Just an educated guess, but judging by the picture I posted earlier in this thread, the length and width would be a little bit more than necessary to contain a head gasket, call it 10" x 29", and depth a little bit more than necessary to enclose the top radiator hose or about 3".
It was heavy cardboard, not corrugated, and stapled together at the corners, though it could also have been glued.
I apologize for a poorly worded question. I had intended to try to find guidance for the dimensions of the 120 “Contineltal Touring Kit” chipboard box ( heavy solid cardboard, folded and stapled), not the Minor Spares box which is what I understood you had posted… Porter’s pictures seem to show a Touring box for the 120s considerably lower aspect ration than 10 x 30. ; shorter and wider based on the comparison to the size of some contents. My last resort is to measure a correct ignition coil and use that as a ruler. The picture I am referring to shows a box constructed as you say, and containing some insert boxes lined with shaved wood pieces for padding and containing a fuel pump, a coil, some oil filter cartridges and with a smaller inner box also lined thah has a collection of bulbs and perhaps points and condensers. The larger box has crossed strips of single sided corrogated laying inside it in the manner of wrapping paper in a Christmas gift. Porters second photo is the wood version he says were for 150s.
I picked up this tatty one recently from 670237 have tried to tidy it up as yet some interesting bits in it including the throttle stop!
Karl has already clarified that he was seeking advice/comments on the “Continental Touring Kit” - that was not generally available with a new XK120 nor to anyone outside the UK, rather than the majority of these comments about the JAGUAR MINOR REPLACEMENT OUTFIT that was arguably supplied initially with all new XK120s for the EXPORT markets only where Jaguar was not confident of new XK120 owners having ready access to original spare parts. Surviving example numbers suggest not all export-XK120s did in fact get them, despite the general belief that in USA at least, the Distributor and/or Dealer kept them themselves for spare parts sales/profits rather than let new XK120 owner have them for free…
Terrys posting of one of these MROs being ex 670237 is most interesting in a number of areas… who was the Dealership that allowed this MRO go onto the buyer of 670237, rather than keeping it themselves…
Clearly the contents are all over the place, as typically these surviving customer receipt kits ended up being well used, and a source of storage space for all sorts of additional bits and pieces - the actual original contents are well known by the detailed label on each MRO box and also pasted into the rear cover of Handbook supplied with export market XK120s…, bearing in mind there was some evolution in these MROs contents and these labels over the 1949-1954 period…
But one other thing in Terrys photo has caught my eye - the pictured LOCKHEED brake bleeder tube Container. These were not included within the original MRO, but were of course included within the XK120s Tool Kit, and clumsily/awkwardly stored within the Tool Roll, so transferring it from the Tool Roll to the MRO makes sense, (as does also storing the Throttle Stop with it) . Good chance this Lockheed Container is original to 670237s original Tool Kit, so Terry, can you confirm whether Containers Lid and Base is aluminium or steel???
But I wonder about the UK Tax disc holder - was 670237 a Home Delivery car ???
1 Like
Terry,
While not the box I was trying to ask about, the picture you posted is very helpful and welcome because it clearly shows detail of the box construction dividers that are almost always adrift or long gone in the pictures we have available, I have been making an effort to collect a set of time correct contents and it is a major task as Roger has warned before and very much a checkbook exercise. Very little of what is shown in the box looks to be correct as original from what I have learned. BTW, it strikes me that the box length is set by the cam cover gaskets which are longer than the head gasket. Still puzzled why modern gasket sets are commonly sold with three of these.
Karl
I have seen a number of photos of the Minor Spares boxes with the metal engine block gaskets “loose” in the bottom of the boxes but possibly appearing as if held in place by the stapled in U shaped dividers. Of course this may have no significance since none are pristine, but it make me wonder that if they did this how they stored the cam cover gaskets for shipping ; flat loose, flat in a protective glassine sleeve, rolled up, etc.
That occurred to me too, but the cam cover gaskets, intake manifold gasket and oil sump gaskets could have been put in the box at an angle, so the head gasket still takes up the most area. They would have to protect them from getting bent so they probably put them at the bottom, perhaps taped to an extra piece of cardboard. Anyway you could lay them all out together and see what size box you would need to make.
