36 replies to this topic

[Nev]

I have been at it again ....

Posted some new stuff about the drive to the quad cams as well as what I consider to be the real reasons the XJ13 never raced - including a picture of a drawing of what could have been Malcolm Sayer's proposed 3 litre XJ13 replacement.

Building the Legend - Jaguar XJ13

[arttidesco]

Great stuff Nev :-)

Hard to imagine BMC being involved with Formula One technology and expense in light of the unfulfilled promise of the later British Leyland XJ12C project, but then strangely that is exactly the kind of thing that ought to have appealed to Prime Minister Harold 'White Heat of Technology' Wilson.

PS Does any one recognise the test track in the second clip on Nev's page linked above ?

Edited by arttidesco, 24 June 2011 - 20:47.

[Catalina Park]

It is probably worth taking into account that in 1967 BMC was stricken by industrial action, the worst of which was a lorry driver strike that stopped the delivery of newly completed cars for quite a time. The resulting loss of cash flow was the main reason for the takeover of BMC by Leyland in early 1968.

So if you look at a combination of rule changes and a lack of budget from the parent company the only smart thing to do was abandon the project.

[RCH]

Interestingly in Phillip Porter's magnificent book "Ultimate E Type" (which I'm only halfway through) there is reference to a "G Type" Jaguar mid engined car which was mooted in the late '50's. It presumably only existed in Malcolm Sayer's mind and odd memos but shows the way he was thinking. (This does of course beg the question, What happened to the F Type?)

I have always had the impression that William Lyons had the view that motor racing only had a use to publicise the Jaguar company. 5 Le Mans wins in the '50's had done that so any further racing was perhaps unecessary. Employing the likes of Heynes, England and Sayer presumably meant that racing projects would always have existed at Jaguar but would have needed commitment which Lyons was just not prepared to give. I can't help thinking that the dispay of Jaguars seen recently on the TV at the general election and the royal wedding would have pleased Sir William more than another Le Mans win?

In some ways the Ford GT40 was the "D Type Jaguar" of the '60's. Wins at Le Mans and success in private hands, almost the default choice for the private buyer looking for a career in sports cars. This was presumably the territory which Lyons would have needed XJ13 to occupy and maybe he just didn't see it happening twice?

[arttidesco]

Interestingly in Phillip Porter's magnificent book "Ultimate E Type" (which I'm only halfway through) there is reference to a "G Type" Jaguar mid engined car which was mooted in the late '50's. It presumably only existed in Malcolm Sayer's mind and odd memos but shows the way he was thinking. (This does of course beg the question, What happened to the F Type?)

I have always had the impression that William Lyons had the view that motor racing only had a use to publicise the Jaguar company. 5 Le Mans wins in the '50's had done that so any further racing was perhaps unecessary. Employing the likes of Heynes, England and Sayer presumably meant that racing projects would always have existed at Jaguar but would have needed commitment which Lyons was just not prepared to give. I can't help thinking that the dispay of Jaguars seen recently on the TV at the general election and the royal wedding would have pleased Sir William more than another Le Mans win?

In some ways the Ford GT40 was the "D Type Jaguar" of the '60's. Wins at Le Mans and success in private hands, almost the default choice for the private buyer looking for a career in sports cars. This was presumably the territory which Lyons would have needed XJ13 to occupy and maybe he just didn't see it happening twice?

One wonders what Sir Lyons would make of the Porsche / VAG / Bentley conglomerates achievements at Le Mans ?

[D-Type]

One wonders what Sir Lyons would make of the Porsche / VAG / Bentley conglomerates achievements at Le Mans ?

He would probably ask "How many extra sales did they generate?"

[arttidesco]

He would probably ask "How many extra sales did they generate?"

Enough to keep them afloat ?

[RCH]

He would probably ask "How many extra sales did they generate?"

