Advertising Last completed movie pages
1975 Jaguar XJ-C [Series II] 
Class: Cars, Coupé — Model origin: 
— Made for: 
![1975 Jaguar XJ-C [Series II]](i263243.jpg)
![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
Minor action vehicle or used in only a short scene
Comments about this vehicle| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2009-12-11 13:10 |
|
|
◊ 2009-12-11 13:41 |
XJ-C |
|
◊ 2009-12-11 13:41 |
USA spec. |
|
◊ 2009-12-11 14:46 |
Interesting in that this scene takes place in 1972, so this would be an anachronism. |
|
◊ 2009-12-11 17:36 |
The pale yellow coupe partially obscured by vegetation in the left background is a 1967-1968 Mercury Cougar. |
|
mister car from 971 ◊ 2009-12-12 02:17 |
It's the only 70's car featured in the whole movie!!!! |
|
◊ 2009-12-12 02:49 |
So, the XJ-S replaced the XJ-C? |
|
◊ 2009-12-13 13:00 |
very very nice .gif ":)") I just love this jagme like-e  |
|
◊ 2010-07-10 22:04 |
Not quite. The XJ-S replaced the E-Type, and competed with the M-B SL. |
|
◊ 2010-07-11 00:47 |
I don't think the XJ-C ever had a direct replacement. |
|
◊ 2010-07-11 00:58 |
Correct. The XJ-S was the replacement for the E-Type aka XK-E and went into production in 1975(as well). Still, they share the same platform, and I once read that production of the XJ-C was stopped in late 1977 order to increase demand for the then quite unpopular XJ-S. What a pity, because I've always considered the XJ-C's design as more beautiful. |
|
◊ 2010-07-11 01:02 |
Do we want to go down the road of whether it's an XJ6-C or an XJ12-C? Both were made but I don't know which were sold in US. |
|
◊ 2010-07-11 01:06 |
 Why not? By the way, were the two Daimler-versions also sold in the USA? |
|
◊ 2010-07-11 01:13 |
No idea about the Daimlers in US. The XJ-C was a rushed production job - removing the B-pillars weakened the structure substantially, and the roof pressing had an awkward join (which is why they all had vinyl roofs to hide the mess. This usually started to rust under the covering due to trapped moisture unless protective action taken). Ceasing production in 1977 reflected these problems - the XJ-S story was a bit of a smokescreen. |
|
◊ 2010-07-11 01:21 |
Yes, both the 6 and 12 were sold in the US. No, Daimler badged versions were not. I believe the last Daimler sold here was the SP250 roadster. |
|
◊ 2010-07-11 01:32 |
In that case I'd guess this is an XJ6-C because I can't imagine the XJ12-C being offered in such a dreary matt colour. |
|
◊ 2010-07-11 01:52 |
@Dsl: Yes, I knew about the structural problems which caused a production-delay of two years. I don't want to know how much money it cost British Leyland to fix that issue. Besides, I've read that the missing B-pillars resulted in awful wind-noises. Nevertheless, I've seen not much more than maybe half a dozen XJ-Cs on the road in my live, and each time this happened I thought that it is still one of the most beautiful Jaguars despite all its issues. |
|
◊ 2010-07-11 02:11 |
@cl82. I agree about the looks, especially in comparison to the brutal and charmless XJ-S. I always wondered what an XJ-C would look like with Pininfarina's S3 XJ saloon styling changes. |
|
◊ 2010-07-11 11:01 |
It was not simply the fact that there was no 'B' pillar that was the problem. It was that that the glasses were frameless without any support in the body. The rear quarter glasses sealed reasonably well but the doors would not. The door glasses were large and the glass thickness 5mm whereas the saloon's smaller glasses were only 4mm. A big increase in weight, that was on the limit for the electric door motors (even when up-rated) so the final sealing when closed was poor and inconsisent. Up-rating the motors caused them safety problems with finger/head trapping. (They had already had issues with child deaths reported on the saloon in the USA). Jaguar tried a few fixes involving limit switches that dropped or raised the glasses into the seal but they finally gave up in the end. |
|
◊ 2010-07-11 13:10 |
Wikipedia adds a couple of points about the doors being expensive to produce as individually reskinned and lengthened saloon doors rather than new pressings, and body flex (with all this added weight and loss of rigidity in the centre?) causing the paint to break adhesion and lift off. Also more generally, Jaguar were moving all saloon XJs on to the LWB platform and the SWB version used for the XJ-C was therefore increasingly isolated within the main production emphasis, and accountants always pounce on this sort of anomaly. |
|
◊ 2010-07-11 14:28 |
Its true that the inner door pressings used modified saloon sections with additional shorter pressings welded in but this was no different from the practice used to manufacture the long wheelbase rear doors for the saloon (mark I and early mark II) before the short wheelbase XJ6 was eliminated. The cost of new larger pressings would not be ecconomic for the small volumes. Most of the extra weight was as a result of the large glass and the complex frame and cable guidance system inside the door. Many of the floor pressings for the short wheelbase would continue on in the XJS. I believe Jaguar decided to drop the XJ-C because of the quality problems inherant in the coupe. These were out of proportion to the number of coupes being made and were not getting resolved. Jaguar's main efforts had to be concentrated on in getting the series III saloon right. |
|
◊ 2010-07-13 08:34 |
I wonder what a modern XJ-C would be like. The M-B CL could use some company. |
Add a comment Advertising Advertising
