635 vs XJ-S

I've been planning on aquiring a late 80's 635 for a while now but I've also seen one or two six cylinder xjs's that have caught my eye.
So how does the beemer stack up against jag? I suppose that they would both have their fair share of problems being 15 plus years old.
The beemer does seem to have the slight advantage of having a roomier interior and better fuel consumption and they both have their share of image problems.
So what does everyone else think of the comparison between these two cars?

Glad to hear your thoughts on this one.

Billy,

Auckland
New Zealand

I saw this question and thought it was really interesting. I'm actually nearing completion on a database covering EVERY high-end car sold in the United States since 1980, so at the very least I can provide some history and specs on these cars.

The 6 and XJS occupied the rarified arena of high-priced coupes in the 1980's--6-Series prices ranged from $32,825 for a 633CSi in 1980 to $47,000 for a 1989 635CSi, with an '88 M6 going for $55,950. A 1980 Jaguar XJS GT went for $30,000 while a 1990 XJS (V-12) was $48,000. 1993 was the first year for a 6-cylinder XJS (the 4.0), and that went for $49,750. Now of course you can buy any of those cars (save the M6) for about $5-6K, maybe even less.

The 6-Series and XJS designs both date from the late 70's. The 633CSi used a 174-181 hp 3.2L inline-6 until it was replaced by the 635CSi in 1985. That car had a 182 hp 3.4L inline-6 (shared with the 535i and 735i/L7, except in 1989 when it got the 208 hp version shared with the new 5- and 7-Series. I believe the '89's were also the only year to have a driver's side air bag, although I may be mistaken--the air bag may have appeared in '88. M6's were imported in 1987 and 1988 only. They are obviously a lot more rare than garden-variety 6's (which are rare themselves compared to other Bimmers). M6 is 5-speed only, and EPA estimates are 12/20 mpg. Don't know about the 635CSi, but for the record my 1990 535i weighs about the same and is rated 15/21 with automatic.

The XJS used a 5.3-liter V-12, horsepower of which climbed from 244 to 262/263, then to 278, and finally to 301 for 1995 only. I know you mentioned an interest in the 6-cylinder cars only--those coupes ran 1993-1995, using a 223 hp 4.0L inline-6 in 1993/1994, and a 237 hp version in 1995. All 6-cylinder XJS's have a driver's side air bag, with the passenger receving one for 1994/1995. ABS was added to the XJS sometime in the late 1980's, and to the 6-Series for 1985.

Personally, I'd be scared to buy any Jaguar unless I had a lot of money in the bank for repairs (an unfair stigma?), so I'd get the 6-Series. For the record, I once spoke with a Jag-exclusive mechanic who said that the bad reputation should apply to 1970's Jaguars only. I also have a friend who owned four Jaguars (two XJS's) and loved/hated them--they were very smooth, very fast, and complete garbage.

By comparison, the "big" BMW inline-6 has a reputation for durability, and overall the car should be dependable and relatively easy to work on. It is probably more spacious and simply laid out inside, although admittedly I've never been inside either of these cars. Exterior styling/brand image is completely in the eye of the beholder. You sure don't see many XJS's, but neither do you see many 6-Series.

My advice--you'll be happier with whatever 6-Series you can afford, unless you've just got to have a Jag.

I have to add that the prices for these cars and their specs are for the U.S.--hopefully someone can convert to--is it guineas? Anyway, American spec is the best I can do; hopefully the above post is not completely irrelevant to you.

Guineas? LOL! We use NZ Dollars over here. :smile:

Thanks for all the info, very informative. I take it that the 3.6 engined XJS wasn't sent over to the US market then. I think the home market got it shortly after the XJS was released in the late 70's. Later replaced by the 4.0 in 91, joined by the 6.0 in 93.

I decided to satisfy my curiosity this weekend by heading to a jag dealers and taking a test drive. I took a 87 3.6 XJS out for a spin. From the second I eyeballed the Lucas electrics I knew this wasnt for me. It brought back painful memories of my old Triumphs. They dont call Lucas the "prince of darkness" for no good reason!!
Anyways, on the road it didn't seem that quick ( I suppose I'm just used to lots of low end torque in my current Saab turbo) but seemed ok on the motorway.
I didn't like spongy ride and lifeless steering either.
I also took a Daimler Double Six for a drive aswell, for 5.3 litre v12 it wasn't exaclty chomping at the bit. The 12.5 mpg wasn't too inspiring either.

So, now there is now doubt in my mind that I NEED and 635. How could I ever have though otherwise?

Viva le Beemer I say!

Billy,

Auckland
New Zealand.

Sorry, that comment about guineas was very ignorant of me :uhoh: . To make up for that, here is the current exchange rate: 1 US dollar = 1.41 NZD. So you can multiply all my figures by 1.41 to get a better idea.

According to the data I have, the 3.6L engine was used in U.S.-spec XJ sedans through the 1989 model year--the 4.0 arrived for 1990. Since all American XJS's came only with a V-12 until 1993, there was no 3.6L in those cars.

I have no personal experience with British cars, but your comments unfortunately reinforce everything I have heard. Too bad.

I think the 635 would be the ultimate BMW coupe to buy unless I could afford an 8-Series--and those are still going for $14-15K (US) minimum over here.

I don't know if fuel prices have been going up where you are as much as they have been here, but premium just jumped from $2.39 to $2.47/gal. in ONE DAY--and it was $1.60 just two years ago. Five years ago, regular was $0.99/gal--ridiculous. I see why hybrid cars are becoming so popular.

Best of luck with your purchase.

British cars in my experience are (were) great except for the hideous electrics.
My Triumph Spitfire scared the hell out me on a country road one night, I was taking a steep corner at about 80 mph when halfway through the curve the headlights blacked out! I slammed on the brakes and found myself on the grass verge (how I didn't wrap the car round a tree I'll never know.) Luckily there was no other traffic.
I decided to sell the car after the headlamp switch decided to earth itself on the dashboard. This wouldn't have been a problem if Triumph in their infinate wisdom had seen fit to provide the car with a fuse on the lighting circuit. No fuse!!! (from memory there was only one fuse on the car).

The British and electrics dont mix. The only reason they dont make computers is beacause they couldnt figure out a way to make it leak oil.

I'm sold on a beemer. :-)

Billy.

Auckland
New Zealand

Presently, a Saab 9000 Turbo.

The Jaguar XJS was designed by Malcolm Sayer. He was one of the first engineers to apply principles of aerodynamics to car design. He designed the Jaguar C-Type (which won the 24 Hours of Le Mans in 1951 and 1953), the Jaguar D-Type (which won the 24 Hours of Le Mans in 1955, 1956, and 1957), and the Jaguar E-Type.

The 1993 XJS got a new 4.0 liter I-6 and 6.0 liter V-12.

Here is a website about Jaguar's I-6 and V-12.

http://www.jagweb.com/aj6eng/index.html

"Jaguar claimed more than a dozen wins in 1977 and 1978 (including seven in a row in 78), the drivers' titles in 77 and 78 and the 78 manufacturer's crown [in the Trans-Am Series with the help of Group 44] before moving on to prototype racing and an eventual Le Mans 24 Hour assault."

- Jaguar brochure

http://jaguarracing.wz.cz/Racingcars/xj-s44.jpg

http://jaguarracing.wz.cz/Racingcars/xj-s44_1.jpg

I think the 1988 635CSi got a more powerful engine.