>I'm looking for some advice on the possible purchase of a
>1967 Jaguar XKE 2+2 4.2L. The owner is asking $9000 but will negotiate.
>Have not yet seen the car (it's in New York). Some of the particulars,
>according to the owner:
$9k is a little high. You can get a rust free California car for
that much. $7k is more reasonable.
>*Minor rust on rear quarter panels and rockers panels, roof in primer.
> Haven't got word on whether there's any rust on frame or evidence
> of collision repair, but I am assuming no major gotchas here.
No such thing as "minor" rust! Sounds dodgy, especially the roof.
>*100K miles on car, 20K since engine top-end rebuilt (valves ground or
> replaced) and two pistons/rings replaced. Says it runs strong, no
> noises or smoke
Why did he only do 2 pistons? Stingy on maintenace? Look carefuuly
at oil pressure.
>*Original leather interior in good condition
>*Car in general is supposed to be very original. Has original radio,
> tools, owner's manual. Good chrome.
>*Recent clutch and brake work. Carbs rebuilt.
Good, its not an atomatic 2+2. Triple carbs I hope
>Is this a reasonable price? I've always loved XKEs but have
>always been afraid of Jaguars, which has been reinforced by
>reading some of the horror stories posted here.
>
>Is the 4.2 engine as unreliable as the 12 Cyl? Would I be looking
>at spending more than the purchase price to make this a presentable,
>driveable car (NOT a show car)? Is this car put together any
>better than the notorious 70s-early 80s Jags?
>
A mid sixties Jag is well engineered and extremely reliable IF
well maintained.
>In short, should I:
>(1) buy [after more investigation],
>(2) walk away, or
>(3) run away!!!
>Cast your vote today!
1! but at a price closer to $6k because it sounds like there's
a lot to be done. (3) if it shows accident damage, bent frame etc.
Its a 2+2, not as sought after because of its appearance,
but still a lot of fun.
Cheers, Patrick.
|