Chassis 850062

Talk about E-Types here

Topic author
tinworm
Posts: 350
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 9:48 am
Location: devon
Great Britain

#1 Chassis 850062

Post by tinworm » Sun Jul 12, 2020 1:12 pm

I see Steve Coogan and his E-type may be about to part company - it is offered at Silverstone auctions next sale. A side bonnet lock RHD car number 850062 it is pictured in the famous factory shot outside Browns lane with the first batch of demonstrators.
Looks like a fine job has been done by XK engineering- the shut lines look magnificent. I looked closely for the early features in the sequence of photos and I could not find anything amiss.
Early features noticed -
Riveted boot floor reinforcing channels
black front suspension
2 piece pillar chromes
c45 dynamo
bare metal (blacked) bolts
multi piece throttle linkage
rubber caps top of w/screen pillars
hard to see but could have the one piece tail pipe assembly

Very nice but you will need very deep pockets for this one £300 - 350K

Barrie
1968 E-type roadster, 1964 E-type fixed head 1995 Ferrari 355 1980 Ferrari 308 1987 V8 90 Landrover 1988 Bedford rascal van 1943 Ford GPW

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links


V12 Epyte
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:14 pm
Great Britain

#2 Re: chassis 62

Post by V12 Epyte » Sun Jul 12, 2020 2:55 pm

1971 Series 3 FHC 2+2 RHD Manual
1971 Series 3 Roadster 2+2 RHD Manual
1986 Rover SD1 Vitesse Twin Plenum

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

edriver
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2018 2:43 pm
Location: Upper Bavaria
Germany

#3 Re: chassis 62

Post by edriver » Sun Jul 12, 2020 6:07 pm

It does look nice! The AVON cross-ply CR39 Supersafety 640-15 are made for a top speed of 130km/h, according to the German AVON website. I thought already that this fits to a car that may not see spirited driving any more (like my 3hour drive today on narrow Bavarian roads - with 185/15 Michelins). But it turns out, it is translated wrong: 130mph is correct. I still stick to my tyre selection and let this opportunity pass :wink:
Klaus
1963 FHC 889633, 1979 Porsche 928, 1991 Mazda MX-5

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

Heuer
Administrator
Posts: 13399
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 5:29 pm
Location: Nottinghamshire
Great Britain

#4 Re: chassis 62

Post by Heuer » Mon Jul 13, 2020 1:23 pm

Nice car but ...

Steering wheel wrong colour and maybe wood - should be blonde as seen in the launch brochure
Image

Bumper rubbers wrong - should be narrow style on all early cars. Bumpers are also aligned badly, front and rear!
Image

Rust?
Image

Font on number plates not period correct
Image

Difficult to be certain given the poor quality photos but I don't think the hood is French Grey which is defined as a light greenish grey, much more green than grey. Looks more like light grey. E-Type hood colour sample book:
Image
Image

I also suspect the breather pipe is not held held in place by a Magnatex (Tex) 15 quick-release clip. Photos are poor resolution so difficult to be sure.
Image

In addition:
Panel gaps, especially the bonnet, are not good.
Resonators did not originally have visible welds.
Very early cars did not have the hardtop fixing chromes.
David Jones
S1 OTS OSB; S1 FHC ODB

Add your E-Type to our World Map: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1810

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links


Topic author
tinworm
Posts: 350
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 9:48 am
Location: devon
Great Britain

#5 Re: chassis 62

Post by tinworm » Mon Jul 13, 2020 2:46 pm

You have made some very interesting points David.
Looking at the bonnet shutlines, in the photos on the driveway the R/H sill to bonnet gap is too big but in other photos it looks pretty good - I wonder if the bonnet was not fully closed when the photo was taken.
Secondly the one piece exhaust tailpipe assembly would have been welded together by Jaguar and you say the welds would not have been visible - I would not know as I have never seen an original - so I assume you have ? Do you have an original photo you can share with us?

regards Barrie
1968 E-type roadster, 1964 E-type fixed head 1995 Ferrari 355 1980 Ferrari 308 1987 V8 90 Landrover 1988 Bedford rascal van 1943 Ford GPW

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

chrisfell
Posts: 1205
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 9:52 am
Location: Salisbury
St Lucia

#6 Re: chassis 62

Post by chrisfell » Mon Jul 13, 2020 3:59 pm

The car looked very special when it was first presented about a year ago. I can’t see what others see in the shutlines. As I recall the car was as near perfect as I have ever seen.
Image

Image

Image
The other bonnet in this last photo belongs to another of the cars assembled for that famous photo in the rain in July 1961, chassis 36, 3800RW.
Chris '67 S1 2+2

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links


Topic author
tinworm
Posts: 350
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 9:48 am
Location: devon
Great Britain

#7 Re: chassis 62

Post by tinworm » Mon Jul 13, 2020 5:26 pm

I have viewed more impressive cars but they were American and usually over restored. Nice if that is what you want but Browns lane produce was never that good.

