I'm in Love and it hurts!

[richard btype]

www.nachtigal-klassische-automobile.de

Scroll down and enjoy this original 12/1961 FHC, 14,700 miles, black plate car from California.

[Heuer]

For that price I would want it totally correct, which it is not! Wrong toolkit, no Shelley jack, no Marston (or look alike) radiator, sun visors are missing chromed plastic edging, speaker grilles wrong, radio should be original Motorola, wrong gear knob, fluid bottle caps wrong colour, wrong plug caps, coil wrong colour, no door drains, no runners on boot mat, resonators should be chrome not stainless, headlights should be PL700's .............................. etc etc

[christopher storey]

Equally, although these early(ish) cars have a certain historical curiosity, they do have substantial impracticalities . The flat floor is a grave disadvantage, and frankly unless you are very lucky, the Moss box leaves huge amounts to be desired and for most people will spoil the driving pleasure . Further, as David has pointed out, this is a far from original car

[richard btype]

David

That's like telling me that the girl of my dreams who It seems I could date has a bad case of halitosis! I have a needy case to open door of a jaguar from the early 60's that has the original feel and more importantly smell of that period, that distinctive aroma has left a lasting impression that not even the most painstaking of restorations I've seen have managed to capture. It always appeared to be the Conolloy doped Vaumol leather but must also share something with materials and adhesive and I wonder whether this such original car might still have that odour?

David about the other comments - looking at the sun visors, I wonder whether they were ever fitted to this car, the un pear shaped gear knob I believe I have seen on other US cars and reminds me a little of that fitted to the S type. We don't know that the jack is not correct and I believe the earliest E types did have the 'tray type' tool kits. Not sure also that Dec 61 would have had a Marston style rad.

One other point is that the 'handbrake console' does not show the raised beading between the aluminium and the upholstered recess that it sits within is this normal? I mention it because my car is just 4 months younger and also does without the raised beading.

Still it looks great on the RS5's

[Simon P]

To be fair, at does at least come with a flat cap and pipe

:D

[Heuer]

Richard

E-Type UK have (had?) such an example. Angus and I had a good look at it and it was magnificent - original paint, original interior etc etc. We used it in our 'Factory Fit' thread. You would not want to drive it though!

Sun visors - can either be the clunky & cheap looking oblong design with chromed plastic surround (no longer available) or the more svelte and luxurious type. No indication of when the changeover took place. This car has the former without the chrome.

Gear change knob - all Moss boxes had the pear shaped knob

Jack - should be Shelley (?800 if you can find one) up until June 1962

Tools - the first 50 or so cars may have had the tray tool kit but it is generally accepted the vast majority had the tool roll

Handbrake leather beading - people (Mick Turley is my source) who worked at 'The Jag' say there was none.

Actually I was being unfair about the PL700 headlights. Lucas sealed beam units without the 'tripod' were fitted to US specification cars

[tinworm]

Referring to what Chris says that the flat floor is a grave disadvantage - I owned a flat floor some years ago and never found it a disadvantage at all . I suppose it depends on the size of your feet and footwear. An advantage of the flat floor is the carpet fits properly and dosn't migrate into the footwell of the later cars. The dished rear bulkhead is better (some early cars had a flat floor and a dished bulkhead on the drivers side only) but you can maximise your legroom if you fit the seat mountings as far back as possible, set so the lower back of the seat is just off contact with the bulkhead - a half inch makes all the difference here.
I would say that a driver of 5' 10'' is the tallest that will fit comfortably into a flat floor - and with the fixed head you would still need an auxiliary rear view mirror on the dashboard so you could see further than about ten feet behind you !

regards Barrie

[38E]

My '62 is just a few months later than that example.

Interesting David mentioning the missing chrome trim around the visors because although mine has the trim, I've never seen another car with it or ever heard mention of it before. So if that is confirmation that the chrome trim was actually used, I'm glad to know.

My car does have the beading around the console, usual pear-shaped gearshift, has (or had-it's now a reproduction) a Marston alumium rad, has a regular tool roll and a Metalfacture jack with integral ratcheting handle.



(Iknow, my radio and speakers have to be rectified yet...)

[Heuer]

The sun visors were standard but were incredibly cheaply made - basically cardboard backing and chromed plastic trim. Invariably the cardboard warps/disintegrates and the chrome wears off the plastic leaving an amber colour beneath. My own thought is they are generic items that Jaguar bought in for the early cars and, I have to say, they look clunky and wrong. At some point they changed over to a more streamlined chrome-less version. These are the second style on my FHC 860294 (ignore the odd reflection on the LH visor!):


Even Haddock makes no mention of the two styles but both Richard Smith and Mick Turley have confirmed both are correct. They seem to have been fitted randomly however.

As regards the hand brake trim Mick Turley, who worked on the E-Type trim line, insists they were never done that way at the factory but it appears on lots of restorations for some reason.

As regards the Shelley Jack they were supplied with the first 4,972 E-Types as follows:
RHD OTS: to #850548
LHD OTS: to #877518
RHD FHC: to #860660
LHD FHC: to #886246

It would appear Jaguar placed an order for 5,000 units and once they were used up moved to the cheaper and more practical Metalifacture version.

