I‘m being sarcastic here, because it isn’t. Everytime I order parts there is always something wrong. Well, in nine out of ten cases.
I bought two exhaust manifolds from an eBay seller in England, listed as E-Type Series 2 manifolds. Never buy something from a Brit, I‘ve said before. I‘m allowed to say that as I‘m one myself.
Now I‘ve ordered all screws and gaskets etc, and just as I wanted to declare my E-Type weekend open, I realize that the gasket rings don‘t fit. They are either too large or the hole in the manifold is too small, which means two things. The manifolds listed on eBay are not from an E-Type, or that company in England with the three letters has sent me the wrong rings. What do you think? The hole in the manifold is 4,8cm diametre, which is about 1-7/8“.
CT,
I’m trying to remember how mine looked but I believe that the rings are slid onto the down pipes and then the pipe is slid into the header slightly - the flanges on the pipe and the header will capture and crush the gaskets sealing the joint.
It’s not visible in the pic, but the manifold outlet should have a chamfer that matched the chamfer on the donut. Those chamfers mate, and then the donut is put into compression to create the seal.
The donut is not meant to go up, inside the manifold.
Go slow…
Yes even slower than a Brit…ha ha…
The gland ring should sit in the hole. Like your picture.
The down pipe should slide up into the gland and then you crush it.
After market manifolds will need a massage around the 4 stud holes as well to fit nicely.
Now step back , have a cup of tea and stay calm.
It looks ugly but the design works when its all together. The gland is for all the variables.
Your right to blame the brits!
I’m joking…
GTJOEY1314
I don’t know if the exhaust manifold was changed for the 4.2 but I have a 3.8 pair here and the I.D is much larger than you say you have, which doesn’t seem logical.
About 51.5 mm for the ID, 61.5 mm for the gasket recess and the gasket itself is about 59mm and goes right up inside the manifold. The manifolds also have studs fitted.
P.S… REMOVE YOUR SILVER gland AND SEND A PICTURE.
If there is an indent on the manifold in the hole its an ETYPE.
If its flat and no indent into the hole its a xk manifold.
A little british bird flew by my window…We are having tea as we speak.
Pip Pip.
gtjoey1314
That is my recollection too but I’ll add that I had to slightly dress the inside of the rings/gaskets before they would slip on the down pipes. Not a big deal, just keep it in mind if they appear a bit too small.
I replaced the entire exhaust system and found something interesting in the same area : the down pipes are not the same and I had the same problem slipping the donut on one them after a previous tear down.
The photos shows that one has a smaller ID but slightly larger OD to the point where I had to file it and grind it with a dremel drum sander to get the donut to fit. Also, the same unit one does not have a tapered ID. The new system has identical and tapered ID’s. I assume that at one point the PO must have replaced one of the them.
Marco
I think I‘m getting closer.
I added the thick white metal (or is it alooominum) gasket which has a bevelled edge in which the gland gasket fits quite nicely. On the other hand the hole in the gasket is much larger than the one on the manifold. I‘ve added a picture of the manifold without the silver
Tx Chris
One of the pipes appears to be clearly too small in that it looks like it has been rammed into the manifold deep enough to cause abrasions on the collar, unless you caused that by filing.
The system works well enough, the only trouble I’ve had being being keeping the brass nuts tight, hence the special Nordlocks.
A more rigid system wouldn’t provide the flexibility to move the pipes around to clear T-bars and still keep a seal. Like I say, it’s a good system.
It looks like someone machined the flat section of the manifold and in doing so removed the recessed/beveled section that the gland ring bevel should fit into. You may need to have a machinist re-bevel the manifold interface. Photo credit SNGB website…
If the flange was machined so as to completely remove the recess, the whole bolt flange would have gone. So it looks like the OP has a different manifold. Maybe one from an XK which looks similar but is different in the sealing arrangement.
Maybe Nick S. will chime in because he has an XK and a 4.2 E and we were discussing this the other day.
Guys those are XK MANIFOLDS THEN………E TYPE have a recess for the gland.
Unless the photo is on a bad angle DOUGS is an etype, the other is not.
GTJOEY1314
While my project is stalled… It’s fun to be able to chime in on others. My manifolds are original to my '69 FHC. The i.d. is 2-7/16" and the depth is approx. 3/8".
Bo agrees as he is now 16!
Let’s take a nap till new manifolds come
I have my old 1967 manifolds if you would like
It’s easier to buy new but pm if you need them
Unless your car is a series 2 with upper bolt holes for evap pipes
The reason why this hobby is so much fun is because of you guys who are a willing to provide information even by adding fotos. So it turns out I have bought (or I should say, was sold) XK manifolds and not E-Type ones. Well worse has happened to me before because by coincidence I own an XK 140 FHC project which was also missing the manifolds, so I don’t have to get all bent out of shape again this time (about buying from a Brit).
Your images gave me a clear idea on how the whole manifold/exhaust area looks and I am one step wiser on my Jag project. Thank you all for tuning in and helping here.
GTJoey actually kindly offered his manifolds and I have send a pm, hoping we can work something out.
Chris, in Germany
