Wrong wire wheel spinners

All really interesting reading, I know from reading this thread that this issue is for series 3 cars, so as series 2 cars also use the same sinners does this problem of the spinner apply to the series 2 cars?
Thanks, Pat

I only researched the eared spinners which are the same for all E-Type’s and any wire wheel shod Jaguar’s. The ‘Federal’ spinner lost the ears and was standard on S1 cars shipped to Germany and Switzerland and almost all S2/3 cars (a few RHD S2’s had eared spinners). The later earless spinners were the three sided design.

The repro Federal spinners produced by Orson have the correct font but I can’t comment on their fit. Basically if you have any repro spinners on your E-Type you may have problems


Pat - I use the referenced repro spinners on my 69 S2 – apart from appearance (notably the lame attempt at the Jaguar script) the only problem is that they (especially the front ones) can be more difficult to get loose than the original ‘federals’ I had. The up side is that wailing on them with a 6# hammer is easier with the eared version that when using that bronze tool fitting.

I do have a gadget for removing the spinners with a breaker bar and 1½" socket:

But I still have to use a few hard licks with the hammer before the tool will work. Before I figured this out I had to return 2 (broken) breaker bars to Harbor Freight. They didn’t even ask what I was trying to do with them.

Either they may be available again of I lucked out and got a set after production ceased. I bought a set of 4 from either Welsh or SNG in the US within the past 8 months or so. I can’t find the receipt just now so I’m not sure which supplier had them… They have the MWS logo but not the “KG 5262 JR”. I’ve noted no problems with them.

Love this sort of quality research.
One major detail, not yet mentioned, and a major problem in my experience with certain reproductions, is the MATERIAL used. I understand the original Albion Brockhurst made C1102 and C1103 knock-offs were made from Magnesium Bronze. Per chance do you know any material details, indeed any properties such as its Plastic Yield Strength - I appreciate that’s a big ask short of accessing original engineering specifications.

But the issue with many reproductions, and until this thread I just hadn’t appreciated the variety of other problem areas, is that inferior strength material is used with a much lower plastic yield strength - I condescendingly refer to, for want of a more correct word, as just Brass. With your contacts in Orsen Engineering, or anyone else, has this aspect of material used come up. I certainly don’t have any specific technical information, and haven’t even contemplated any metallurgical tests, as there are many aspects in manufacturing that can affect resultant plastic yield strength.

So in the same vein, any comments on whether originals and repros, are FORGED or CAST, before being machined?

From a user-perspective, the originals are most resistant to bruising/deformation/damage, with the repros seemingly much less so, indeed I have seen repros with broken-off ears after a fair amount of abuse - but don’t recall make/source of repro, if indeed I was then aware of the many different ones.!


And while talking Spinners,

What is known about the C.14891/2 ‘earless’ knock-offs as supplied to late XK150 and all E-types, as supplied new to the German and Swiss (and later, Japanese) markets, being the first ‘safety-spinner’ pre-dating the 3-lobe ‘Federal’ spinner by approaching 10 year. On introduction of the ‘Federal’ spinner for USA 1968MY E-types, a few months later, German/Swiss and Japanese E-types standardised, superseding their C.14891/2 ‘safety-spinners’ (My terms - not official)

See picture of a ‘near-side’ C.14892 :-

Certainly the JAGUAR lettering looks to be Albion Brockhurst, as you would expect, but I don’t think I have any other photos showing rear-side markings.

Indeed if anyone has an original C.14891 or C.14892 (or both) they don’t want, I would be most interested in acquiring for my collection, along with the special bronze tool C.14927. The pictured C.14892 belongs to a friend. I believe these are also Reproduced - thus in Concours condition, but don’t know if any of the same problems as the C1102/3 reproductions.

I think you may actually be referring to the tensile strength of the material used, to determine typical deformation under various conditions such as tension, compression, torsional forces, etc. All of which can be determined under controlled condition, but this would effectively entail destructive testing of the sample. More meaningful for these spinners may be confirming the hardness of the material, using say a Vickers Hardness Test (non destructive), this can then be used to approximate the yield strength of the material if one wants.