In my view Audi success at Le Mans has completely changed the public's view of them. Even the rally success didn't achieve this. They have gone from being another German manufacturer to having a unique reputation with the general public. A sort of combination of Volvo for reliability and strength; BMW for sporting appeal and Mercedes for "chicness" and perceived "greatness". Sorry struggling for words to explain this but it is almost as though they have vastly increased their reputation for all round "goodcarness" whilst still continuing to produce the same, albeit very good, cars.

Jaguar could do with a bit of that.

[rl1856]

Reading the timeline of the XJ13, it appears that had full backing had been given, LeMans 1966 would have been the likely target. The salient question becomes would a reliable and sorted XJ13 have been able to defeat a Ford GT40 MKII ? I don't think so. By 67 it was obsolete. If it had appeared in 64 or 65, then I think it could have been successful.

What might have been ?

Best,

Ross

[Catalina Park]

Would a 66 Jaguar really have been obsolete by 67? The 64 Ford seemed to do Ok in 68 and 69.

[BRG]

In my view Audi success at Le Mans has completely changed the public's view of them. Even the rally success didn't achieve this.

Sorry, but I don't agree this is the case. Pre rally Quattro days, Audi were seen as a worthy but boring car maker, a sort of German Rover. Once the Quattro burst onto the scene, their image change hugely. Everyone knew about the rally cars, but I doubt if the man on the Clapham omnibus even knows that they have won at Le Mans, or cares.

[RCH]

Sorry, but I don't agree this is the case. Pre rally Quattro days, Audi were seen as a worthy but boring car maker, a sort of German Rover. Once the Quattro burst onto the scene, their image change hugely. Everyone knew about the rally cars, but I doubt if the man on the Clapham omnibus even knows that they have won at Le Mans, or cares.

Not arguing but it just seems more recent than the rally success that "the man on the Clapham omnibus" has started regarding Audis as the best in everything. I suspect he is more likely to have heard of Le Mans than the World Rally Championship.

[David Birchall]

In my view Audi success at Le Mans has completely changed the public's view of them. Even the rally success didn't achieve this. They have gone from being another German manufacturer to having a unique reputation with the general public. A sort of combination of Volvo for reliability and strength; BMW for sporting appeal and Mercedes for "chicness" and perceived "greatness". Sorry struggling for words to explain this but it is almost as though they have vastly increased their reputation for all round "goodcarness" whilst still continuing to produce the same, albeit very good, cars.

Jaguar could do with a bit of that.

It is difficult yet to predict what the future holds for Audi in North America. I was hired as a service manager by an Audi dealership in 1988 and Audi were in deep ****! The US television program "60 Minutes" had just made a big deal of "unintended acceleration" cases involving Audis. We also had a very local problem of Audis bursting into flames on the new Coquihalla Freeway that started east of Vancouver and allowed cars to achieve considerable speeds, but always uphill when going east. This caused the underbonnet temperature of turbocharged Audis to reach a point where the alcohol laden windshield washer fluid ignited with devastating results! This was happening nowhere else in the world apparently.
The double whammy of the "unintended acceleration" (later proven untrue but the damage was done), coupled with the catching fire if you were absolutely stupid killed Audi sales in North America for many years.
North Americans generally neither know nor care who, what or where LeMans is.

[Bloggsworth]

In my view Audi success at Le Mans has completely changed the public's view of them.

Has it? Hardly anyone I know has even noticed, and those who have are of the opinion that if they spent spent that much money, Kia could win Le Mans.

Edited by Bloggsworth, 29 June 2011 - 07:51.

[Ralf Pickel]

Exactly the same over here - nobody cares or does take much notice.
Similar with current DTM - whoever wins (Mercedes or Audi) is more or less irrelevant.
A big shame, but they worked hard for the public disinterest....

Edited by Ralf Pickel, 29 June 2011 - 07:54.

