Top Cat: The Jaguar E-Type

Sophisticated, glamorous, gorgeous, and fast, this car is on everybody’s short list of the greatest cars of all time. Its flaws are well documented, but there are few automobiles that still command more loyalty or more all-out lust. This week, we examine the history of that favorite sixties icon: the 1961-1975 Jaguar E-type.

1968 Jaguar E-type FHC badge


We’re going to start off by saying something mildly heretical: If we were going to own a vintage Jaguar, it probably wouldn’t be an E-type. It’s not because it isn’t lovely (because it is), nor because good ones are very expensive (although they are), nor even because it has a well-deserved reputation as a finicky and cantankerous house guest (which it does). No, the problem is much simpler than that: The Jaguar E-type is so pretty that there’s no way we could drive one, let alone own one, without feeling like a prat. Steve McQueen could have pulled it off (although McQueen favored the E-type’s rawer, less-practical ancestor, the XK-SS), as could Catherine Deneuve or Faye Dunaway, but the rest of us … not so much. The E-type is out of our league and, given how it treats its owners, it probably knows it. We know our limitations, so we would take one of the saloons, perhaps a Mk 2 3.8. Less pretty and less nimble it might be, but we suspect it would provoke fewer derisive snickers from passers by.

That is, of course, precisely the reaction Jaguar founder Sir William Lyons hoped the E-type would provoke. The main reason Jaguar offered sports cars at all was to drive interest in the sedans, which were the Coventry firm’s bread and butter. Even the fabulous XK120 was never intended for mass production; Jaguar originally planned only about 200 copies of the car that dazzled the crowds at Earls Court in the fall of 1948. It would hardly be fair to characterize Jaguar’s interest in sports cars as a sideline — after all, the company won Le Mans five times — but the sedans were always Lyons’ primary focus.


A brief sketch of William Lyons will explain a great deal (both good and bad) about Jaguar’s cars. We briefly discussed his background in in our article on the XK120, but we didn’t say much about the man himself. Sir William — Queen Elizabeth II knighted him in 1956, after Jaguar’s fourth Le Mans victory — was by all accounts a refined and dignified gentleman of the old school. We can summarize his other key attributes as follows:

  1. He was an exceptionally savvy businessman.
  2. He had a fine eye for both style and talent.
  3. He was a world-class cheapskate, rivaling even the notoriously penurious Henry Ford.

A staunch reluctance to never buy for a shilling or a quarter what may be had for sixpence or a dime is by no means rare among the wealthy and successful, perhaps because it supports the (often fictive) notion that their wealth and position were achieved through determined effort rather than fortuitous accident of birth. However, even a casual reading of Sir William’s life reveals him as no mere amateur skinflint. Stories of his determined grip on his pennies — in his personal life as well as his business — have become legendary.

Inevitably, it was this avocation for penny-pinching, as much as Sir William’s impeccable aesthetic sense, that gave Jaguar cars their unique character. Jaguars were, with few exceptions, exceptionally stylish, quite fast, and lavishly appointed, which made them eminently desirable to all but the most reactionary. At least in their home market, they were also very keenly priced, particularly considering their impressive mechanical specifications. Unfortunately, proud new owners soon discovered that consumables (such as wiper blades) and minor parts (such as electrical components and rubber gaskets or seals) were often disconcertingly flimsy and/or distressingly short-lived. Individually, these problems might be no worse than minor annoyances (what matter wiper blades in an expensive sports car?), but over time or upon closer examination, the list grew long indeed.

When now-exasperated Jaguar owners (or, more likely, their long-suffering mechanics) set about trying to rectify these shortcomings, their dismay was compounded by another unhappy realization: that Jaguar’s very talented designers and engineers apparently had not given much thought to the idea that someone might one day need to access these parts for maintenance and repair — or that one might prefer being able to do so without having to disassemble half the bloody car in the process. Such workaday headaches were of course separate from any actual design flaws, of which each Jaguar had its share.

1963 Jaguar E-type FHC engine
Introduced with the XK-120 in 1948, Jaguar’s venerable XK six lasted for more than 35 years. Fitted with an aluminum head, a cast-iron block, and dual overhead camshafts, it was offered in 2,483 cc (152 cu. in.), 3,442 cc (210 cu. in.), 3,781 cc (231 cu. in.), and ultimately 4,235 cc (258 cu. in.) forms; a 2,791 cc (170 cu. in.) was offered in the late sixties and early seventies, but proved troublesome and was dropped after 1973. This is the 3,781 cc version, with three S.U. HD8 carburetors, offered in the final XK150s and the early Series I E-Types.

Even in its heyday, Jaguar’s foibles were well known. American buyers, who tended to demand more in the way of appliance-like reliability than their British counterparts, were sometimes put off, but for the most part, those weaknesses did little to dampen buyer enthusiasm. If anything, they became part of the mystique.


Ahh, yes, the mystique. Did we mention that during Sir William’s reign, Jaguar won Le Mans — not simply a class victory or other such obfuscation, but first place overallfive times? They did: in 1951, 1953, 1955 (albeit under regrettable circumstances), 1956, and 1957.

That was an era where the gap between racing cars and street cars was not nearly as vast as it later became, when was still possible to buy a moderately civilized sports racer that could be driven to the track with a good chance of winning and then be driven home. This is not to say that a stock XK120 was ready for the Mulsanne Straight, but the gap was narrower than you might expect. In fact, three more-or-less stock XK120s made a fine showing at Le Mans in 1950, suggesting that specialized racing versions would be extremely competitive.

After Le Mans, William Lyons, with considerable prodding from chief engineer Bill Heynes and service manager Frank “Lofty” England, decided to develop a new version of the XK120 specifically to compete in that prestigious endurance race. Jaguar thus embarked on what would prove to be a glorious racing career.

It was clear early on that the traditional means of improving performance — reducing weight and adding power — were not going to be enough to carry the Jaguar to victory at Le Mans. Bill Heynes could and did extract more horsepower from the XK120’s DOHC six, but for endurance racing, durability was as important as outright power. Furthermore, light weight and high power did not necessarily provide high-speed stability. What the XK120 really needed was better aerodynamics.

In 1950, William Lyons hired Malcolm Sayer, formerly an engineer with the Bristol Aeroplane Company, as Jaguar’s Director of Design. Sayer, who always described himself not as a designer, but an aerodynamicist, set about applying the engineering skills he’d learned at Bristol during the war to the task of winning Le Mans.

1956 Jaguar XK140 Le Mans badge
Some mid-fifties Jaguars, like this 1956 XK140 fixed-head coupé, carried badges commemorating Jaguar’s enviable competition pedigree.

