1969 Jag S2 FHC, 4.2l Rebuild Story

Nice feature, eh?

:stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

“in beer there is truth”

2 Likes

While you have the pump out, shoot some good rust proofing into the cavities.

1 Like

I visited Lawrence Toneto this weekend and discussed my car with him. He is near Austin and has worked for “Classic Jaguar” & “Restoration-forgot-the-name”… in the past and has 30+ years working with E-types, now working on his own. He has quoted me three levels of body repair. One to the metal/tinning stage, next to the priming/pre-paint stage, and lastly to the full painted stage. I am leaning towards the initial one, allowing him to get my '69 body to the “good” metal, tinned, and pre-primed stage. It would include all the interior wax oil treatments. He wanted me to write up a contract and I am not sure what this should/shouldn’t include as far as details? For example, gap tolerances,straightness, etc?

Any input is appreciated.

My checkbook may turn out to be my most powerful tool…

-Steve

1 Like

Let us know how this proceeds; I was given his reference by another poster and although I’m in Florida, I was considering trailer my ‘66 fhc to him. The contract idea sounds reassuring, as it’s your car left at a person’ residence and what if he files bankruptcy Etc. Then your car is held up in the process; contract I would think protects both parties.

Patrick
'66 fhc

Lawrence did the body work on my '63 OTS 15 years ago and I was really pleased with his results. I’ve had many complements on the fit & finish he achieved.
IMHO, it is too risky to enter this type of project without a contract that clearly puts the parties understanding in writing.
Another big concern I’ve always had is what happens if there is a fire, theft, damage in transit, etc. Theses risks might be “covered” by garage keepers policies, transportation companies policies, etc. Hagerty used to require that a restoration project had the engine installed to be insurable. Now they will provide coverage at agreed value that includes cars & parts under restoration. That made me more comfortable as I wrote the checks for my just finished '64 FHC project.

Lawrence did the body work and painting on my car this summer. I had a very basic contract with him and that worked fine. Of course, I live in Austin so was able to drive out and see how things were proceeding and that made me feel good. I was also able to take progress photos: https://www.instagram.com/drewscherz/

Photo taken in Scottsdale in early October just before the GCOL:

5 Likes

It looks like BD.75721 which is the “Seal and Retainer, for L.H. ‘A’ Post”.

It is an assembly comprised of:
BD.25717 - Rubber Seal, for L.H. ‘A’ Post
BD.23653 - Seal Retainer, for L.H. ‘A’ Post

Richard Liggitt

1 Like

Well I’ve taken what seems to be forever off on the project. I won’t be starting anything significant until after January 1 but I am having a liquid refreshment out here as I look at the rear hatch

compartment lip. Question to the audience, does the inner lip on this look normal or is it bent? The top and bottom edge appears perpendicular to the main body, but the sides appear to lean back towards the body ( Video posted on YouTube. https://youtu.be/4P6ak7TjdII

p.s. I was a complete rookie when I named this blog. There’s a lot of redundancy in my title. I guess it could have simple been “1969 XKE FHC Story”…

1 Like

Lips look generally fine to me.

When I first looked at the video I thought the right side had been kicked out but when you changed the angle of view it looks like the two sides of the channel are in fact parallel so it would seem that it’s not bent. There does appear to be a few places where someone has been “at it” with a hammer although not that drastically. Does/did the rear hatch leak?

Only owned it a year and it hasn’t been drivable so don’t know.

I don’t get it. So in the top photo the lip is truly fully vertical and in the others it’s folded over? I don’t own a fixed head so can’t say for sure it’s right or wrong but if the lip on my OTS did that I’d suspect someone made a mod, maybe to try to allow the lid to fit flatter. Drew had an issue with his lid not fitting flat and it turned out a PO had left out necessary shims under the hinges to drop it lower.

Guess I need to put my eyes on a known good FHC

Search the picture archives, esp. Jerry Mouton’s and Bill McKenna’s.

Well – that simply makes you the Chief of the Department of Redundancy Department. :laughing:

1 Like

Thanks for the input

Yes Steve, I 2nd Jerry’s reply and was trying to figure out how to word it. The inner upright of the U channel is perfect 90 degrees to the bottom all the way around the opening. I cant tell very well from your pic, but is that the case on yours at the far low left, hinge side? In the pic ti looks a little flattened there, may just be my view of your pic.
Cheers Jim

On my screen the last picture clearly shows a fold over in that upright. I can see the shadow created by it. That combined with the slight waviness of the fold over suggest that someone made a modification for some reason. I can only assume to improve the hatch fit.

See if this picture helps.

From: https://ejag.wordpress.com/

1 Like