Elite_Deforce Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 which is in the pipeline (i read it a while ago but i cant find the proof!) You know they'll just screw it up. Hopefully they don't put another 6 in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2007DBR9 Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 The original one was a huge failure! Did they not originally promise to put a V12 in it, then when it was announced it would have a V6 TT everyone wanted their deposits back and took Jaguar to court over it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elite_Deforce Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 The original one was a huge failure! Did they not originally promise to put a V12 in it, then when it was announced it would have a V6 TT everyone wanted their deposits back and took Jaguar to court over it? That was the owners being stupid, there wasn't anything wrong with that engine, it's just when it comes to cars like that you expect NA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2007DBR9 Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 That was the owners being stupid, there wasn't anything wrong with that engine, it's just when it comes to cars like that you expect NA. Exactly, I would have wanted my money back. I want a NA V12! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elite_Deforce Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 Exactly, I would have wanted my money back. I want a NA V12! I wouldnt have cared. Apparently the biggest reason people sued Jag was because of the spectators who would just buy them and sell them at a premium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris V. Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 I wouldnt have cared. Apparently the biggest reason people sued Jag was because of the spectators who would just buy them and sell them at a premium. And considering that the V6 was the Le Mans race engine for that year, it seems stupid to complain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bfeeney Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 Ok, the specs on the XJ220 are... Concept: 6.2L V12 making 500 hp/510tq, but they couldn't meet rising emmision standards with the V12. 4WD. 3439LBS. They had a target speed of 220mph (hence the name). In 1989 the price was set at $580,000 with $80,000 down. Production: 3.5 V6 twin Garretts, 542hp/476tq. 2WD. The price was raised to $650,00 after people put the $80,000 down, which naturally pissed them off. The production car ended up going 223mph. So in my opinion, sure the cost went up by $70,000, but so did power with 1/2 the cylinders and I'm not a fan of 4WD on a supercar and at 223mph they exceeded their target number. That being said, I wouldn't buy one because it's the most boring looking 200+mph I have ever seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elite_Deforce Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 I think it's the best looking car ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammo Posted February 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 I think it's the best looking car ever. It aint bad for a car that borrowed brake lights from a Vauxhall Senator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elite_Deforce Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 It aint bad for a car that borrowed brake lights from a Vauxhall Senator And rearview mirror from a Citroen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammo Posted February 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 And rearview mirror from a Citroen. Didnt know that....really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elite_Deforce Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 Didnt know that....really? Says Wiki. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammo Posted February 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 (edited) Says Wiki. If so, im astounded, yet at the time, Jag were part GM owned and did borrow abit (I think?) Edited February 2, 2010 by Jammo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr. joint Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 I think it's the best looking car ever. Oooh I agree..Jaguar designs have always impressed me and the XJ220 is the best. +1 on the V6. Rumors were the V12 engine (once tested) ruined the cars dynamics. How true? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris V. Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 If so, im astounded, yet at the time, Jag were part GM owned and did borrow abit (I think?) No, Jag has never been GM owned. Ford bought jaguar in 1990, 2 years before the XJ220 went into production, but 2 years AFTER it had been shown to the public for the first time and one year after production had been announced and a price set. Boring? Absotely stunning: The original V12 was Tom Walkinshaw's Le Mans winning V12, but it ended up not being suitable for a road car by the time Ford bought Jaguar. Ford paid to make sure the car was produceable and functional, but becausee of that the cost went up. Specualtors had been putting money down on the cars before Ford bought Jag, but with the global recession in '91, most of teh specualtor money dried up. Hell, every supercar manufacturer had it rough at that time. I had been hired as a consultant/designer on one supercar project that got as far as venture capital meetings when the recession hit. Ended up busting the company. that sketch was from '89 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.