XKSS Revival

Talk about E-Types here
User avatar

Topic author
SEJohnson95
Posts: 707
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:07 pm
Location: Bristol and Derbyshire, UK
Contact:
Great Britain

#1 XKSS Revival

Post by SEJohnson95 » Fri Feb 13, 2015 8:59 am

http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/jagua ... ction-run/

Anyone else seen this? Even if it's only gossip it sounds exiting. Hardly surpising though, given that they've just made that lovely new facility at Browns Lane and once they've built the LWE replicas they're just going to be sitting there twiddling their thumbs.
Simon Johnson
Postgraduate Synthetic Chemist at The University of Bristol
Chasing the dream of a S1 4.2 OTS, but plan on getting an E ASAP!
Occasional contributor to the E-Type Club magazine
Lucky passenger in a 1962 FHC - 860927 - See restoration thread

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

paydase
Posts: 283
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 7:11 am
Location: Belgium
Belgium

#2

Post by paydase » Fri Feb 13, 2015 10:46 am

Seems possible to me.
Good communication strategy: it would allow to maintain the sporty image of Jaguar.
And at the price at which they would be sold (likely around 1M), no doubt it would be juicy as well...
Serge
S1 FHC 889725

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links


christopher storey
Posts: 4470
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: cheshire , england
Great Britain

#3

Post by christopher storey » Fri Feb 13, 2015 7:40 pm

Well, personally, I think the XKSS is one of the ugliest cars Jaguar ever produced . They were only marketed to try and use up the redundant D type chassis after the D was discontinued . I cannot see the point of replicas of it

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

Heuer
Administrator
Posts: 12486
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 5:29 pm
Location: Nottinghamshire
Great Britain

#4

Post by Heuer » Fri Feb 13, 2015 9:24 pm

What Christopher said plus the cars lost in the fire were all D-Type's waiting to be converted into the XKSS because they could not sell the former.
David Jones
S1 OTS OSB; S1 FHC ODB

Add your E-Type to our World Map: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1810

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

abowie
Posts: 2161
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:15 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:
Australia

#5

Post by abowie » Sat Feb 14, 2015 12:29 am

christopher storey wrote:Well, personally, I think the XKSS is one of the ugliest cars Jaguar ever produced . They were only marketed to try and use up the redundant D type chassis after the D was discontinued . I cannot see the point of replicas of it
Thank God I'm not the only one who thinks it looks like a deformed tree frog.
Andrew.
881824, 1E21538. 889457..oops
http://www.projectetype.com/index.php/the-blog.html
Adelaide, Australia

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

PeterCrespin
Posts: 3978
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 8:22 pm
Location: Gaithersburg, Maryland.
Contact:
United States of America

#6

Post by PeterCrespin » Sat Feb 14, 2015 12:55 am

A very fast frog that eats cats for breakfast, but yes, the word 'afterthought' springs to mind. Still a very desirable motorcar though and, with so few extant, a genuine high-value Jaguar immune from bubbles.
1E75339 UberLynx D-Type; 1R27190 70 FHC; 1E78478; 97 XJ6L

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

paydase
Posts: 283
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 7:11 am
Location: Belgium
Belgium

#7

Post by paydase » Sat Feb 14, 2015 9:31 am

If it were to be hand made built with the race technology of that time and weren't to be sold at likely sky high prices but at the discounted price of that time, I would be happy to contemplate one;)
Serge
S1 FHC 889725

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

Topic author
SEJohnson95
Posts: 707
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:07 pm
Location: Bristol and Derbyshire, UK
Contact:
Great Britain

#8

Post by SEJohnson95 » Sat Feb 14, 2015 9:35 am

Waiting for Tony's input here... ;)
Simon Johnson
Postgraduate Synthetic Chemist at The University of Bristol
Chasing the dream of a S1 4.2 OTS, but plan on getting an E ASAP!
Occasional contributor to the E-Type Club magazine
Lucky passenger in a 1962 FHC - 860927 - See restoration thread

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links


Tony
Posts: 909
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:12 pm
Location: UK
Great Britain

#9

Post by Tony » Sun Feb 15, 2015 12:11 am

Would I get my wife to go in it? No. But then she is not over fussed about the E type. As to the money, I suppose it will end up in some very rich persons Collection as an investment. The looks of the car are not great, but then I suspect it was built to race, or was it built as a road car and then raced.?
Tony (E typed)

Tony

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

Topic author
SEJohnson95
Posts: 707
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:07 pm
Location: Bristol and Derbyshire, UK
Contact:
Great Britain

#10

Post by SEJohnson95 » Sun Feb 15, 2015 12:14 am

I was thinking of t'other Tony (Sarthe72 with the XKSS IIRC) but Tony you do make a point, it'll probably go to some collector out of the way of the public, which in my view is more tragic than not building them.
Simon Johnson
Postgraduate Synthetic Chemist at The University of Bristol
Chasing the dream of a S1 4.2 OTS, but plan on getting an E ASAP!
Occasional contributor to the E-Type Club magazine
Lucky passenger in a 1962 FHC - 860927 - See restoration thread

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

rfs1957
Posts: 821
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 2:52 pm
Location: Montpellier, France
France

#11

Post by rfs1957 » Thu Feb 19, 2015 10:18 pm

Best way of lampooning the looks of these hideous cars might be to point out - kiss of death as regards good taste - that one C.Evans bought one at the Bonham's sale at Goodwood 2014 ; at least he drove it away on Sunday morning.

http://happy234.com/archive/chris-evans ... lucy5odG1s

The good news is that the driving position appeared so ill-adapted to his frame that at the first touch of the brakes he was going to trepann his forehead on the upper windscreen trim.

