I am restoring a 54 XK 120 roadster . I’m too big for it . Anybody ever cut and shorten their battery box and rear deck ( boot surround panel) 2-3" ? I’m at that stage in the body work that it could be pretty undetectable when finished and give me the maximum seat back movement I can get. Anyone have any thoughts they care to share ? Kevin
Kevin,
I approached it differently.
I added mostly XK150 parts, pedals and steering etc to the frame and extended the pedal box forward about 6 inches…! Outwardly the body is unchanged
Hi Kevin:
I did what you are describing, but on a 1953 DHC. I basically eliminated the battery boxes, putting a smaller Odyssey 12 volt unit in the boot offset to the driver. I had a section of angle iron welded to the frame rails that goes up and over the drive shaft and used that as a base for fabricating a new sheet metal section behind the seats. This allowed the seat rails to be moved back gaining valuable inches to accommodate my 6’ 2" frame. A couple of other advantages space-wise can be achieved by fitting the smaller, “trick” pedals from Bill Bassett and the fitment of a Mota-Lita wood rim steering wheel that is a smaller diameter than the original. Upon completion I enjoyed an almost straight arm driving position, however, I also had a steering wheel that was basically between my knees! I had to move the seats forward a little to get my knees in front of the steering wheel, but enjoy much more room and I am not driving with the wheel inches from my chest.
Clearly not a solution for those concerned about originality, but it works for me.
Chris.
Wondering if that particular solution would work in an OTS, given how close the seat backs are to the cockpit crash roll and the softop frame below.
I’m also deep into '54 XK120 bodywork but at 5’10" (I used to be an inch and a half taller - who says getting old has no benefits?) the squeeze isn’t quite so bad.
OTS more awkward than DHC or FHC to gain room, Here`s my approach.
This with a small indent in the battery box area allows a bucket seat to be
mounted “tilted back” increasing reach to the s/wheel.
Some more photos that might be of interest.
Hi Nick:
I recognize that the rear cowl on the OTS will not allow one the leeway that I had with the DHC, however, one additional thing I did in order to move away from the wheel was to remove the small projections at the rear end of the lower seat frames that provide a rest for the seat back. With these gone, I then fitted a large, oblong piece of dense upholstery foam that now rests on top of the rear of the drive shaft tunnel. When I am in the driving seat I can stretch and push the rear of the seat back against the foam (which is about 4" square) and the seat back angles backwards an extra inch or so. Of course, the front and top faces of the foam bolster are covered in red Rexine that matches the door/inner boot lid/ “A” and “B” panels of the interior, thus the bits that are visible between the seats blend in nicely.
Nick, you are not that far away, if you are ever in the area, drop in anytime!
Best,
Chris.
I am 6’3" and couldn’t fit in my current 120 either. I easily fit in the one I had in high school without a problem, though??? Go figure. I used Bill Bassett’s trick pedals and removed the seat tracks and bolted the frames through the floor as far back as possible. I can fit, but is still a bit tight.
I felt my car was too close to original and couldn’t bring myself to do it, but, if you have the opportunity to extend the footwell, I would highly recommend it. You can get additional room wnd retain the body shape. Then buy a 16" steering wheel.
Or, get a 140…
Sorry guys,…this talk of hacking on an XK120 makes me cringe. Get another car and don’t be so arrogant as to permanently damage a historical vehicle for your own, personal funsies.
We are custodians of these wonderful machines. Do the maximum you can do without doing permanent damage and if thats not enough, go get a larger car !
A - Remove the soft top - seat back goes a touch further back without it.
B - Put in bucket seats - the seat backs are thinner, will go under the crash roll
C - Get the “trick pedals” that are shorter.
D - With a 16" steering wheel your left knee can come up further when operating the clutch.
E - As a last resort, in my opinion, maybe install a pedal box. But please,…don’t chop !!
I’m 6’ and drive my XK120s in standard set up, so I have to think that those extra 3" can be negotiated without West Coast Customs style butchering.
2 Likes
Don’t worry about historical value, it is your car and you should be able to enjoy driving it comfortably. About 12 years ago a master metal fabricator friend of mine called me up insisting that I come take a look at his latest work. When I arrived at his shop there was a very early Ferrari, from 1951 as I recall. The new owner of this car was about 6’5" and he didn’t fit the car at all - and he wanted to drive the car enjoyably. The rework involved much cutting and stretching of the structure, movement of the seat and pedal box. All the work was done not with modern materials and welding equipment, but using the same materials and welding style as authentic to the early '50’s. Most people would never notice the changes, only the purists who knew that the car was not originally designed for a tall man were offended. The owner was undeterred by the idiots who didn’t own the car, he cared not a bit what this might do for resale value as he liked to drive all the cars in his collection. Cool dude really, he liked getting behind the wheel more than bringing his cars to a high end show where people would mutter grievances about what he had “done.”
1 Like
My add to the trick pedals and 16 inch sedan steering wheel is to remove some padding in the seats. I’m 6”4”and 250 so most cars are tight. Swapping down fill for some of the foam in the seats allows the seat to puff back up so it looks right when it’s parked, then the down compresses when you sit. And make sure your brakes and clutch mechanisms are in perfect shape since the trick pedals reduce the pedal travel a lot.
Thanks for the input ! That was just the sort of emotion I hoped I would stir.
LOL ! Well done !
I’m reading a fascinating book on Goering’s unbridled and greedy acquisition of Europe’s most prized paintings. As an artist and art-lover, I am so thankful that he did not listen to his drunken mates ; " Hey, Hermann,…its you’re freakin’ Vermeer, after all !! If you think a tattoo, right below the left earring, would look good on the girl, go for it, sport ! Here’s a Sharpee."
OK, maybe that analogy is a little over the top, I admit.
I’ve got mixed emotions about the originality paradigm. I’m doing up my 120 faithfully to original configuration (though not the original colours, which I cannot abide) because I’m enjoying the process and may even decide to show it at a JCNA concours someday. My '68 E-type features several retrofits - rod mounted rearview mirror, eared spinners, toggle switch dash, mohair top - and a number of improvements - electronic dizzy and tach, 6" wheels - and that’s how I like it. The car looks entirely stock to the uninformed and took 1st in its category at the recent British Car Day at Bronte here in Ontario this past September. However, I have been approached by cruise night lawyers who have made it their business to point out the things about which my car isn’t “correct”. I’m mostly polite, pointing out that all the retrofits and improvements are reversible, if the person to whom my wife sells the car after I’m dead should be an adherent of the Jaguar religion. Sometimes I’m not so polite.
I bought the XK120 as a barn find basket case so, though I am its “custodian”, I am solely responsible for its resurrection and I owe it nothing. How does one owe something to a machine? If the next owner wants to bring it back to its original pastel green and suede green interior he/she can go at it, but I’m not restoring this car for the next owner, I’m restoring it for me.
2 Likes
My kinda guy!!!
Sounds like we are bruddas of diff’rent muthas!
1 Like
There is one fellow in particular, whose first initial is B, who approached me at the local Friday cruise night to say that he too owns an E-type only his is “the rarer and more desirable S1 coupe”, at the time awaiting a respray at a paint shop. He would be showing it sometime thereafter. He went on to critique my car, pointing out the various incorrect retrofits, as if I wasn’t aware. Very helpful. He showed up later that summer with his metallic dark green 1965 FHC and there were two things I immediately noticed, though I restrained myself from sharing both because I am Canadian and typically polite (cof). Normally I would have said nothing, but felt I should return the favour. His wheels featured forged hubs, which as we all know didn’t debut until the end of the 1967 model year run. He was visibly upset on hearing about it.
The second thing I noticed, but did not share, was the bodywork, which B had done himself. It was a very nice paintjob applied over some of the worst bodywork I’ve seen in an E. Inconsistent gaps and wavy panels, obviously a lot of bondo. He was apparently cognisant of it - you’d have to be blind with no hands not to see it - because he volunteered the following year that he was thinking on having the body redone professionally.
Two other things about this fellow. He aquired the car from a local J-L member (whose name I won’t share, but he is a true gentleman) after I had had a chance to look it over and provide an opinion. The offer from B was $18K. I suggested at least $20K would be more appropriate, though the car was complete and running it needed a great deal of work. Still, an exceedingly fair price. So B agreed to pay the $20K in installments, defaulting on the last one and paying only what he felt the car was actually worth. That was six or so years ago, and we know what has happened to values in the interim. I’m afraid that has impacted the esteem I have for this fellow E-type owner.
The other thing was the huge placcard he had positioned near the car on a tripod stand proclaiming it to be “the most beautiful car in the world!” 265 horsepower, 150 mph, yadda yadda. It was embarassing.
My good wife once observed there are two kinds of E-type owners, the gentlemen and the assholes. Fortunately the former, met in my 36 years of E-type ownership, are the majority.
Primum non nocere - Hippocrates
(first, do no harm)
I’m reminded of a program I saw about a painting of a 16th century gentleman, unsigned but attributed to or done by the school of one of the old masters, and I thought it was a pretty nice portrait.
But the experts thought it had been overpainted over an original by one of the old masters, Da Vinci or Van Dyke or one of those guys. If true it would be incredibly valuable. They convinced the owner to have the overpainting stripped off. Well, the underlying portrait was inferior and looked like it was probably by some first year apprentice. Shoulda left well enough alone. “Do no harm”.
What did Lofty England do, anybody know? He was pretty tall.
Ultimately just about any modification can be undone by someone who really cares to. But some mods are more trouble to undo than others.
I don’t care how hard he makes it for any subsequent owner to reverse the changes. Its his car and he wants to drive it - I say go ahead cut it up and have a welding party. We are not talking about some one off special factory prototype with vintage racing history.
2 Likes
It is obvious Jaguar had nobody over 5’ 8" in their ergonomics department hence no need to make the cockpit bigger. Probably why this was listed as the major complaint in the design from the start , or from the first time someone went to get in it. Why isn’t the 140 seen as an abomination with all those “improvements” ? The horizontal line of the car is completely altered with the lengthened doors .