Cheers Barrie
1968 E-type roadster, 1964 E-type fixed head 1995 Ferrari 355 1980 Ferrari 308 1987 V8 90 Landrover 1988 Bedford rascal van 1943 Ford GPW

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

Philk
Posts: 391
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 7:48 am
Great Britain

#8 Re: chassis 62

Post by Philk » Mon Jul 13, 2020 5:32 pm

I have to confess to loving the colour. Agree with David on the points he's made. Particularly re the rubbers around the bumpers and the steering wheel. The latter looks way too dark and glossy. I was also surprised to see the rust on the bolt near the commission plate and also elsewhere in that picture.
Phil
1964 S1 3.8 OTS

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

Heuer
Administrator
Posts: 13399
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 5:29 pm
Location: Nottinghamshire
Great Britain

#9 Re: chassis 62

Post by Heuer » Mon Jul 13, 2020 5:52 pm

Wrong battery decal I can now see. This would be close although used from 1965 onwards: https://weskcar.com/product/lucas-batte ... icker-kit/

Up until then the battery would have looked like this:
Image

Both available as reproductions. That gold/red decal is so out of place.

Chris's photos are much better and the shut lines look very good. Wonder what happened to make the bonnet go out of alignment. No excuse for the wonky bumpers though! Wipers need adjusting as they are too high on the screen.

Hood is the wrong colour, the green car behind has a French Grey colour hood.

Estimate: £300,000 - £350,000 Subject to 12.5% +VAT Buyer's Premium

If you are going to charge that much it needs to be perfect. Still, the new owner could take it to Angus and get the job done properly (he also has the correct bumper rubbers).
tinworm wrote:
Mon Jul 13, 2020 5:26 pm
but Browns lane produce was never that good.
The Factory was very good especially as the first 500 were hand fettled. Have a look at Angus's very original 4.2 FHC and you will see how good they were.
David Jones
S1 OTS OSB; S1 FHC ODB

Add your E-Type to our World Map: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1810

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links


Robbiee
Posts: 471
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2015 12:07 pm
Location: Derbyshire

#10 Re: chassis 62

Post by Robbiee » Mon Jul 13, 2020 9:52 pm

Just by the way...what colour should the bracket for the clutch/break reservoir bottles be?
The one here looks like dove grey possibly
My original one(March ‘62) has black paint
Robbie
Robbie 1962 3.8 Coupe OSG 1962 OTS ODG

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links


Ian Howe
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:57 pm
Great Britain

#11 Re: chassis 62

Post by Ian Howe » Tue Jul 14, 2020 5:04 am

Do you mind if I say a few words.

As someone trying to restore an early car, from the photographs I can appreciate the work and attention to detail that has gone into this car. On the other hand, there are some features that have been highlighted that could be improved upon by the new owner, if they choose.

We are still learning - take for example the breather pipe clip - whilst I have not seen a Magnatex clip it does not mean they were not fitted. However, my car will have the Cheney 1A clip it came with. Does this mean my car will be incorrect?

French Grey hood - as someone trying to source this colour it appears it is not available!

In terms of 'early features' it is important to reference the body number. The first 25ish RHD cars were produced quickly then there was a gap in RHD production for LHD. This 'early' RHD car has body number R1236 which equates to a LHD car with a VIN in the region of 875150 - quite late in terms of some early features that changed rapidly (in body number sequence) during initial production.

Some changes were not documented and it is difficult/impossible to be certain when discussing this level of detail. Personally, I am surprised at the boot pop-riveted reinforcing channel and the single thin boot hinges on such a late body number. But as I said, we are all still learning.

Ian
Last edited by Ian Howe on Tue Jul 14, 2020 6:04 am, edited 2 times in total.

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

chrisfell
Posts: 1205
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 9:52 am
Location: Salisbury
St Lucia

#12 Re: chassis 62

Post by chrisfell » Tue Jul 14, 2020 5:53 am

And, please don’t forget that when these particular cars were being made, the factory was overwhelmed with orders. “Cars were completed with whatever was to hand just to get them out of the door.” These words were spoken to me, personally, by someone who was there, at the time.
Chris '67 S1 2+2

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

splosh
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2014 12:03 am
Great Britain

#13 Re: chassis 62

Post by splosh » Tue Jul 14, 2020 12:17 pm

This car is not original. Its been recently altered to make it look like an early car with alterations to the Boot hinges. Previously it wore later style hinges when it was a Red car. and the boot drain outlet is as per later cars being on the side.

And now the car has been recreated to appear to be an early car with the early single boot lid hinge and the boot lid drain in the centre of the car. Fuel tank is a later replacement.

Fuel filler cap cover previously later production..
Image


Certainly not an early original car. Caveat emptor..
Hubkem 2 copy.jpg
Hubkem 2 copy.jpg (137.2 KiB) Viewed 1830 times
Attachments
31 copy.jpg
31 copy.jpg (52.58 KiB) Viewed 1830 times
Clive
August 1961 Flat floor ots

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links


Topic author
tinworm
Posts: 350
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 9:48 am
Location: devon
Great Britain

#14 Re: chassis 62

Post by tinworm » Tue Jul 14, 2020 12:54 pm

You think it's been re-bodied in the past Clive - I see the points you indicate . More than one of those about by now I would have thought . You can't really get away from it can you.
Reminds me of a certain red roadster which is in that photo from Browns lane.
I was looking at the XKE data stats the other day and was not surprised to learn that the most prolific survivors are indeed the 3.8 OTS cars . Over 50% have remained on this earth - and I expect that will creep up over time especially if they make £350K when (re) built


Barrie
1968 E-type roadster, 1964 E-type fixed head 1995 Ferrari 355 1980 Ferrari 308 1987 V8 90 Landrover 1988 Bedford rascal van 1943 Ford GPW

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

Heuer
Administrator
Posts: 13399
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 5:29 pm
Location: Nottinghamshire
Great Britain

#15 Re: chassis 62

Post by Heuer » Tue Jul 14, 2020 2:03 pm

splosh wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 12:17 pm
This car is not original. Its been recently altered to make it look like an early car with alterations to the Boot hinges. Previously it wore later style hinges when it was a Red car. and the boot drain outlet is as per later cars being on the side. And now the car has been recreated to appear to be an early car with the early single boot lid hinge and the boot lid drain in the centre of the car.
Correct - Single hinges were used until about June 1961 #875100 (875100 Dual, 875103 Single, 875115 Dual) and Dual until about September 1961 #875778 with the thick single cast used from #875779 onward. So this car would have had dual at the Factory which were changed to single solid during an earlier restoration/rebody and then incorrectly put back to single hinges. :roll:
Ian Howe wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 5:04 am
In terms of 'early features' it is important to reference the body number. The first 25ish RHD cars were produced quickly then there was a gap in RHD production for LHD. This 'early' RHD car has body number R1236 which equates to a LHD car with a VIN in the region of 875150 - quite late in terms of some early features that changed rapidly (in body number sequence) during initial production.
Does that mean it was not featured in the July 'Famous 56' Factory photograph?

From the official blurb: "Much like many of its sister cars, #62 had over the years lost some of its distinguishing early features, which had partly helped to hide the significance of this car. The car most importantly retains its original matching numbers body (although naturally a number of panels had been replaced) and engine - including matching cylinder head - as well as the original Moss gearbox."

I understand it had a scalloped rear bulkhead and a later bonnet in 2016 - so yes Barrie, probably re-bodied. Look, no OBL fitings:
Image
David Jones
S1 OTS OSB; S1 FHC ODB

Add your E-Type to our World Map: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1810

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links


Joes66
Posts: 100
Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2020 7:16 am
Great Britain

#16 Re: chassis 62

Post by Joes66 » Tue Jul 14, 2020 3:17 pm

Interesting
I guess you have to be careful when you buy an expensive fully restored classic
I wonder what car it was or is?
Maybe 2 or even 3 cars?
I have come across this before on classic cars where they have had a chequered life
Most of the car is new and some have like only 20 percent or so of the original car left
Reminds me of that works D type that turned up at auction a few years ago that had a double in someone else's garage
You can buy a wreck and get its log book then build another car and call it the original
There is a 62 e type log book on e Bay at the moment!
Doesen't help when you can also buy a body shell like an MGB or Midget and just swop over everything and call it the original car
In my opinion its not the original car
It never lived the life of the first body shell
Hard to say what you can call original these days
1969 series 2 2+2

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

splosh
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2014 12:03 am
Great Britain

#17 Re: chassis 62

Post by splosh » Tue Jul 14, 2020 3:37 pm

tinworm wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 12:54 pm
You think it's been re-bodied in the past Clive - I see the points you indicate . More than one of those about by now I would have thought . You can't really get away from it can you.
Reminds me of a certain red roadster which is in that photo from Browns lane.
I was looking at the XKE data stats the other day and was not surprised to learn that the most prolific survivors are indeed the 3.8 OTS cars . Over 50% have remained on this earth - and I expect that will creep up over time especially if they make £350K when (re) built


Barrie

Barrie, Some of the components in this car may be genuine but the whole story does not fit for what is being being offered for sale.
The body has too many discrepancies in the past. It wore a pressed louvre bonnet and not a correct "welded louvre" that it would of left the factory with. It appears to of been "Componented Up" and re-bodied to make it appear correct. It's a Bitsa car - Bits of this and bits of that.
Clive
August 1961 Flat floor ots

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

User avatar

Philk
Posts: 391
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 7:48 am
Great Britain

#18 Re: chassis 62

Post by Philk » Tue Jul 14, 2020 3:53 pm

Given most cars have had bodywork on them at some point or other (particularly "barn finds" which are often quite rotted out), it is an interesting question as to where the market will look to in years to come in terms of "originality". During my search for an E-type, I saw plenty of examples where superb restoration work was being done by at various companies in terms of metalwork etc. However, the end-product, whilst amazing, could hardly be called "original" even if it was a matching numbers car.

I am fortunate to have a 3.8 OTS which is matching numbers and is from the dry part of the USA. It had an exterior British Racing Green paint job when the car was 21 years old (I'm guessing the elements were a bit hard on the exterior paint finish) but, fortunately, all of the original opalescent gold sand paint was left under the interior trim and in a number of other places out of sight on the car. 35 years on, I can therefore point to these parts and say unequivocally that those are the original panels. Had the car been bare metal stripped painted back in 1985, it would be harder to prove this (you're then looking at spot welds etc). For me, being able to point to original paint and panels is worth far more than having a car which, whilst beautiful to behold, is over 50% new metal.
Phil
1964 S1 3.8 OTS

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links


Topic author
tinworm
Posts: 350
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 9:48 am
Location: devon
Great Britain

#19 Re: chassis 62

Post by tinworm » Tue Jul 14, 2020 4:44 pm

Then it comes down to what people consider to be 'original' . The car in question seems to have continuous history including 3 registration numbers. Its early features have been re-incorporated and the car returned during its latest rebuild to something approximating it's original condition . Some early features it is arguable should not have been there (maybe) as Jaguar did not advertise its detail changes during production. These details of fit may come out in original paperwork form (proof if you like) or it won't - and it becomes agreed by debate such as on here to what changed and when.
I started this thread to point out that I thought the standard of turn out was very good - I still think that. Everyone is allowed their own opinion of course and the respondents have let us have theirs.
Lets face it hardly any E-types are truly original - or shall I say none - because they do not have all their original parts .There are a handful of unrebuilt cars like David has used in the factory fit page which are wonderful for reference - but if you need to check them out it means you suspect your own car (if you own a similar model) is not right in some detail.
I remember 77RW's rebuild at Robeys - a lot of early details had to be fabricated and copied because the original parts/panels etc were not good enough to use. This is the reality of the situation nearly 60 years after these cars first rolled out of the factory.
I mentioned the American concours scene above of which David (I think got the wrong end of the stick) stated that Jaguars E-type production was as good as the American concour winners - well our cousins can over do it by deflashing castings highly polishing everything until the car is like a little jewel - and they have to do this to gain points in their chosen competition. I seem to remember that Jaguar used to give an outgoing car a light blow over leaving overspray on rubbers etc - who would incorporate that now ?
I like what PhilK has to say about his car in that it has a higher proportion of jaguar panels than many cars have.
Clive calls number 62 a bitsa - bit cruel - as if you replace parts like for like it would be impossible to identify which identical item is the original - as all cars are a collection of parts.
So to summerise - I feel the car is a good rebuild and original as it goes to a point ... but that of course may not be enough to attract £350K - time will tell.

Barrie
1968 E-type roadster, 1964 E-type fixed head 1995 Ferrari 355 1980 Ferrari 308 1987 V8 90 Landrover 1988 Bedford rascal van 1943 Ford GPW

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links


steve3.8
Posts: 395
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 9:12 pm
Location: nottinghamshire,uk
Great Britain

#20 Re: chassis 62

Post by steve3.8 » Tue Jul 14, 2020 5:54 pm

Fair comments and a very nice car.
Although at this level i think better job could have been made of the cill /bulkhead metal overlaps area , often overlooked it's an important small detail that was originally sharp and defined .

Is it a fillet weld i see in the corner that could have been done inside ? .

No doubt Paul Calf would say " bag a sh*** " :lol:


Image

Image
Steve3.8

64 3.8 fhc, 67 4.2 fhc

Link:
BBcode:
HTML:
Hide post links
Show post links

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic