This is not an easy car to just do an Outtake on, given the weight of history it carries on its seductively-curved shoulders. But seeing this one posted at the Cohort by William Rubano just a few days after the 1948 Tasco makes it impossible to resist. The XK 120 was launched in 1948, and set the sports car world on its ear. It sported the brilliant new XK 3.4 L DOHC six engine, making 160 honest hp. That translated to a top speed of 125 mph, and a 10 second sprint to 60. Both those numbers were absolute dream figures at the time. Priced at $3,945 in the US ($38k adjusted), it wasn’t exactly cheap, but the dollar/performance ratio was unbeatable, especially compared to a similarly-priced Porsche with 60 hp.
The XK 120 sparked a huge sports car wave that swept across the country and that lasted well into the sixties. It was a formidable competitor at race tracks on every weekend. Its superb sleek lines inspired every sports car that followed it, from production cars to countless fiberglass roadsters cobbled up in the driveway (like future GM designer Wayne Kady’s here) or via body kits available from countless small manufacturers. In the fifties, “the Jaguar” was an icon, and the dream car of a generation.
To put that horsepower figure in perspective, IIRC the groundbreaking 1949 Cadillac V8 also put out 160 horsepower, and the original 1951 Chrysler FirePower hemi put out 180. The XK120 was anything but underpowered in 1948.
These are beautiful cars – I could gaze on the lines of one of these for hours on end.
The Jag XK 120 was one of the most beautiful cars ever created. But to compare a 120 to a coeval Porsche could not be done. Contrast, yes, but comparison, no. My friend had owned both back in the ’50s and ’60s. Jag-slow revving, torquey, somewhat ponderous handling, and the unmistakeable aroma of the eau de creosote floorboards, but a true chick magnet. The Porsche was the polar opposite-revvy, light on its feet. Even in the late ’60s, hauntingly-beautiful women with big sunglasses in their 356s would flash their headlights as they passed in the opposite direction while I played Porsche owner in my friend’s Speedster. The one thing that both cars shared were totally execrable heaters, a real downer in Chicago winters.
Agreed: apples and oranges. But I don’t agree about the “slow-revvy” and “revvy” part. The XK 120’s 3.4 had its power peak at 5000 rpm; the Porsche 1500 “Normal” at 4800 rpm. The rather rare Porsche Super upped that to 5000-5400 rpm.
Even the ultimate Porsche flat four (except the ultra-rare Carerra DOHCs) the Super 90 (1960) had its power peak at 5500 rpm. By that time, the Jag 3.8 had its power peak also at 5500 rpm. Porsche flat fours, based on the VW engine, were anything but revvy. That would come with the 911 2 liter flat six.
There’s no doubt that I’d have no choice but to take a Porsche 356 over the XK 120 for a number of reasons, most of all because I could never dream to fit behind the wheel of the Jag. I don’t know why they put the seat so close to the dash and wheel, but they did fix that problem with later versions, to some extent.
Ah, but that’s where the magic of an Iskendarian camshaft comes in. In 1964 a much older friend was rebuilding a 1957 Porsche Speedster in his garage in Isla Verde, Puerto Rico. I lived in the neighborhood and spent most of my spare time that summer working on the Speedster. My job was to bring the magnesium engine castings back to like-new condition with Gunk and a wire brush. Once the engine was completed it was stuck in the Speedster to break it in. It had a stinger exhaust system. Under 3000 rpm the thing sounded like a VW Bug with a bad muffler. But once it hit three grand most glorious sound emerged, sort of like the proverbial ripping canvas. I don’t know what the rev limit was, but the car topped out at about 115 mph on the way to the race track. As a teenager I didn’t get paid for my work, unless you count the gin and tonics I was fed to make the engine castings sparkle.