But first things first, I just need to find a set of new eared spinners that will fit. :smirk:


The aspect I was trying to highlight, is the point at which elastic deformation is overtaken by plastic deformation, thus whether the ‘ears’ on a knock-off deform plastically or not. Thus I used the term ‘plastic yield strength’, maybe not precise. I associate the term ‘Tensile Strength’, more in the context of ‘Ultimate Tensile Strength’, which is way beyond the bruising/deformation issue I was trying to describe… Not sure I would be able to relate a Vickers test to the relative yield properties of forged magnesium-bronze, versus cast non-ferrous materials - my metallurgy is somewhat rusty, but as you say, may well be a quick indicator. My point is, it would be interesting to know the relative metallurgy and properties of an original Albion Brockhurst spinner, versus the various modern reproductions - as my general observation is that the reproduction ones are inferior in their resistance to plastic deformation, and I just wonder how controlled/of interest metallurgy is to the reproduction manufacturers, rather than the cosmetics, and indeed dimensional accuracy for purpose.
Metallurgy is not a strong point of reproduction manufacturers outside a controlled engineering environment, such as existed within Jaguar, and their contracted external suppliers such as Albion Brockhurst. AS a matter of course, if metallurgy or materials technology matters, I avoid anything made in China, regardless of how shiny it looks.

Certainly this discussion has made me a lot more interested/wary regarding restoration versus reproduction spinners, so all credit to David for his efforts.


As far as I know all repro spinners are cast and then machined but I have not researched the metal used. Albion Brockhouse specialised in drop forging and used manganese bronze for the spinners which were then machined with the thread.:

Albion Drop Forgings Co
of Foleshill, Coventry. Telephone: Coventry 8091. Telegraphic Address: “Albion, Coventry”. (1937)
1900 Company established in Lockhurst Lane.
1914 Specialities: diesinking, stamping and smith’s work, engineering motor railway work, iron, steel and brass stamping and drop forgings
1937 Drop forgings manufacturers
1937 Sold by J. Brockhouse and Co
1937 Listed Exhibitor - British Industries Fair. Drop Forgings for the motor, aircraft, railway and general engineering trades, in high grade ferrous and non-ferrous materials. Heat treatment and tests on modern scientific lines. Approved Air Ministry. (Stand No. D.518)
1939 Approved Aircraft Industry Suppliers
1960 Acquired by J. Brockhouse and Co and merged into the Brockhouse Group as Albion-Brockhouse
1961 Manufacturers of drop forgings for aero, motor and engineering trades. 250 employees
1967 Albion Drop Forging Co. forging was stopped and the work was moved to Brockhouse at West Bromwich
2017 Trading as Brockhouse Group. The company is still on the same 5.5 acre site in Howard Street, West Bromwich, to which it moved in 1888.

Albion Brockhouse are still in operation and are prepared to remanufacture the spinners providing there is a minimum order placed. Hopefully there will be sufficient demand to allow this to go forward.


So does this mean that the series 2 eared spinners available from the usual suspects will not fit the series 3? I was wondering about this as I wanted to swap mines… I don’t like holding the tool and whacking it so close to my fingers :slight_smile:

I have a 2 1/2’ pipe bolted to the tool but that’s not ideal.

The Series 3 rims are obviosluy wider but does this mean the hubs are different?

Spinners (two eared and earless) will fit all S1/2/3 cars with splined hubs. Fitting wider wheels makes no difference to the hubs or spinners.


In fact, I think that the Rudge-Whitworth splined hub design is standard. So in principle any 52 mm spinner (Borrani for example) should fit any 52 mm hub unless (like those in this thread) it is of faulty design. There are two thread pitches around, so of course you would have to match to your hubs. Logos are a different matter. IMHO–I’m not sure about this.

So there I was, having read this thread from top to bottom, on my knees in my garage by the front wheel of my car with the images of the right and wrong spinners on my iPad checking which ones I had, thinking “what on earth am I doing?”

Of course I have the wrong ones. They were fitted ‘new’ less than 15 years ago along with the ‘new’ wheels and tyres. New as in Wrong. Wrong tyres, wrong spinners, wheels with ‘Made in India’ on a bright yellow sticker. A bright yellow sticker that I have been religiously cleaning for all those nearly fifteen years so it can still be read, should anyone ever confuse my brightly polished bag of nails for a concours winner.

I’m happy with my wrong spinners on my wrong wheels, now with Vred tyres, which are not quite as wrong as the 195/65 15s originally fitted at my expense back in those bad old days before I knew anything about E -Types, by someone who told me they were experts in E-Types.

Mine are wrong too, but different. My dad bought them years ago because he liked them better than federal trilobes. They were still in a box when he gave me the car. I do not know when or where he bought them. Now I have to look for the box.

The “G” & “U” are wide like the originals, but the “J” &“R” seem a little too tall. The forming of the letters is a little off.

There are no markings on the inside.

They seem to fit well & work with my Dayton wheels.

I think those are the spinners made by SC Parts aka Limora. The Jaguar logo is not too bad but is flat on the bottom and curved at the top whereas the originals are curved top and bottom. The R is also distorted and looks more like an A.

Closer to the originals than the others though!


Well the search continues! I have found a supplier that has the MWS spinners, with a thread depth of 28.11mm. This being about 2-3mm deeper than my recently purchased spinners that I’m having issues with, but 3-4mm shallower thread than my original continental spinners. Wether thats enough to overcome my problem of not enough thread depth, I’m not sure. Guess I’ll just have to purchase them and try them out. In the meantime, I still await a response from my current supplier of poorly designed spinners and trust they will accept their return and refund. :smirk:

Just to complete my findings here, after purchasing another set of spinners from MWS. I now have 3 sets, the SMGB and the MWS slightly different from one another, but both quite different from my original Continental style spinners, as far as the depth of thread is concerned. See photos below for differences, which are enough on the SNGB sourced spinners to create my problem, but will the 1.6mm of extra thread of the MWS spinners make all the difference?
So in conclusion, I have concluded that there is no conclusion. :thinking: Does anyone what to buy a set of spinners! :unamused:

Hi John
I am interested in your findings.
At Orson we do pride ourselves on manufacturing accurate representations of products.
This is the first time I have seen this Forum and this thread regarding the spinners.
I have begun to investigate the position and will try and report back fairly soon.
I do not though have an original sample to use as a start point.
I am have been with the business 10 years and we have always produced this spinner in that time and without being flippant we have not had issues during or before that period.
I appreciate that the response of “no one else has complained” is a little easy to say - but genuinely this is the case - sometimes it can be difficult to identify an issue from a perceived isolated event.
I will speak to parties and follow up on the findings.
We do take our responsibilities seriously and do not treat these as “that is close enough”.
We can be found on the Web.
Anyone is welcome to contact me directly.
Regards to all
Dave Wood


Maybe my beat-up, but perfectly OEM servicable knock-offs have some value…:wink:


Thanks for taking the time to respond.

Your first port of call should be to buy an original spinner to set the standard. Fortunately originals can be bought off eBay for not much money: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Classic-Jaguar-Knock-On-Off-Wheel-Hub-Nut-Wing-Wheel-Spinner-Nut-Chrome/202586139005?hash=item2f2b13297d:g:XfEAAOSwf0hcVuq4:rk:5:pf:0

You may also want to read this thread where I fully documented my research into spinners: http://forum.etypeuk.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2006&p=36206&hilit=spinners#p36206

The current thoughts amongst most owners and restorers is to avoid reproduction spinners and have originals de-chromed, engraved, dressed and re-plated until proper copies become available. Note I say copies rather than reproductions.

If you need more information or assistance I am more than happy to help.



1 Like