Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 33

Thread: Jaguar XK180 Concept

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    East Sussex, England
    Posts
    3,373
    Quote Originally Posted by matek
    People have baught Ferrari concepts for the right price also Ital design have sold some of there concepts so why wouldnt Jaguar sell theres???
    Because it holds development secrets. Infact this car remains in the warehouse near their factory that Jaguar keeps all of its concepts in, including the rare early prototypes for the XKR. Jaguar don't sell their concept cars; fact.

    Edit: In that same warehouse are something like 10 XJ220s which remain unsold or which their owners just didn't bother collecting because as you might know, the XJ220 was a dud. Theres an article somewhere about the warehouse.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,456
    XJ220 IMO wasn't a dud per say, just owners does not like the final product in the end having a TT V6 instead of a bespoke V12.....
    University of Toronto Formula SAE Alumni 2003-2007
    Formula Student Championship 2003, 2005, 2006
    www.fsae.utoronto.ca

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    South England
    Posts
    685
    ^^^and it was RWD when it was promised to be 4WD...AAAnd the engine came from a Metro... Nuff' Sed..
    You type without knowledge, you are 'a keyboard warrior - lots of mouth, little brain....

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,456
    The engine came off a Jaguar Group C car.....which for all intents and purpose is probably superior to a scratch built V12 anyway....
    University of Toronto Formula SAE Alumni 2003-2007
    Formula Student Championship 2003, 2005, 2006
    www.fsae.utoronto.ca

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Porto - Portugal
    Posts
    5,593
    Quote Originally Posted by Clique
    ^^^and it was RWD when it was promised to be 4WD.....
    That can only mean the chassis and the dynamics were better tahn promised. The car worked well with RWD, so it probably didn't need the weight and steering spoiling of the AWD system.

    Quote Originally Posted by Clique
    ^^^AAAnd the engine came from a Metro... Nuff' Sed..
    A Gr. B Metro wich was a well proven rally car in what concerns to the engine. It had a large development potential and it was never a problem in the rally car or in the XJ 220. It might not be noble as a V12, but neither was the fantastic F40 V8 when compared to the V12 of say, a lousy 400i...
    Money can't buy you friends, but you do get a better class of enemy.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    East Sussex, England
    Posts
    3,373
    Quote Originally Posted by RacingManiac
    XJ220 IMO wasn't a dud per say,
    I was speaking in terms of its success in sales

    But the V6 suffered from an interesting amount of turbo lag which would not occur in a normally-aspirated V12 engine. The V12 engine also wouldn't have sounded as inspirational as a milk-float, unlike the V6 they ended up using, which did.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Porto - Portugal
    Posts
    5,593
    Quote Originally Posted by :Exige:
    The V12 engine also wouldn't have sounded as inspirational as a milk-float, unlike the V6 they ended up using, which did.
    I believe you have never heard a XJ 220 or a Metro 6R4 accelerating, because they didn't sound bad at all.
    Money can't buy you friends, but you do get a better class of enemy.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    East Sussex, England
    Posts
    3,373
    Quote Originally Posted by McReis
    I believe you have never heard a XJ 220 or a Metro 6R4 accelerating, because they didn't sound bad at all.
    A 6R4 sounds good, probably because it uses a different exhaust system to an XJ220. An XJ220, does not. I've heard an XJ220 accelerating and I've read the reviews of other people who agree with what I say.

    Edit: Watch this video for evidence .. http://xfer.gofastvideo.com/gallery/.../208/1/aaq.wmv
    Last edited by :Exige:; 04-10-2006 at 12:21 PM.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    South England
    Posts
    685
    IMO the XJ220 came too early...It was sold during the bleak years in the world economy thus reducing the number of people who could afford to buy one or drive one...I wonder if it was released around 2000 its story might of been very diffferent... For Example in Top Gear it drag raced a Zonda, and beat it comfortable...
    You type without knowledge, you are 'a keyboard warrior - lots of mouth, little brain....

