The 'E' Type Forum

Hi,

Probably discussed previously but I thought - to kick-start some light-hearted discussion as we head into the weekend - I'd share my thoughts on the "best overall" standard production E-Type models based on the combination of aesthetics, dynamics, practicality, and desirability (but avoiding perceived or actual exclusivity or current values or RHD/LHD or S1.25/1.5 hybrids). Manual transmission set as default setting.

Here's my Top 10 ranking, with an added E-Type category award (in brackets) thrown in for good measure - so everyone is a winner!

1. 4.2 S1 FHC (The most well-rounded)
2. 3.8 S1 FHC later models with synchronized transmission (The most sporting)
3. 3.8 S1 OTS - early models (The most stunning)
4. 4.2 S1 OTS (The most sought after)
5. 5.3 S3 OTS - with original hardtop (The best overall roadster)
6. 4.2 S1 FHC 2+2 (The best overall practical)
7. 4.2 S2 OTS (The "Middle Child" of E-Types)
8. 4.2 S2 FHC (The best value for money)
9. 4.2 S2 FHC 2+2 (The most over-looked)
10. 5.3 S3 FHC 2+2 Auto (The best GT)

Let the friendly banter begin...

M.

Aside from personal preferences, which would include a preference for the car one actually owns, another category could be “those faults which cannot be lived with”.
Tall chaps and early flat floor coupes, unless you have two knees in each leg.
Tall chaps and any SWB roadster, unless you like the feeling of flies in your teeth.
Shorter chaps who can’t reach the pedals In any 2+2, no one likes to drive using a booster cushion.

chrisfell wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 11, 2020 6:43 am

Shorter chaps who can’t reach the pedals In any 2+2, no one likes to drive using a booster cushion.

Chaps? Very sexist.
My wife is 4ft 11 3/4ins tall, and drives my 2+2. Admittedly, she does use a cushion behind her. She still complains she "can't get the throttle all the way down", but I tell her that's no bad thing.

Did they make a 3.8 with all synchro . `box ? If they did , that would be my ideal car ( preferably an OTS ) .

No, they did not.

Quite easy to convert to all synchro as we all know ...my 3.8 will have a synchro box.

Barrie

I'd say the one that's 'best' is one that's running sweetly on summer's day - regardless of whatever mode it happens to be

Much as I love my 3.8 fhc, I prefer driving my ser 3 auto. I thought a few 3.8s did escape with synchro g/box's. You live and learn.

Heuer wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 11, 2020 11:01 am

No, they did not.

Hi,

I may be mistaken but I am pretty sure that the very last 3.8s produced were supplied with the same gearbox as used on the succeeding 4.2s. Not only have I been informed of this by varying experts over the last 30 years but even the author Philip Porter of "Original E-Type" fame makes the same assertion in his books.

M.

Meonstok wrote: I may be mistaken

Yes, you are. Please refer to the SPC and list the changes to the gearbox installation. Heresay is not something we accept.

No worries! And here's me thinking Philip Porter is an acclaimed authority on E-Types! If I ever bump into him I'll point out his error on page 30 of his seminal book. You live and learn.

Umm, Mr Porter doesn’t talk to mere mortals like you and I! To get back on theme; all E-types are the spice of life, and whatever your preference, there are enough different Models to satisfy us all. For me it’s a Series 3 OTS, with 16” wheels, more power, decent brakes, comfortable seats, quicker steering and properly set up suspension. So maybe a No11 to add to the list; Resto-mod E-types!

Meonstoke wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 11, 2020 10:46 pm

No worries! And here's me thinking Philip Porter is an acclaimed authority on E-Types! If I ever bump into him I'll point out his error on page 30 of his seminal book. You live and learn.

Ahh, I think what you are referring to is the original Factory plan to launch the 4.2 alongside the 3.8. Bob Berry, Jaguar PR Officer confirmed the case with a letter sent out with the press release: "We would like to stress that these are additional models to the Jaguar range for the outstanding success of the current 3.8 litre versions has led to the decision to continue them for 1965. Thus the 4.2 litre Mark X and E-Type models join the existing range of the 3.8 litre models ..."

The idea never reached production although I have no doubt there would have been some Factory 'mules' out and running. None seem to have survived or where fitted with 4.2 engines and sold on. The idea gained some traction hence the 4.2 badge on the boot lid.

We have just rebuilt an all synchro box with Aug 63 cast into the body. Numbers are stamped in the same place as a Moss box.

I first got a ‘62 coupe in OSG as I think the coupe is the most beautiful...how can you not look at the rear of one from a slight angle and just drool a little..probably just my age

Then ..a dark green ‘62 RHD OTS appeared for rebuild...so I’m lucky enough to have two Original S1 cars in pretty well the same colours as Jaguar Classic are “reproducing” to sell at a price well above my range. Oddly I guess they’re not worth as much as that though

I always wonder what makes us all prefer different models?
With me it comes down to early experience as a youngster in the 60’s when a friend’s Dad had one!!

Angus, did the '63 all synchro box you mention have 3.8 or 4.2 number series?

Barrie

I have also heard and read about late 3.8s with original sychromeshed gear boxes.

I recently spoke to an E-Type owner, who confirmed full matching nos and a full sychromeshed gear box as well as a 4.2 interior in his 3.8 roadster.

The car is currently for sale:
https://m.mobile.de/auto-inserat/jaguar ... ml?ref=srp

Next time I see him, I will ask for more details as well as a Heritage certificate.

The decision to develop an all synchromesh gearbox was taken by Jaguar Directors in early 1961. Norman Dewis was testing the in-house Jaguar gearbox (in a 3.8) during February 1963. In January 1964 Claude Bailey reported: "The sample production gearbox built up with gears made from the second production batch was not passable for gear noise ... the box was not considered a passable standard on the production rig".

So an all-synchro case with 1963 date is entirely possible and they were fitting and running them in 3.8 mules. But releasing those into the wild in another thing. Interesting though if more evidence comes to light!

tinworm wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 17, 2020 5:26 pm

Angus, did the '63 all synchro box you mention have 3.8 or 4.2 number series?

Barrie

Barrie, will check in the morning. Angus