[RCH]

Maybe it's just a personal thing, but it seems to me that in the last few years there has been a huge shift in attitude in the UK towards Audi. The average "man in the street" or on the "Clapham omnibus" who knows or cares little about cars appears to have gained a perception of Audi as being one of the superior brands. (I speak with virtually no experience of Audi so maybe they are).

This is summed up by a couple of examples. I rarely find time to read newspapers but happened to be looking at the motoring section of The Sunday Times a while ago. They were apparently running a series where "celebs" were describing their first car crash! The lady involved said that she was unhurt because she was driving an Audi. If she had said Volvo it would seem a reasonable comment but Audi? Are they more safe in an accident than VW or Vauxhall or Ford? A friend of mine was describing the virtues of her then recently acquired Seat Arosa. "Far better cars than VW or Skoda" she claimed "because they use Audi parts rather than Skoda which uses VW". Maybe it's true! But it sounds like a nice piece of salesman's patter to me. The point is though there is an implied "Audi is superior to other makes" message.

I am really just casting around for a reason for this perception, maybe good advertising or perhaps its true!

Having said all that a friend of mine has hillclimbed a Quattro for nearly 20 years. The reliabilty has been so good it has seldom seen a trailer.

[Odseybod]

Maybe it's just a personal thing, but it seems to me that in the last few years there has been a huge shift in attitude in the UK towards Audi. The average "man in the street" or on the "Clapham omnibus" who knows or cares little about cars appears to have gained a perception of Audi as being one of the superior brands. (I speak with virtually no experience of Audi so maybe they are).

This is summed up by a couple of examples. I rarely find time to read newspapers but happened to be looking at the motoring section of The Sunday Times a while ago. They were apparently running a series where "celebs" were describing their first car crash! The lady involved said that she was unhurt because she was driving an Audi. If she had said Volvo it would seem a reasonable comment but Audi? Are they more safe in an accident than VW or Vauxhall or Ford? A friend of mine was describing the virtues of her then recently acquired Seat Arosa. "Far better cars than VW or Skoda" she claimed "because they use Audi parts rather than Skoda which uses VW". Maybe it's true! But it sounds like a nice piece of salesman's patter to me. The point is though there is an implied "Audi is superior to other makes" message.

I am really just casting around for a reason for this perception, maybe good advertising or perhaps its true!

Having said all that a friend of mine has hillclimbed a Quattro for nearly 20 years. The reliabilty has been so good it has seldom seen a trailer.

They certainly seem to be driven on the road as though they (and their driver) are superior to anything else around - so maybe they've taken over that mantle from Volvo, as well as the 'safest place to be' one. A sweeping generalisation, of course, gained during my 100-mile daily commute (NOT aboard an Audi, before you ask).

Edited by Odseybod, 29 June 2011 - 11:44.

[john aston]

I remember seeing the demonstration of the XJ13 at Silverstone in ..was it 73 International Trophy? My immediate reaction was that it looked like a relic from the very early 60s and postively agricultural next to a P4 or a GT40. So the answer to the question is'because it would have not seen the opposition for dust'. Almost as ill advised as the overweight monster XJC which Jaguar wheeled out to win ETCC (was it ?) . And yes- subjective and almost totally ill informed response- but probably right as well?

[Nev]

Reading the timeline of the XJ13, it appears that had full backing had been given, LeMans 1966 would have been the likely target. The salient question becomes would a reliable and sorted XJ13 have been able to defeat a Ford GT40 MKII ? I don't think so. By 67 it was obsolete. If it had appeared in 64 or 65, then I think it could have been successful.

Yes - I agree that if a fully-developed car had appeared as early as 64 or 65 it may have stood a chance. As it was, the first V12 wasn't assembled and placed on a test-bed until July 1964. The first V12 didn't actually run on the road in a car until April 1965 (albeit in a Mk10 Jaguar because the XJ13 was nowhere near being ready). At this stage, in early 1965, perhaps the 1966 Le Mans could have seemed a realistic target? Unfortunately, the XJ13 wasn't ready to receive an engine until March 1966- even though construction had commenced in 1965 - clearly too late for a realistic 1966 Le Mans entry. The emphasis at the time would have been on 1967. I have unconfirmed reports that Jaguar provisionally entered THREE cars in the 1967 race but I have yet to track down any documented proof of this.