Even today it still looks gorgeous,I don’t care that it has a rubbish heater,Joe Lucas Prince of Darkness electrics,the engine is a brute to work on compared to OHV types or the thirst for petrol.I don’t even care that I couldn’t ever sit comfortably in it because I could still look at it.A 4 wheeled work of art,
Gem, that’s pretty much my take on the car too ever since I discovered in my early 20’s that I’m too tall to drive one.
Looks fast just sitting still — a good thing, have you seen film footage of XK120’s in races back then? Handling (and especially tires!) has come a long way.
Still, I wouldn’t kick one out of the garage for eating crackers…
Don’t get me wrong, I love old Jaguars and have no complaints about electrics or heaters etc ( though rust protection left something to be desired).
Nevertheless the XK120 was heavily influenced by late 30s BMW roadsters.
The XK120 was the marriage of BMW 328 and Chrysler Newport.
How many truly original cars were there ever? design is an endless river….
The Jag was influenced by many cars, including the Cisitalia and other early Pininfarina/Ferrari barchettas, as well as the many superb sports/tourers of the late thirties.
But what made the XK 120 so important is what it offered for the money in a production car. It was as beautiful and fast as a Ferrari and other rarities at half (or less) of the price. What a deal….
Jaguar has more of a “heritage” burden than most makes, and I think a lot of people would agree that they’ve turned their back on it… many would say for the better.
But they’re just talking about retro styling. What people often forget–and this is the true lost heritage–is the fact that Jags used to offer more performance for your buck than almost any other vehicle.
Dad had a used XK140 in college (early-mid 60s). He wanted the 120, but couldn’t find one. The 140 was apparently a dream to drive when it was tuned correctly, but he said it generally needed an adjustment of some kind at least once a month. At one point it required a $400 repair. This is in 1964 or so dollars. My grandfather was not pleased when presented with said bill.
It met a sad end when he lent it to a college buddy who promptly got into an accident with it. At least the guy worked all summer to pay Dad back for the car. For the rest of his youth, he drove a series of 1960s Galaxie convertibles. And ever since I got my first car, he has warned me not to lend a car to one of your friends.
Originally it was built to showcase the new DOHC engine but was so popular it went into production in steel instead of alloy, there is one cruising around here regularly yeah the owner is short but compared to junk like VWs these have great electrical systems if maintained properly.
In the great pantheon of the most beautifully styled, classic automobiles of all time, the XK120 roadster is in the top five of anyone’s list (and likely number one of most). Sure, it had its engineering and maintenance issues (even for 1948), but it had the performance to back up the looks, and the stunningly timeless design could easily put one in a museum, anywhere (and of any type, not just for automobiles).
The other thing that was prescient about the XK120, I suppose, is that it was essentially a show car that was pushed into production without the sort of development one might like for series-production cars. How often have we heard that story since?
Some lines are just classic. If you said to almost anyone with a little knowledge, “draw me a very late ’40 sports car,” you’d get this. Kind of like today’s ’66 Lincoln. “Draw me a classic ’60s American luxury car profile.” Skirts would be optional on either the ’40s sports car profile or the ’60s lux car.
The thing about the styling of XK120 is the complete lack of adornments on the sides, i.e., no chrome spears, moldings, coves, vents, etc. Not even so much as a chrome door handle. Just a small, vertical, body color vent door, and that’s it. It’s truly an organic shape.
I’m not much on 0-60 times, and I realize that one has to keep things in historical perspective. That was fast, when the car was new, I understand. But at the same time, it’s hard to wrap one’s mind around the idea that 0-60 in 10 sec. was fast. My grandmother’s Camry is considerably quicker.
Your grandmother’s Camry might be faster to 60, but you’re in a silent, enveloped cocoon during the process. The XK120 is a much more visceral, low to the ground, wind in your face, engine singing experience. It will be more exciting, even if technically no faster.
The performance compared to most cars of the day would be like a Corvette ZR1 compared with the Camry. Acceleration was usually quoted for 0-50 mph and even ignoring the missing 10mph, times were still slower.