E-Type toolkit quality

E-Type
1

When I purchased my 67 E-Type the toolroll was missing so I have been gathering original tools for a toolroll. As most of you are aware, tools can be found for huge prices on ebay (although a close look is necessary to verify they are indeed original). I recently purchased a complete MK2 toolkit and since both my original S2 and my current S1 were missing the toolrolls, it was the first time I had gotten a good look at original tools and was surprised at the poor quality. My set has the newer Garrington 4" adjustable wrench and SSP and TW wrenches. They seem particularly flimsy which is not exactly what I expected. The Garrington is okay for such a small wrench, but the open-ended SSPs and TWs look like they would have difficulty with any tight nuts and bolts. Is this correct? Are these brands the worst of the wrench possibilities or are the other brands pretty much the same?

Also, how do you tell an original screwdriver from a copy?

Thanks for any help,
–Drew

2

David Jones on the UK forum has posted on the subject of toolkits quite frequently, so perhaps look there.

kind regards
Marek

3

Drew for originality talk to Tom Buckus. As far as quality I have used them for years in several models–never an issue but I will gladly buy you a set of your choice and trade.

4

Thanks Marek. I’ll take a look.

–Drew

5

Thanks George. I’ll look for Tom. I’m happy with the tools. I was just surprised how thin some were.

–Drew

6

Drew dang–thought you might swap–not really. They are thin but very strong and unless used as a lever they are very strong for removing bolts and nuts. I am sure the thin part was to reduce carried weight.

7

Drew, You raise a number of particularly relevant topics.
I am nearing completion of an extremely detailed/pictured paper fully detailing E-Type Tool-Kits/Rolls and Wheel-Changing-Equipment 1961 to 1975, that is due to commence publication in monthly installments in Philip Porters UK based, but Internationally circulating THE E-TYPE magazine, commencing next April 2017 issue. Thus my recent thread on some detail aspects of the Metallifacture Jack as used 1962 to 1970, across five main variations.
Bottom line is just how correct do you want your tool-kits to be - must it be ‘as-original’ for your specific Car No E-type, or is ‘near-enough’ good-enough for you.
So a couple things you need to clarify up front - you say you have a 1967 E-type, but you must appreciate there were a number of changes across the 1967 Calendar Year, and indeed further complications if you are referring to the American protocol of referring to 1967 Model Year. And indeed, you haven’t advised where you are from and what specification E-type you have, given there are major differences from August 1967 onwards built E-types supplied to the USA market compared with UK and all other world markets.
And what’s ORIGINAL? My goal is to detail ORIGINAL tools, but accept if AUTHENTIC that’s good enough, given my definition of AUTHENTIC is that it cannot be determined as being and different from an ORIGINAL tool - for your particular date-of-manufacture E-type. So regarding reproduction tools, if the quality is so perfect that it cannot be differentiated from an original, then it is Authentic and thus 100% acceptable. This of course gets into shades-of-grey (and yes, about fifty). How close or how far from perfect is acceptable to you?
You mention the 1967 Screwdriver reproductions - as an example. In a stand-alone situation these reproductions (I think made or commissioned in Holland) are of the highest quality and visually cannot be differentiated from an original, but if you measure the diameter of both interchangeable blades they are smaller than the original nominal 1/4in diameter (actually 0.247"-0.248"), thus reproduction blades will not properly fit into an original black handle, and vice-versa.
So to me - I can differentiate a reproduction from an original, thus it is not 100% thus not-to-me acceptable, but given in a stand-alone situation without a micrometer in hand you cant visually tell - is that ‘good-enough’ for you?

Picking up on a couple other things you mention.
If your car was built in 1967, and to USA market specifications, if built after August 1967 then you did not get any tool-kit/roll at all. All you got was your Wheel-Changing Equipment, Jack, Hammer, Hub-Cap Tool and a sparking-plug box spanner. Certainly your Series 2 (if you are in USA) is not ‘missing’ its tool-kit - it never received one from new.