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,456
    Turbos are not exactly best for sound on an engine......6R4 was normally aspirated no?
    University of Toronto Formula SAE Alumni 2003-2007
    Formula Student Championship 2003, 2005, 2006
    www.fsae.utoronto.ca

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    East Sussex, England
    Posts
    3,373
    Quote Originally Posted by RacingManiac
    Turbos are not exactly best for sound on an engine......6R4 was normally aspirated no?
    Yes, I believe you are right there. 6R4s generated around 400bhp, which is around 200bhp less than a de-cat XJ220, which is probably the amount gained by turbos. 400bhp in something so light and with such a short wheelbase is still completley and utterly insane (and great ). 6R4s weren't really designed so much as road cars either, so they wouldn't have to worry so much about emmissions and volume.

    Quote Originally Posted by Clique
    IMO the XJ220 came too early...It was sold during the bleak years in the world economy thus reducing the number of people who could afford to buy one or drive one...I wonder if it was released around 2000 its story might of been very diffferent... For Example in Top Gear it drag raced a Zonda, and beat it comfortable...
    Does anyone know where I could find that video? Sounds good. XJ220s are fine as long as you keep the boost. What I would like to see is an XJ220 with a more modern turbo system with less turbo-lag and less weight. XJ220s are only around £65-70k nowadays (as compared to their original £450k price tag) so when I'm rich and famous *cough*, I might invest in one ... if it carrys on depreciating like it is, it'll be £8.99 by the time I can afford to run it
    Last edited by :Exige:; 04-10-2006 at 01:36 PM.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,456
    well it was a decent competition car consider it did win its class on track in 1993, though it was DQed for documentation infringement......Coulthard I believe was one of the drivers.....13th or 14th overall....

    hmmm, I can't believe my 800th post here would be about David Coulthard....
    University of Toronto Formula SAE Alumni 2003-2007
    Formula Student Championship 2003, 2005, 2006
    www.fsae.utoronto.ca

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    East Sussex, England
    Posts
    3,373
    Quote Originally Posted by RacingManiac
    hmmm, I can't believe my 800th post here would be about David Coulthard....
    I can't believe theres a single post about Coulthard that doesn't mention his jaw

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,775
    Quote Originally Posted by :Exige:
    Yes, I believe you are right there. 6R4s generated around 400bhp, which is around 200bhp less than a de-cat XJ220, which is probably the amount gained by turbos. 400bhp in something so light and with such a short wheelbase is still completley and utterly insane (and great ). 6R4s weren't really designed so much as road cars either, so they wouldn't have to worry so much about emmissions and volume.
    Yes they did.
    The GroupB homologation required the cars to meet the road standards fo the countries it was to run in. So it had to meet the noise and emissions limits for Europe at the time. Of course noise stnadards only referred to OUTSIDE the vehicle. The works 6R4s were horrendously noisy inside, esp the transfer box adn gear box straight cut gears !!!

    Will Gollop developed a bi-turbo version of the Metro for Rallycross after GroupB was banned.
    He had a theoritical 800hp
    Attached Images Attached Images
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    East Sussex, England
    Posts
    3,373
    Quote Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine
    Yes they did.
    The GroupB homologation required the cars to meet the road standards fo the countries it was to run in. So it had to meet the noise and emissions limits for Europe at the time. Of course noise stnadards only referred to OUTSIDE the vehicle. The works 6R4s were horrendously noisy inside, esp the transfer box adn gear box straight cut gears !!!

    Will Gollop developed a bi-turbo version of the Metro for Rallycross after GroupB was banned.
    He had a theoritical 800hp
    Always out to prove me wrong, eh?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. GT4 whole car list!!!!
    By Mustang in forum Gaming
    Replies: 247
    Last Post: 07-07-2010, 08:06 AM
  2. Jaguar Advanced Lightweight Coupe Concept 2005
    By Matt in forum Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 07-17-2006, 01:54 AM
  3. Jaguar Concept Eight 2004
    By Matt in forum Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 12-15-2005, 05:06 AM
  4. 2004 Jaguar Concept Eight
    By DarkPhenix in forum Multimedia
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-15-2004, 05:21 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •