NMNA: Big Block Jagggg

In reply to Stampie (FS) :

To my knowledge Jaguar never sold "crate" engines like Chevy did. Panther used engines from "scrapped "  or junked cars.  I don't recall them ever using a V12 but then I'm not an expert on Panther. 

In reply to frenchyd :

So a company with a history of financial issues turned down all the manufacturers that were beating down their doors to buy that magical V12?  I'm not saying that the Jag V12 is a sucky engine.   I'm just saying that there's being a fan boy and there's burying your head in the sand.  I understand the butt hurt on all the people that threw away Jag engines for a SBC but you don't see Ford guys spend their lifetime defending Model As from having a SBC put in them.

frenchyd said:

Adrian_Thompson (Forum Supporter) said:

The biggest issue with Jag engines, especially the V12's, is that they weren't Chubbies or Frauds so mechanics in this country didn't know how to work on them.   Because of that they got a lousy but on the whole undeserved reputation. 

We are a nation of monkey see, monkey do mechanics. Myself included!  Stepping out of our comfort zone is difficult ( but rewarding ) 

The V12 had 4 years of carburetors  but once fuel injection happened  it scared most.  The mechanic opened the hood and failed to see a carb he could turn screws on and see what happened and he was going to bad mouth it.  
 

The few who worked their way through it and could properly  repair Jags etc are probably retired on a beach someplace eating peppermint bon-bons  while a scantily clad young lady brings them thier drink. 

How come Mercedes engines didn't suffer the same fate when they went away from carbs? I think they did the switch to fuel injection around the same time as Jaguar. You don't see a whole lot of Chevy or Ford swapped 60-80's Mercedes Benz car. 

I like the jag v12, it's a strong engine that was built very well, internally. But, it was a finicky engine with quirks that people didn't adjust to well because other options were better.

Let's face it, you're not willing to see it's negatives and blaming everyone but Jaguar for its lack of popularity and owners unwillingness to keep them running. Yes, you decided to race them and learned all this about them but that doesn't mean it's so easy or so much better. Like always, you're using your personal experiences and applying them universally. You do it with more than just jag v12's.  

The m120 Mercedes v12 has the same problem. It's a very powerful and well built engine but it's hardly worth the effort to keep running because of the way Mercedes decided use the parts around it (electronic throttle actuators wtf). It's my favorite Mercedes engine but I'll never blindly defend it like that. Put a stand alone ecu on either of these engines and you'll have a beast. But, if you're looking for performance AND ease of maintenance then neither of them are great options. 

In reply to frenchyd :

In reply to yupididit :

Oh I agree that the fuel injection Jaguar wound up with is not the best system . You say it well, It was a finicky system that people did not adapt to.  I think it's more complex because the dealership trained mechanics kept the car running well.  Most of the "damage" was from untrained mechanics.  Plus the labor issues in England at the time. 
  Like all early fuel injection system's there was a lot to learn.  Look at Chevy's first "cross fire" system in C4 Corvettes. Early fuel injection caused a lot of Car-B-Ques.  I had an early Blazer that burned the wheels off right down to the ground!  But not just Chevy and Jaguar.  Every manufacturer slowly learned and improved  

Jaguar's started out using 3 Bosch ECM's as used by Volkswagen. 3 years later Lucas  used most of the German system with their own analog ECM version.That gradually got better, but didn't get the OBD2 system until Ford bought Jaguar in the late 80's. 
Ford really improved Jaguars across the board. Prices of really nice Jaguars reflect that post Ford investment. 30 year old Jaguars sell for $20,000+ here in states and £30,000+  in England.  

 
See as a Luddite who cares only about racing. I throw Fuel injection away. I won't bother fighting with something at my age. I'll bolt the Jag carb set up on. Yes it costs me 20 horsepower to start. But I know Group 44 made 460 horsepower with that carb set up. That was before E85  which is simple adapting to that.  It will take me 10 minutes to ream the jets out to  the right size.    Zero cost. 
 

With regard Jaguar and Mercedes. Jaguar introduced their V12 in the fall of 1971. In the Series111 XKE    I'd be surprised if  Mercedes introduced their V12 even a decade later. And BMW was still racing their 6 cylinder in Group A racing When Jaguar  was winning the championship. By the way that was mid 80's. 
Both learned from Jaguar because if you look at their V12 combustion chambers it reflects the recessed exhaust valve Jaguar pioneered with their HE. 
 