C, D, and X

The first fruit of Sayer’s labors was the C-type. Officially known as XK120-C, implying a competition version of the XK120, it ended up rather different from the stock car, featuring space-frame construction rather than a platform frame. There was also a new rear suspension, using tubular shock absorbers and transverse torsion bar springs rather than the street car’s leaf springs and lever-action dampers. Clad in lightweight, streamlined aluminum body panels, the C-type had only a single door and the most minimal windscreen. As a result, it had around 20% less drag than its road-going sibling, making it capable of speeds on the order of 145 mph (234 km/h).

The first three C-types were completed in May 1951 and one of them, driven by Peter Walker and Peter Whitehead, won Le Mans that June. Jaguar attempted an encore the following year, but the revamped C-types, with more radically aerodynamic bodywork, proved unstable at speed and were hampered by engine overheating. The result was an embarrassing DNF (Did Not Finish). In 1953, the C-types reverted to their original shape, but traded their over-matched drum brakes for new Dunlop discs, which proved a far more successful combination. On June 14, 1953, Jaguar’s publicity department sent a telegram to the Queen, announcing that Jaguar had scored its second Le Mans victory.

Although the ’52 C-type body had been a failure, Malcolm Sayer had not stopped working on a more aerodynamic shape for the racers, which resulted in the 1954 D-Type. Smaller and sleeker than the C-Type, the D-type was structurally quite different, discarding the space frame for an aluminum monocoque, far more like an aircraft than a car. The engine and front suspension were carried on a separate aluminum space frame, welded to the cowl and clad with stressed aluminum panels. Its most notable feature was a prominent vertical fin behind the driver’s head, for better stability at speed.

1956 Jaguar D-Type long-nose side by Anthony Fosh
A 1956 Jaguar D-Type, photographed at the 2009 Goodwood Festival of Speed, shows off its prominent dorsal fin. This is one of the “Long Nose” variations, developed to improve aerodynamic penetration. (Photo: “1956 Jaguar D-Type ‘Long Nose’ Goodwood Festival of Speed 2009” © 2009 Anthony Fosh; used with permission)

With more power and much better aerodynamics, the D-type was scorchingly fast, taking second place at Le Mans in 1954. The D-type made another strong showing in 1955, but that race was marred by tragedy. First, William Lyons’ son, John Lyons, died in a crash on the way to the track. Then, during the race, a collision caused Mercedes driver Pierre Levegh’s car to flip into the air, sending its engine and debris into the crowd; Levegh and more than 80 spectators were killed. The crash prompted Mercedes-Benz to withdraw, so Jaguar won the race almost by default. Nonetheless, the sad circumstances prompted Lyons to dissolve the factory team.

Although Jaguar officially withdrew from competition after that, Malcolm Sayer and Bill Heynes continued to develop aerodynamic and performance improvements to support private racing teams. The Scottish privateers Ecurie Ecosse, who became Jaguar’s unofficial factory team after the 1955 season, took Le Mans in 1956 and 1957, allowing Jaguar to tie Bentley’s five-victory streak of the late 1920s.

The D-type Jaguar could be driven on the street, although it was neither very practical nor particularly comfortable. Production was naturally quite limited. Since they were very expensive — the D-Type listed for £1,895 FOB and ran to nearly £2,700 with purchase tax (around $10,000 U.S. at the time) — Jaguar built only 68 D-types and managed to sell only 43 of those. To use up the unsold stock, Jaguar developed a spin-off called the XK-SS, using the D-type’s monocoque tub, engine, and suspension, shorn of its prominent dorsal fin and fitted with a modicum of interior trim. Ostensibly a street car, the XK-SS’s real purpose was to homologate the type for Sports Car Club of America (SCCA) road racing. Only 16 were built before a fire at the factory destroyed the production tooling. Jaguar decided that resuming production was not worth the cost, making survivors very rare and very valuable today.

1957 Jaguar XKSS front 3q by Gabe McGinnis
Although sold as a dual-purpose sport racer, the XK-SS was not much of a street car, with fragile aluminum bodywork, noisy exhaust, and a near-total lack of cargo space. This one was once owned by actor Steve McQueen. (Photo: “Jaguar XKSS” © 2009 Gabe McGinnis; used with permission)

Aside from generating favorable press notices, the racing cars served as testbeds for technology later used in production Jaguars. In 1955, the compact Mk 1 sedan became Jaguar’s first unit-body production car, albeit in steel and a good deal stouter than its racing cousins. The C-type’s Dunlop disc brakes became available on the Mk 1 and the XK150 sports car in 1957 and were added to the big Mk IX sedans the following year. Many of the engine improvements developed for competition also found their way into the production cars.


Although 1957 was Jaguar’s last hurrah at Le Mans, the firm was still looking for an eventual replacement for the XK sports cars. The XK150, produced from 1957 through 1961, had addressed many of the weaknesses of the XK120, but had lost much of the original’s glamor and was starting to feel old. Simply re-skinning the existing chassis yet again was not an inspiring idea; the time had come for something new.

The first prototype of the XK’s successor appeared in late 1957. Dubbed E1A, it was structurally similar to the D-Type, with a monocoque shell and forward subframe, although its overall dimensions were somewhat larger. More importantly, the E1A was the testbed for an entirely new rear suspension.

Up to that point, all Jaguars, including the race cars, had used live axles; Jaguar had only switched to independent front suspension in 1949. The live axle was sturdy enough, but as the engines grew more powerful, keeping that axle under control became a problem — particularly on the sedans, which, unlike the race cars, could not resort to rock-hard springs and dampers. The factory had toyed briefly with a De Dion layout (described in our story on the Rover P6), but the results were evidently not encouraging. By 1957, Bill Heynes decided that a true independent rear suspension was the better option.

Independent suspensions offer a number of advantages for both ride and handling. The independent suspensions of that era, however, particularly the simple swing axles used by Volkswagen, Mercedes, and the early Chevrolet Corvair, among others, also had some unpleasant vices. Jaguar wanted none of this; vicious suspension behavior was bad enough on the track, where high cornering speeds were at least matched with greater driver skill, but it was hardly acceptable for the luxury sedans for which the new suspension was eventually bound.

The suspension that Jaguar engineer Robert Knight developed for this purpose used the axle halfshafts as upper control arms (as in a swing-axle car), but added separate lower control arms and used a pair of longitudinal trailing arms to transmit acceleration and braking forces. There was also a rear anti-roll bar. More unusually, there were four coil-over shock absorbers, two ahead of each lower control arm, two behind. We’ve heard several explanations for this unusual set-up, but to our understanding, it was primarily motivated by the desire to provide adequate damping with minimal wheel travel, so as to limit rear camber changes. The entire assembly was carried in a complex subframe, which was bolted to the body through rubber-isolated mounts. The subframe also carried the rear disc brakes, which were mounted inboard to reduce unsprung weight.

