Welcome back! We’re up to the letter J in our alphabetic celebration of crappy cars, and today, the British are coming. Only this time, it’s two by land. Or, unfortunately, two by tow truck, but we’ll get to that in a minute.
Wow, you all really hated that lifted Amigo yesterday. That’s the most lopsided vote we’ve had in a while. It actually did worse than that poor Bitter SC we looked at back at the beginning of the alphabet. Guess you’d all rather play GI Joe with that Canadian military truck.
Fine by me; I’ll take the big Tonka truck, and you can’t play. I’ll be doing donuts in a field while listening to the appropriate soundtrack for this vehicle. Correct grammar be damned; sometimes you really don’t need nothin’ but a good time.
Now, you might think, this site’s editor-in-chief being who he is and all, that I would have a mandate to feature two Jeeps when I got to the letter J. But I do what I want. Therefore, I am subjecting you to two very cool, very derelict old British cars. They’re priced a little higher than some other non-runners we’ve looked at, but shitboxes are shitboxes still, no matter the price.
1961 Jaguar Mark II 3.8 – $7,000
Engine/drivetrain: 3.8 liter dual overhead cam inline 6, four-speed manual w/overdrive, RWD
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
Odometer reading: 70,000 miles
Operational status: “It used to run great but we haven’t driven it in years”
“Grace, Space, Pace” was the tagline used by Jaguar for its sedans (or rather, saloons) in the 1950s and 60s. These cars were stylish, comfortable, and legitimately fast – 0-60 in eight and a half seconds, and a top speed of 125 miles an hour, with leather and wood all over the interior, and a smooth ride thanks to a fully independent suspension. Jaguars may be something of a punchline these days, with their pink concept cars and weird advertising, but back in 1961 they were a force to be reckoned with.
That performance comes courtesy of Jaguar’s XK inline six, the same engine found under the E-Type’s long bonnet. Here it puts out 220 horsepower, and drives the rear wheels through a four-speed manual with electric overdrive. The seller has owned this example for thirty years, but they haven’t driven this car in ages. It ran great when they parked it, so they claim, but now it will need some work to get it going again.
And that’s not the only work it needs. The wood in the interior is in rough shape. The leather seats look all right, but they’ll need gallons of that reconditioner stuff. The carpet is MIA, but that just means you don’t have to remove it before you get to work on patching up the rusty floors.
Actually, the seller says the rust “isn’t bad,” and I agree, at least based on the photos. The floors need some work, and the ad mentions the battery tray, but the rest of the body looks good. It was originally maroon, the seller says, but it came to them in this green and tan combination. I like it, personally, and I bet it would shine up well.
1972 Jensen Interceptor MkIII – $13,750
Engine/drivetrain: 440 cubic inch overhead valve V8, three-speed automatic, RWD
Location: Beverly Hills, CA
Odometer reading: 55,000 miles
Operational status: Not running – I think it has been sitting for years
European automakers in the 1960s had a love affair with American V8 power. Italian maker Iso used Chevrolet V8s in their grand tourers, DeTomaso chose Ford power for its Mangusta and Pantera mid-engine sports cars, and AC in Britain, after the success of the Cobra, chose Ford power for its short-lived Frua 428. Jensen chose the smallest of the Big Three, Chrysler, to provide power for this car, the Interceptor.
This ’72 Interceptor is powered by a Chrysler 440 cubic inch V8, with a four-barrel carb and a Torqueflite automatic. This standard Interceptor is rear-wheel-drive, but Jensen made an all-wheel-drive version called the FF, years before Subaru or Audi added AWD systems to regular passenger cars. You won’t find one of those for sale, though; only about three hundred were built. This Interceptor is for sale at a dealership in Beverly Hills, and all they say about its mechanical condition is that it is “not currently running.” But that’s the nice thing about a common American V8 drivetrain – parts to get it going again are available anywhere.
It doesn’t look too bad inside, except for the carpet and some cracks in the vinyl. The front seats look nice, and the back is all right except for a popped seam. The wood on the center console could use a little help as well. But I certainly wouldn’t call it trashed. It has air conditioning, but there’s no way to know if it works until you get it running again.
It needs some help outside. The paint on the roof is trashed, and the hood appears to actually have holes in it. But what’s weird is that it looks like it rusted from the inside out. I’m not sure how that could happen in the middle of the hood. Honestly, I’d be tempted to just leave it; call them “speed holes” and make the folks at car shows deal with them.
You’d have your work cut out for you with either of these, and I’m not sure either one is worth more than a mechanical restoration to get them running, and then enjoy them as-is. They’d be conversation-starters, that’s for sure. I mean, when is the last time you saw an old Jaguar saloon or a Jensen Interceptor, let alone a ratty one? Mechanical parts aren’t a problem for either one, so it’s just a matter of which one you’re more willing to work on.
