/C and manual steering was also a 'tradition' for many decades- but at some point certain features are expected hallmarks of certain classes of vehicles. Certain treatments of details & construction were abandoned years earlier by numerous more plebian marques, then, eventually, Jaguar abandoned them too, following in the other's footsteps. None have returned to those methods- why? Where is the modern thick, buldging black rubber windshield gasket? They all sealed- which one looks more refined? How can this not matter in this class- would it be fine & dandy to have it be twice as thick? Three times??? At what point does asthetics become an issue with British cars, or is whatever they do sheer perfection?

I am no more 'close-minded' than you are by refusing to see things objectively and deflecting critiques. Sounds mightily like you're calling a Jag "luxury" just because it's a "Jag". Now who sounds like the media?

What about the above pictures says 'luxury' to you, razor? Maybe I'm just not seeing it; enlighten me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better start saving now.  I don't even want to know how expensive that is.

178104[/snapback]

Expensive... yeah.

You must be referring to the electrical gremlins, or perhaps the

ludicrous parts prices, or the craptastic UN-ease of maintenance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recently attained experience with mid-60s Jaguars?

178811[/snapback]

Actaully, yes, now that you ask. :duh: :AH-HA_wink: :P

A friend's uncle has one, and it's hell to maintain sometimes. It's also caught on

fire (luckly no damage)

But I've driven in it, and Fly-it's well worth it. :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. I'll have the most beautiful smoldering hulk on the block! :P

If I win the lottery, I'm just going to have a garage filled with rare, hard-to-maintain cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the above pictures says 'luxury' to you, razor? Maybe I'm just not seeing it; enlighten me.

178783[/snapback]

Everything !

but only because its a Jaguar.............................. :lol:

So just how H U G E was that Caddy engine............a real "class" leader Im sure.............. :lol:

I got no problem with Cadillacs, I dont jump in on Cadillac topics to chop them down.........even through, they, for the most part have been gawd awful ugly......in my eyes

You want to damn everything and everybody that did not have the same industrial might and vast resources and engineering advancement as America post WWII. For such a great historian, you at the same time seem anxious to dismiss certain complications involved in the balance. You want to damn another country for being steeped in tradition, that was struggling to just get back to where they were after WWII let alone lead the way. Then of course once again its a country little larger than Flordia, and a company much smaller than any of GM's divisions...........How dare they not have "everything" and yet the nerve to be called "luxury". Then there was one final great gigantic trump card that America had and it was Harley Earl, a totally non traditionalist. Though he later did become steeped in his traditional wings and rocket fuselage with gigantic holes for and aft and 100's of pounds of stainless gawd..............something that most of his understudies hated. Still, one has to wonder had it not been for Mister Earl would Americans have been building bicycle fender cars well into the 50's ? Exner seemed lost after his great years in the mid 50's..........would Harley too have become trapped in his creativity ?

Hey I can see it, just not sure you can. I bet you wish you were with the Big Three in the 50's and Jag and Ferrari and all other European brands that you so loath were also under Domestic control and you'all could have crushed them like Tucker and all others that fell to the big money boss's pull. I mean in one topic you will lament Tucker for their fate and in another curse a survivor of similar unbalanced scales. Manufacturers who only survived those days due to the fact that they were within their own countrys and their own countries pride. Well, damn them to hell, how dare they see things differently. Perhaps all those extre thousands of miles between them and California left them a bit in the dark ......... ponder that ?

" Maybe I'm just not seeing it; enlighten me." Ive grown to not care what you "can see" because I clearly see you are narrowminded and cant except all differences that make for different products and approaches from different locations. I guess in todays world this would mean you would be a typical Lexus buyer and blow right passed the Caddy.

Jaguar never "followed" anyone and stuck to what they deemed proper for a Jaguar. One only needs to look at the few models they produced over the years to see they did not copy anything, always unique and uninspired by others. That in itself takes class in my eyes. It was also their demise but I got to love them for it. Today they are Fords with a touch of Jaguar throwback.

"What about the above pictures says 'luxury' to you" That car is all class, its that simple, myself I can only hope those hinges are brass, because if I had built that dash they would be...........polished brass, I may have even detailed them a bit and placed them entirely exposed.................like those of a high standard trunk. Speaking of which, I still love exposed finely crafted chromed trunk hinges........and here today everyone is complaining about "intruding trunk hinges"........we'll hey I got the answer.................in one day and time that would have been thought of as fine craftmanship I guess today it only means "not luxury"........... :stupid:

I have a photo of a 63 Grand Prix placed nicely in my collection of fine motorcars, including the likes of Jaguar, Ferrari, DeSotos, Bugattis, Pagaso's, Maseratis and Buicks. Makes me smile to think of the cringing that would be done by the narrow minds of the "enthousiasts" on both sides of the pond to see such cars side by side.

8)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consider this - England had the daylights bombed out of them for four years, and they managed to build a car like this. Not bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry the fleetwood was the wrong year, just a mistake

I found this for the Cadillac engine and performance

"Cadillac's long-running V-8 got its first major revision in 14 years for 1963. Bore and stroke were unchanged, as were valves, rocker arms, cylinder heads, compression (still 10.5:1), and connecting rods. But nearly everything else was different: lighter, stronger crankshaft; a stiffer block weighing 50 pounds less than the previous one; ancillaries relocated to improve service access. While all this did little for performance, the revised 390 was much smoother and quieter. Then again, performance was already good. The typical '63 could reach 115-120 mph, do 0-60 mph in 10 seconds, and return about 14 miles per gallon."

this is what I have for the 63 Jaguar engine......no now wait a second my book says the Mark X was introduced at london motor show in 61 but none the less.

"The Mark X used the 265 hp 3.8 litre (231 ci).............to record some impressive statistics for a big car: 0-60 in under 11 seconds and a top speed of 115."

Boy they were way off the mark with that one............... :rolleyes:

So by 65 MY they increased to 4.2 litre with the same HP but 10% more torque and top speed of 122.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For priceing I only have

"Remarkably, a Series 62 still cost as little as $5026; the Eldo Biarritz was only $6608."

only have XK E-type for 61 I believe

"$5,595 for convetable and $5,895 for the coupe ". yes that is US dollars. Im sure the MarkX was more or so one would think.......but then again the XKE with its chrome spoke knock offs "could reach speeds of 151 and 0-60 in seven"

again way off the Mark..............

I ponder what the first domestic production car to reach speeds of 150 was, then I bet there was no :ohyeah: involved................... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, now Im up to speed with theyears agian so were back to 62 Cadillacs. Heres the highly acclaimed Coupe Deville in economy caps

Posted Image

another ?? with caps

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Im not finding leather yet, I better go look for an Eldorado

"Ill be back"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×