Remarkably, Bob Knight developed this complex layout in less than 30 days — not to meet any production deadline, but simply to win a £5 wager with Sir William that it couldn’t be done. This suspension, which Jaguar used (with some modifications) well into the 1990s, had many advantages and a number of drawbacks. On the plus side, it allowed the use of softer springs without compromising wheel control and dramatically reduced unsprung weight, improving both handling and ride quality. There were a variety of downsides, but from a dynamic standpoint, the worst centered on the subframe’s rubber mounts, whose deflection could cause unwanted oversteer and annoying rear-end wander, particularly as the rubber became worn. Still, Knight’s rear suspension was an extremely sophisticated design for its time and on balance worked very well.

The early E1A prototype spawned the bigger E2A, which was powered by a highly tuned 2,997 cc (181 cu. in.) version of the XK engine. In 1960, Jaguar gave the prototype to Briggs Cunningham’s racing team for another stab at Le Mans, but the weary development mule was not up to the task and the result was another DNF. Many had hoped it heralded Jaguar’s return to motorsport, but it was not to be.


The E2A presaged the form of the production car, which was known as the Jaguar E-type to suggest its continuity with the C-type and D-type race cars. (Jaguar marketing literature occasionally used the designation XKE, but the factory did not call it that in shop manuals or other documentation and the term raises the hackles of purists today.) As you would expect, the E-type bore a strong resemblance to the D-type in both appearance and concept.

1963 Jaguar E-type roadster front
While the E-type is less curvaceous than the D-type or XK-SS, its kinship with its racing predecessors is evident. The prominent bulge in the hood is necessary to clear the XK engine’s cam covers; it became such a stylistic trademark that it was retained by the V12-powered Series III cars, which didn’t need it. Roadsters are extremely low — only 48 inches (1,219 mm) overall.

Unlike the earliest XK120s, the E-type had a steel body, built by Pressed Steel Ltd. The body itself was a monocoque, with fat full-length sills and a prominent driveshaft tunnel for greater rigidity. To this monocoque shell were bolted the rear suspension subframe and the forward space frame, which carried the engine and front suspension. Unlike the D-type, the forward space frame was now steel, using square-section tubes of Reynolds 531 steel (more commonly found in high-end bicycles) that were furnace-brazed together rather than welded.

The E-type’s engine was the same 3,781 cc (231 cu. in.) six introduced on the final XK150s, with three S.U. HS8 carburetors and a rather optimistic 265 hp (198 kW) gross rating. (Various sources suggest net ratings between 180 and 228 hp (134 and 167 kW), a point obfuscated by the fact that many of the cars Jaguar released to the press had noticeably more power than the standard tune.) To this engine was linked, sadly, the XK’s familiar and cumbersome Moss four-speed gearbox, still lacking a synchronized low gear and no more pleasant to use than it had been on earlier Jaguars.

The E-type’s specifications were impressive for its time — dual overhead cams, fully independent suspension, four-wheel disc brakes — but they were totally overshadowed by its startling good looks. We will cautiously suggest that it was not quite as jaw-droppingly voluptuous as the XK-SS, but the E-type was a true road car, which the fragile, aluminum-bodied SS really was not. The only production cars of the time that were even in the same league were true exotics like Aston Martin and Ferrari.

The E-type’s performance was in keeping with its exotic looks. In March 1961, The Motor famously clocked an early fixed-head coupé at 150 mph (242 km/h), which a few years earlier would have been a respectable velocity for a pure racing car. Admittedly, their test car was not exactly stock, but any E-type in reasonable tune could do at least 135 mph (217 km/h), still very lofty territory at the time. Acceleration was similarly formidable, with 0-60 mph (0-97 km/h) in less than 7 seconds. If these figures do not impress today, it must be remembered that at the time, the typical British sedan needed at least twice that time to reach 60 mph and was hard-pressed to exceed 90 mph (145 km/h).

1963 Jaguar E-type FHC front 3q 2011
The Jaguar E-type is not a large car to modern eyes — 175 inches (4,445 mm) long on a 96-inch (2,438mm) wheelbase — but by contemporary standards, it was rather large for a sports car. Series I roadsters weighed around 2,800 lb (1,270 kg) all up, coupes perhaps 60 lb (27 kg) more than that. Wire wheels, commonly fitted, were technically optional, adding about $175 to the list price.

The E-type handled exceptionally well too, with sharp steering, excellent body control, and respectable grip. Thanks to the new rear suspension, its agility was also matched with a relatively supple ride. Brakes were at least adequate, which was definitely not the case with many of its contemporaries. In all, the Jaguar E-type was perhaps the most well-rounded sports car of its generation.


The E-type made its public debut at the Geneva auto show in March 1961. Its effect was galvanic, particularly for Britons. It was gorgeous, it was fast, and it had an enticing price tag. The E-type was actually cheaper than the XK150, with roadsters starting at £2,098 (with purchase tax), the fixed-head coupé at £2,196. (In the U.S., the roadster started at $5,595, the coupe $300 more.) That is the equivalent of around $40,000 adjusted for inflation, which put the E-Type within the reach of upper-middle-class buyers for whom an Aston Martin DB4 or a Ferrari 250 would only ever be a daydream. For Great Britain, which had just opened its first modern motorway in 1959 and still had no national speed limits, the E-type seemed to herald the dawn of an exciting new era.

1963 Jaguar E-type roadster interior
Early “flat-floor” Jaguar E-types had a grievous lack of legroom, which Jaguar hastily addressed by adding depressions in the floor on either side of the transmission. Series I cars lack sun visors, which is painful on bright days. Aluminum console and dash trim later gave way to a black matte finish, but the fine Connolly “Vaumol” hides remained. Note the prominent door sills; a structural element, they make entry and exit cumbersome.

Of course, it didn’t take long for the E-type’s flaws to make themselves known. Getting in and out over the intrusive sills was not a graceful operation, particularly in the low-slung coupe. Once you were inside, the early cars were desperately short of legroom, the seats were miserable, and ventilation was hopelessly inadequate. While fuel economy was quite good — up to 22 mpg U.S. (26.4 mpg in Imperial figures, 10.7 L/100 km) — the engine could ping on even super-premium fuel if it was in less-than-perfect tune. Oil consumption could be positively alarming; the factory regarded 500-800 miles per quart (800 to 1,300 km/L) as normal. The aerodynamic headlight covers looked good, but hampered the lights’ range. The brake booster was erratic and the best that could be said of the Moss four-speed transmission was that the engine’s torque obviated the need for frequent shifting. Moreover, like all Jaguars, flawless mechanical reliability was not among the E-type’s strengths.

