E-Type toolkit quality

G’day Jerry,
889791 is very early, first-week, of January 1964, so a most useful demarcation point E-type (don’t have exact date).
Do you believe your Jack and Tool-Kit are original to your car, and if so, are you able to provide photos of both, or at least answer some specific detailed questions I have re detail variations.
I note your advice regarding brand-of-spanners, but they are only a small part of the research.

Your Jack for instance, will be folding-integral-handle variety, so no date-stamping is expected, but there is an earlier/later handle variants that differ in the casting that holds the spring-loaded pawl mechanism that was a minor design improvement to try and address potential failures in service. I suspect yours will be the earlier version, as at this stage I have narrowed down demarcation to be in 1964, but not a month.

Probably best/easiest to send-photos and dialogue direct to me at rogerpayne@bigblue.net.au if you prefer, as it can all get a bit long-winded on forum, but I am happy either way.

Thanks,

Roger

Roger, I find your analyses of the various jack and tool kit offerings to be interesting, long winded or not. Please continue to post your findings on the forum for the benefit of us all.

Roger,

Built January 17th, 1964 (noted in xkedata.com)

The jack is the earlier type with the flat landing for the pawl. I use it at least once a month!

Both jack and toolkit (what’s left of it) are original to the car as far as I can tell. I got the car 10 years old, in 1974, (for less than the current value of the tool roll!) and the previous owners likely never touched it given their nature. OTOH, several pieces were missing or I lost them later.

Grease gun, screwdriver set (two shafts), brake bleeding hose, tube spanners, flat spanners, and tommy bars are all original. Tool roll and jack bag were both worn out and have been replaced 2-3 times (I do still have the originals I think).

Yes, keep these posts going on the forum. This is the kind of information that we all need to have.

Jerry

You had me worried, although my Data is not daily exact I was pretty sure ‘first-week’ in January 1964 - but as you say, all is shown on XKEData, and it says Dispatch Date is 17th Jan, and Build Date is 6th January, so as I had hoped as close as I could hope for the very start of 1964. Car looks as though it goes as well as it looks, but ouch re punch-in-nose!

So that improves my still wide period of uncertainty re change in first-type to modified-type integral-folding-handle Jack, that I still think happened some time during 1964 or maybe 1965, so still looking for any original Jack owners from 1964 or 1965. Be careful over-using Jack - very high percentage of these integral-handle Jacks seem to be breaking, thus the improved later separate-handle-design.

Your other tools, I will add to my growing spread sheet, and if anything within period of uncertainty, I will get back to you re further detail - many thanks, it all helps.
One immediate question, is your small Tommy Bar, tapered or parallel, bright-steel or Black-Oxided?

Tapered and black. It’s about the most useful tool in the kit, for me.

My jack still seems very good. What is the failure mode? I’ll watch out.

Jerry

I can’t do this in all cases. In Roger’s case he had used 4 different email addresses on the old forum. When we migrated these appear as 4 separate users on the new platform. To reunite these 4 accounts without losing the historical posts which each had created would mean transferring ownership to the account which Roger is now using. It takes me about 60 seconds per post to change ownership to a different account. Rodger’s other 3 accounts don’t have all that many posts, but it would still take me about 5 hours to change the ownership.

Once the ownership has been transferred then I can delete the old accounts, thus freeing up the original username which is “in the way” of renaming the account that Roger is using, then I can change his username to Roger_Payne.

The problem isn’t just housekeeping, or peoples preference for a username. I just had a look at Rodger’s 4 accounts. It would appear that people have searched for something or other and found one of his historical posts. If they then reply or PM to that historical Roger Payne then the message will bounce and Roger will never see it.

It sounds complicated, but it isn’t really. We’re still working on a solution to automate the ownership change.

See this guide for further detail:

Roger, I think I have an easy question for you. My Dad bought 2 E-types new: First a 1965 & then traded the '65 in on a '69. I found this tool kit in the '69, but did it come with the '65? Thanks, Tom

Tom interesting tool kit. The tire valve extractor is later so possibly 65 but I see the parking brake tool for a much earlier E so not for 65. If the 69 was a US purchase it came with out this type of tool kit which was eliminated in 1968 (US market). That said it looks almost complete and is valuable.

G’day Tom,

The simple answer is the Tool-Kit in your photo is defiantly from a 1965 E-type and definitely not from a 1969 E-type.
USA market Series 2 E-types did not get any tool-kit/roll (just wheel-changing equipment), and the tool-kit that came with UK and Rest-of-World markets Series 2 were totally different tool-roll and contents (much less than Series 1)

Its hard to be more accurate than 1965 without seeing the individual tools included, but in what I can see is totally consistent with any 4.2 E-type tool-kit from first 4.2 in October 1964 (build date) through to early 1966 (build date), so 1965 is pretty definite, but need more detail of tools to be more accurate. Per chance, do you know Chassis No/VIN of the E-type, as that allows an accurate dating of both E-type and this tool-kit. A simple ‘1965’ (in American terminology) may mean 1965 Model Year or 1965 date-of-sale, rather than the more accurate date-of-manufacture.

One thing I do notice, is the very-left side Allen-Key, which was a tool introduced for the very first March 1961 E-types, that required manual adjustment of their handbrake calipers. When the Handbrake was modified to be self-adjusting from August 1961, this Allen-Key was no longer required, but regardless was still listed and in fact still supplied within all 3.8 E-type tool-kits. Indeed as with yours, although now deleted from the 4.2 E-type Spare-Parts-Catalogue, it was still supplied with all 4.2 E-type tool-kits, 1965, 1966 and 1967, with the latest Series 1 tool-kits being confirmed in UK and Australian tool-kits after USA 1968MY (from August 1967) cars ceased getting tool-kits. One of the rare errors in Jaguars technical documentation not matching the practical reality - but there are others!

So its other tools included that allow for the ‘1965’ dating.

Roger

Jerry, thanks for that.
Can you advise if your Feeler Gauge has its three sizes 6, 4 and 8 etched onto blades with double-stroke numerals, or single stroke numerals?

Re the failure mode of the Jack. I have seen countless examples now of these earlier integral-handled Jacks with total handle missing, and the should-be attached ratchet-wheel also missing, leaving just an exposed end-shaft and often the end-bracket bent out. There are reports of a lot of Jack breakages fixed under warranty. I don’t know for sure, but design is very weak relying on a single small spring loaded one-way pawl held within the cast handle boss, driving and resisting the full load of one side of an E-type being Jacked up, by engaging a single tooth of the ratchet wheel. If either pawl or tooth are worn or not fully engaged, its easy to see the jack collapsing under the jacked-up mass, and breaking of either a tooth or teeth of the ratchet-wheel or more likely I think the Pawl, and indeed I have just been sent photos of a cast-handle-boss cracked open along the hole where the spring-loaded pawl sits. This first design cast-boss was revised by building up the platform around the spring-loaded pawl hole, but also adding a groove/location so that the pawl-rod-handle aligned at 90 degrees, thus I presume better aligning or pawl in engagement with the ratchet wheel engaged tooth.
But still insufficient, thus the total new design of having a large direct square drive on the Jacks main screw, and a separate-ratchet-handle with a much stronger and positive internal ratchet pawl-design, and indeed to reduce the mechanical advantage load, the screw thread was larger with a shallower pitch. Hard to describe, but see attached photo of the inside of an integral-ratchet-handle, and the small/minimalist pawl engagement that carries the entire load of half the side of an E-type being lifted, noting this pawl is spring loaded to keep engaged, or allow ratcheting release.

Be careful - there are a lot of these Jacks out there with missing/broken handles, and you have earlier design without the reinforced/locating boss.

Jerry I feel your pain but your statements are a bit shallow. Let’s use the S1 E type guide as a basis here. For years originality was a very subjective call with strong wills and observation ruling the day too often. Bob Stevenson set out to write a guide and gave of his time and efforts freely. I did not know Bob then but contacted him shortly after I had seen the draft (pre internet). We discussed his draft and I listened to his frustration about documentation. As I had been hoarding documents I offered him copies of all technical and spare parts bulletins. We had a running bet at the time that the top 100 issues could be documented! Last I remember we had done so for 95% or so.

Second protest drive research. No entrant has to simply accept a non auth. score–they can --and do–protest. The protest not only drives the protest comm. to do research but the entrant also. When I judge I encourage valid protest and carry a form in my pocket and even help fill it out if needed.

Third if you read the guides they all state clearly that if you have information to please contact the author–what could be more open. The authors have done a pretty good job of updating when presented with facts. They do not do well with “my car” observations. They also seek original cars but at this date those are usually molested.

Fourth in this case it is tools–JCNA does have a guide which is the basis I think for Roger’s soon to be work. I think some of the same folks are working on it. The correct type of tool is what is judged and not the make. If that is correct the standard has been met. We all know of original tool kits with mixed tool brands.

Fifth if you look at the Judges guides you will find “observational” notes in them. These simply are there to help the judge and at this point there is no document.

So as I said I feel your “pain” but there is a solution, or at least a method of easing it. I remember the radiator exchange and a few others. The author of the S2 and 1968 (or 1.5 ) guide found almost all of his answers in the IPLs and fiche that continued well into the late 70s but was never put in hard print.

While I fully admit there are some things that documents will never be discovered for I can say that the hunting is normally very rewarding. As evidence and using the tool example I provided Roger a Hornburg sales bulletin (not found in Jaguar (factory) literature that the 1968 E types came with a very shorted tool kit. It only stands to reason that previous customers wondered where their tool kit was and Hornburg staff asked the factory and was informed. While the trail of letters seems to not exist the evidence --in the form of a bulletin to all dealers (the very largest organization) seems to be proof enough.

So love it or hate it the competitions (flawed as they may be) are largely responsible for the expansion of knowledge re: Jaguar cars. Competition breeds (or should) excellence. These are not dog shows where subjective rulings control the day. Not that AKC does not have standards–they do–but they are often ignored for reasons of “personalities”.

So go get involved and if you are sure the judges are wrong explain it to them and show the proof. If they do not agree protest–protest is not looked upon as anything other that a search for evidence–unless the entrant acts like a jack wagon!

Would that be an integral-handle jack wagon?

In some cases yes—with a reverse switch!

Soon after I got my '68 FHC in 2000 my ratchet handle type jack bowed out the plate where the jackscrew goes thru and broke the weld on one side at that plate. I have forgotten all of the circumstances now but was using it on a nice flat concrete surface at the jack pad point on the car when it broke. Scared me to death but I should have been paying closer attention .

David
68 E-type FHC.

George,

I think you misunderstand my post. I have no issue with JCNA judging or rules. I appreciate Concours competition (though I have not participated for some years). Even tough picky calls are OK with me, you sometimes need something to distinguish and rank near-perfect cars. No pain here.

I’m just saying that Roger’s research (great research) won’t have much meaning for JCNA authenticity judging. Plenty of us will enjoy knowing more on this subject, I know I will.

Jerry

George,

Where is this guide? I couldn’t find a separate book, so do you mean the pages in each version’s guide?

Jerry

Just to clarify a few things.
I am Australian, live in Australia and indeed contribute significantly to the Australian (ACJC) equivalent of JCNA in matters Concours originality, and my writings/publications to date have been in British based specialist Jaguar magazines and books, and indeed contributions to European specialist Jaguar books and indeed web-sites, but indeed nothing in USA nor indeed JCNA, albeit I have made regular contributions to American authors and indeed JCNA to use as they see fit.

But no, my work on TOOLS and TOOL-KITS is all my own research and initiative, albeit soliciting help wherever I need it or from whoever can help, such as indeed my current theme on this forum seeking help on demarcation details regarding Metallifacture Jacks, and indeed as George mentioned, his supply of an incredibly useful Hornburg Bulletin re USA market (only) 1968MY cars lack-of-receiving-any tool-kit . So NO - my efforts are most definitely NOT based on anything JCNA at all, indeed quite the contrary - I am providing my work and research on and as requested, to help develop a JCNA work in progress, which I understand will be appropriately acknowledged when completed.

What I am doing, and have been doing for some 40+ years is researching tool-kit detail to a level way beyond what is conceivably practical to apply in a JCNA Concours environment which I have to say, JCNA is appropriately USA-centric and sensibly so for their parochial USA environment, and is accordingly necessarily subject to JCNA Policy decisions.

As with my request on this forum for help on METALLIFACTURE Jacks, my research has concluded on there being SIX distinctly very different major variants, and I will detail all, including as close as possible to my target of monthly accuracy demarcations between the variants - this level of detail is NOT supported by any factory documentation that has ever surfaced from factory archives, albeit it may be there somewhere within internal Engineering Drawings or supply contracts.

JCNA as I understand it, will and can only differentiate between only the TWO variants that are identifiably supported by available factory documentation, the FHC/OTS version or the 2+2 version, each having a different part-number. If after I publish my detailed SIX-variant efforts in a UK magazine that circulates Internationally, if JCNA wish to expand their guidelines to recognise more than their current two variants, up to say maybe four, five or indeed all six of my variants, then that’s a JCNA policy decision to make one way or the other, and go through their very necessary approval processes. Of course I will help, IF REQUESTED.

But lets keep this in perspective, Tool-Kits are only a very small part of the balanced content of the various JCNA E-Type Judges guides, so can only cover matters-originality at a macro level, and not to my detailed-micro level. Those who want the satisfaction of having their tool-kits as 100% accurate as possible, will need to refer to my published papers - this level is just NOT published anywhere else, but watch out for the rapid Ebay response soon after. Those who simply want to maximise their score in a JCNA Concours, should refer to the relevant JCNA Judges guide and comply at least with those ‘macro-level rules’. If you want to play the JCNA game, you abide by the JCNA rules, and as George has pointed out, if you are unhappy about any judged aspect, there is a Protest protocol that will fully consider your concerns, and update the JCNA rules if found necessary/ warranted within prevailing policy guidelines.

Anyone with a Tool-Kit that fully complies with my detailed published papers, will have no trouble at all, fully complying with JCNAs far-abbreviated expectations.

Publication of my DETAILED papers on E-type Tool-Kits is scheduled to commence from I expect the APRIL 2017 issue of Philip Porter’s British specialist monthly magazine THE E-TYPE available by direct subscription only, but it does enjoy an extensive world-wide circulation to E-Type owners and enthusiasts, including those in USA and I dare say also to some members of JCNA. But as above, apart from some help from George and most likely some other probable members of JCNA, my detailed publications owe little, if anything at all to JCNA - living in Australia, I am not a member.

But please, as previously - if anyone has any questions or input re SS and Jaguar Tool-Kits, and not just E-types, I am more than happy to respond, direct, or on-forum. I do have a wealth of information/detail/photos on all Tool-Kits from 1932 SS.1 through 1975 V12 E-type and later, albeit I do not have the same interest/passion for later models. A MAJOR stand-alone book I am working on covers SS and Jaguar Tools and Tool-Kits (1932 to 1975), with the SS-Jaguar period, XK period and E-type period well progressed, but publication is years away.

Thanks for your great work, Roger. Some confusion may arise from your name being listed along with Steve Kennedy on the JCNA publication Jaguar Tools and Toolkits being sold here: http://www.jcna.com/shop/items/60

I look forward to reading your more complete information in THE E-TYPE this coming year.

–Drew

Roger, I believe you and I exchanged posts on what I found in the boot of my 1968 E when I acquired it back in 1982, and that is a ratty tool roll with maybe half the tools missing but including the Tecalemit GC.3020 grease gun. I am not at all certain this tool roll is original to the car as there is some belief, if not evidence, that Canadian delivery Es that were transshipped through New Jersey - by far the majority - were configured the same as the US Federalised cars. It’s a question I didn’t think to ask other Canadian S1½ owners but shall when opportunities arise. I do know that home delivery Canadian cars had the toolkit, as there was a very original one here in the neighborhood that had one, along with the triple SUs and missing Tex door mirror, all other features the same as the US cars.

By the way, all other Canadian owners I have contacted report their cars fitted with SUs and lack the Tex mirror.

Jerry see the shoppe–it is under JCNA publications.