Hello folks - After 5 MKII (still have 1), 2 XJ6 and recently selling my E-Type, I am wondering what my next Jaguar should be (other than yet another MKII). I’ve toyed with the idea of a MK9, or even a 420 - but honestly I am getting a bit used to more modern conveniences - like the car working - and so looking at slighter newer things with A/C and a radio that doesn’t run on positive ground…I was reminded that I’ve always liked the XJS.
Since the model had a long run and several changes, I tried to figure out what I wanted in terms of year, and it seems things have narrowed dramatically to 1993 or the first half of 1994! - Here is why:
I only want the straight 6. I know there are fans, but you couldn’t pay me to take on a V12. No point trying to convince me on this one - I know they are a stout engine, but not going there, lol.
I am very much tired of inboard brakes, so that immediately scoots us to 1993.
I’ve read that the AJ16 version of the straight 6 started mid-year 1994 - BUT that while it is a great engine generally, all its new computerized stuff make it very hard to work with unless you have the Jaguar PDU / diagnostics - which almost nobody has. Around here, I’d probably be out of luck in terms of equipped mechanics, and I also read several posts where the AJ16 has some sort of issue (high idle, for example) and you literally can’t do anything about it unless you find some shop with the right electronic tool. This also applies to any parts you change, like sensors, etc, that then require a re-calibration. SO…according to what I read, the AJ6, although perhaps less refined, is easier to work with and less likely to develop a problem that requires hen’s teeth to repair. - and since they stopped using that motor mid 1994 for the XJ6, that means…drum roll…
I can only look for a 1993 or an early 1994. Which is sort of annoying because I see a lot of nice looking 1995 and 1996.
Agree? Disagree? Are the AJ16 “boogie man” stories over blown? Speaking of blown… I also read a few head-gasket issues with the AJ16 as well.
I’d be interested in owner feedback so that I can make a more informed decision, rather than just reading dubious accounts of second-hand data.
I have a 1995 XJS, and a I have a PDU. The PDU is completely unnecessary. The TPS can be set based on voltage output, which is all the PDU is measuring. Don’t be put off by a 95 or 96… with the exception of the constant crank position sensor failures I had, the car was dead reliable. I took it from 80k to 200k before the clearcoat was gone and it was just too ugly to drive. Mechanically it was great.
If you really want to use a PDU for some task, there is one here in New Hampshire and another in DC area. Where are you? They are out there. 95 and 96 can also use the later diag equipment which is a Ford Rotunda VCM and some bootleg software on a Windows XP computer. Got one of those and never use it either.
I can’t fault your preferences. I was recently looking for a 93-94 Coupe. Not that many around and fewer still in the condition I wanted…which get snapped-up instantly. Convertibles are much more common.
I wouldn’t be absolutely 100% firm on refusing a '95-96 car, though. A really excellent 95-96 would be a better choice overall than an average/fair condition 93-94, IMO.
My AJ16 experience is with an X300/XJR. I did have more than a few engine management issues and drivability problems. I referred to the car as “The Tormentor” .
This was Jaguar’s early foray into OBDII engine management. I don’t know if the XJS also used this early OBDII as well.
@John6
I’m in Washington state. There are about 8,000 European can mechanics out here, but most of them have the sudden urge to go to lunch, for perhaps a year, when you mention the specific European car you have is a classic Jaguar. I’ve nothing against doing my own work - and frankly used to do it all myself, but the electronics and sensors make it tough and it seemed the AJ16 had a major lack of diagnostic availability - but, perhaps that’s not really true.
I’d actually prefer a convertible -which means I’d have three…in Washington…so, not sure what that says about my logic.
I had a 3.2 litre AJ16 engined XJ6 for 9 years. I would say there are only two weaknesses: the crankshaft position sensor and the fact they were prone to crack manifolds if the fuel filter wasn’t changed. This would make them run slightly weak and overheat.
However they are complex and full of electronics, that’s obviously a negative as a vehicle gets older.
1995.25 model year and up had many improvements, including a vastly improved and simplified ABS system, improved electrics, connectors, etc, ventilated rear discs instead of solids, and the 6 cylinders had OBD2 for the engine that can be read by most handheld code readers. You can get the technical intro here: http://jagrepair.com/images/AutoRepairPhotos/XJS%201996%20update.pdf
I don’t know much about the straight 6 engines and 90s models (im a mid 80s V12 Lucas guy). But from what I’ve seen here on the forums, some specific years (?) the aging ABS system in the XJS gives nothing but grief.
That would be the Teves system. Not a shining star in the history of ABS systems.
Other manufacturers besides Jaguar used the system. Jeep stands out in my mind as one of them…and they had a couple different recalls on the system back in the day.
In thinking about it, a lot of the early ABS systems were not all that great but other manufacturers moved on to better systems pretty quickly as I recall.
The upside is that (much like old Jags in general) we know a lot about Teves systems nowadays. The faults and fixes are all documented. It’s easier now to own an XJS…or deal with Teves brakes… than it was 25 years ago.
Hmmm. My XJS had heated seats as standard equipment, but it was an '88. I’m not an authority on later models (or even early ones) but I think the heated seats were included in the optional “Winter Package”.
Yeah, my 88 V12 has heated seats, they may be an option with the L6?
One good thing about the 90s L6 is that the 90s 5.3L V12s used the Marelli ignition system. Marrellis DO idle smoother and operate better than the 80s Lucas systems, probably because of the added 90s technology. But the coils and rotors can cause much grief if they go out. Even fires. If i was getting a 90s Jag, I’d probably get the L6 also. Way more dependable. And actually, almost as fast.
But i prefer my Lucas V12 to all. Much simpler ignition system, no abs, no air bags.
Look further down the list. Heated seats were part of an option package with lumbar support, and seat memory on the 4 liter. That option package was standard on the 6.0 in the US. That option table is confusing as hell.
Isn’t the late ZF trans not diagnosable electrically without some fairly specific Jaguar tool? One of those Jag’s of that era that was the case it seems that I was looking at. I don’t think I ever found a consumer priced alternative like you can for Mercedes or such of the era but I guess that’s only a thing if you are a diehard DIY type. The dual fuel pumps looked like a side-grade from the early mess but I’ve never worked with them. Other than that you ought to be practically (by XJS standards) home free with a later i-6 car, no v12 stuff, no early ABS stuff, they aren’t quite as cool looking but that’s a matter of preference. Generally speaking, anything right before or right after the mandated switch to OBDII was a little dodgy, from most manufacturers.
I own a 1994 and a 1995 XJS. Honestly, I do not see much difference in them. The 94 has the engine that was in the late XJ40. The 1995 has the engine that was in the 1995-1997 XJ6 X300. Both engines are bullet-proof! The postives are they are dramatically more dependable in every way compared to the earlier XJS! With the outboard brakes, no major problems! Very little to no electrical issues! The reason there are few posts about these “facelift” models is they are NOT trouble-proned like the earlier models! Jaguar corrected most, if not all, the problems with the facelift models which are the 1994-1996 models. The 1993 XJS had some of the features of the facelift models, but were not completed “transformed” until 1994!
Like others have said, I would not discount the 1995/1996 XJS!
I’ve read that the transmission can be diagnosed by reading codes on a flashing pattern when shorting a pin to ground
not the most convenient, but better than nothing
(I’ll try and dig the post about it)
You can do that on the 4L80E transmission in the 6.0 V12. I permanently connected a wire to the correct pin to a push button switch on my 6.0 so I can easily test for tranny codes anytime I want. I don’t know about the ZF in the 4.0. Completely different beast.
.