But if your 1967 E-type was built earlier in 1967 (pre August) then yes it would have originally received its full tool-kit/roll the same as all other E-types sold in UK and the rest-of-the-world.
But in 1967, the 4" Adjustable was NOT the ‘newer Garrington’ brand - it should be the 1967 applicable BAHCO brand.
Your four open-enders in 1967 would invariably have been SSP brand, maybe with a mix of one, maybe two SNAIL BRAND, but not TW brand that were only supplied in 3.8E-type and XK150 years.

But Georges point! Surely you don’t intend ‘using’ the spanners as spanners, thus your comment about ‘strength’.
Original tools are to valuable these days to use, or indeed risk damage, when useable tools are readily available made of a higher quality and readily available new and second-hand at a cheaper price than good-originals. By way of my experience, there are three brands of tools that stand out re quality and precision - the British BRITOOL brand, the German STAHL WILLE brand and the American SNAP-ON brand. NO one can disagree that these are all the very top-end quality tools, albeit others may wish to add other brands - certainly PROTO also rates very highly, and there is a French brand that escapes me. (But notice - no Chinese brands included)

But your comment about the quality of SSP/TW/GARRINGTON Jaguar tool-kit tools. Rest assured they were all premium UK brands that made all their spanners to the prevailing British Standard, regarding dimensions, material strength, and tolerances, and thus were totally adequate quality.

I am more than happy to respond to any further specific questions you may have about any Jaguar Tool-Kits, not just E-type, and not just 1967, but direct to me at rogerpayne@bigblue.net.au is best.

8

The type of steel makes a difference. Chrome or vanadium steel allows the manufacturer go get by with less material per wrench since the material, oz. for oz. is much stronger. I’d guess the Jaguar tool sets were made of vanadium steel.

9

Roger,

If you click on Drew’s smiling face you will see he lives in Austin, Texas and that his car number is 1E33801; looking in xkedata.com you will see that it was built in November, 1966. This is all in his profile, and I notice you have not updated yours. Click on your avatar in the upper left of the page, click on the gear (settings) icon, then continue to update your profile.

You can use this to see where people live and details about their cars, if they have entered them.

Jerry

10

I still have my original tools, most of them, though in the third tool roll (I do still have the shredded remains of the original). Unfortunately they acquired some rust in the hands of the previous owner, so they will never be concours quality. And of course I don’t use them or even carry them in the car; I have built a kit of all the modern tools I expect I’ll ever need on the road to carry in the spare.

Jerry

11

Jerry if you have seen a set restored by Tom Buckus you might change your mind–he is a wizard at it!

12

Thanks Jerry,
Still learning this new site and hadn’t worked that out yet. although I am sure if I looked there are probably excellent instructions. But yes, can now see Drew’s location and Car No, so something I would call a 1966 E-type, not a 1967, but far enough earlier than the USA 1968MY (from August 1967) peculiarities to be the same as all world-wide-market Tool-Kits, so fairly straight forward. Always a point of confusion with matters originality, it is the Car No and/or Date-of-Manufacture that is relevant, and not date-sold, date-first-registered or any marketing terminology.

Re my own profile, will do so, but I want to work out how to get rid of the ‘2’ at the end of my name/tag first. Once done - and there was some discussion earlier that it can only be done by an Administrator so I need to follow up - then I will add profile details and indeed maybe a photo!

13

Thanks, George, I’ll check Tom out.

Jerry

14

Roger,

Model Year is a different thing here than elsewhere. Typical US Model Years start in August or September. That’s all you see in dealerships after that, previous years cars would be “specials”. (Occasionally makers start offering cars for “next year” as early as March!) The 1968 and later “US Model Year” standards in August or so actually continue on from prior practice. Since the E-Type S1 didn’t change much specifically for model years prior to 1968, dealers didn’t have to offer any “special deals” prior to 1968. Here in the US, it’s the registration year that counts, so Drew’s is a 1967 here. Other countries might call it a '66. What would you call an August 1967 car stamped with US MY 1968 spec?

PS, the technique to get back your old ID is to log in using it, then say you forgot your password. You’ll get your new password on the email address you associated with that ID. If you have changed that email address, admins will need to get involved! And, Andrew has been moving posts from people’s “-2” ID to their real one, on an as-available basis. Thanks, Andrew!