I'm not blaming anyone.  No, the Jaguar was too expensive to ever be popular. But that lack of popularity is its strength.   The engine is a beautiful thing.  I really should drag one of my blocks out and take some pictures. But watch top gear they have one as a coffee table. 
 But it's cheap!!!!!!!! Cheaper than a Toyota, cheaper than a Chevy, cheap 

It's like finding a Gold dollar in your change  A real diamond  in a pile of rocks cheap. 
  

 

Stampie (FS) said:

In reply to frenchyd :

So a company with a history of financial issues turned down all the manufacturers that were beating down their doors to buy that magical V12?  I'm not saying that the Jag V12 is a sucky engine.   I'm just saying that there's being a fan boy and there's burying your head in the sand.  I understand the butt hurt on all the people that threw away Jag engines for a SBC but you don't see Ford guys spend their lifetime defending Model As from having a SBC put in them.

Well, yeah, a lot of ford guys don’t care for sbc ‘s in a ford body, but your point is valid 

In reply to frenchyd :

So, you’re saying you could put a v12 in, say a  firebird, and get it in the 500 to 600 hp range CHEAPER than an LS in a jag? I’ve done neither, But I’ve seen big power from the LS. The v12 would be wicked cool, but cheaper? I would have to see that done to believe

In reply to 03Panther :

No an engine swap is more expensive by a factor of 4 than just replacing a stock engine with a stock engine. 
Go on Car-parts dot com and punch in a replacement engine.  
Then  price out what a Chevy engine and transmission cost plus the cost of the kit to install it and add the time it will take to make the HVAC  work the cost of adapting a driveshaft and getting a tachometer that's fits and works.  Assuming you can even get the rest of the instruments to work. 

If you need 600 horsepower don't start out with 4665 pound car with a 2:88 final drive.  It won't  feel very impressive. Like racing grannies Cadillac.  

 

Stampie (FS) said:

In reply to frenchyd :

So a company with a history of financial issues turned down all the manufacturers that were beating down their doors to buy that magical V12?  I'm not saying that the Jag V12 is a sucky engine.   I'm just saying that there's being a fan boy and there's burying your head in the sand.  I understand the butt hurt on all the people that threw away Jag engines for a SBC but you don't see Ford guys spend their lifetime defending Model As from having a SBC put in them.

Most engine swaps were con Jobs.  They cost much more than properly fixing the Jaguar engine. And didn't fix the basic troubles of the Jaguar. 
Labor disputes were common in England in that period not just at Jaguar,  every British car company. 
So they failed to properly install stuff to sabotage the company. Radios had loose wires so they worked intermittently. Same with many components. 
 . 
Jaguar was a small manufacturer  trying to stay alive when most small manufacturers were going under. 
They did it by building beautiful cars  that were way ahead of the competition. Cars  like the XK 120 that would do a legitimate 120 mph when  80 was the top speed of most cars. 
The XKE that Enzo Ferrari said was the most beautiful car ever made. And would do 150 mph when Corvettes struggled to do 120 mph. 
And the first mass produced V12 in a moderately priced car.   
People who want cars of that sort accept that a higher level of maintenance is required than ordinary transportation modules cost. Nobody buys a Ferrari because it's reliable and gets good mileage. 
  Yes a lot of loyal Ford guys hate a small block chevy in a 32 Ford.   
 

frenchyd said:

In reply to 03Panther :

No an engine swap is more expensive by a factor of 4 than just replacing a stock engine with a stock engine. 
Go on Car-parts dot com and punch in a replacement engine.  
Then  price out what a Chevy engine and transmission cost plus the cost of the kit to install it and add the time it will take to make the HVAC  work the cost of adapting a driveshaft and getting a tachometer that's fits and works.  Assuming you can even get the rest of the instruments to work. 

If you need 600 horsepower don't start out with 4665 pound car with a 2:88 final drive.  It won't  feel very impressive. Like racing grannies Cadillac.  

 

I only responded to a v12 jag being cheaper than a LS. To swap in a jag maybe, but to build HP, no way. If the two are separate, then keep em separate .  Maybe you did , and I misunderstood. 

No one NEEDS 600 HP to drive around. Doesn't keep folks from doing it. And there have been some pretty fast caddys through the years. Not sure how that relates to cheap HP...but whatever. 

In reply to 03Panther :

That's correct. But somehow people seem to think the reason to not take advantage of the cheap cost of a V12 is it's cheaper to make X amount of power With whatever. 

That maybe  a good thing. Ran when parked is a common thread I hear. Then it sits in a garage or barn for 10-15-20 or more years and the grandson can't get it started. So it's sold cheap or even scrapped. 
  It's not a worn out, clapped out, Honda or Ford that really needs a complete rebuild. It's a successful guys last car. Being successful he knew it should be taken care of and it was. 
 

frenchyd said:

In reply to 03Panther :

That's correct. But somehow people seem to think the reason to not take advantage of the cheap cost of a V12 is it's cheaper to make X amount of power With whatever. 

But it is though 

In reply to yupididit :

I was impressed I got a "that's correct" out of it. 'Course 3 paragraphs explaining why v12's are cheaper/ better included takes away from that a bit, but still made me feel good

yupididit said:

frenchyd said:

In reply to 03Panther :

That's correct. But somehow people seem to think the reason to not take advantage of the cheap cost of a V12 is it's cheaper to make X amount of power With whatever. 

 

But it is though 

If 600 horsepower is your standard, then I assume everything you own has at least 600 hp?  

yupididit said:

frenchyd said:

In reply to 03Panther :

That's correct. But somehow people seem to think the reason to not take advantage of the cheap cost of a V12 is it's cheaper to make X amount of power With whatever. 

 

But it is though 

Check me on this, but isn't the point here that making X amount of power isn't necessarily still cheaper by the time you do an engine swap?  Yes, two engines on an engine stand and the V12 is not cheaper, but changing a car from the V12 may not be worth it and swapping a car back to what it came with might be easier than doing an entirely separate swap from what it has now?

I don't really know, but this thread feels like it has a weird vibe.  I just don't picture this conversation as being treated as this personal if the one person was saying that getting magic spinning doritos to run isn't that hard and swapping from a particular example of low HP per weight American iron back to a Renesis might not be a bad idea.

frenchyd said:

yupididit said:

frenchyd said:

In reply to 03Panther :

That's correct. But somehow people seem to think the reason to not take advantage of the cheap cost of a V12 is it's cheaper to make X amount of power With whatever. 

 

But it is though 

If 600 horsepower is your standard, then I assume everything you own has at least 600 hp?  

Nah, I'm saying it's easier to make X amount of power with an LS engine than v12 jaguar engine. Or even a 454. You keep moving the needle on the debate, so there's no point and I knew better. 

In reply to matthewmcl (Forum Supporter) :

I'm willing to bet that if you wanted to make a "600" in an V12 XJS that it will probably be cheaper to swap in some variant of the LS then mod it to 600hp than to try and get the v12 to said power levels. 

It's hard to follow these jag v12 debates sometimes because every other post changes stance lol. 

yupididit said:

frenchyd said:

yupididit said:

frenchyd said:

In reply to 03Panther :

That's correct. But somehow people seem to think the reason to not take advantage of the cheap cost of a V12 is it's cheaper to make X amount of power With whatever. 

 

But it is though 

If 600 horsepower is your standard, then I assume everything you own has at least 600 hp?  

 

Nah, I'm saying it's easier to make X amount of power with an LS engine than v12 jaguar engine. Or even a 454. You keep moving the needle on the debate, so there's no point and I knew better. 

 

I don't know when 600 became the magic number you're required to have to make a car worthy. 
 

But I'll play the game. 
 

Tell me what you can buy the required  LS engine and transmission  for, plus ECM etc etc.  Then add the cost to buy the kit to install it. Get it working properly with HVAC working, , gauges all matched and working.   And make a nice reliable 600 horsepower. 

Then  I'll take that same amount  ( or less ) and do it with the V12. The starting cost for a compete rust free Southern California car with a Megasquirt is $500 

. Remember the Twin turbo  I built on a Chump car budget? ( on 4 /27/15. ) But actually built it in the early 2000's 
If you remember I once kludged a XJS  with a pair of junkyard Saab turbo's and made just short of 500 horsepower on a Chump car budget of $500. With E85 and a pair of regrind camshafts. My local camshaft grinder Barry Cams still assures me he has the camshaft masters.  I'm pretty sure I can make the extra 100+ horsepower. 

In interest of accuracy (hard to do when answers are many paragraphs long, and talk about stuff never mentioned and in no way relevant, but...)

I was the one that throwed in the 500 to 600 HP thought, when Frenchyd  implied (strongly) v12 were cheaper than X ...

