Eye of the beholder, as the comments above clearly indicate. For many matching numbers are important, but it’s a paradigm. For others matching numbers is irrelevant, so long as the car is period correct, another paradigm. For still others, neither matching numbers nor period correctness is relevant to the enjoyment of driving the snot out of the car - also a paradigm, but with a decidedly positive slant. Those who get wrapped up in perfectionism tend more to focus on perceived failings or missings while those who don’t give a rat’s ass tend to smile and enjoy their cars more.
Answer, no. Not in my view. But that’s just my paradigm.
Count me in with that statement !! I could care less about keeping everything as it was 50 years ago…make it safer, make it run smoother…maybe save a little gas, maybe put in some modern sound…yea…drive the hell out of the car and enjoy !! FYI…I once had a 1976 Paradigm Deluxe. A little cramped, and could never find parts. Not a problem anymore , I guess, since they opened Paradigm’s Unlimited in San Lose That Pimple outside of Boise.
Bob, with all respect and not wanting to get into an argument.
On what basis can you possibly say ‘an unquestionable improvement’.
What is better in absolute terms, let alone when you consider the cost, and more importantly the engineering competence of the many five speed offerings. It’s good business for those selling the conversion kits, but otherwise, a total waste of time and money.
If you have a USA spec E type, that is clearly undergeared, far better to change rear axle ratio to factory standard for all non USA cars to 3.07:1 if you are concerned about highway cruising.
This seems to have become what I call a ‘boxers or briefs’ discussion - strong preferences in many cases but no compelling case to be made one way or the other.
It is an unquestionable improvement…to those who choose to make such an upgrade. You don’t agree, so …don’t put one in your car. As for me…the box (Borg/Warner) from the Driven Man, shifts smoother, and on my long highway trips, I sometimes get 18 to 20 mpg. Cant do that with a four speed. During the installation,I got a chance to upgrade the clutch/pressure plate (all GM parts), send out drive shaft for shortening(for ease of installation) and re-balance , in addition to sending out the flywheel to address its needs. All in all, it makes for a much more pleasant driving experience ! My suggestion is you should not make the upgrade…it would be a total waste of YOUR time and money, which should be your only concern. Happy Motoring !!
The only compelling case is what you want and how deep your pockets are There is a case for a 5sp, anybody notice that modern cars have had
them for years regardless of engine size, people like them. The case for
the original is just that, original and its sufficient for the job. As we
know the XK motor will pull stumps in practically any gear, the 307 rear
end would help highway cruising and fuel mileage if that’s important but
not everyone drives their car on highways long distance.
pauls
No help on fuel mileage in my experience. I have got measured 21 US MPG over tours of several thousand miles; I have never heard anyone get much better than that. No help on cruising in my car, the engine is actually quieter at 3500 RPM than at 2800. E-Type torque is pretty sub-par these days when Honda Civics can beat it in a drag.
To each his own, but not everyone agrees with you on the 3.07, only reason I am posting this.
I can’t say that I noticed an improvement in gas mileage when I installed a 5 speed. If there was any it’s subtle. The XK engine doesn’t appear to be like a typical US built V8 where high rpm really ups fuel consumption. I agree with Jerry about XK quietness at higher rpm, but with a slightly different slant. The exhaust booms at 2700 rpm plus and minus a couple of hundred rpm. This corresponds to the torque peak of the engine. Unfortunately that rpm in a typically geared E Type with a 4 speed equates to normal highway cruising speeds, where I find it quite annoying. (I know drive faster.) With a 5 speed it occurs at 75 - 80 mph when you can’t hear it over wind noise (at least not in a ots), but at least it’s quiet going through 60 mph.
As to value - if your car is collector worthy - that is $200k plus I suspect it doesn’t make any difference as these cars are not driven. For a driver I would pay more for a car with a 5 speed but probably not what the 5 speed cost to buy and have professionally installed ($10k?).
IIRC, didn’t most European delivery E-types come equipped with 3.07 rear ends? I’ve read many of the contemporary road tests of 3.07 equipped cars conducted by European publications and U.S. publications which covered mainly 3.54 equipped cars. I don’t recall any of the European publications lamenting the lack of acceleration with 3.07 gearing.
Didn’t Jaguar provide 3.54 gears in the U. S. to drop 0-60 MPH times because that’s what buyers in the U. S. were/are obsessed with? I think I read that somewhere years ago.
In my opinion this is the best post of the bunch. It’s your car, equip it in the way that most satisfies you, not to some arbitrary standard imposed by others, be they purists or hot rodders.
So since the 5sp doesn’t improve mileage, is it safe to assume that the 307 rear end doesn’t either? I didn’t do either but was sure I read folks here saying their mileage was improved.
pauls
I don’t plan to sell my car. for me value is meaningless. My wife will probably sell it for 10 cents on the dollar when I die.
So if anyone here is smart they would make friends with her now 'cuz she doesn’t really care about cars and will just want it out of the garage quick!
I believe that’s right – they were all over themselves with amazement on how strong the car was! But there was a difference.
The only US road test that I know of that tested a 3.54:1 axle was the Car & Driver test of the new 4.2 OTS in February 1965 (I have it right here). The tests recorded by Skilleter in the “Collector’s Guide” are all for 3.31:1 or 3.07:1. 0-60 times recorded:
3.54:1 4.2 OTS: 6.5 secs;
3.07:1 4.2 OTS 7.4 secs – about a second’s difference;
3.31:1 3.8 OTS 7.1 secs – right in between
The new Chevy Bolt 0-60 time is 6.5 secs!
The 4.2 is said to have more torque, but my experience driving my 3.8 and others’ 4.2 cars tells me the 3.8 is quicker; probably they are a wash in 0-60.
So, yes there is a difference in acceleration with the numerically higher ratio, axle or 5th gear.
Paul, when you make as big a change as a 5 speed, you always want to have better mileage and smoother cruising; it’s natural to believe you actually do. Mileage, to be real you have to measure miles and gallons over a thousand consecutive miles or more; how many have done that?
I used to have a soft cover book that was a collection of road tests of the E-type Series I and II cars. About 20 tests in all from the US, Europe and even one from Australia I believe. From the first tests published in The Motor to tests of the Series II with AC I let it go years ago, wish I still had it. If I can still search the old archives prior to 2005 I might be able to find where I posted a summary of the tests.
Hmmm…gas mileage. Assuming gas is $4 / gal and that I will make 2 more miles per gallon 10% better mileage,…how many miles do I have to drive before I break even on $8k transmission (labor/parts/tranny/taxes/delivery charges)? 8000/4= 2000 gallons. So now the question is how many miles do I have to drive to save 2000 gallons of fuel…or 10% ( 2 miles on 20mpg). 20/2 = x/2000…so x = 20,000 gallons of fuel. At 20mpg I would have to drive 400,000 miles to save 2000 gallons of fuel and thus to justify spending $8k . I think I might be dead by then…and a half dozen transmission rebuilds too. .My math could be a little off…but you get the picture.
So…do it for the fun factor … not the mileage.
There is a case for a 5sp, anybody notice that modern cars have had