The factory addressed some of these problems — the seats, the legroom, the transmission — while others dogged the E-type throughout its run, but it never really seemed to matter. Demand wildly outpaced Jaguar’s ability to build the new car. In short order, there were lengthy waiting lists. Jaguar sold more than 12,000 E-types through 1963, but the car’s popularity is best revealed not by the sales figures, but by the fact that the factory turned down several offers to feature the E-type in film and television, because they didn’t need any additional publicity! (Contrary to legend, that was not why Roger Moore’s Simon Templar ended up driving a Volvo P1800 in the ITC version of The Saint; the producers of the series did try to obtain a Jaguar for the show, but they were after the new Mark X sedan, not the E-type.) More important to the factory were the brisk sales of the saloons, stimulated in no small way by the E-type’s popularity.

1963 Jaguar E-type FHC headlamp
The distinctive covered headlights, not technically legal in some American states at the time, added 2-3 mph (3-5 km/h) to the E-type’s top speed, but made for poorer headlight range. They also tended to fog over in damp conditions and proved a notorious rust trap. They were removed in 1968 in favor of an open “sugar-scoop” arrangement.


The Jaguar E-type sold even better in the U.S., where there were far more customers who could afford such a car. This popularity proved a mixed blessing, however, because it brought with it greater pressure to conform to American tastes.

The first reflection of the American influence was the introduction of a bigger engine in 1964. Based on the familiar XK engine, it had re-spaced cylinder bores that allowed it to be bored from 3,781 cc (231 cu. in.) to 4,235 cc (258 cu. in.). The 4.2 had about 10% more torque than before, making it better suited for lugging in American-style traffic, but was less eager to rev than was the 3.8-liter engine. The 4.2’s lower redline also reduced top speed: Maximum speed with the standard 3.31 axle was now about 128 mph (205 km/h) and sustained cruising at engine speeds over 5,000 rpm (116 mph/187 km/h with stock tires) was dicey.

Whether the 4.2 was a worthwhile trade-off in the E-type is still a matter of some debate among fans, particularly since the 3.8 had never lacked for torque. However, even if the E-type didn’t need the extra torque, the bigger S-type and Mark X saloons certainly did, particularly with automatic transmission. By 1967, Jaguar had phased out the 3.8 across the board.

1963 Jaguar E-type fixed-head coupe rear 3q 2011
The E-type fixed-head coupé shows off its sleek fastback profile, designed for low wind resistance. At first, buyers preferred the roadster, but the closed cars outpaced the roadsters starting in 1962. The fixed-head coupé is still quite low, but it is about 2 inches (51 mm) higher than the roadster.

Even if the engine itself was of dubious benefit, the 4.2-equipped cars had a number of more worthwhile improvements. One was the long-awaited replacement of the unloved Moss gearbox with a far more pleasant fully synchronized four-speed and an easier-to-manage clutch. (The Laycock de Normanville overdrive optional on other Jags would have been a welcome addition, but as far as we know, it was never offered.) The 4.2 also substituted an alternator for the generator, added a much better brake servo, and implemented various measures aimed at reducing the engine’s thirst for oil. Still, many buyers would probably have been content to take the new transmission and other improvements with the earlier 3.8-liter engine.

Another controversial step, again influenced by the demands of the U.S. market, was the introduction of a long-wheelbase 2+2 model, announced at the Geneva show in March 1966. If you believed Jaguar’s advertisements, the 2+2 made the E-type into something like a family car, with child-size rear seats. The longer wheelbase also allowed the installation of an automatic transmission, which had definite appeal to U.S. buyers, even though the Borg-Warner Model 8 was inferior to American automatics of newer design. The 2+2’s greater length and more bulbous tail came perilously close to spoiling its proportions and its greater weight sapped its performance. It nonetheless sold quite well and all E-types would eventually adopt its longer wheelbase.

1968 Jaguar E-Type 2+2 front 3q
By the late sixties, many E-type buyers opted for the less svelte but more practical 2+2, which rode a longer, 105-inch (2,667 mm) wheelbase and allowed the installation of automatic transmission, power steering, and air conditioning. The latter sounds an odd choice for a sports car, but it made a certain amount of sense given the E-type’s notoriously poor cabin ventilation. Note the open headlights; this is a 1968 model, known unofficially as “Series I 1/2,” because it incorporates some, but not all, of the changes implemented for the Series II cars in 1969.


As beautiful as it was, the Jaguar E-type did not age gracefully. It lost its sleek headlamp covers in July 1967 (not entirely a bad thing, given their effect on headlight range) and the following year’s Series II models had a host of minor modifications to meet U.S. safety regulations, including new bumpers and a larger air intake to provide for the newly optional air conditioning. Many fans wince at these changes, although we think saying that they spoiled the E-type’s appearance is like calling a beautiful woman ugly because you don’t like her shoes.

1969 Jaguar E-Type roadster side
This Series II E-type roadster shows off a few of the cosmetic changes necessary to meet U.S. safety requirements, including side marker lights, higher bumpers (note that the rear bumper now rides above the taillights, not below), and oversize tail lamps. The wire wheels no longer have knockoff “ears,” which were now prohibited by American regulations.

Where the rot really was really setting in was under the hood. America’s first federal emissions standards went into effect in 1968. By that time, the Jaguar’s XK engine was 20 years old, and smog control had never been part of its design brief. Federalizing it made for a rather lazy cat; U.S.-bound Series II E-Types were optimistically rated at 246 gross horsepower (184 kW), but the net rating was a less-impressive 171 hp (128 kW). The Series II was heavier than before, too, which took its toll on performance. The bulkier 2+2, saddled with automatic transmission, power steering, and air conditioning, was no longer in the Supercar class.

1969 Jaguar E-type roadster dash
Federal safety regulations also led to some interior changes on Series II cars, such as the use of rocker switches, rather than the early cars’ toggles. The E-type’s minor controls always looked impressive, with the sort of jet-pilot ambiance cultivated by cars like the Thunderbird, but with so many nigh-identical switches, ergonomic convenience was not a strong point. Note also the lack of dash vents — not a huge problem for top-down roadsters, but oppressive in the coupes.


