Subject: Time:12:33 PM
OFFICE MEMO Lucas Reputation Date:11/11/93
>Rick on the Jag-lovers group wrote: The fuse block in my '84 XJS is melted
around the wipers fuse.
>The fuse block(s) in my '66 3.8S are Bakelite and would withstand
a nuclear attack...
>Rick
This is a good lead into something I've been wondering about, and would like
to hear thoughts from other British car folk.
Question #1: Did the Lucas reputation for poor quality and reliability have an
identifyable beginning? That is, cars made after the year 19xx were noticably
unreliable because of electrical problems.
Question #2: Has there been a significant improvement in recent years, such
that one could say, "cars made after the year 19yy are much less likely to have
frequent electrical problems"?
Keep it separate from other problems in design or assembly such as Smiths
electrical parts, carbs, engine internals, suspension, body fit, clutch,
gearbox, etc.
Why do I wonder about such a question? My old faithful 1950 Jaguar Mark 5
really hasn't given me much trouble at all with electrical problems in the 24
years I've had it. Most of the wiring harness is original, as is almost
everything Lucas or Smiths on the car, including the starter, generator,
voltage regulator, fusebox, and all the dashboard switches and instruments. I
can forgive a car this old for an occasional corroded connector, but even that
doesn't happen that often.
My '74 Jaguar XJ12, on the other hand, has had numerous failures of relays,
switches, and alternators. The window lift rocker switches, for example, have a
habit of breaking their pivot pins, a glaringly poor design. But recently made
replacement relays and other parts seem to be holding up. The 5th alternator is
different from the others, and it has lasted a long time.
So what do the rest of you folks know of Lucas history?
|