"But it's cheap!!!!!!!! Cheaper than a Toyota, cheaper than a Chevy, cheap. It's like finding a Gold dollar in your change  A real diamond  in a pile of rocks cheap."

It has focused on the 600 since, but I used 500 to 600, since ( although I personally haven't) I know that an LS can achieve those numbers these days. 

In reply to frenchyd :

"made just short of 500 horsepower one a budget of chump car budget of $500. With E85 and a pair of regrind camshafts I'm pretty sure I can make the extra 100+ horsepower. "

That's wicked impressive! So you did make the 500 to 600 goal I asked about on a budget! That would would have been an answer I understood. Instead of paragraphs of how expensive checks are and something about grannies caddy

frenchyd said:

yupididit said:

frenchyd said:

yupididit said:

frenchyd said:

In reply to 03Panther :

That's correct. But somehow people seem to think the reason to not take advantage of the cheap cost of a V12 is it's cheaper to make X amount of power With whatever. 

 

But it is though 

If 600 horsepower is your standard, then I assume everything you own has at least 600 hp?  

 

Nah, I'm saying it's easier to make X amount of power with an LS engine than v12 jaguar engine. Or even a 454. You keep moving the needle on the debate, so there's no point and I knew better. 

 

I don't know when 600 became the magic number you're required to have to make a car worthy. 
 

But I'll play the game. 
 

Tell me what you can buy the required  LS engine and transmission  for, plus ECM etc etc  buy the kit to install it. Get it working. Properly with HVAC working, gauges all matched and working.   And make a nice reliable 600 horsepower. 
Then  I'll take that same amount  ( or less ) and do it with the V12

 

. Twin turbo  I talked about that on 4 /27/15. But actually built it in the early 2000's 
If you remember I once kludged a XJS  with a pair of junkyard Saab turbo's and made just short of 500 horsepower one a budget of chump car budget of $500. With E85 and a pair of regrind camshafts I'm pretty sure I can make the extra 100+ horsepower. 

It’s been proven that slap on a turbo method gets you 800 LS horsepower. Yes bigger injectors are required. Still more power than Jag V12 and cost less. Don’t know why you insist on arguing that a 60 year old V12 is a better engine than a modern designed abet 20 year old. 

In reply to Stampie (FS) :

Frenchyd is only a fan of carbureted V12's.

He even admits the Jag fuel injected bits are trouble-some and he throws that part in the trash.  Yet EVER one that is Chevy swapped is from the fuel injected era.  I doubt even Frenchyd could get one of the injected engines running again with the factory bits.

03Panther said:

In reply to frenchyd :

"made just short of 500 horsepower one a budget of chump car budget of $500. With E85 and a pair of regrind camshafts I'm pretty sure I can make the extra 100+ horsepower. "

That's wicked impressive! So you did make the 500 to 600 goal I asked about on a budget! That would would have been an answer I understood. Instead of paragraphs of how expensive checks are and something about grannies caddy

I'm a Luddite.   it would be simple if I could cut and paste stuff like all you younger people do.  Then I could Show you that  in the early 2000's I built a slightly less than 500 horsepower V12 V12  on the $500 Chump Car budget. Legitimately  

( the post about V12 mods) 

Indy "Nub" Guy said:

In reply to Stampie (FS) :

Frenchyd is only a fan of carbureted V12's.

 

He even admits the Jag fuel injected bits are trouble-some and he throws that part in the trash.  Yet EVER one that is Chevy swapped is from the fuel injected era.  I doubt even Frenchyd could get one of the injected engines running again with the factory bits.

Yes you are right. I don't like anybodies fuel injection.  I'm much more comfortable using things I've done a lot of which is modify carburetors. 

Not just Jaguars, although the  series on U tube about Jaguar's EFI makes me confident I could get one running.  I'm guessing on modifications. No actual experience.  Except when I built the chump car with help,  we made the stock motor get just short of 500 horsepower. 

Indy "Nub" Guy said:

In reply to Stampie (FS) :

Frenchyd is only a fan of carbureted V12's.

 

He even admits the Jag fuel injected bits are trouble-some and he throws that part in the trash.  Yet EVER one that is Chevy swapped is from the fuel injected era.  I doubt even Frenchyd could get one of the injected engines running again with the factory bits.

There is a series on U tube that makes  the Jaguar  EFI seem pretty simple.