I’ve sold my MK-8 (the one in Hitchcocks Vetigo movie) and am starting on a MK-1, I find there seems to be little available or mentioned as compared to the MK-II, These BOTH have many successes rallying and roadracing, The Mk-I started a whole new line of smaller, more lithe high performance saloons that offered unheard performance not available elsewhere after the big Jags had established that guidepost for others to aim for. Of course the MK-II was improved AND heavier but not one that could run away from it’s older brother.
What’s the problem?
There’s less of them around?
For the same restoration costs the Mk2 is usually preferred. The changes in appearance and engine are good sales points for the Mk2. It doesn’t make the 3.4 (or “Mk1”) a bad car but it is probably not a good investment. Jaguar owners will rarely admit it but they usually expect to make money on their car. And keep in mind some of those little brothers had little engines.
It’s sad that our HOBBY has turned to that, When I was a member of JAG in the bay area, most were well paid professionals who had earlier Jags and worked on them. because they loved it! for many it has become an investment.
I’m interested in the Mk-1 because it weighs a C Wt less than the Mk-2 and I want to prepare one for the slaloms AND has a distinguished racing history!
Think of the bright side and make the most of it. When everyone else want’s something else it makes it easier to buy what I want. I have a 420 I’ve had for 20 years. I love it. Bigger engine and IRS. Nice formal grill. And they’re worthless. No one wants them. People follow like sheep. If you follow them you have to watch where you step.
1 Like
The first car I ever owned was a '58 3.4 Litre Saloon (MK1) in Carmen Red with disk brakes, a 4 speed /OD Close Ratio transmission, fog lights and wire wheels. It looked like a 4-door XK150 FHC. It was also shod with Michelin X Radial tires, which no one I knew in America had ever seen before. The previous owner had shipped it to Europe and bought the tires in France. I certainly learned a lot about fixing Jaguars, since there were no dealer or aftermarket parts back then. It also set me on the course of Jaguar ownership which has changed the course of my life in many ways.
1 Like
When I was a kid a neighbor had one, which he called his Two Four Leader, pronounced exactly like that. I suppose he didn’t know what a decimal point and a Litre were. I remember it had spats. Seeing it often, along with a Mark IX driven by my high school history teacher and a 120FHC I would see along the route of my school bus inspired me to look for one when I could drive and had a bit of cash, so I bought the Mark V I still have.
Somebody asked me why does Mark 1 come after Mark 5. I tried to explain but then I wondered, does anybody know, when was the Mark 1 first called the Mark 1? The term appears in the 3.4 Jan '61 amendment parts catalogue.
1 Like
The Mark V was part of the series of large saloons, which progressed through the Mark VII through the Mark X. They skipped the Mark VI since Rolls Royce already had used that name. The small saloon line started with the 3.4 Litre Saloon and then progressed to the Mark 2 and Mark 2S. The 3.4 Litre was only referred to as the “Mark 1” after the Mark 2 was built. The difference between the large and small saloon designations was that the large saloons used Roman numerals and the small saloons used Arabic. That’s how a MK2 could come after a MKVII. They were in different series’.
2 Likes
Yes, and similarly the unofficial designation Mark IV was only applied by owners and dealers after the Mark V was on the market.
Anders Clausager explains in his book XK120 in Detail that the Mark V got its name simply from the fact that William Lyons and his team of panel beaters in the back shop put together five experimental prototype mockup bodies in the 1946-48 period before he was satisfied with the result, and the chosen design was referred to as the XJ Mk 5 in internal company documents, as Lyons explained to a dealer and press convention announcing the Mark V in Sept 1948. There is a picture of the rejects, which may have been called XJ Mk1 through XJ Mk4, one of which has a split windshield like the Mark VII and a one piece bonnet like an XK120.
1 Like
I’d sure like to buy my ‘67 back…
1 Like
Same deal, wrt Lincoln Continentals.
1 Like
Greetings All,
I own a 7M and a IX along with a RHD MKII MOD.
The interior on the MKI is far more cockpit-like because of the heavy frame surround of the doors. You have to love the guy who designed the windshield to be removed from the inside.
If I remember correctly, more 2.4’s were made than 3.4’s. That along with the rear track being narrower than the front didn’t earn it any handling kudos.
Again, I like the car but the lines are clunkier because of those thick door frames.
Wire wheels aren’t as abundant on these compared to the MKII.
To me it’s a totally different feel than the later MKII, and I’m not sure why.
These cars also suffered greatly from rust issues like the MKVII, VIII’s and IX, more so than later models. It took me forever to find relatively rust free examples of those models. Not sure what they did different but the MKII was an improvement rust wise. IF thehey had only ceased gluing that padding on the inside of the door skins.
Just enjoy it!
If you like it, make it your own.
Remember if you were 21 and can afford a Mark 1 new in 58/59.
Your basically in a home or worse.
American cars are fairing much worse .
Once the generation dies, its nearly dead as well , at least euro cars look more like works of art.
Enjoy it baby…
GTJOEY1314
1 Like
I’ve ALWAYS thought that the MK-X should be considered the top Jag of the period, NO it wasn’t a race winner–then but it had the best off everything Jag had to offer! the logical progression of the VII-VIII-IX X, I find them preferable compared to the Rolls
more expensive than an E-type when released, very luxurious interior
a good one is getting hard to find, and if you do expect to pay near $A30K, which will be well below the cost of any resto
Greetings All,
I like the car, but it’s an odd duck.
A decade of the VII, VII, IX preceded the MKX/420G. Some felt the Big Jag was getting long in the tooth, hence the new design.
The new lines coupled with the triple SU’d engine always seemed like more of a sport Tourer than a luxury ride, at least to me. Yes, the car is nice, but the it’s much nicer to be a passenger in a MKIX than to be one in a MKX/420G. I think the driver is more “involved” with the newer car.
These also suffered from the dreaded tin worm.
Intended to jump in on this fwiw.
I had a Mk2 and a MkVII. I always liked the MKI, a perfect blend of the two previously mentioned models I love equally.
Loved the older dash design personally, but the car is a very 50s design when I look at it now.
The Mk2 is an outstanding upgrade, timeless, and arguably one of the best upgrades of any model I can think of, ever…from any maker.
Anyway, my .02 on the MkI popularity however is, well, you know… it may be due to the fact Mike Hawthorne died in one.
I feel it genuinely left a dark mark on the model and it never, ever recovered from that. It seemed to become rather shunned afterwards.
PS: Boy are they becoming impossible to find now… I haven’t see one listed anywhere in AGES…and I’m always performing Jaguar searches for whatever damn reason.
I happen to have a Mark I, rhd, 3.4 with manual and overdrive. Yes, it is a very '50’s design. But what is not to like about the all wood dash, window surrounds, black paint, all wool and red leather interior? Looks like the perfect English drawing room. Makes an excellent get away car if you rob a train.
1 Like
Nothing. LOVE the wood window surrounds and dash etc…
In fact just found one listed online for sale. Opalescent blue. Perfect color.
Yeah, they look really great.
Not as 50s (dated)as I seemed to feel.