In the late sixties, Jaguar had ambitious plans to replace the E-type with not one but two new models: a smaller 2+2, known internally as the XJ17, and a direct successor, known internally as XJ21. Both would replace the venerable XK six with a new family of V-8 and V-12 engines.

Jaguar had been toying with the idea of a V-12 since at least 1954. While six-cylinder engines were fine for the British and European markets, they left Jaguar at a disadvantage in the U.S., where cars with fewer than eight cylinders were considered economy models. The early V-12 concepts were basically two XK sixes sharing a common crankcase, but this proved impractical. The eventual production V-12, designed by Walter Hassan, abandoned the XK’s long-stroke design, DOHC head, and hemispherical combustion chambers for a short-stroke, SOHC layout, with dished pistons and flat, Heron-type heads. The V-12 had a displacement of 5,343 cc (326 cu. in.). It was about 3 inches (76 mm) longer than the XK six and about 75 lb (34 kg) heavier.

1971 Jaguar E-Type V12 badge by Maurice Woodworth
Jaguar’s V-12 was originally slated to have a new AEI-Brico fuel injection system, but the supplier canceled the system before production, so early V-12s had four Zenith-Stromberg carburetors instead. At launch, Jaguar claimed 314 gross horsepower (234 kW), 272 net horsepower (200 kW), except in the U.S., where it made about 250 net horsepower (187 kW). (Photo: “V-12 E Type Jag” © 2009 Maurice Woodworth; used by permission)

The planned V-8 engine was to be a straightforward derivative of the V-12, displacing about 3.6 L (217 cu. in.). Although Jaguar had high hopes that it would eventually replace the 4.2 L six, the V-8 never worked satisfactorily, in part because it shared the V12’s 60-degree cylinder angle rather than the 90-degree angle customary for V-8s. The resultant vibration problems were mitigated with twin balance shafts, but Jaguar remained unsatisfied with its sound and feel and finally canceled the project in 1971; Bill Heynes refused to even release photographs of the test engines.

The V-12 was originally slated for the XJ sedan, but the engine’s development proved protracted and troublesome. Although the first development engines ran on test stands in August 1964, the V-12 was still not ready by the time of the XJ’s debut in September 1968. The XJ bowed instead with the familiar XK six and the planned V-12 version was put on hold.

At Heynes’ suggestion, Jaguar decided to offer the V-12 first in the E-type, allowing Jaguar to gain useful production experience with the new engine before installing it in the flagship saloon. The V-12 E-type, known as Series III, was supposed to debut in 1970, bridging the gap between the Series II and the E-type’s intended successors.

Unfortunately, these plans badly strained Jaguar’s resources, particularly in the wake of the 1968 merger with British Leyland. The Series III was delayed by almost a year and the XJ21 was canceled entirely. In its place, Jaguar developed the XJ27, a coupe based on the XJ4 sedan platform, although even that was stymied by the unexpected death of Malcolm Sayer in 1970. It did not emerge (as the Jaguar XJ-S) until 1975. The XJ12 sedan, meanwhile, didn’t appear until July 1972, nearly four years behind schedule, and the aging E-type was left to soldier on.


The Series III was still clearly an E-type, but there were many obvious differences, including a wider track and a much bigger air intake, now covered by a chrome grille. All Series III models now rode the longer wheelbase of the previous 2+2, allowing Jaguar to offer automatic transmission across the line. To cope with the extra weight and power of the big engine, there were various improvements to the E-type’s suspension, tires, brakes, and steering; power assistance for the latter was now standard.

Unlike its predecessor a decade earlier, the Series III inspired no great hosannas when it debuted at the Geneva show in March 1971. The big V-12 endowed the E-type with effortless acceleration, even with automatic, but it was no faster than its Series I predecessors and was substantially thirstier. Despite its power, the Series III was saddled with at least 600 lb (272 kg) more weight than the Series I and was nose-heavy to boot.

The price was up, too, to £3,369 for the 2+2 coupe, around $7,400 in the U.S. That was still much cheaper than exotic rivals like the Lamborghini Miura or Ferrari 365GT, but the E-type’s performance was not in their league. The new E-type sold well, all things considered, but there were no more waiting lists. Critical response was generally harsh.

1971 Jaguar E-Type 2+2 front 3q by Martin Alford
All Series III Jaguar E-types now rode the longer, 105-inch (2,667mm) wheelbase of the former 2+2 and the two-seat fixed-head coupé was dropped. Rationalizing production around a single wheelbase was cheaper and addressed persistent buyer complaints about legroom. It also allowed roadster buyers to opt for the Borg-Warner automatic, which didn’t fit in the short-wheelbase floorpan. Note the tacked-on scoop beneath the grille; to our mind, this is a much greater aesthetic affront than the somewhat controversial grille. (Photo: “1971 Jaguar E-Type Series III” © 2009 Martin Alford; used with permission)

The E-type’s final years were painful in other ways as well. British Leyland had seemingly endless confrontations with its workforce throughout the seventies, resulting in repeated strikes. Sir William Lyons retired in 1972 and his successor, Lofty England, was forced into retirement barely two years later. Without the formidable Sir William to protect it, Jaguar was left at the mercy of the struggling and not always sympathetic British Leyland bureaucracy. Technical director (and subsequently managing director) Bob Knight later alleged that British Leyland management siphoned off Jaguar’s profits to feed other, weaker parts of the BLMC empire. Then the 1973 OPEC oil embargo nearly destroyed the market for big, thirsty cars, leaving dealers struggling to move their stocks of unsold E-types.

Even without the OPEC embargo and the ensuing energy crisis, the E-type was well past its prime. The world had moved on; Great Britain had speed limits by the seventies, as did every U.S. state. Roads where you could give a 140 mph (225 km/h) sports car its head were few and far between by then, and day-to-day comfort was becoming considerably more important than raw performance.

Shortly before his retirement, England ordered the E-type’s cancellation. Production actually ended in September 1974, but Jaguar didn’t announce the termination until February 1975, fearing it would make it that much harder for dealers to clear unsold stock. The XJ-S was nearly ready by then — it debuted that September — and in any case, the E-type could not meet the next round of American safety standards. When the line finally ended, it was more merciful than tragic.


Jaguar never really offered a direct replacement for the E-type. The eccentric-looking XJ-S was (and was intended to be) a quite different animal, a posh luxury cruiser aimed at a wealthier (and likely older and more sedate) customer. Plans for an F-type have popped up periodically for more than three decades, but subsequent Jaguar coupes have all been luxury tourers in the mold of the XJS. Jaguar’s most serious stab at a genuine sports car was the toweringly expensive, short-lived XJ220 of the early nineties, which was not a success. [Author’s note: The F-type finally debuted in 2013, almost four years after this story was originally written.]

There’s much to mourn about the demise of the Jaguar E-type. There have been many sports cars and GTs since then, many of them faster, more reliable (admittedly not difficult to be), and more practical, but none more desirable. None has ever really aroused the same covetousness that the E-type still provokes.

Part of the problem is that the racing world has moved on, too. The E-type owed much of its glamor to the fact that it was a modernized street version of the car that won Le Mans. Today, sport racers like the D-type are long obsolete in most forms of motorsport; most serious racers today bear only the broadest cosmetic resemblance to their civilian counterparts. Without that genuine racing connection, sports cars inevitably suffer what the aviation industry calls “mission creep”: They get bigger, they sprout more convenience features; weight climbs, and the only way to maintain performance is bigger engines, which require bigger fuel tanks and yet more weight. Before long, you have a numb and bloated two-door luxury sedan whose only claims to sportiness are an illustrious badge and styling cues cribbed from the icons of the past.

Maybe it doesn’t matter. There’s a school of thought that says the only performance that’s important is the bottom line; if it sells, it must be good. However, we still cling to the unfashionable notion that there are meaningful values beyond profit margins and market share — values like beauty, character, pride, and elegance of design. Measured in those terms, the E-type still ranks among the best.

As we said at the beginning, we don’t aspire to E-type ownership, but we don’t question why so many others still do. If you’re an E-type owner, you seldom have any illusions about the car’s faults, but you indulge its idiosyncrasies for the simplest of reasons: they just don’t make ’em like that anymore.



Our sources for this article included Ken Adams’ voluminous history of BLMC, “Formation of an Empire: BMC is created,” AROnline, 18 September 2008, www.aronline., accessed 13 October 2009; the Auto Editors of Consumer Guide, “Jaguar C-Type,”, 4 September 2007, auto.howstuffworks. com/ jaguar-c-type.htm, accessed 5 October 2009, “Jaguar D-Type,”, 4 September 2007, auto.howstuffworks. com/ jaguar-d-type.htm, accessed 6 October 2009, and “Jaguar XKE History,”, 5 September 2007, auto.howstuffworks. com/ jaguar-xke-history.htm, accessed 5 October 2009; “Auto Test: Jaguar E-Type Series III 2+2 vee-12: New Wine in Old Bottle,” Autocar 15 Nov. 1971, reprinted in Jaguar E-Type 1971-1975, ed. R.M. Clarke (Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 1976), pp. 38-42; “Auto Test: Jaguar E-Type V12 Roadster: More new wine wine in old bottle,” Autocar 5 July 1973, reprinted in Jaguar E-Type 1971-1975, ed. R.M. Clarke (Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 1976), pp. 76-77; Arch Brown, Richard Langworth, and the Auto Editors of Consumer Guide, “1961-75 Jaguar E-Type,” Great Cars of the 20th Century (Lincolnwood, IL: Publications International, Ltd., 1998), pp. 286-291; Martin Buckley, Jaguar: Fifty Years of Speed and Style (Haynes Classic Makes) (Sparkford, Somerset: Haynes Publishing, 1998); former Jaguar engineer Roger Bywater’s “The technical history of the Jaguar V12 engine,” Jaguar World, 1997 www.jagweb. com, accessed 5 October 2009); Mike Covello, Standard Catalog of Imported Cars 1946-2002, Second Ed. (Iola, WI: Krause Publications, 2001); Jim Donnelly, “Visionaries: Malcolm Sayer,” Hemmings Sports & Exotic Car #67 (March 2011), p. 64; “Jaguar E-Type V-12,” Car and Driver Oct 1972, reprinted in Jaguar E-Type 1971-1975, ed. R.M. Clarke (Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 1976), pp. 65-67, 85; “Jaguar XK-E 4.2,” Car and Driver Vol. 10, No. 8 (February 1965), pp. 25-29); “Jaguar XKE – Most Overrated? Corvette Sting Ray – Just a Plastic Chevy?” Road Test May 1965, reprinted in Corvette Stingray, 1963-1967 (Gold Portfolio), ed. R.M. Clarke (Cobham, England: Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 1990); David Lachance, “No Regrets,” Hemmings Sports & Exotic Car #67 (March 2011), pp. 24–27; Pete Lyons, “Jaguar’s Glorious E-Type,” Car and Driver Vol. 35, No. 12 (June 1990), pp. 131–137; Mark J. McCourt, “Living Up to the Legend,” Hemmings Sports & Exotic Car #67 (March 2011), pp. 18–23; Ian Nicholls’ splendid articles “Quantum Leap: Jaguar E-Type,” AROnline, 19 September 2008, www.aronline., accessed 13 October 2009, “Jaguar XJ-S: A brave new direction,” AROnline, 19 September 2008, www.aronline., accessed 13 October 2009, and “Jaguar XJ21: The missing link,” AROnline, 15 November 2009, www.aronline., accessed 3 April 2011; Philip Porter, The Jaguar Scrapbook (Sparkford, Somerset: Haynes Publishing, 1989); Cyril Posthumus, “New Jaguar E-Type V-12,” Road & Track, May 1971 (Vol. 22, No. 9), pp. 26-31; “Road Research Report: Jaguar XK-E,” Car and Driver Vol. 7, No. 6 (December 1961), pp. 30-35, 84-88; LJK Setright, “A Cat may look at a King,” Car and Driver Vol. 24, No. 4 (February 1979), p. 110; the WebCars! guide to the E-Type, www.web-cars. com/ e-type/, 2007, accessed 5 October 2009); and “William Lyons biography,” Jag-Lovers, n.d., www.jag-lovers. org, accessed 5 October 2009.

We clarified the oft-repeated story about Jaguar not providing an E-type for ITC based on emails dated 18 April 2011 from a Saint fan (who asked not to be named) who has discussed the matter with both actor Roger Moore and Saint producers Bob Baker and John Goodman.

Historical exchange rates for the dollar to the pound came from Werner Antweiler, “PACIFIC Exchange Rate service, Foreign Currency Units per 1 British Pound, 1948-2007” (2007, University of British Columbia, fx.sauder.ubc. ca), and Lawrence H. Officer, “Exchange Rates Between the United States Dollar and Forty-one Currencies,” MeasuringWorth, 2009,, used with permission. Exchange rate values cited in the text represent the approximate equivalency of British and U.S. currency at the time, not contemporary U.S. suggested retail prices, which are listed separately. Inflation estimates were calculated using the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Inflation Calculator, All such figures are approximate and are provided for informational purposes only; this is an automotive history, not a treatise on the historical value of money, and nothing in this article should be taken as financial advice of any kind!


Add a Comment
  1. In your story about the E-Type, you mention that the front subframe is built out square tubes of “Reynolds 531 alloy”.

    It is important to avoid confusion, that Reynolds 531 is an alloy STEEL. The subframe would be best described as made of steel. Reynolds 531 is somewhat heat-sensitive which is why they brazed it together (bronze soldering) rather than welded it.

    1. That’s a fair point, although the sentence did say, “now made of steel, a Reynolds 531 alloy,” which seemed reasonably clear. Still, “alloy” does more commonly suggest aluminum, so I made that change.

      I’ve heard a number of accounts that suggest the reason for the brazing was related to labor issues (I’d have to look up the details, but I believe it was the qualifications and pay required of an employee able to braze versus one able to weld), rather than technical ones, but that, too, is a reasonable point.

      1. Reynolds 531 was used on only the best bicycles. The high performance expensive bicycles.

        Reynolds 531 can not be welded as the steel gets very brittle from the heat of welding. Brazing or even silver soldering.

        1. That’s interesting. I understand that the alloy was usually used for really high-zoot bikes, but I hadn’t known that it couldn’t be welded. The usual story is that Jaguar resorted to brazing to get around obstructive union rules about which workers were allowed to weld versus which were allowed to braze. The alloy not being able to be welded honestly makes more sense.

  2. Reynolds 531 is a very strong and light steel, which is why they used it. It is an alloy of steel, managnese (not magnesium) and molybdenum (a mananese-moly steel). It was considered stronger/lighter than a more commonly used chrome-moly steel.

    When you say, that it is more commonly found on bicycles it isn’t used on the kinds of bicycles that you ride to the grocery store or around the park. It’s used to build the kinds of bicycles that would win the Tour de France. It was a pretty popular material in the high-end bicycle world through the late 1970’s.

  3. I had always appreciated this car in pictures but never really thought it more special than a handful of other cars. Yesterday I saw one on the street in the flesh for the first time. I didn’t realize how absolutely gorgeous it is. The size, proportions, everything is absolutely as it should be. It was incredible as was the sound it made and the cloud of what could only be described as machinery smell around it. It’s no wonder that people spend a fortune keeping it alive.

  4. Ref your comments about unreliability , I doubt they were any worse than other contemporary British cars. My experience with a used(pre-owned) Mk11 saloon in the late sixties was that a lack of rust prevention was the main problem , coupled with poor corrosion resistance of first-generation disc brake calipers.I remain impressed with the fact that this was the only car I ever owned with grease nipples on the door hinges.

  5. Nice write-up and I learned some things. Another point of correction or clarification, the “unique swing-open rear hatch” came with the original Fixed-Head Coupe (FHC) in ’61, not with the first 2+2.

    While I like the coupe and convertible and would trade my FHC for an OTS, I would say that the FHC is more beautiful than the OTC, easily. Any rear 3/4 or side view demonstrates that well for the original coupe, not the 2+2. Re the covered lights, I disagree and feel lots was lost on balance in the move to open head lights. Yes, I’ll put up with: the light dispersal; and a temperamental alignment of the glass, rubber, screws and screw holes; and some fogging glass in the rain for those wonderful lines.

    Ah, one other thing, keep the Amco bars off the front of the E-Type. Especially keep the front of the Series 1 E-Types clean. The resultant “puckered lips” looks also helps degrade the looks of the most beautiful “mass produced” car.

    Thanks again for the nice article.

    ’62 E-Type FHC

    1. Thanks for the correction regarding the hatch; I’ve amended the text.

      I agree that some of the detailing of the Series II and Series III cars was unfortunate, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say it spoiled the car. Naturally, aesthetic questions are very much a matter of taste, however.

  6. The nice writeup has one author listed, who keeps referring to himself as “we”, as in: “…there’s no way we could drive one, let alone own one, without feeling like a prat.” Now there has to be at least one of his personalities who ignores the one who feels like a prat.

    1. The editorial ‘we’ can be a pain in the ass…

  7. Good comprehensive article! I am surprised though that there is no mention of the XK8, which is a bit of a spiritual successor, if more aesthetically than mechanically. Granted it’s a GT not really a sports car, but it definitely carries the look forward and–as another contributor mentions–looks better as a coupe than a convertible, just as with the E-Type.

    1. The XK8 is discussed in the XJ-S article, since the XK8 was really a direct successor to that car. As such, I’m not sure comparing the XK8 to the E-type really does either any great credit.

      What does bear mentioning and I should probably add at some point is some mention of the F-type. As you can see, when this article was written and published, the F-type was still in the “believe it when I see it” category, but it is now on sale and is definitely intended as a modern successor to the E-type.

  8. No mention of the ultra rare final Commemratives

    1. End-of-line special editions are pretty common and are seldom that special, if you’ll pardon the expression. I don’t necessarily consider special editions worth listing unless there’s something specifically noteworthy about them. (This is out of self-defense as much as anything else, considering that some quite ordinary cars may have literally dozens of special editions over their lifespans.)

  9. my father bought the 1965 XKE (E type) Jaguar coupe. from a dealer in Manhattan,NY. the dealer was very impressive (high end furniture,rugs, ect) the mechanics were from Germany, and other countries, very impresive. my father almost immediately put a Abarth exhaust system on it. my father LOVED this car. about after a year old, the headliner material fell down, and we got rubber cement, marked the material, and reinstalled it. and we did a top notch job. then the transmission developed a leak, and my father brought it back to the dealer. that is when the nightmare started. they tried to access the tranny from the underside, and they destroyed the new exhaust system, broke numerous bolts, screws. then they approached it from the inside. they destroyed the headliner, passenger seat, and broke more bolts, screws, fasteners. they also broke exhaust bolts in the engine block, that later i removed, replaced. the leak was never fixed. my father was to say the least, was completely heartbroken. he sold the car a short time later to a Japanese businessman who for years sent my father letters and cards thanking him for selling him the car. my father was what you might call a real car lover. if it had a steering wheel, he was smitten.

  10. As the owner of a 1966 Jaguar E-type 4.2 2+2 Coupe for the last 40 years, with only one previous owner, some misconceptions seem to have entered into the so-called folk law about E-types.

    When I was seeking a secondhand E-type in 1975, I soon found that very few roadsters were available on sale and then at over inflated prices. Having tried a couple of coupes I soon found that the cockpit was too cramped for me. I found the 2+2 for sale in a BL dealer showroom in North-West London which had been traded in against a new XJ6. There was plenty of room for three people in this, with one sat cross-ways in the rear seat.

