Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#22
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Adrian wrote: (Andrew Robert Breen) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: Except that they've also (in some cases) switched to aluminium monocoque construnction, which should make them lighter, just as it has in cars Hmmm.. 1968 Jaguar XJ6 4.2: weight 1537 kg. 2008 Jaguar XJ-R: 1659 kg. Small problem there... The X308 steel predecessor to the X350 ally XJ was about 200kg heavier than the X350. After the "Series" XJs, which would have steadily put on weight from the s1 you quote above, the late '80s/early '90s XJ40 was north of 1800kg. Sure - but the XJ40 had most of the crash-resistance measures in place. The OP's position was that crash protection couldn't add that much weight.. -- Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair) |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Wagn Rolling Stock | London Transport | |||
Wagn Rolling Stock | London Transport | |||
East London Line Rolling Stock Proposals | London Transport | |||
Rolling stock losses in the bombs | London Transport | |||
LUL rolling stock question | London Transport |