I’ll take the Jensen and get it doing burnouts for a few hundred bucks.The Jag is just not my cup of tea.
Me: Why haven’t they driven the Jag to keep it healthy all of these years? (Looks at interior.) Oh…..
I’m not a Jensen fan, but it looks closer to my standards than the Jag, and at least it is interesting.
Holy shit! I mean…holy bonnet!
I do like both of these body styles, but gotta go Jensen since I prefer that a little more because 2-dr and it’s a more unique brand. Plus Mopar 440 V8! Too bad it’s an auto- I’d find a way to manual swap. It’s just such a cooler, fun car. The interior on the Jaaaaaaaaaag is just terrible and not really worth fixing up unless you had a ton of $
I have always wanted a Jensen,they’re the awesomest of the defunct British car makers yet,except TVR of course.
I absolutely adore the Interceptor, so despite the rust, I’m voting for it. Too bad it doesn’t have the rear louvers, though.
Did the Interceptors have padding on the inside of the engine compartment ?
That would possibly explain the condition of the hood if it trapped moisture.
There is some disconcerting corrosion on the Interceptor, that somehow isn’t persuading me to vote Jag.. The trim rings around the gauges are rusty… weird.
There’s also a lot of more interior damage hiding just out of frame in the photos. Also too many photos of the not rusty parts.. but, still voting Jenson, now if the Jag was a Mk3..
Watch nerd action here the speedo and presumably the tach are Jaeger (jayjay) part of the watch company, Jaeger-LeCoultre, I knew they made early car instrumentation (like 1910 early), but had no idea it went into the 70’s. I don’t know about their accuracy, but one would have to imagine since they have been a primer watch company since their inception they were good. So a rebuild of the speedo might cost more than the rebuild of the engine.
FYI that interior wood is plastic in the convertible JH probably the same here though you can buy real wood replacement parts. As for the hood rusting from the inside I would bet the Interceptor suffered from the dreaded melting T in the fuel line and that the none to rare engine fire resulted. I still picked this as these go for some money when in good condition.
Jaaaaag for me even though it needs a good amount of work and when you take the cost of the work needed along with the purchase price, it’ll probably have an on-the-road price that is double of the Jensen.
But it’s manual and I just love how it looks.
Jag plus om606 not fun to shoe horn it but better then trying to deal with whatever lucus might be lurking under there.
They’re both too expensive, but that Jag will never run unless you’re a Jaguar savant with magical abilities. The Jensen’s much more badass anyway, so go with that one.
I like the Jenson as a car better. But I wouldn’t keep either. It would be more of a get-it-driving-and-enjoy-it-awhile-then-sell-it kinda car. And the Jag has a lower entry fee
The drivetrain parts on the Jensen may be easy, but they are not cheap cars to run or restore. However, it looks to be in better shape, I’d much rather have it in the end, and (without looking up values) it’s got to be worth more.
Neither of these will be affordable to restore and maintain. I can’t imagine what replacement glass would run for the Jensen. A Lexan replica is $840+
That Jensen is way cooler than the Jag. But given the unusual location of that rust, I would have the Interceptor checked real closely for flood damage. Just a hunch.
I love the look of the Jaguar, though that interceptor rear window is interesting. Is that a hatchback?
I’m seeing a pattern in my votes here. Every time, I end up in the minority. I guess it’s because I don’t really KNOW cars and vote for the ones that look most interesting to me.
I keep entertaining the idea of getting a project car, but then I vote for a loser and read the comments to find out why it’s a bad idea. Then I think “But I like this one anyway.” Whatever happens, I’m sure that a project car will someday be more project than I bargain for.
Heaven help me, I kind of want both and I know what an unwise decision either of these would be. But if I have to choose, I already have a Jag and I’ve always loved those Interceptors plus I’m an old-school Mopar fan so Jensen it is.
About 15 years ago, a friend of mine showed up with a similar Jaguar at my house and wanted me to get it running again. I looked at it and knew it needed far more work than I wanted to do it it. Luckily for me, some other guy knocked on my door about 2 weeks later and asked how much for the Jag. I put him in touch with my friend and the Jaguar disappeared a week or so later with me having done not a damn thing to it. I was quite relieved. So I’ll take the Jenson, please.
The smart choice here is the Jensen, but I voted for the Jag anyway.
Interceptor, because easy engine parts and the name. I mean, Interceptor.
Uh, Mark?
I’m expecting a Shitbox Showdown between a burnt-out frame on the side of the highway and a Saab 900 with Mark choosing the ashes.