Gentlemen,
I am looking at the possibility of purchasing a 1996 XJS 4.0 Celebration convertible or my next choice is the XK8 Coupe, mainly due to budget constraints on XK8 convertibles.. I know this will be subjective feedback, but I would like to know for shear driving pleasure which would you have.

Thanks in advance for your 2 cents worth,
Ron Petrey
Atlanta, GA
1999 XJ8L (wifes car, she lets me drive it to fill the tank and clean it)

Submitted by bevanadams@hot… on Fri, 05/19/2006 - 07:33

Technical stuff aside then! The xk8 is a better GT and a better ride. The xk8 will also hold its money better as well.

bevanadamsathotmail.com

Submitted by NC43-62049 on Tue, 05/16/2006 - 18:16

Edited on 2006-05-16 18:18:41

... For sheer driving pleasure XJS or XK-8?
That was the core question.

This assumes that re-sale value, gadgets, head room, maintenance issues, public admiration and all that other stuff do not matter.

So my vote is for the XK-8 by a proverbial nose: my buddy who has owned both praises the turn-in on the XK-8 as much tighter.

Inevitabily, Ron will try/buy them both (one is never enough).

Regards,
Dan Lokun
Toronto Canada
62 XKE
90 XJ-S

Submitted by bevanadams@hot… on Mon, 05/15/2006 - 08:57

IÔÇÖm afraid I donÔÇÖt understand any of this? Your question was, witch one of the two is the better car. All that about v12's. None of them had a v12.
In my opinion the better car is the 96 xjs celebration. The 97 xk8 with that X308 v8 motor is a fab car and still is. Early examples of the v8 here in the UK suffered from a bore lining problems due to the high-octane levels in our fuel. This problem has now been rectified here but it has put me of early xk8's. At least until the 99' model.
The xke is properly the best car ever to leave Coventry but lets not forget those early teething problems we had with the sires one.
Buy the 96 xjs. That aj16 motor will never let you down.

Submitted by silver007@shaw.ca on Thu, 02/09/2006 - 19:10

Art Dickenson.
1983 XJS GT "Silver"
Pacific Jaguar.ca

mine would be , the 6 cyl are lighter and handle better than the 12s, although we have 2 12's, Art

Submitted by rpetrey@mindsp… on Thu, 02/09/2006 - 00:57

Is that a vote for the XJS? They are both 4.0's I know the XJS is a heavy car, almost as much as my old 86 XJ6. Nothing beats weight and long wheel base for ride comfort.

Ron

Submitted by silver007@shaw.ca on Thu, 02/09/2006 - 00:46

Art Dickenson.
1983 XJS GT "Silver"
Pacific Jaguar.ca

I believe the 4.0 litre had no problems with its cam chain tensioners, good on mileage also, and apparently quite reliable.