Jerry

15

Thanks Roger,
The reason I asked about tools was because originality is important to me. And correct, I am not going to use these tools, but rather keep them as the originals that would have been supplied with the cars. I’m not anywhere close to having a concours car, but I would like to have an accurate to the car set of original tools. Sadly, the screwdriver set that came with my recent purchase mics in at .235 so must be the reproduction you mention. I’ll keep looking for an original. All the other tools appear to be originals. Since the set includes the TW spanner it must have been cobbled together by the previous owner.

And, as Jerry mentioned, my car was built in November 1966. The gearbox has a December 8, 1966 date on it, but it matches the data plate. The car was dispatched on Jan 2, 1967 and has a 1967 title date.

–Drew

16

G’day Drew,
Your earlier post said when you got your 1967 E-Type (built in Nov 1966) there were no tools, thus you have been gathering them including from a Mark 2 tool-kit. Nothing wrong with that as age-for-age, a Mark 2 tool kit can include many of the same tools you need for your E-type tool-kit. But just your comments that the Mark 2 tool-kit included a GARRINGTONS adjustable and a mix of SSP/ TW spanners tells me that the Mark 2 tool kit is from an earlier built car than your E-type, thus not necessarily correct for your car - if you want to be that level of originality.
As before, the original tool kit in your November 1966 E-type tool-kit would then have had a BAHCO brand adjustable spanner, possibly a later supply GEDORE brand maybe, but definitely not a GARRINGTONS. There was some overlap of brands depending on stock on hand versus new stock bought in, thus being November 1966 and not ‘1967’ does now open up chance of old stock GEDORE (as replaced GARRINGTONS in 1964/5). But by 1967, definitely BAHCO.
Same with your four open-enders. T/W brand was supplied/used mainly in late 1950s/early 1960s, and improbably that any old stock may have hung around to appear any later than about 1964 at most, so quite surprising in same Mark 2 tool-kit as SSP brand. Actually makes me think either your TW or your SSP spanners are not original to your Mark 2 tool-kit.
But again, for your November 1966 E-type Tool-Kit you should have a mix of SNAIL BRAND and SSP, with more likely to be SSP - maybe 3 SSP and one SNAIL BRAND as the Snail Brand supply was by then at end of life and SSP dominant in late 1966 and 1967. But if you are assembling a kit from other sources, I would not be unhappy either with a matching set of four SNAIL BRAND or four SSP, as some people prefer matching-sets to mixed-brand-sets. But by November 1966 - definitely no TW brand spanners - swap them with someone trying to assemble an XK150 or 3.8 E-type tool-kit.

You say your Screwdriver mics up at .235", so yes, I think its a reproduction, but still as before in a stand-alone situation near impossible to tell its not original, just don’t try and interchange blades/handle with an original - they don’t fit. But if this Mark 2 Kit included a reproduction Screwdriver, then that questions just how original everything else is that was included. As per my comment above that you would not expect an original Mark 2 tool-kit, to have a mix of TW and SSP spanners, one or other not being original to that kit, probably the SSP brand ones, which is good for you as that’s what you want for your E-type kit.
Yes, I know its complex, and that’s why my detailed paper on E-types will run to be a complete book chapter, after being magazine published part by part over probably 12+ months, but there is worldwide demand and interest in this subject, to this level of detail, and with prices now expected by eBay vendors for very variable quality/accuracy offerings, buyers need to have access to detailed information to make informed purchasing decisions.

But the offer is still there, contact me direct if you want any more help, but up to you, how accurate do you want to be.

But also as per previous post - no need to bother with a Tool-Kit for your Series 2 - USA market Series 2 never got a factory-supplied tool-kit/tool-roll; just the necessary Wheel-Changing equipment.

17

Thanks Roger,
This is extremely helpful information and exactly what I need for my Series 1. My Series 2 was rear-ended and I eventually sold it so it is no longer in the picture. I was lamenting that I didn’t get tools with either car. :slight_smile: The Mark 2 toolkit I have is the round wooden box with black flocking, which should be an early kit, but as you have pointed out it probably is a put together set. What I will do is send some photos of what I have to your email address if you don’t mind. I’d love to know what to keep and what to look for. I have a better idea now.