    This car had seen extensive service but had been well maintained, although the bonnet had seen some repair work owing to rusting. I discovered later that it had been fitted from new with the all-syncro close ratio manual gearbox supposed to be exclusive to the 2-seaters. The clutch had never been replaced as the paintwork underneath had to be chipped off to get to the bolts securing the bell housing.

    The engine was in a poor state of tune, having been moved around the dealer’s car showroom for several months. A Jaguar main-dealer trained mechanic set up the engine very well indeed, using some basic equipment with new points and plugs fitted.

    For the next 4 years the car continued to run very well, apart from the new clutch, until a full overhaul became due in 1979. This was carried out by Ron Beaty, the former top development engineer for 13 years at Jaguars, then running Forward Engineering Co. in Kenilworth.

    The engine and gearbox were thoroughly overhauled with a new crankshaft, then balanced, gas-flowed head with bigger inlet valves and wider timed camshafts. I was told then that a standard 4.2 engine gave between 210-215 bhp, so I expected mine to be increased to a round 240bhp DIN with the engine modifications. Forget all the nonsense about 265 bhp, that was based upon the measurement method used by Jaguar in the factory and was strictly ‘gross’ and the bench ideal figure, rarely reached on standard production engines.

    I also had the entire braking and suspension overhauled with new Koni dampers fitted all round (six in all).

    All standard production 3.8 and 4.2 E-types are limited to a maximum of 5,500 rpm, so will not attain 150mph. Those figures obtained by the magazines Autocar, Motor, Autosport, etc., were on specially tuned cars wearing racing tyres to gear up the transmission and with far less drag. I don’t think a completely standard car was tested until a V-12 E-type Roadster in 1973 and then by Autocar who retained it for longer-term evaluation.

    I was told by Ron that the engine in mine would increase the top speed from 137mph to 143mph. An extra 30 bhp only gave another 6 mph. Jaguar claimed that fitting the steel braced radial tyres used on the Jaguar XJ12 saloon was worth another 8mph on a standard V-12 Series3 E-type. The normal V12 E-type having textile-based radials.

    So don’t rely on what was written about the E-type in the magazine road tests of 40+ years ago.

    1. Paul,

      Thanks for sharing your experience. I will point out, though, that the text does clearly state that the factory horsepower ratings were gross figures (and quite optimistic at that) and that the 150 mph press car was not representative of production cars, something the magazines in question eventually admitted.

      It’s not unlike the infamous Pontiac GTO tested by Car and Driver in 1964, which recorded outlandish performance figures despite the editors conveniently not mentioning that it had a heavily massaged 421 cu. in. engine rather than the 389 that was actually offered in the GTO. Most of the later GTOs that went to magazines for testing, even if they had the proper displacement, were gone over by Royal Pontiac beforehand and thus weren’t especially representative of showroom cars’ performance.

  11. The first car I lusted after. Then 14yrs. old I sent away requesting photos from ?? Jaguar. In the return mail I received two 8×10 glossies. I still have them 55 years later. The coupe was my favorite but well out of my lower middle class status. My first car cost me 1/20 of the E Jag and much less to maintain and driving as in movement and miles was what I craved.

  12. I bought a 1964 e type roadster in desert sand from a retired colonel down the street who could not get in or out and hit the front of his garage with it it had 6000 miles and i paid 2000 for it in 1970. she had fully syncro gearbox and a 3.08 rear axle. i was 17 and in high school worked weekends and nights to pay for it. wish i had it today. took it away to college and had trouble making it through the parking lot each morning as someone or other wanted a ride (women) and i missed alot of school.

  13. I really enjoy my ’69 E Type open two seater. Nowadays these are not sports cars to be used every day, but rather, they are to be enjoyed in moderation on sunny days, given their value and how much attention they attract wherever you go. After all, you wouldn’t use a genuine Ming vase as a garden pot, would you?…
    While my Series II has the open headlamps and the bigger air intake opening, I still think it is very nice…and while you never hear much about the following, I agree with Sir William Lyons that a wrap-around bumper in the back looks nicer on the E Type than the split bumpers of the Series I. When Sir William first saw the E Type, he asked Malcolm Sayer why he hadn’t used a wrap-around bumper per the XK SS. Lyons also wasn’t crazy about “those Rolls Royce tail lamps placed horizontally over those split bumpers”. Like Sir William,I also prefer the bigger, rectangular tail lamps below the bumper…especially on the open car.
    An E type is not supposed to be a practical people mover. It is a toy and a work of art on wheels. If it is serviced regularly and not abused, it is reasonably reliable. Mine never leaks oil, its electricals always work, and it is a wonderful hobby, as well as a rolling time capsule and a nostalgic link to the swinging sixties.

  14. In 1982 I obtained my wife’s uncle’s 1968 XKE series 1.5coupe with 7500 miles. In 2018 I had the head serviced, new valve guide installed so I could burn unleaded fuel. All other components were rebuilt. The short block was perfect as the car had only 13,500 miles on it. A new clutch and refaced flywheel were installed. The trans was perfect. The 1968 air conditioning works perfectly still! I had the clock rebuilt and now absolutely everything works as it did when new. As an original California car bought new it is totally rust free, I am having it repainted it’s original British racing green, all the old rubber replaced and a few interior repairs. The interior and exterior chrome is immaculate as the car was always garaged.garaged. I am glad it was never sold, although many offers have been made. Thank goodness my late uncle let me have it.

  15. A very informative and interesting article about a car I’ve always wanted – thanks! The year 1968 was a seminal one for me; I graduated college, was commissioned a lieutenant in the Marine Corps and got married; the next year I was a platoon commander in Vietnam. Fast forward 50 years to 2018. When I recently became aware of a very nice 1968 E-Type for sale I decided to look into it. A friend’s brother decided to part with his 1968 Series 1.5 roadster; I couldn’t resist it, especially since it was a 1968, with only 64K miles, and so I bought it. The owner had purchased it in 1998 following a total restoration but drove it less than 1,000 miles over the 20 years of ownership! Because I’m a member of a local (Sacramento) Jaguar Club, I have the benefit of plenty of advice on continuing care and maintenance. I have owned a beautiful 2005 XK8 roadster for nine years; it’s been a very good, reliable car but it just isn’t an E-Type. So now I have my E-Type and have added another interesting aspect to my memories of the year 1968.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments may be moderated. Submitting a comment signifies your acceptance of our Comment Policy — please read it first! You must be at least 18 to comment. PLEASE DON'T SUBMIT COPYRIGHTED CONTENT YOU AREN'T AUTHORIZED TO USE!