mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Re: [Re: Poetry and Proper Name....]]

To: "James H. Nazarian Ph.D." <microdoc@apk.net>,
Subject: Re: [Re: [Re: Poetry and Proper Name....]]
From: Matthew Trebelhorn <matttrebelhorn@netscape.net>
Date: 15 Mar 00 18:07:56 EST
"James H. Nazarian, Ph.D." <microdoc@apk.net> wrote:
> My Jag had chrome lettering on the hatch (it was a 1964 4.2 Liter coupe)
that
> clearly said E-Type, as did the owner's manual. I think they were named
E-type by
> Jaguar, and are today properly called E-type not XKE.
> 
> Jim
> 
> Matthew Trebelhorn wrote:
> Jaguar only rarely
> > used the name E-Type.  

I was mistaken.  James Sr. and Allen are correct.  Trunk lettering, owner's
and shop manuals all are E-Type, not XK-E.

An insert in England's The Motor, March 1961, announces the Jaguar E-Type:
http://www.jag-lovers.com/brochures/adverts/1960/61_etype_insert_1_l.jpg

However, the rear cover of the May '61 Road & Track in the U.S. carried an ad
which announced "The New Jaguar XK-E"
http://www.jag-lovers.com/brochures/adverts/1960/r_t_05_61_bkcover_l.jpg

American advertising used XK-E quite a lot.  Of course, thy also go back and
forth on the OTS/Roadster question.  Probably safer to say that they should be
called E-Types.

I do, though, like the logic of the term XK-E.  A somewhat streetable D-type
was called the XK-SS, it seems like the street car "E" should be an XK, too. 
I guess my own appreciation of the logic overwhelmed my feeble memory.  Mea
culpa, and thanks to Allen and James.

M.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>