I look forward to your article in The E-type.

–Drew

18

Roger,

Very interesting work. What is the source for your detailed information?

Jerry

19

Actually, multiple sources Jerry,

I have been studying/researching all Jaguar Tool-Kits, not just E-types, since about mid-1970s mostly a two-part outcome of having a particular interest, but also as a Concours Originality Judge constantly being asked ‘what is correct for my car’.

I have a LOT of internal factory technical/engineering information, and not just the published technical catalogues, and hundreds and hundreds of photos – originally paper-photos, now digital of course, and accompanying comprehensive notes of detail not readily seen in photos, of original tool-kits, taken if and when I see them, when reliably original to known chassis number/date-of-manufacture Jaguars – an essential aspect, and very much the reason I focus on date-of-manufacture, and not marketing Model-Year or date-of-sale terminology.

The task at hand is putting together everything I have in an ordered manner with a view of publication, and seeing what gaps and anomalies are evident, then working at filling those gaps or resolving any anomalies. Thus, my recent question/theme regarding variants with the Metallifacture Jack as used 1962 to 1970 E-types. I am fully aware of five main variants of this E-type specific Metallifcature Jack, plus a couple major sub-variants, but did not have yet that I could find, sufficient reliable and satisfactory evidence of the demarcation between these five variants and sub-variants to my goal of one-month accuracy – anything more is a bit of a nonsense given variables of Jaguars tool-stock on hand and subsequent deployment to a specific cars tool-kit, except of course when factory documentation quotes exact CAR No. introduction points.

But I have already done this with XK120-140-150 Tool-Kits, and indeed you will find that effort now published as a complete Chapter in Philip Porter’s title ORIGINAL JAGUAR XK (3rd Edition).

I was asked to do a similar chapter on E-Type Tool-Kits, which as above, really is a huge task of working through 40 years of research material/photos and notes, identify the gaps, and improving them.

But first, my best-effort first-comprehensive paper, will be published in monthly installments in Philip Porter’s THE E-TYPE magazine, that I expect to commence from April 2017 issue, so I am on a timetable to get first section on 3.8 E-type tool kits and probably also 4.2 tool-kits ready by the end of February – not panicking yet - with Series 2 and V12 to follow! But once published, I hope to get informed/critical feedback, and more time to work through all my research material, so I can improve things for the intended stand-alone chapter for the next edition of ORIGINAL JAGUAR E-TYPE that will cover full period 1961 to 1975, and as applicable to all markets, not just RHD markets as relevant to UK and Australia, but also LHD markets, including of course the USA market peculiarities for 1968MY and later.

Also, a work well in progress, similarly details SS and SS-Jaguar tool-kits, and I can assure you – next to no original tool-kits to reference, but still progressing nicely.

Once upon a time it was a matter of lots of miles and physical visits and paper-photographs and pages of notes, so life is now much easier with on-line forums, digital photos and many genuinely helpful and accommodating owners, albeit there are not so many reliable sources of original XK and E-type tool-kits around these days, with restored cars and restored tool-kits dominating and less than honest vendors on eBay in particular – things are only original once!

Sorry about the plug, but you asked, and indeed I welcome all comment and input – and criticism if it can be backed up with evidence.

Email: mailto:rogerpayne@bigblue.net.au rogerpayne@bigblue.net.au

20

Roger,

Very impressive work! I am looking forward to reading it.

A problem I see is that JCNA judging rules require any component to be documented in standard Jaguar factory manuals or bulletins. The parts books list the individual tools, but the make of the tools (except the Tecalemit grease gun) is not shown. I assume there has to be some way to verify that the tools in the kit are not Craftsman, but brand of tool for each specific S/N, is there some documentation that can be used to authenticate a tool kit to a sticky judge?

Given that the make of the tools is not specified, how can a judge declare any particular tool as non-authentic?

“Original to a particular car” is in general not something you can depend on as it’s the memory of the current owner, perhaps several owners from new. I have come across this objection in several cases of things I believe are original to my car (I have owned it for 43 years).

Jerry