While the XJ13 was being constructed, Jaguar acquired a GT40 for comparison and, with the benefit of this comparison, still decided it was worth pressing on with their own car. I am away from home at the moment so can't access my copy of an original internal Jaguar report which compares the XJ13 against its main opposition - largely in terms of power to weight ratio. The report concluded that a competitive XJ13 was achievable (but they would say that wouldn't they!). On my return home I will dig it out and see if it sheds any more light.

[arttidesco]

"because they use Audi parts rather than Skoda which uses VW". Maybe it's true! But it sounds like a nice piece of salesman's patter to me. The point is though there is an implied "Audi is superior to other makes" message.

My land lady is counting the cost of backing her '07 M.Y. Passat into a '07 Mitsubishi pick up, damage to the rear VW badge which came into contact with the Mitsubishi's tailgate nil, damage to the tailgate £2K !

Dread to think how much damage a superior Audi badge would have caused in similar circumstances

Back in the day when I was working for VAG in Wolfsburg IIRC pretty much all VAG parts were stamped with the VW & Audi badges I wonder if that applies to contemporary Bugatti & Bentley products ?

Back on topic seems like the XJ13 suffered from chronic under investment given the lead times Nev has mentioned.

As to the XJ13 appearing agricultural I could not agree less, even in it's original, certainly dated, guise compared to a GT40 of any denomination it looked a quite svelte, even if not quite in the P4 league.

[Glengavel]

Almost as ill advised as the overweight monster XJC which Jaguar wheeled out to win ETCC (was it ?) . And yes- subjective and almost totally ill informed response- but probably right as well?

The XJC was a fast car let down by its reliability. Isn't it easier to make a fast car reliable than to make a reliable car go faster? If only BL hadn't pulled the plug on the project...

[rl1856]

Yes - I agree that if a fully-developed car had appeared as early as 64 or 65 it may have stood a chance. As it was, the first V12 wasn't assembled and placed on a test-bed until July 1964. The first V12 didn't actually run on the road in a car until April 1965 (albeit in a Mk10 Jaguar because the XJ13 was nowhere near being ready). At this stage, in early 1965, perhaps the 1966 Le Mans could have seemed a realistic target? Unfortunately, the XJ13 wasn't ready to receive an engine until March 1966- even though construction had commenced in 1965 - clearly too late for a realistic 1966 Le Mans entry. The emphasis at the time would have been on 1967. I have unconfirmed reports that Jaguar provisionally entered THREE cars in the 1967 race but I have yet to track down any documented proof of this.

While the XJ13 was being constructed, Jaguar acquired a GT40 for comparison and, with the benefit of this comparison, still decided it was worth pressing on with their own car. I am away from home at the moment so can't access my copy of an original internal Jaguar report which compares the XJ13 against its main opposition - largely in terms of power to weight ratio. The report concluded that a competitive XJ13 was achievable (but they would say that wouldn't they!). On my return home I will dig it out and see if it sheds any more light.

If Jaguar acquired a GT40, I suspect it was powered by a 289 V8, rather than the 7L unit employed by the LeMans MK-II and later MK-IV. The difference in HP would have altered the P/W analysis.

In 67, Jaguar would have competed against the Ford MK-IV and 330P4. The MK-IV was a completely new car, incorporating all of the lessons learned from the GT40 and MKII. The 330P4 was an evolution of the P2-P3 and very nearly as fast as the MK-IV at LeMans. At other tracks the P4 was arguably the better car. By 67 the XJ13 was a 2-3yr old design that would have given up 100hp to the MK-IV and probably 50hp to the P4. I have no doubt that the XJ13 would have handled well and appeared with fully sorted aerodynamics, but if 67 was the more realistic target date, it would have been uncompetitive on arrival no matter which top driver was employed (Clark, Hill, Stewart ????).

In a way it reminds me of the Aston Martin DBR-5 front engine GP machine. Had it appeared when designed or a year later (57 or 58) it would have been competitive. When it finally appeared in 59 it was obsolete.

I would be interested to read whatever documents you can post and we should all be grateful for your efforts in reconstructing an XJ13.

Best,

Ross

[RCH]

I remember seeing the demonstration of the XJ13 at Silverstone in ..was it 73 International Trophy? My immediate reaction was that it looked like a relic from the very early 60s and postively agricultural next to a P4 or a GT40. So the answer to the question is'because it would have not seen the opposition for dust'. Almost as ill advised as the overweight monster XJC which Jaguar wheeled out to win ETCC (was it ?) . And yes- subjective and almost totally ill informed response- but probably right as well?

It looked different to a P4 or a GT40 but does that make it agricultural? Malcolm Sayer didn't make mistakes when it came to aerodynamics and even if he had there is no guarantee that XJ13 as it was would have raced looking the same.

As for the XJC nothing that a bit more money, a bit more development couldn't have put right. Anyone who witnessed Andy Rouse's ultimately futile chase of Walkinshaw's BMW towards the end of the TT at Silverstone couldn't have helped but to support it. I suspect that the crowd close to where I was standing would have willingly picked the car up and run it round for the last few laps if asked!

[404KF2]

We also had a very local problem of Audis bursting into flames on the new Coquihalla Freeway that started east of Vancouver and allowed cars to achieve considerable speeds, but always uphill when going east.

LOL, I passed a burning Audi 5000 Turbo in my Peugeot 404 Injection going up the Coquihalla in 1988, approaching the toll booth. The 1963 car didn't catch fire, for the record!

For a car supposedly designed to run at 230 km/h, that was kind of mind blowing, really.

Which reminds me: in 1984 in Switzerland on an Autobahn, I had just come out of a tunnel and saw a STAU ahead; sharp braking got the Renault 5 to a stop in time. Then a very early 1984 Audi 100 came flying out of the tunnel at 180 km/h, saw the Stau, braked hard (the car had no ABS), locked all 4 wheels and skidded for about 200 metres.....missing the stopped cars by about 20 m. You should have seen the flat spots on the tires, the car was visibly hopping after that.

[cheapracer]

In my view Audi success at Le Mans has completely changed the public's view of them. Even the rally success didn't achieve this.

Disagree totally - who/what was Audi before the 1980's? Group B rallying made Audi. In America the SCCA Trans Am cars and even the Pikes Peak car gave them more publicity than and before LeMans.

[john aston]

It looked different to a P4 or a GT40 but does that make it agricultural? Malcolm Sayer didn't make mistakes when it came to aerodynamics and even if he had there is no guarantee that XJ13 as it was would have raced looking the same.

As for the XJC nothing that a bit more money, a bit more development couldn't have put right. Anyone who witnessed Andy Rouse's ultimately futile chase of Walkinshaw's BMW towards the end of the TT at Silverstone couldn't have helped but to support it. I suspect that the crowd close to where I was standing would have willingly picked the car up and run it round for the last few laps if asked!

XJ13 looked very old school to me- but one of our group of friends solemnly announced that it was the most beautiful car in the world. I did witness the XJC's debut and seem to remember a wheel fell off? I will own up to never really getting Jaguars- am in the small minority which thinks the E Type looks ...ok.

[LB]

PS Does any one recognise the test track in the second clip on Nev's page linked above ?

No and its really bugging me, where is it?

[packapoo]

XJ13 looked very old school to me- but one of our group of friends solemnly announced that it was the most beautiful car in the world. I did witness the XJC's debut and seem to remember a wheel fell off? I will own up to never really getting Jaguars- am in the small minority which thinks the E Type looks ...ok.

Nev's ongoing on the XJ13 I find extremely interesting, however like you I feel it's all (the XJ13 that is) a little bit late and that puzzles me.

I'm extremely biased though, as the only Jag that really gets my attention (apart from the Listers and they're OT) is the D-type. They were one truly beautiful piece of work.
None of their other creations even come close. Including the C, good as it was.

[RCH]

XJ13 looked very old school to me- but one of our group of friends solemnly announced that it was the most beautiful car in the world. I did witness the XJC's debut and seem to remember a wheel fell off? I will own up to never really getting Jaguars- am in the small minority which thinks the E Type looks ...ok.

I think we are making the mistake of seeing it through early '70's eyes, when it was made public, rather than as it would have seemed in 1966. I must admit to thinking it a bit odd myself, almost D Type meets Ferrari P4. It was as though Sayer felt he had to retain the Jaguar D Type identity in the shape but then the D Type worked so why not? I'm sure that if it had actually been raced then the shape would have evolved. Bear in mind that every development of the 911 Porsche has seemingly seemed old hat, to me anyway, but they work!

I was referring to the XJC's second appearance in the TT. Rouse was carving chunks of time off Walkinshaw's lead in the last 20 or so laps to make up for an extra pit stop. Where I was standing the crowd was pretty electrified by the chase and were with the Jag to a man. The XJC programme seems to have come in for a lot of criticism but it went well whilst it lasted which is more than can be said for Aston Martin's current efforts.

Edited by RCH, 01 July 2011 - 12:56.

[Nev]

No and its really bugging me, where is it?

arttidesco is such a tease .....

Want a clue? The clue is in the opening title to the YouTube video (spelt correctly in the video itself ) YouTube Video

[Nev]

Peter Wilson's long-awaited new book on the XJ13 is at the production stage and can be pre-ordered.

Details here:

http://tinyurl.com/6454bxd

I must emphasise I have absolutely no commercial connection with Peter Wilson or Paul Skilleter - I only mention this in case it is of interest to fellow hardcore XJ13 enthusiasts.

[Option1]

Nev's ongoing on the XJ13 I find extremely interesting, however like you I feel it's all (the XJ13 that is) a little bit late and that puzzles me.

I'm extremely biased though, as the only Jag that really gets my attention (apart from the Listers and they're OT) is the D-type. They were one truly beautiful piece of work.
None of their other creations even come close. Including the C, good as it was.

I have to admit to being on Nev's side of the fence. I find the XJ13 to be mouth-wateringly beautiful. I also tend to think that the lines of the XJ13 are very nicely remembered in the XJ220, which I also find more than somewhat attractive.

Neil

[john aston]

XJ220- arguably the most ludicrous looking supercar I have ever seen. Huge,excessive overhangs, horrid interior and the engine sounds like a bag of spanners - sounded fab in the 6R4 Metro but not in the Jag. Cant say the daft Countach or Diablo looked much better though...

[Option1]

Each to their own John, although I freely admit to never having seen one in the flesh, never having seen the interior, nor ever having heard one.

Neil

[arttidesco]

arttidesco is such a tease .....

Want a clue? The clue is in the opening title to the YouTube video (spelt correctly in the video itself ) YouTube Video

Shelsely was the easy one I meant where was this one filmed ? I really cannot place it at all. Looks like a proper race track ?

[RCH]

Each to their own John, although I freely admit to never having seen one in the flesh, never having seen the interior, nor ever having heard one.

Neil

Back in the days when I was gainfully employed as a sales engineer I was invited to climb all over an XJ220 to check out whether there were any items my company could supply to replace existing components which were cheaper/better. Looked pretty impressive to me!

[Sharman]

You can keep them all. The most beautiful Jaguar ever was, and is, the C type