I don't suppose that would make much difference to his skill-set though.
Rory
3.8 OTS Cream 877393 Built May 28th 1962
1978 Mini Van
(plus bevel and belt single-cylinder Ducatis)

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links


Gfhug
Posts: 1793
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 3:08 pm
Location: Near Andover, Hampshire,in D.O. Blighty
Great Britain

#12

Post by Gfhug » Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:45 am

Well Andrew Frankel in Saturday's Daily Telegraph thinks it's a thing of beauty.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and my eyes think an E Type is more beautiful.
S2 FHC Light Blue

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

Topic author
SEJohnson95
Posts: 707
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:07 pm
Location: Bristol and Derbyshire, UK
Contact:
Great Britain

#13

Post by SEJohnson95 » Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:47 am

I agree entirely with you there, nothing will ever beat the E-Type in my eyes, but come on, I've seen worse looking cars.
Simon Johnson
Postgraduate Synthetic Chemist at The University of Bristol
Chasing the dream of a S1 4.2 OTS, but plan on getting an E ASAP!
Occasional contributor to the E-Type Club magazine
Lucky passenger in a 1962 FHC - 860927 - See restoration thread

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links


Sarthe72
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 7:21 pm
Great Britain

#14 Re: XKSS Revival

Post by Sarthe72 » Mon Dec 17, 2018 1:22 pm

Yeah yeah yeah; three years behind is what I am! I thought I'd - finally - put in my twopennorth on the matter. Are you sitting comfortably? Originally the D-type could not be road-registered in the USA so was not eligible for any SCCA (Sports Car Club of America) events. By 1956 the solid rear axle D-type, designed and built for the 2.5 mile Mulsanne straight, was outmoded, but Jaguar had a lot of short nose shells left. So, because Duncan Hamilton (or was it Jumbo Goddard?) had already added a mackled-up hood Jaguar had the idea to do the XKSS and so have road legal racers for the USA. Now I have had three Lynx cars over the years; a long and short nose D-type and now the XKSS. And before you shout back, I don't find it the prettiest of cars either, but let us agree on "purposeful". So, "off with its head" (the fin and headrest were only riveted on and not integral), cut out the centre bar in the cab - which to Jaguar's surprise did not cause a loss in structural rigidity - add a windscreen, wipers and hood plus alloy bumpers and hey presto! one had an XKSS. But the fire of February 1957 put a quick end to this new production with only 16 made. Incidentally, for the first time ever, I finally got to see one of the original D-types that Jaguar converted and compared to the new XKSS (more on that anon) it was extremely interesting. The cars were snapped up, and ever since have rarely come on the market. I remember interviewing Walter Hill in Florida (two XKSS, #27 E-type RHD, Commemorative, #1 LHD XK120, Bonneville speed record D-type to name but a few) and even with Lofty's help it took a year to find one in Kansas) They were always a car that was for the cognoscenti, under the radar and little known.

Lynx started making D-type replicas out of E-type wrecks in 1975, using the A-frames, engine, front suspension, rear IRS as the base for the D-types and were asked by a client if they would make him an XKSS - so they did and 10 were eventually made against around 60 D-types. We'll not forget the lightweight E-types as well, including the 13th original one all from NOS.

Seeing the posts above, the XKSS is obviously a marmite car, but rather like in the day they are appreciated by those who have never seen one - and there are plenty who have never seen a real one. The driving experience is completely different to the D-type too. In a D-type a shower leaves you soaked and you need goggles or the rain drops really sting. In an XKSS you not only have a proper screen but the luxury of wipers too. Don't even think of driving with the hood up since it is damned hard to put up and you are left with a letter box sized door to get in, and the only way is by crawling in on your stomach across to the other side and then drawing your legs in. Getting out is the reverse. I've used mine once! So all I can say is that the driving experience is much more civilised in an XKSS with no wind in your hair but the same exhaust note and your passenger's feet well cooked by the side exhaust. So given that I have had the lot, thumbs up for the XKSS as a usable road car compared to the D-type.

The nine new XKSS are in my opinion a pastiche and trade purely on the Jaguar name. Jaguar hardly made any of it to start with and so many things are wrong. The rev counter is electronic not chronometric for instance, because Smiths did not have the knowledge to make them. I could go on but suffice to say for those of us in the know they are not at all as theyshould be. And as I am fond of saying, Woodham Mortimer (the old JD Classics) have a real copy built by the Pearsons for sale at £425,000. Now if my maths is correct that means that Jaguar are charging £1 million for a 7x5 piece of alloy plate - the chassis number. Oh, and by the way, there weren't nine unused chassis numbers either by my maths.

So, how does the driving compare to my flat floor? A raw and brutal edgy car against a lithe and smooth roadster is the answer. The XKSS is on cross plies and the E- on radials, but the light weight of the XKSS gives immediate steering response far quicker than the E-type - and my rack is hard mounted before you ask.

Well, that is my opinion, but most of you are against the progenitor of the E-type. A poor world if we all thought the same.

Oh, and registering the new lightweight E-types and XKSS models. The only way to do so is the IVA route, and some have done that. But figure it out; after three years the first MOT comes up, so all the IVA gear you took off to return the car to standard will have to go back on each and every year!
Image

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic