Replacement Engine for a "lumped" XK140

I like it a lot. I agree about the angle, and I would have preferred a higher quality hose, like you used, but couldn’t make the bend - the 120 port looks a bit different, but is in the same location. I might just change mine at my next oil change. I have a bit of trouble with my sump plug leaking, and this should solve both issues. Thanks

I don’t know where you’re located, but I have a Mk II gearbox with matching Laycock de Normanville overdrive unit still attached gathering dust in my garage – if that’s an option for you. Serial number GBN 48152 JS. Been off the road since at least '82, so it would need a good flushing and new seals front and rear. San Jose, California.

Chris

Have you used this filter head Ron?
Peter B.

1 Like

No. What is it off of? Does it take the same blanking plate as the xj6? The only downside I see is that it might be a bit messy to change the filter, but then the horizontal ones aren’t exactly clean.

If you want to stick with a ammeter, this 0-60 CAV type is a nice unit.
One of the instrument guys in the UK might supply. Rim can be changed.
Peter B.

Call me biased, but I like the look of mine better. My design criteria included two requirements: even though the parts and modifications are clearly not original, to make them look like they belonged, and second, that they be reversible. I have a box full of standard red and blue anodized AN fittings. I choose the nickel plated Aeroquip hose ends and the black Aeroquip hose because I liked the look.

I would also point out that that routing would not conform to what would be considered best practices.

On a RHD the upright filter head Peter shows will clear the steering column, that head is a bit uncommon

The straight down filter from a MK10-420G fits most places, but isnt a spin on

On a street car, the smooth bends do not in any meaningfyl way compromise oil flow.

Were there 10 of them, yes, but not on a street car.

Oh, I agree, neither hose layout has any significant impact on flow. There is very little flow and almost no pressure in either hose. My critique is that the stainless hose is too short and straight, and thus very rigid, and could contribute to the fatigue failure of the aluminum hose end. Similar to what is shown in example #5 in the Parker hose guide.

Maybe, but, if it is standard AN rubber/SS hose, that is unlikely to happen.

On many a race car—subject to much more demanding levels of vibration—I never had a single failure of a hose end (good quality: this was back when Chinese butter metal fittings weren’t even a glimmer of a thought).

I woild suggest the T-5 box, or the >1965 Jag all synchro box with OD. Have both on XKs besides the Moss which are charming when in good order.

Scott,
Sorry that we’ve sort of pirated your thread.
To your question, a friend more expert than I says that you can make a Mk2 manual transmission work in a 140. I don’t know the details. As another poster stated, the late 4 synchro overdrive is great (it’s what I have in my Mk2) but it’s hard to find.

1 Like

Series 3 XJ Ron, as you see it has connections for a cooler that will
be utilized . There is a internal hole that can be tapped and plugged
rather than a blanking plate, when using a cooler, if that is what you refer to.
Some of the Racers prefer this type spacewise.
Peter B

Yes Wiggles and the XK has not made the street yet, its still in the workshop !
I now take care how I shut a door in case I fracture a connection
on the bypass hose. BUT WAIT A MINUTE !
I have not considered the expansion rate of the sump V the block.
Oh JC! what to do. I suppose its back to the drawing board.
Now let me see, where did I put that fag packet?
Peter B.

1 Like

Hehehe!!

Just take care when slammin’ shut the glovebox…:stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

LOL - I know what you guys are saying, “Ain’t no way it’s gonna fail!” and would have to agree, you are probably right. I worked on my first racecar, a methanol fueled dirt track 3/4 midget, as a teenager in 1967, more than 50 years ago. I have seen hoses fail, almost always because they were poorly installed or improperly assembled. Beyond that, I come by my design conservatism professionally. I spent my career as a Registered Professional Engineer in high hazard chemical plants and distilleries. In those environments, hoses, any hoses, are treated as fundamentally flawed devices to be employed with great scepticism. Because of the very real risk of very large explosions, we did everything by the book, and the book was based on the philosophy of Best Engineering Practice. If something fails in that environment and the subsequent investigation reveals that some aspect was shortcut or not done by the book, someone’s head was going to roll. So for me, my early exposure to motorsports and my background as a PE mean that best practice will always be part of my decision process.

2 Likes

Mike: Is that a 3.4 liter block with the adapter and spin-on filter? If so, please tell me who is the supplier. Have been working this prob for some time for my 54 120 FHC.
thanks
m

Mike: New at posting on this site. Is that a 3.4 liter block that your S1 E type sump is on? If so, where did you get the adapter for the filter. I have been working this prob for my 54 120 FHC.
thanks
m

Yes, 3.4L block and the sump is S1 E-Type. I originally built the engine to vintage race, and the SVRA was a stickler about the engine displacement, or I would have used a 4.2. The filter mount is a Jaguar part, I believe it originated on S1 XJ6. I have two of these. The part number on the casting is EAC1668PA on both. One these I bought new in a box and the part number on that box was EAC-1924 (photo above). I cannot explain the discrepancy, other than maybe it was in the wrong box?

It is a RARE instance you will EVER see me making that statement…:stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: