15 hp? What do you drive, a skate board? Below 60 mph, the key resistance are tyres, which can have very different rolling resistences. I notice that the Michelin tyres I currently have, adevrtised as very low rolling resistence, indeed do have a small, but noticeable advantage over other tyres I have had (Kormoran, Polish, delivered with the car, Cooper-Avon, Continental). But, at around 60 mph, the main reistence is offered by the air and is thus dependent on car aerodynamics, as expressed by their Cx factor.
As for truly long lasting cars, I don't reallky think there are many around - of any. These days, EVERYTHING is built to last about 50% longer than the warranty, and that's it. Cars included. They don't want us to have them for a long time, because if we do, who will they sell their new models to?
You may not know this. At the end of the 70ies, Porsche displayed a car on the Frankfurt motor show, bodywork in aluminium, large 4 cyl engine with only 85 hp, they said they could guarantee for 20 years. On the next meeting of the German auto makers' society, they were quickly and VERY brutally whipped back into shape, and that prototype was never seen again.
I have never had a Toyota, nor am likely to, for two reasons: they are rather expensive locally (in comparison with their competition), offer a 3 year warranty only and have a VERY expensive service and parts. Old Japanese logic - cheap car, expensive parts and maintenance, they all do it.
Dad had two European made Fords, and both were indeed damn well made. The newer one, from 1969, is still around, dutifully doing its job. But, that was then, in those days EVERYBODY made longer lasting cars, and those days are gone never to return. Today, a Ford Focus is the third most expensive car in its class on the local market (VW being the most expensive, followed by Opel/GM's Astra), with only a 2 year warranty.
At the moment, easily the best deal on the local market is GM's Chevrolet Cruze, which is a thorn in everybody's eye because it has a low. low price, is chock full of equipment and amenities and offers a 5 year warranty. Its only relatively speaking "failing" is a low choice of just two engines for the better equipped LTZ model, a 1.8 litre, 141 hp petrol and a 2 litre 163 hp diesel, which commands a premium of €2,800 (app. $ 3,650). This is easily the greatest cost add-on for any such engine on the local market, but I don't like diesel engines anyway, so the 1.8 litre petrol is my choice. Unlike the US market, they do not offer the 1.4 litre turbo engine with 140 hp, because they would end up competing with themselves, as the Cruze would then be like the Opel Astra, but at €3,000+ less money - who would buy the Astra?
As for the safety and other features, if memory serves, ESP will be obligatory on all cars sold in the EU from this coming December, just as ABS was made many years ago - you can't sell a car without it. To their credit, GM has taken a very progressive position on this matter - you can't buy a GM product without ESP being standard since last January, a year ahead of the deadline. Now Ford has joined them, but some companies, especially VW, still require you to pay no less than €500 ($659) or more for it. Very odd for a company which boasts of its safety features and already has sky high prices, easily being the most expensive car in its class, already in the BMW and Mercedes Benz price class.
I just drove the Cruze hatchback two days ago. I like it a lot, and have something to compare it with because it's effectively two generations removed from my own current Daewoo Nubira, which itself was a camouflaged Opel. The Cruze is stiffer and had much better handling, and feels much tighter than the Nubira, which was in my view too soft, almost inviting you to fall asleep. It has a slightly smaller capacity engine (1.8 vs 2.0), but its nominal power output is 8 hp more, while the two cars have only a 30 lbs weight difference, and consequently it feels less stogy and sort of more lively.
Its local cost with high level equipment package is €15,300 (app. $19,890) on the road. Warranty 5 years or 150,000 km.
An equivalent Opel, also a GM product, with a 1.4 litre turbo engine also with 140 hp, locally costs with equivalent equipment costs €20,500 (app.$ 26,650). This explains why there are so few of them around. Warranty 5 years or 150,000 km.
A Ford Focus, with a 1.6 litre turbo engine, with a little less equipment, costs €18,200 (app. 23,660). Warranty 2 years or 100,000 km.
A Toyota Auris, well equipped, with a 1.6 litre 132 hp normally aspirated engine, cost €16,900 ($ 21,970). Warranty 3 years or 100,000 km.
A Renault Megane, well equipped, with a 1.4 litre turbo engine delivering 130 hp, costs €17,200 ($ 22,360). Warranty 4 years or 150,000 km.
As you can see, NOBODY touches the Cruze. My most likely purchase, although the Renault Megane does have a few advantages. It's even better sprung than the Cruze, and they have obviously been working hard on their drive train, because in real world tests, it outperforms the Focus not so much in 0-62 mph tests (which are meningless to me), as in the 60-100 km and 80-120 km tests, meaning that the Renault has very small drive train losses, which the Ford has rather large losses, something I never thought I'd be saying for a Ford, but there it is.
As you see, there very siginificant maret differences between USA and Europe, and especially my own local market. We Europeans have to pay much more for our cars, even in absolute terms. Hence, we choose our cars veyrcarefully.
Why should I convert my Jaguar to a Chevy driveline?
In today’s world, peace of mind is hard to find. Jaguar is world renowned for the beauty, comfort and luxury of their cars: it is second to none. Unfortunately, Jaguar is just as notorious for the gremlins exported with their cars. Converting the English engine and transmission to "Made in America" power provides you with reliable, low maintenance motoring at an affordable price. Imagine, driving it there and back again... carefree. Our Conversion provides you with three main benefits:Reliability: The most important reason to put a Chevy V8 and transmission in your Jaguar – long life, and dependable, economical service. Plus you get the convenience of having a Chevy motor, transmission and accessories that everybody stocks and most anyone can fix – don’t get stranded waiting for Jaguar parts (and a Jaguar specialist) in Smalltown USA.
Affordability: The Chevrolet V8 is easy to install and maintain, meaning fewer problems (and expenses) now and in the future. When your GM water pump dies it costs $50.00 for a new one, not $230.00. And if you have the grueling commute every day, your conversion will pay itself with 15-18 mpg in the city and 19-22 mpg on the highway. Wrecker bills and car rentals will vanish instead of your day off.
Driveability: Reliability and economy are the reasons why most people convert their Jaguars, but driveability is what they love the most. The V8 possesses more torque and power than the Jaguar 6 or 12 cylinder, giving you more GO off the line and more passing power on the highway . Also, the V8 driveline moves the center of gravity slightly rearward and lower, improving handling. All in all, the conversion will give you confidence and peace of mind.
In today’s world, peace of mind is hard to find. Jaguar is world renowned for the beauty, comfort and luxury of their cars: it is second to none. Unfortunately, Jaguar is just as notorious for the gremlins exported with their cars. Converting the English engine and transmission to "Made in America" power provides you with reliable, low maintenance motoring at an affordable price. Imagine, driving it there and back again... carefree. Our Conversion provides you with three main benefits:Reliability: The most important reason to put a Chevy V8 and transmission in your Jaguar – long life, and dependable, economical service. Plus you get the convenience of having a Chevy motor, transmission and accessories that everybody stocks and most anyone can fix – don’t get stranded waiting for Jaguar parts (and a Jaguar specialist) in Smalltown USA.
Affordability: The Chevrolet V8 is easy to install and maintain, meaning fewer problems (and expenses) now and in the future. When your GM water pump dies it costs $50.00 for a new one, not $230.00. And if you have the grueling commute every day, your conversion will pay itself with 15-18 mpg in the city and 19-22 mpg on the highway. Wrecker bills and car rentals will vanish instead of your day off.
Driveability: Reliability and economy are the reasons why most people convert their Jaguars, but driveability is what they love the most. The V8 possesses more torque and power than the Jaguar 6 or 12 cylinder, giving you more GO off the line and more passing power on the highway . Also, the V8 driveline moves the center of gravity slightly rearward and lower, improving handling. All in all, the conversion will give you confidence and peace of mind.
Until Thursday I drive a Ford Taurus Wagon. My Citation used to require 9.5 HP to maintain cruising speed on a level road. The Taurus runs a bit more. Highway mileage is 30 to 32. 32 is on a good day with the wind to my back. 30 is normal on regular lead free gasoline. Synthetic oil, air in the tires and smooth acceleration are the only tricks needed to get that mileage.
With modern synthetic oils engine wear is not really an issue.
On my press brake with my wider die (3/4" slot) lubricated with "Way" oil the limit is about 5' of .112" 36,000 PSI steel. Changing the lubricant to Mobil 1, the difference is amazing. I can bend 8' of the same steel, faster and with a clean sharp edge.
BTY before buying a new car I have rented most of the contenders. I am glad you like the Chevy Cruze. It was on my "I can't stand this car" list!
With modern synthetic oils engine wear is not really an issue.
On my press brake with my wider die (3/4" slot) lubricated with "Way" oil the limit is about 5' of .112" 36,000 PSI steel. Changing the lubricant to Mobil 1, the difference is amazing. I can bend 8' of the same steel, faster and with a clean sharp edge.
BTY before buying a new car I have rented most of the contenders. I am glad you like the Chevy Cruze. It was on my "I can't stand this car" list!
Scott, I cannot argue the reasons, but I do argue the essence. Change that engine and you no longer have a Jag, you have a cheaper replica.
I have heard from a number of people what you outlined above, and I gather that Jag owners are not a happy lot. In essence, the lower models were actually Ford Mondeos whith a different bodywork. Since the Mondeo has a rock solid reputation in Europe, I have to conclude that it was someone in Jaguar company which blew it big time in that he succeeded in making a highly reliable and respected mechanicals into an overexpensive failure.
Frankly Scott, damn the car which I have to redo myself as soon as I buy it. Jaguar or not.
In 2003, I purchased my current Daewoo Nubira. It's a caravan which, much like the Jauguar uses Ford parts, uses Germany's GM chapter Opel parts; literally everything but the bodywork is Opel's. It was, at the time, easily the cheapest car of its type, which was fine with me, because I live in an apartment building and have to keep my car parked on the street, and because I don't actually use the car too much for city driving. In 9 years, my annual average is just 9,200 km (or 7,050 miles), of which about one third belongs to our annual summer vacation.
I think you'll agree that with an annual mileage like that, I'd be a fool to buy a big and expensive car, even if I could afford one.
On the other hand, I do have that li'l ol' car I made myself, which is the exact opposite of the Nubira - small, not even the "c" from comfort, but handles quite literally like a top flight race car, is small and naturally nimble, and is rather powerful for its featherweight. It does things nobody expects it to be able to do, nowhere, nohow, which enhances my driving experience - all I have to do is to accelerate from zero to 60 km/h (37 mhp) in something like 2 seconds - the law says I cannot drive faster than 60 km/h in the city, but the law says nothing about how fast I can get to 60 km/h.
In other words, I have both my bases covered, I have it big and comfy for long haul trips, and small and fiery for fooling around.
I don't understand this about 9.5 hp needed to maintain any cruizing speed bigger than 3 ft/h. Please explain, because you just told me any engine over 100 hp is for the idiots only.
You believe advertisements about lubricants way too much. As for synthetic oil, unless your car manufacturer expressly allows you to use it, you are in fact doing the engine a disservice. The problem is that synthetic oils are not as thick as mixes, and your oil pump could well be failing to deliver as much oil as it was designed to be. Yoghurt and milk do not have the same thickness or specific density, if you like.
And no matter which oil you use, engines will ALWAYS wear out. Keeping it at a constant work regime is the best way to prolong its service life, of course, assuming that is not some wild number, like 6,000 rpm.
I won't grace the last paragraph with an answer. That's outright mean.
LOL, I'm sure you have not had one DVV, The E-type is the cats pajamas ...
DVV,
I don't believe you are aware of how a wankel engine functions, a 13B has the equivalent displacement of a 3.9 Litre 4 stroke piston engine..
Yes that is about right for a compact car ....
Toyota yes, Ford , i cannot agree with .....
Yes there is , but you will have to lay down some objective measure to discuss such
Only if something stupid is done , like Jump boosting a dead battery ...
Huh .... !!!
Oil present in the combustion process in a 4 stroke engine, is a problem , the oil breaks down the fuel and will lead to detonation..
Hell no .....
Wayne, I know reasonably well how a Wankel works.
The reason why I too double up is not because that is necessarily true, but because FIA took it that way officially. To this day, they count double for a Wankel. 3,000 cc standard race V8 is equivalent to 1,500 cc Wankel.
As ever, the official reasoning could be right, may be wrong, but it's the only relevant standard in use.
The reason why I too double up is not because that is necessarily true, but because FIA took it that way officially. To this day, they count double for a Wankel. 3,000 cc standard race V8 is equivalent to 1,500 cc Wankel.
As ever, the official reasoning could be right, may be wrong, but it's the only relevant standard in use.
If you are using 100 hp for cruising how do you accelerate up a hill? Automobile engines rarely produce maximum hp. They really aren't built for it! Once you hit speed most folks ease up on the fuel. Of course if you keep the throttle fully open you will hit your maximum speed, which will vary with the road conditions. The limit will be engine life. Racing engines are designed for 100 hour life. They cost $15,000 each last time I priced them.
Synthetic oils are rated in centistokes just like any other. Pick the right viscosity and your oil pump will move it. It just doesn't get thicker in winter or when cold so the lubrication is better and the oil pump does less work. If you use too thin an oil then it will leak around seals, valves etc. Now most cars will run on a standard synthetic oil. However once an engine has some use it is not a good idea to change it over.
You are welcome to try and measure the wear on an engine that has run it's entire life on a good synthetic oil. There will be no discoloration, gunk or significant wear. Now every other part will have a chance to fail first.
There are different tastes in cars and driving. Your's ain't mine. Let me know if you ever get past 1,000,000 miles, 500 hours at a track (even sweeping the track counts, but not spectating!), or a racing license.
You are welcome to search for the perfect car. The only car I was offered but did not buy, that I regret, was a Lotus 9. Not a perfect car but just plain fun.
No the electronics just don't last. From the LED displays that fade, to the voltage regulators that fail because they were attached to the heatsink with a nylon rivet. Then there is the new issue of lead free solder and vibration for 5000 hours or so.
With electronic ignition batteries last almost forever. First time it doesn't crank in winter you just replace it. Around here that is even free at any auto parts store.
If you buy a high performance car and don't know how to drive, you not just wasted money, you are endangering yourself and others.
You're probably right, Wayne, but as far as I am aware, that's the only official "rating" there is in the world of sports.
As a lovely memory, I remember 1971, when I had a ride in an NSU RO80, the first passenger car ever to use a Wankel. It's actual displacement was a cc or two below 1,000 cc, but in Germany, it was taxed as classic 2 litre car. Let's, for the sake of illustration, keep to that rating.
At the time, BMW had a classic 2 litre engine in four versions: classic, street legal, 1 single barrel carb, rated at 100 hp, two twin Weber carbs and 120 hp, Kulgelfischer mechanical fuel injection and 130 hp and turbo, 170 hp.
That NSU had 115 hp, but I have never before tasted a Wankel. It's nothing like a regular engine, much less vibration, and sound of a muffled jet engine. Unique. Unfortunately, it was kinda dead below 3,000 rpm and really came on line at 5,000 rpm and over. This caused it to be a real gas guzzler, it used up about twice the amount a typical 2 litre car of the time used
That was before the first fuel crisis, so nobody cared, because a litre of fuel costs less than a litre of minaral water - literally. But, after 1974, when fuel prices began to climb, it was no longer an insignifcant aspect. Sales slumped and eventually, that Wankel engine spelled the doom for NSU as a company and they went under.
Still, a unique experience I have fine memories of.
Before the Ro80 NSU sold the Wankel Spider.
What killed NSU was not so much the fuel prices but the cost of replacing the engine 3 or 4 times under warranty. That allowed VW to buy out NSU which they merged with their Auto Union brand to form Audi. Audi being the latin translation of the name of one of the companies (Horch) which formed Auto Union before the war. Audis are still being made in NSUs Neckarsulm plant as were Porsche 924 and 944s.
What killed NSU was not so much the fuel prices but the cost of replacing the engine 3 or 4 times under warranty. That allowed VW to buy out NSU which they merged with their Auto Union brand to form Audi. Audi being the latin translation of the name of one of the companies (Horch) which formed Auto Union before the war. Audis are still being made in NSUs Neckarsulm plant as were Porsche 924 and 944s.
The Wankel is also very "dirty" as it has a high surface area to chamber volume causing NOx issues. I looked at an RX8 and was surprised how much improved the torque was. Modern computers I guess. Bought a GTI anyway. Mazda still has problems with rotor lockup and the seal issues are "tolerable".
I would swap out the 12 no problem as it was a piece of junk anyway. The XJ was a work of art. One could do modern electronics like Megasquirt and get a fantastic engine, but still have the oil issues as it is so lose when cold.
The mouse is the "standard" swap because it is cheap. But today there are a lot of far better engines out there. How about a larger alloy V6 complete with current electronics including a modern gearbox? You know, one that actually has working syncro's like Moss never had? Far lighter. Far better drive-ability. Far more power than original. I put the Ford 5.0 in my TVR because it was smaller and lighter than the Chevy. In retrospect, I should have put in the Chevy 3.1.
Changing the engine sure involved a lot more than most expect. Getting the handling balance and break balance back is no easy task. Then you are faced with gear ratios that may not fit the weight of the car and torque band as well as the original.
I would keep the XJ if you have it. It is not the engine that is at fault, it is the stuff bolted to it. The first thing I did to every British car I owned, from A to TVR, was put in a Delco alternator. Next was an ignition system that might actually generate a spark when you need it. You would be surprised, even in my worn-out +4 how much the driveablity was improved.
If it makes you feel any better, a good friend has a mid 80's Bentley. He loves it. "Everything is failing right on schedule".
You'll be pleased to gloat that my UK Jaguar in the UK is unreliable too. However it is 11 years old and the engine and transmission are still sweet as a nut.
Recently its been the peripherals that have been eating into my pocket.
1. One of the ABS reluctor rings fractured - In the UK we can have new reluctor rings fitted which saves hundreds of pounds.
2. One of the front suspension springs snapped - £25 and a lot of swearing.
3. The windscreen split - Not a Jaguar issue, more of "Thanks to a big lorry"
4. I did have to replace BOTH fuel pumps last year - but that might be down to the fact that it has an LPG conversion.
As its now over the 100000 mile mark I wonder if its going to succumb to the Ford Dual Mass Flywheel problem that is common in Mondeos at that mileage ?
Not very hard to believe the exhaust issue - most very high revving cars have the same problem. The faster you rev them, the shorter the burn cycle.
No wonder the European auto industry is downsizing to small dispacement turbo assisted engines. Typically 1.4 litre, power range 120...180 hp. Turbo gives them the torque and power of a 50% larger displacement volume normally aspirated engines, and while their consumption is not quite that of 1.4 litre engines, it's way less than an equivalent 2 litre engine, say around approximately 1.6 litre engines.
However, the key point is not exhaust, or taxation (smaller displacement pays smaller taxes, even with turbos), but the fuel. These engines typically do not rev above 5,500 rpm, many at 5,000 rpm and less, which prolongs the burn duty cycle. The turbo provides additional pressure 0.7...1.1 bar typically, and these two properties make such engines ideal for burning natural gas, which is a renewable resource in some versions. I mean burn EFFICIENTLY, as many pterol engines adapted to use it are in fact very inefficient at it, locally everybody has converted for reasons of economy. Yes, their engines will use some 50% more natural gas than petrol, but the price of natural gas is around 40% that of the petrol, so in the end, they do save quite a bit.
On the other hand, the governments will catch up soon enough. For years, diesel fuel was much cheaper than petrol, which caused an explosion of diesel engones particularly in German and French cars, until the governments noticed a big, black hole in their revenues - last summer, diesel was a few cents MORE expensive than petrol in Greece. As this trend goes up, governments will simply add extra taxation for natural gas used as fuel, no way they will ever give up a hen laying pure gold eggs like fuel.
Americans may not know this, but state taxes everywhere in Europe are exceptionally high, often at 120...150% over the base product price. We are talking about hundreds of BILLIONS of state revenue per annum here. Consider just Germany alone - 40+ million motor vehicles in private ownership, assume each vehicle uses just 1 litre of petrol per day, assume taxes amount of only € 0.8/L, and you have (40,000,000 x 0.8 x 365) €11,680,000,000 per annum just on that.
In reality, when you add up everything else that uses petrol or diesel, including public transport, ships and airplanes, trains, commercial transport, this is much more like 11 or 12 times the amount, and probably more. Remember that an airplane fuels up in TONS, not litres.
Last edited:
Fine, but essentially, it doesn't damage the key point - governemnts have their tax day with fuel anyway.
True but only if the fuel is not used by powerful industries and it is certainly not '11 or 12 times the amount'.
As I said aviation fuel is tax free and so is shipping fuel (not even VAT on either).
Diesel is cheaper than petrol in Germany, France and Italy because it is taxed less (German petrol tax is €0.68, diesel €0.45 per litre).
Public transport like trains busses etc is owned and run by the state (except in UK) thus any tax revenue from those is equally paid for by the state and thus gets cancelled out the equation.
In the UK for a number of years has been a movement to impose taxes on aviation fuel as the tax-free status of it amounts to a £10billion per annum indirect subsidy for the airline industry. So far sadly without much success.
As I said aviation fuel is tax free and so is shipping fuel (not even VAT on either).
Diesel is cheaper than petrol in Germany, France and Italy because it is taxed less (German petrol tax is €0.68, diesel €0.45 per litre).
Public transport like trains busses etc is owned and run by the state (except in UK) thus any tax revenue from those is equally paid for by the state and thus gets cancelled out the equation.
In the UK for a number of years has been a movement to impose taxes on aviation fuel as the tax-free status of it amounts to a £10billion per annum indirect subsidy for the airline industry. So far sadly without much success.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.