Rob,
Any theories as to whether they may have used a gasket set commercially packaged vs individual Jaguar parts ? My guess is when the cars were brand new, the availability of aftermarket sets would be problematic for a year or so , and they would likely pack individual different small gaskets pulled from factory stock. All of this is more or less speculation, but I want to do something that seems credible even though these are not monitored if a car is judged. I have never seen any remnants of a package for the large gaskets and they were likeltyslid in under the diaphrams, but I was thinking for the smaller ones they be grouped in Glassine bags by function and labelled by hand with the part nunbers just as they hand labelled the boxes themselves. I have seen remains of well aged Glassine envelopes in some photos of Minor Spares boxes.
Karl, at the same time that MRO boxed kits were supplied to EXPORT only XK120 and XK140, Jaguar also produced carboard-envelope kits of two Gasket sets - one for complete Engine Overhaul - called a SET OF ENGINE JOINTS, and one for just a Cylinder Head removal and overhaul - called a SET OF DECARBONISING JOINTS. These were available for all Mark IV, Mark V, Mark VII, Mark VIIM, XK120, XK140 and maybe later, but it gets a bit confusing/messy with later issues as period MRO were not issued for later models such as XK150.
Trouble is, these Engine and Head Gasket sets were put together for sale as Spare Parts supply, and not for free inclusion within a new export market XK120/140 as per the MROs. The packaging and content also varied over the years as these kept being put-together supplied during period, but also later in 1960s and 1970s…
With a bit of effort you can presume which kits and packaging was correct period for the XK120 and XK140 MROs thus the question is/was - was one of these card-enveloped Head Gasket sets actually included within the MRO box or was the set-of-gaskets simply put loosely in the MRO box or what…
The Complete Engine Overhaul sets were Part Numbered in the Ass.2xx series with the last two numbers indicating model of Jaguar, for instance Ass.211 was for ‘Early’ XK120, Ass.212 for Mark VII, Ass.213 for ‘Later’ XK120, Ass.214 for ‘Later’ Mark VII, and Ass.215 for Mark VIIM and XK140.
The Decarbonizing or Head overhaul sets were Part Numbered in the Ass.3xx series, using the same last two numbers to denote the model - thus Ass.311 for ‘Early’ XK120.
Fortunately these Ass.2xx and Ass.3xx sets include a label stuck on outside of card-envelope that details the contents included, thus my belief that that the Ass.3xx sets may be relevant to the same age/model MRO, whereas the Ass.2xx sets have additional gaskets not included in the MROs…
I don’t have a photo of a period ‘Early’ XK120 Ass.211 set, just this following one printed in maroon on the post-period label…, and in a larger card Envelope…
See next what I believe is a period ‘Early’ Mark VII Ass.212 label…
These come in a card envelope that fits within a Mark VII MRO.
See also a period ‘Early’ XK120 Ass.311, sadly damaged, and not all visible/readable but still of the correct period style. Conceivably these were included as is in an early XK120 MRO as is, or I think more likely just the contents and no outer card envelope - albeit this example was found with/inside an MRO…
And for comparison purposes, and indeed full details, see next a post-period maroon label Spare Parts supply Ass.311 label…
All good fun to try and resolve/work out what this all means, and indeed relevance to the factory supplied MRO, as one of my projects has been to put together a correct/authentic period accurate MRO for my XK140 - so has been partially complete original XK140 MROs, mixed and matched, with period Ass.215 and Ass.315 Gasket sets, and period correct/boxed (as appropriate) Lucas, Champion and Dunlop additions… I am almost there, but who knows how accurate or otherwise my completed MRO will be ???.
Not even trying for XK120 unfortunately - just to hard - albeit I am partially underway with a Mark V MRO as well…
1 Like
Roger,
Thanks for your response. It looks like one could do a “made up to fool the judges” cardboard sleeve set by combining the style and format from your correct time period picture, albeit torn , of a partial label and the contents from tne later set in your picture. That is actually a very satifying answer to my query unless one goes for the loose bits theory. Certainly it is not likely anyone can likely prove such to be wrong, and “wrong” has no consequences for an item not judged. If it were taken a step further by tearing off the corner of the sleeve to reveal the gaskets inside that has a certain charm too ,and becomes an exact replica of an existng part. The really nice result is that your picture of the tear is itshows the color of a set of “correct” cam cover gaskets as offered by Jaguar; a nice tidbit.
Does anyone know if this box is being or was reproduced, or by chance does anyone have one they would like to sell?
I came across this picture of a parts box in a Mark VII chassis 710845.
The car is in very good unrestored condition, though the contents wouldn’t be the same as for 120, different hoses for one thing.
I am going to guess that a PO cut open the top of the box in each compartment to gain access to the various compartments. The general appearance does make me think that that it is less likely than I thought before that the large decaobonising gaslets were slid under the compartment dividers at delivery, but that is just an impression.
Karl
If you mean the Mark VII box, the dividers are not cut open, they are simple sheets folded at the sides and stapled to the main sides, but now have been mashed down. Glue here seems less likely, in that the dividers have separated from the sides, but where the corners of the box are glued they have not. The large gaskets could have sat on top. The lid is gone.
I also note the pink labeled Handbook, which no doubt Roger P already knew about.
Rob,
You are correct, of course. I was seeing the curved bent ends of the dividers as rounded openings in the lid, which they are not. The really great thing about this picture is it is the first one I have seen that clearly shows a relative comparison between the height of the dividers and the box sides. I guess alsot also , then, argues that the gasket set was contained in a sleeve such as the one in Rogers picture, and if so we know what the sleeve looked like and also the contents of the label on the sleeve and the fonts. Lots of valuable information from your picture. Makes my day becasue I had mocked up the label before concluding that the gaskets were loose below the dividers. The sleeve is easy to make.
710845 is indeed a superb Mark VII built in c7 Oct 1951 - see pic…
The pink labelled Handbook is indeed the very first issue (of six) of the Mark VII Handbook with this issue dated 31/1/51 but was subject to six stick on Addendums/errata to keep it up-to-date, prior to the issue of the revised second edition of Mark VII Handbook issue dated 31/10/51. Given 710845 was built only a few weeks prior to the second-issue Handbook, it is most probable that the 31/1/51 Handbook will be to the final updates with all six Addendums/errata included…
Being a car exported to/sold new in NZ, this MRO will be typically original/correct for an export market Jaguar, and being an Oct 1951 car will have the first issue/make up of the Mark VII MRO - there was a later updated kit… See attached MRO label, as stuck in rear of Mark VII Handbook…
Contents are similar, but there are differences for same age XK120, and also further changes for later Mark VII and XK120…
Is that car in Australia now? It looks like WoFs stopped here about 2008
A few of you know me here on the XK120 forum, I own a 1951 XK120 OTS #660792.
As I have bought back my old cat after a break of 20 years, I’m doing the usual “fettling” with the car, re-discovering things I instigated almost 40 years ago. most items are as they were when I started the restoration process back in Melbourne, Australia. It’s a fascinating experience, and of course there are things I was not even aware of during my first tenure of ownership. This brings to mind the MRO boxes that accompanied the cars during their trips to foreign lands. When I first bought the car, it was in boxes and luckily almost all the parts were there. I have some vague memories of there being odd shaped cardboard boxes, with a combination of parts in them. Some of the boxes were falling apart and were tossed when we moved the car and parts to Germany in the late 80’s!!
Now, looking back, I would like to recreate the “MRO” box for myself. I’d appreciate any help as far as Size, Length, Width and Height and configuration - the top Lid to the bottom of the Box and if they were Dividers and how many. Thank you all.
Karl Robertson
Karl, We have started an effort here in the States to reproduce the MRO box. We have an original one that is a little worn around the edges, but is very usable for a model. Also have an original label on the back cover of an XK120 Handbook and we have located a company that seems capable of reproducing the box. Will keep the Forum posted.
3 Likes
Clifford,
I believe I learned somewhere that the label reproduced in the handbook may not be an exact reproduction of the ones on the boxes. I am delighted that someone is doing the boxes, but getting them to be correct is not simple or easy.
I wish you success.
Karl