1990 Jaguar Xjs, V12 (5.3l),very Clean,automatic,only 84k Miles,rust Free Az Car on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Thieves stole $3.7 million worth of Jaguar Land Rover engines

This past Tuesday was not a good one for Jaguar Land Rover. According to British news source Birmingham Mail, just over $3.7 million worth of engines were stolen from the company's factory in Solihull, England. Reportedly, the thieves drove up to the facility in a stolen semi-truck, found a trailer full of engines, hooked it up, and drove off. The thieves did this twice in one night, with the same truck, and got the first trailer in just six minutes. Perhaps more shocking is that Birmingham Mail reports this is the second time a theft of this type has occurred at the facility. The previous time happened in almost exactly the same way, but the engines taken were valued at just over $1.2 million, and five people were convicted of the crime. Currently, local police are looking for the latest suspects and the engines. The trailers were found, but were empty. We got in touch with a Jaguar representative who provided us the company's official statement: "We can confirm that we are working closely with West Midlands Police to investigate the theft of engines from the Solihull manufacturing plant. A reward is on offer to anyone who has information which leads to the successful recovery of these engines. It would be inappropriate for us to make any further comment whilst this investigation is ongoing." This was the only statement he would provide, and didn't provide answers as to what engines were stolen and if there would be any impact on manufacturing or vehicle deliveries. But if you're in the UK, and you've got a tip, let the cops know. Related Video: Related Gallery 2017 Jaguar F-Pace View 46 Photos News Source: Birmingham Mail, JaguarImage Credit: Jaguar Plants/Manufacturing Weird Car News Jaguar Land Rover Luxury jaguar land rover

Jaguar solution to keyless start could save lives

UPDATED: An earlier version of this story indicated the Jaguar keyless start function was meant as a safety feature, when in fact, it is meant as a convenience one and will not work as described if automatic stop/start is not engaged. Today, The New York Times published an article about more than two dozen deaths related to drivers accidentally leaving their cars running, closing their garages and later succumbing to carbon monoxide that flooded their homes. The reason has been identified as "keyless start" features, or proximity entry and push-button start, where owners don't need to physically handle a key or fob to gain entry into the vehicle or start it. It is the latest, and deadliest, issue raised with this system after those related to security and simple inconvenience (for instance, leaving the car at a valet or car wash with the fob in your pocket). From my personal perspective, The New York Times had a rather harsh "evil carmakers" tone throughout the article. This is not a matter of a known faulty component, as with the GM ignition switch recall. This has as much to do with user error where people leave their car without pressing the "off" button and without noticing the engine is still running. About half of the cars in question are produced by Toyota and Lexus, brands that have offered keyless start longer than most. They are also brands with high rates of elderly owners, who seemingly made up a majority of reported deaths and injuries. One fire department in Florida even started a campaign alerting those in the area of the dangers of leaving your car running when it noticed a correlation between an increase in cars equipped with keyless start and calls related to carbon monoxide poisoning. I see several contributing issues at play, most of which go well beyond this particular issue. First is insufficient training of owners by dealers and/or owners not paying close enough attention during this training. Cars are complicated, but you should at least know how basic functions work. Second, woefully inadequate driver training in this country. Third, and with apologies to the AARP, insufficient testing of elderly drivers and/or insufficiently low standards for elderly drivers. If you don't know you have to shut the car off or cannot hear that an engine is running, perhaps you shouldn't be driving. Fourth, re-examining keyless start systems.

2021 Jaguar F-Type Luggage Test | Get away, and look extremely good doing it

Just like the Porsche 911 I performed a luggage test on not too long ago, the 2021 Jaguar F-Type is not a luggage-hauling machine. It’s a sports-car-oriented grand tourer, and it also happens to be stonking fast with a supercharged V8 under the hood. Since the engine is in the front, that leaves the rear trunk for all the cargo coming onboard. Assuming you want to take your F-Type on vacations and longer journeys (you do), the respectably-sized boot will come in handy. Jaguar says the coupe (what weÂ’re testing) has 14.4 cubic feet of space, whereas the convertible just about cuts that space in half with only 7.3 cubes. From a numbers perspective, the Jag just edges out the 911 (13.8 cubic feet of space combined between the frunk and rear seat). However, weÂ’ve learned to never take those numbers at face value. I use different equipment than Riswick does in Portland: Two carry-on suitcases sized (24 inches long, 15.5 wide, 10 deep); one carry-on suitcase (21.7L x 13.7W x 9 D); one medium-size suitcase you have to check (24.5L x 16.8W x 11.5D) and one larger, full-size suitcase (33.8L x 21.5W x 13D). The second full-size suitcase didnÂ’t get the call up, because one look at the luggage compartment was all I needed to know that two of them werenÂ’t going in there. Getting into the luggage compartment is luxurious enough for a Jag. Use the button on the fob, a toggle switch on the interior, or press the button under the lid. ItÂ’s fully powered going up and down, so you can devote all of your bodyÂ’s energy to wrestling the car around corners. The space itself is rather shallow and hindered by a privacy cover that hangs low. YouÂ’ll need to remove that shade to take advantage of the entire space, but we started with it on to see what could fit under it. This F-Type is low, so even though you have to lift things over the rear bumper, itÂ’s not horribly strenuous. I initially slid two of the carry-on suitcases in. Those fit lying flat, but there wasnÂ’t much extra space. To take advantage of what was left, I squeezed in the fancy bag (22L x 8.8W x 12D). With the privacy shade intact, youÂ’re not going to fit any more suitcases than that due to height restrictions. A very shallow item could slide on top of the inboard suitcase, but it would have to be very short. Another configuration I tried showed that the medium suitcase and one carry-on could fit. Additionally, the full-size suitcase also fits if itÂ’s in there alone.