[PeterCrespin]

Pekka Telivuo (sp?) on J-L has a green-trimmed 2+2 with the chrome-trimmed visors. Sounds too late but he's sure they are original.

I sat in my first flat floor a couple of months ago at Dave Kerr's house and with my size 13s It was fine (actually my right is size 14 since I broke it a few years ago). It reminded me of the footwells on my Realm D-types and they were fine even with much lower seat cushions. The leg room didn't seem terrible either but maybe I was sitting up more as the top was down? The D-types got small driver footwells (all made in 54,55 & 56) so it's odd they tried no footwells in the E at first. I find it hard to believe they sent cars out with cutaway bulkheads and flat floors, as the flat bulkhead persisted a fair while longer after they had already gone to footwells. I suppose one or two special orders?

How did Lofty England fit in 77RW, especially with the top up?

Pete

[tinworm]

Sorry Pete , just re-read my original post - which should have read 'some cars had a dipped floor and a dished bulkhead on one side only' . I know there are cars which had the rear bulkhead dished panel fitted with pop rivets.

regards Barrie

[Heuer]

My FHC 860294 built March 1962 has a flat bulkhead and dipped floors. I wonder whether those asymmetric cars were factory or later additions? The chrome surround visors seem to appear haphazardly suggesting they 'sent someone out' to buy some from the nearest factor if they ran short. My guess is they were standard on another make of car.

[38E]

Well, that's interesting about the chrome trim on the visors because I had been assured by all the "experts" on Jaglovers, including our Mr. Crespin here, that Jaguar never used it and mine had probably just been stuck on by somebody.

As regards the Shelley Jack they were supplied with the first 4,972 E-Types as follows:
RHD OTS: to #850548
LHD OTS: to #877518
RHD FHC: to #860660
LHD FHC: to #886246
It would appear Jaguar placed an order for 5,000 units and once they were used up moved to the cheaper and more practical Metalifacture version.

So in that case, I ought to have a Shelley screw jack. But at the price, I think I'll pass. The later Metallifacture jack actually works very well. I did need to use it a couple of times years ago and it will raise one complete side of the car very easily.

.... I know there are cars which had the rear bulkhead dished panel fitted with pop rivets.

I had heard of cars with the dished bulkhead on the driver's side only too so when I restored my car, I decided to add that feature. But there's a little more to the modification than a few pop rivets. There is a substantial chassis member behind the panel which needs modifying, plus the radius arm fixing plate etc. I actually welded in my panels, re-positioned the seat rails and achieved 2" more room than before.

[PeterCrespin]

Well, that's interesting about the chrome trim on the visors because I had been assured by all the "experts" on Jaglovers, including our Mr. Crespin here, that Jaguar never used it and mine had probably just been stuck on by somebody.

That was then and this is now Clive. It's called learning over time....except I'm still a bit dubious actually. Same as you perhaps, since you've never seen another FHC with those visors?

I've seen/owned a lot more E-types and other Jags than I had when I gave that opinion along with others more experienced than I (however many years ago). I sort of still have it as my default. Nobody should believe an internet forum without corroborating what they read, especially one full of "experts" as opposed to people aware of their own knowledge gaps. My Mk2 had that type and shape of visor, David reports having them, plus there's your gorgeous car, so it certainly seems Jaguar used such a construction in the period. I'm just not 100% convinced about E-type original fitment.

I'd even be a teensy-weensy bit sceptical of Messrs Turley et al, in the sense that although their co-workers presumably made thousands of the things, they perhaps were never technically supposed to be used on E-types, even if they occasionally were? Dunno - I suppose I'm still 70/30 agin the idea but coming round to it. Slow learner really...

[Heuer]

I was looking at Paul Brown's very early unmolested FHC a few weeks ago and it had the chrome trimmed visors. I questioned Paul on the subject and he said they were factory original and he really does know his stuff! http://www.pbcj.co.uk/

This is from Clausagers book:


This is French 'barn find' #860040 which is coming up for sale at Coy's


From 'Collectors Corner' - period pictures are the best evidence:


From 'Factory Fit':
E Type UK's highly original FHC which has the same visors as my car, as does 9600 HP - different shape, no chrome.


Finding any period pictures with the visors deployed is really difficult - guess both Jaguar and owners thought they were pretty useless!

Pete - Interesting about the chrome rectangle ones being the same as the Jaguar saloon's though. Any idea which ones had them?

[PeterCrespin]

Agree totally about period pics being the best evidence, so on that basis it's clear the chrome trimmed square-ish ones were fitted sometimes. I'm convinced. To my mind, 9600HP and other restos are less persuasive in the matter of soft trim but period original proves the matter.

As for models, I think early Mk2 , probably Mk1? Maybe 420 (420 was much bigger). I've already forgotten what my MkIXs were like except the were held up by a small central clip. Maybe Jag-lovers brochure section or the XKEData saloon photos will show this area? By the time of the XJ in 68 it was vinyl over foam so I'd look at fifties models and early sixties.

[1954Etype]

This one caught me out as well and I had a debate with a mate who has an unmolested 38 FHC. That has the chrome edging.

[Heuer]

Also note that the car Miss Suspender Belt 1966 is luxuriating in is a 4.2.

But - #860005:


And #860013:

[richard btype]

Can confirm that 860403 is also fitted with the chrome sun visor edging, the roof lining and visors are very original.