Originally Posted By: rslifkin
Originally Posted By: bigjl
I would not even contemplate defending the reliability of the XJ 40 shape though.
They deserve a reputation for lack of reliability.
Interesting... I've always thought of the XJ40 as quirky, but fairly reliable (and heard that they were one of the better Jags for reliability, certainly better than a Series I/II/III XJ6 or any V12 Jag). I've got a family member with an 88 XJ40 Vanden Plas (3.6 / ZF auto) with 77k miles. It still runs and drives great (despite being a little under-maintained other than oil changes). It handles a lot better than I'd expect for a 4000lb land yacht on 205s too. It had an AC issue and a rear suspension issue that were resolved under warranty when it was fairly new.
Other than that, it's been pretty good. The only real issues are as follows: The brakes are super-heavy due to a dead nitrogen bladder in the brake system (not a hard fix, just haven't done it yet), and one of the displays on the digital dash only works sometimes (just a cracked solder joint, another easy fix). The ABS doesn't work, most likely due to the nitrogen bladder issue (and that's pretty much a non-problem anyway).
The X-type and S-type were just pieces of [censored] from everything I've seen. The X308 XJ8s seem to hold up well though.
S Type was ugly but very underrated, the X Type suffered image problems due to its links with the mk3 Mondeo, the petrol versions and 4wd versions were not as common as the diesels in the UK.
Neither bad a bad reputation.
I can still remember the problems with the XJ 40 shape the hydraulic system was a nightmare, high pressure and low pressure switches, warnings on the dash.
Horrendous fuel use, even the 2.9 would hardly crack 20mpg round town.
That was before you considered the multitude of electrical gremlins they had.
I ran a garage back in the early '90s and we used to see a lot of those shape Jags, they were so cheap people would buy them and have no idea into how to maintain them properly.
They also used to rust fairly badly.
In the UK at least.
The aluminium bodied version was a huge step forward in build quality and reliability.
They did put a very nice Diesel engine in the S Type in Europe and that was the most popular version in the UK I suspect.
Perhaps that explains the difference is reliability.
That Diesel engine was also fitted to the XF till recently and was fitted to the Discovery 3 for a fair few years also.
Replaced by a much better 3.0 engine which is both cleaner, economical and quicker.
Don't get me wrong, I liked driving customers XJ40's but would never own one.
But the vehicle the OP is talking about is one I would always have at the back of my mind if buying a high days and holidays vehicle.