1954 Jaguar XK120

[66andBlue]

I would have thought that these classy looking cars are a lot pricier:
https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1954-jaguar-xk120-roadster-4/

[johnk]

I love these and hope to get one some day. For now they are also on the Hagerty list of the most over-valued convertibles given an large run up over the last several years. Problem is while I am only 5-11 my legs are too long for the car. Would have to go with the 150 but its lines are not quit as attractive.

[georgem]

Hey John,

Having owned and restored a 150, I`ll take you to task re the 120 being more attractive than the 150

BTW, I am 6ft2ins (or was when I owned it many years ago) and fitted comfortably. I don`t think the leg room is any different between the two. What did  change was they got a bit fatter and the sides came up higher to allow wind up windows

[johnk]

OK George I'll take your word for it on the looks. I would kill for either model!

I read somewhere that 150 had more legroom and it seemed when I sat in one but I could very well be wrong.

How would you compare the car in general to a pagoda?

[georgem]

John,

The comparison is a bit chalk and cheese.
 Although from about the same period - the 150 was 1963, the 230 1965, the 150 was a cross over model as far as  construction went - it has a separate chassis that the suspension, engine and gear box was mounted to, yet the body was a complete welded unit - if I remember the front guards were welded on. The body could be separated from the chassis as a complete unit (as I did when I restored ours) Suspension was rudimentary -solid axle at the back with leaf springs and very basic independent suspension at the front - Its heart was that iconic Jag motor - twin OHC with 2 or 3 SU carbies  very impressive with the alloy covers polished. Compare that to the Pagoda, unitary body construction, independent suspension front and rear and a level of engineering sophistication that was way ahead of the Jag.

The Jag was a bit of a tank to drive - very heavy at the front (PS wasn`t an option) with a truck like Moss gearbox that required a lot of double declutching esp  down  changes - I don`t think there was syncro on first.... so.....not so good around town but loped along the highway and very quiet - esp with electric overdrive on 3rd and 4th - technically it had a 6 speed box if you could flick the dash mounted overdrive switch fast enough.

The Pagoda is more comfortable and roomy. The Jags seats were virtually on the floor so your legs were nearly parallel to the floor  and the seats weren`t as comfortable and air-con was achieved by opening outside vents in the footwells on each side (it took the Poms until later that century to realise that their cars were sold in countries where the sun actually made an appearance on more that 3 days per year . The heater was ferocious though!

So all in all the Pagoda gets my vote. That's not to say that I wouldn`t like another, but not if it meant selling the Pagoda

[johnk]

Thanks George that really helps my bucket list perspective. If you enjoy driving your classic car a lot like most of us in this group does, it seams you cant beat the reliability and drive ability of a Pagoda!

All that said, do the 120 to 150's have the reliability issues the jags are know for?

[georgem]

John,

Their reliability was as good as any English car of that era.  Poor old Jag gained the reliability reputation when electronics were introduced - late 70s onwards (I think) Mr Lucas, that well known Prince of Darkness helped here. The basic drive train - engine, gearbox and rear axle were over engineered as was normal for that era - it was the add ons that gave the grief later on. The SU Carbies, esp if there was 3 could be a challenge although they are pretty rudimentary.

The 120/154/150 were very basic, old school cars, as I said earlier, technically a bit of a T Rex, replaced by the E Type, which shared the same motor but it was wrapped in a body and suspension that  brought it up todate and maybe a bit beyond its peers.

George

[Chris_ATL]

George,

As well as the prince of darkness causing reliability issues, you also have to remember that Jaguar was swallowed up by British Leyland in 1968.. Things went downhill dramatically from then onwards.. not just parts sharing by labour disputes caused a lot of poor quality builds...

I love the XKs.. very simple to work on

[georgem]

Chris,

Point taken re the take over and industrial trouble.

Even taking all that into consideration, I am still a Jag fan -my father owned a Mk5 when I was a kid and I was hooked from then on.

Once again, in defence of the 120/30/50s, they were at the change over point in design and development as far as chassis and suspension was concerned. Probably  fairer  to compare the E Type and our W113s..........now try picking the coolest body shape out of that line up

[66andBlue]

Comparing E-type (or "small moving space") and W113? You can read some hands-on experience here:
https://www.sl113.org/forums/index.php?topic=14705   
Or this discussion from a few years back:
https://www.sl113.org/forums/index.php?topic=5462.0;all

[georgem]

Ahh Gary - you are confusing technical sophistication with practicalities - our Pagodas win that battle - no worries -= as you have documented.

The Poms were rather economical with interior space - form over function I guess. My example is the car I dreamed of owning ever since I was a Kid - the original MG TF. Sadly when I eventually was able to afford one, my 6ft 2in frame was just too big - no room for feet beside the pedals, esp the clutch and my head was 2ins too tall for the soft top. Because it was my dream car, it took me a long time to admit that it was too small and it was eventually sold to fund the XK 150.

There`s probably some historical reason - perhaps cars had to fit into the old carriage houses, maybe there was a tax on garage doors wider that a certain width - they liked rubbing shoulders with their passenger -  who knows.

Mind you, If I could afford and or house a V12 E type 2 +2 with aircon  I`d be prepared to give one a crack .

[johnk]

I've loved the jags since my older brother had a 67 e-type in 1968 and totalled it in 1969. Later in life after he was married and a bit more responsible he bought a 220D. Always looking up to my brother I had two 220D's and two e350's since then plus my beloved Pagoda. But supporting the theory that true loves never really die I bought a 2016 jag f-type R this spring. I hope to keep it forever but I am sure I would trade it in a heartbeat for an e-type if I thought I could drive it as much as my pagoda.

John