SUPERCAR SUNDAY has returned!!!

Too bad about the front license plate on the Jag.

That's a 2+2 Jag, and it kind of loses that look that old Enzo raved about.  Yes, he did compliment the first iteration of the XKE as being exceptionally well styled.

Not sure what he would say about the 2+2 version, looking somewhat bloated.

I still can't figure out who wanted a four seater XKE...it's a sport car, not a saloon.

@Bob: IM S6 posted:

That's a 2+2 Jag, and it kind of loses that look that old Enzo raved about.  Yes, he did compliment the first iteration of the XKE as being exceptionally well styled.

Not sure what he would say about the 2+2 version, looking somewhat bloated.

I still can't figure out who wanted a four seater XKE...it's a sport car, not a saloon.

I submit into evidence....the Porsche Panamera

I'm with you Bob. The 2+2 just doesn't look quite right.

@Bob: IM S6 @DannyP points well taken....but what a great car and piece of motoring history!...perhaps a british doctor or lawyer or stock broker type wanted the family to also enjoy the E-TYPE .....i see lots of cars at these events....and i appreciate "unique" & original (only original once).....i am guilty of being a bit jaded and only snap away at stuff that "moves me"... no pun intended

while i'm in the mood...and to show it's not always about PORSCHE....a little taste of HOT ROD day....since i'm in my 60's....i also like "old school"

@Michael McKelvey posted:

Too bad about the front license plate on the Jag.

That's California for you! Though, the owner can always go without a front plate and "tempt fate"...knowing that gives any traffic officer the probable cause needed to pull him/her over and run through the myriad of DMV's regulations and requirements to legally drive in our "anal" state. Personally, I believe the odds of a clean E-Jag or Clown Car being stopped are minimal unless the driver has done something "stupid"...but, then again, this is the Granola State and stupidity prevails!

@Napa Paul you are correct sir with your comment....if our INSANE LEFTIST SNAKE GOV of what once was the golden state directed law enforcement to write FIX IT TICKETS at car shows for no front plate....then they would be able to fund all their climate fixes and pay for the undocumented...but in doing so would incur the RATH of "we the people" for their selective choices of which laws to enforce....sorry for the TABOO opinion and THREAD DRIFT since that talk is kinda not allowed here...my bad...but also as always IMHO

Back when Michigan required a front plate I went without one on my Lotus Europa.  One time I got stopped just because the cop wanted to see the car.

Thanks as always for the cool (or should I say kewl?) photos Jim.  

I believe front plates have been officially required in California since the mid 50s (and for most of the years before then).  The Governors of our great state have been republican a bit more than half the time since the mid 50s, including Reagan and the not-a-girly-man Ahh-nold.  So I don’t think it’s a political issue from where I’m sitting.

My plan will be to carry my front plate in the passenger cabin somewhere.  My car won’t have bumpers, so it seems to me I’d need to drill holes to mount a front plate.  

Jon

There are removable and hidden(flick a switch and it appears!) front plate holders available if needed.

You could also put a couple nutserts in the body before paint and presto, quick and removable. It would be legal to drive and looking cool at car shows. This id probably the cheapest option.

@jncspyder I like almost all Jags, especially the XKE droptop. The hardtop version is cool too, pre stupid headlight thank you.

@jncspyder posted:

@Napa Paul you are correct sir with your comment....if our INSANE LEFTIST SNAKE GOV of what once was the golden state directed law enforcement to write FIX IT TICKETS at car shows for no front plate....then they would be able to fund all their climate fixes and pay for the undocumented...but in doing so would incur the RATH of "we the people" for their selective choices of which laws to enforce....sorry for the TABOO opinion and THREAD DRIFT since that talk is kinda not allowed here...my bad...but also as always IMHO

damn dude,,,U can always move out of state, maybe Alabama

@Jon T @barncobob forgive me if i ruffled some feathers....i know better from some previous past posts from the group on differing subjects....i guess what i was trying to say is that in calif...(which decades ago was a different place in my born & raised state).... it is still "existing law" to have a front plate...and regardless of comply or not comply.... wrong place, wrong "cop?"...they can write tickets all day long if they choose to do so...and i should have left it at that....peace everyone & happy motoring

No offense taken Jim, we’re good.  I’m just saying we’ve been required to run front plates for longer than I’ve been alive.

@Jon T posted:

I believe front plates have been officially required in California since the mid 50s (and for most of the years before then).  

My plan will be to carry my front plate in the passenger cabin somewhere.  My car won’t have bumpers, so it seems to me I’d need to drill holes to mount a front plate.  

Jon

1911 is when California started to require a front plate. The first cars to be registered in California were registered in 1904 and you had to provide your own plate. In 1914 the state began issuing plates.

I don't know why the legislature began requiring a front plate in 1911 but I do know why they are needed today. A front plate is very beneficial for law enforcement purposes and I don't mean for the low hanging fruit reason of writing you a fix-it-ticket (FIT). A FIT costs more to issue than it generates since you usually only pay a processing fee and the violation goes away.

For 10 years I was on a fugitive team and we tracked down and arrested some of California's most violent offenders. During the surveillance of many an acquaintance of those fugitives I/we used the no front plate law to make an enforcement stop for the purpose of conducting a criminal investigation. Because birds of a feather flock together I could usually find something that would send the driver or a passenger to jail for the night. I could then use that leverage for good information about the fugitive I was looking for. Without that law I wouldn't be able to conduct an enforcement stop for the purpose of 'chatting" with the driver. I had to have a lawful reason to make the stop. That was just one of the tools I used in my job. During the time I was on that team we arrested 1,500 violent fugitives. Of those we arrested, 110 of them were wanted for murder or multiple murders. Of the remaining fugitives the average prison sentence received was about 20 years.

Do I disagree with traffic cops using that as the sole reason for the stop and issuing a FIT? Yes, because it wastes more time and money than it generates. But, on the flip side, we have to show we stop others for the offense and not just those we've profiled criminally. If you can't show that it is enforced equally then the violation could be taken off the books. So if you get a FIT for no front plate then just be creative when you attach it and have it signed off, pay the court costs, and take the plate off again.

FWIW, 30 of the 50 states require a front plate.

@Robert M  thanx for your law enforcement service to our golden state....and thanx for that informative stuff...very interesting   @Michael McKelvey    see what you got started by fussing about the jag's plate?.....haa!....just joshin'

FYI I see some 911s with a front plate that is attached low and angled facing the ground.