Could this be a nikasil problem?

If a 1998 engine nikasil has not been 'repaired' by Jaguar, then I would run
a mile and forget about it.
Also check if the timing chain tentioner has been replaced. These are a weak
point and do a lot of damage when they fail

"Nein!" wrote in message

> While looking at a 1998 XK8, the car turned over just fine from cold but
> would not start. The salesman hooked the battery up to a jumper box,
> cranked the car again hooked up to the box, and it fired right up. He
> said they had just run the car a day before, so I don't think it had been
> sitting for long unstarted. I had read engines with nikasil problems
> failed to start from cold, so I was curious, but obviously a jumper box
> isn't going to restore compression but I just wanted to make sure. The
> car has 75000 miles, should I be scared to buy it in fear that it could
> develop a problem down the road?
 >> Stay informed about: Could this be a nikasil problem? 

Well, run might be too strong. Get the dealer to have a blow-by test done at
the Jaguar garage. If this is satisfactory on all cylinders, then you'll
probably be OK, just don't do short journeys, change the oil every 3K and
only use good gas (read no supermarket crud)....

"z" wrote in message
> If a 1998 engine nikasil has not been 'repaired' by Jaguar, then I would
> run a mile and forget about it.
> Also check if the timing chain tentioner has been replaced. These are a
> weak point and do a lot of damage when they fail
>
> "Nein!" wrote in message
>
>> While looking at a 1998 XK8, the car turned over just fine from cold but
>> would not start. The salesman hooked the battery up to a jumper box,
>> cranked the car again hooked up to the box, and it fired right up. He
>> said they had just run the car a day before, so I don't think it had been
>> sitting for long unstarted. I had read engines with nikasil problems
>> failed to start from cold, so I was curious, but obviously a jumper box
>> isn't going to restore compression but I just wanted to make sure. The
>> car has 75000 miles, should I be scared to buy it in fear that it could
>> develop a problem down the road?
>
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Could this be a nikasil problem? 

Kinda funny reading this group about chain tensioners and Nikasil- I had 2
'88 XJ 6's and still have an 89 XJS V12-
The S still runs like new at 60,000 with only normal maintenence over the
years. One of the XJ6's went 175,000 before an accident sent it to the
junkyard- the other one went 250,000 before the paint and interior were too
far gone for any practical repair. It was still running on the original
motor when the local charity guys came and picked it up.
After Ford took over, it was supposed to be better quality control,
technology etc. but I never saw that happen.

"Barney Rubble" wrote in message

> Well, run might be too strong. Get the dealer to have a blow-by test done
at
> the Jaguar garage. If this is satisfactory on all cylinders, then you'll
> probably be OK, just don't do short journeys, change the oil every 3K and
> only use good gas (read no supermarket crud)....
>
> "z" wrote in message

> > If a 1998 engine nikasil has not been 'repaired' by Jaguar, then I would
> > run a mile and forget about it.
> > Also check if the timing chain tentioner has been replaced. These are a
> > weak point and do a lot of damage when they fail
> >
> > "Nein!" wrote in message
> >
> >> While looking at a 1998 XK8, the car turned over just fine from cold
but
> >> would not start. The salesman hooked the battery up to a jumper box,
> >> cranked the car again hooked up to the box, and it fired right up. He
> >> said they had just run the car a day before, so I don't think it had
been
> >> sitting for long unstarted. I had read engines with nikasil problems
> >> failed to start from cold, so I was curious, but obviously a jumper box
> >> isn't going to restore compression but I just wanted to make sure. The
> >> car has 75000 miles, should I be scared to buy it in fear that it could

> >> develop a problem down the road?
> >
> >
> >
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Could this be a nikasil problem? 

> After Ford took over, it was supposed to be better quality control,
> technology etc. but I never saw that happen.

I think on the whole it has. You've had some good experiences, but at one
time Jaguar had tremendous problems with quality - very often with
components bought it.

The cam chain tensioner is actually a design fault, rather than what most
people would think of as a quality problem. Of course, it is actually a
problem with the quality of the design process.

My biggest complaint is that Jaguar should shoulder the entire cost of this
problem. Apparently the type 1 tensioners would start to fail after only
50,000 miles or so. The fact that Jaguar think an engine life of 50,000
miles is acceptable pisses me off no end.

Mine's done 90,000, and I still think that is an unacceptably low mileage
for an engine to fail.

Obviously, random blow-ups occur, but this is different - it is a systematic
fault which means that every early V8 out there is a potential time bomb.
And Jaguar refuse to do anything about it.

SteveT
 >> Stay informed about: Could this be a nikasil problem? 

Steve Thackery wrote:
> I think on the whole it has. You've had some good experiences, but at
> one time Jaguar had tremendous problems with quality - very often with
> components bought it.

The E-type was once described as the "fastest disappearing car in the
world, and that was before you turned on the engine" in reference to the
fact that the E-type could rust away whilst you were watching it. In
Jaguar's defence, BMW's from the same period were little better. Only
the Japanese had come to grips with the corrosion problems.

My wife's S-type is around 7 years old, and no signs of rust. An early
E-type would have needed welding by now, so definite progress there.

--
Steve Swift
http://www.swiftys.org.uk/swifty.html
http://www.ringers.org.uk
 >> Stay informed about: Could this be a nikasil problem? 

Right you are!


Tue, 04 Dec 2007 18:27:44 +0000, Steve Swift
wrote:

>Steve Thackery wrote:
>> I think on the whole it has. You've had some good experiences, but at
>> one time Jaguar had tremendous problems with quality - very often with
>> components bought it.
>
>The E-type was once described as the "fastest disappearing car in the
>world, and that was before you turned on the engine" in reference to the
>fact that the E-type could rust away whilst you were watching it. In
>Jaguar's defence, BMW's from the same period were little better. Only
>the Japanese had come to grips with the corrosion problems.
>
>My wife's S-type is around 7 years old, and no signs of rust. An early
>E-type would have needed welding by now, so definite progress there.
 >> Stay informed about: Could this be a nikasil problem?