After unsuccessfully attempting to bolt the rear number plate housing to the boot (trunk) lid I had an idea. It is almost impossible to keep the piping in place as you tighten the bolts, it just pops out with a mind of its own.
I though of gluing it to the housing but as it is new PVC contact adhesive does not work, the best glue is clear silicone but how do you hold it in place while it sets. The answer is clothes pegs, well British type pegs, wooden with a perfect cut out that goes over the raised part of the piping. They worked perfectly
Don’t know exactly why, but I didn’t have any problems with placing the piping “under” the rear number plate assembly. I kept the piping with my fingers under the panel (section by section), starting in the middle of the top and then working my way down the sides, every time tightening the bolts at the inside a bit more, until I was satisfied with the position of the piping over the whole perimeter. See pics.
I have to add that during a first attempt I discovered that my Rear Number Plate assembly wasn’t following the contour of the boot lid and there was a gap of more than 1/8" at the bottom. I then decided to re-shape the Rear Number Plate assy until it exactly followed the contour and that turned out to be the answer.
That’s pretty much how I did mine, glue with a whole lot of spring clips.
I used fender welting, the vinyl cover sewn over rope type, painted body color.
I cut some triangular notches in the flange at each corner so it would curve without buckling.
There is some uncertainty about what was original, and at what time periods.
My car came to me with extruded black rubber piping, which looked to me to be original.
But the consensus on this forum (or perhaps majority opinion) many years ago when I replaced mine was that it should be body color fender welt.
Much later I learned that my license panel had been changed, probably when the car came to America from France in the late '50s. The clue was my boot lid has 8 screw holes.
There were four different panels for 120;
early for European plates
early for US and Canada plates
late for European plates
late for US and Canada plates
The difference between early and late is the spacing of the 4 bolts that hold it to the boot lid. The later spacing will hold it down more in conformity to the boot lid shape.
The difference between Euro and US/CDN is easier to spot, the spacing of the bolts that hold the plate.
And for an amusing bit of trivia…
In 1950-51 some states including Illinois had different width plates depending on the number of digits in your registration number, so they didn’t always fit on the rear panel.
I like Bob’s finished rear number plate assembly, I bow to your expertise with the piping, I’m afraid that I failed miserably trying to do it that way.
I have a question for Bob and Rob, I’m now going to fit the boot lid to the bodywork, where does the seal go? On to the bodywork or glued to the boot lid. Looking through the Forum and at photos and the maintenance manual there doesn’t seem to be a common consensus but a lot of people seem to think that it should be glued to the boot lid. I’ve looked at a 120 DHC in the local museum and it has it glued to the bodywork. Which is right or which is the most effective at keeping the water out?
More plate trivia: due to an aluminum shortage caused by the conflict in Korea, Kentucky stamped no plates at all in 1952. Cars registered that year got a 1952 window sticker.
Early cars (to I think about Feb '54) had the seal in the channel on the main bodywork.
Later cars had the seal glued to the boot lid.
There is a separate seal glued to the spare tire tray along the stepped edge.
Fwiw, the original licence plate plinth piping on my car was unpainted black rubber. If the body colour paint had entirely flaked off over the years there was no indication of such. Whereas Viart says the piping should be body colour, the JCNA judging guide (p.37) says it must be black rubber. The guide also confirms (on p. 103) that the bootlid seal went from the gutter channel on the body to the bootlid itself sometime in March/February, 1954.
Reference the boot seal, I’ve just placed the new seal in the channel of the bodywork around the boot opening and it sticks up slightly above the level of the wing bodywork. I’ve not fitted the boot lid yet but it looks as thought the seal will be very tight and show around the edge of the boot lid and the bodywork. Is that normal or should I trim the seal or just accept the 1mm of seal material sticking out which will slowly get squashed down with time I presume?
(Sorry about the standard of the photos, I’m not the worlds best photographer!)
Looking at your photos I suspect you have the seal mounted the wrong way around. On my car the square edge buts up against the surround bodywork with the thin edge towards the boot interior.
Yes, that’s the way it is, the thick edge up against the bodywork and the thin edge toward the inside of the boot, the right angle of the seal in the channel with the 90deg edge toward the bodywork. It’s just my dreadful photography, sorry about that.
It sits really well in the channel but protrudes about 1mm at times above the bodywork surface. I’ll fit the boot lid tomorrow and see how much of a problem it is. It is possible that the surface of the base of the channel has been raised by layers of paint after the re-spray, if that’s the case I will need to do some grinding and stripping which is a shame as the finish of the paint is immaculate.
I guess most things have been said regarding the Boot Lid seals. Indeed, difficult to picture but here is my contribution regarding the higher part of the seal towards the luggage compartment.
As this is a closed cell rubber, the higher lip of this seal will flex with the Boot Lid when closing
.
As mentioned, this Seal was glued to the “gutter” around the luggage compartment up to car number 674941 (February 1954 although Urs Schmid refers March 1954) I decided for my April 1954 car to still use the “old method” because gluing the seal in the “gutter” is so much easier than putting it on the Boot Lid, as I found out with my XK 140. And I accept the 10 penalty points during the forthcoming Concours…(whenever)
OK, so you have BD4875 as this is the correct moulding for the boot lid? From a couple of the photos it looked like the broad edge was facing inward. When I replaced my seal I did have to trim the base in a couple of spots due to some discrepancy in the width of the channel (a result of a little accident damage when my friend managed to attack my boot with his Corvette many years ago!).
David, I think you may have installed it backwards. See my photo of the red car above. The long lip goes inboard and makes contact with the inner edge of the boot lid.
Sear Rob, Chris Bob K et al,
Thanks for all the help. Here’s a photo of the cross section of the seal, it’s labelled 6280 which is BD 9345. (Listed as for XK 120 boot seal).
Here is my drawing of the boot channel. As Some of you have said I may have put the seal in wrongly, as per the upper drawing where the long lip sticks up above the body work, if I put the seal in the other way round, as per the lower sketch, it now seems to me to make a bit more sense but is not as comfortable a fit, unless I have the wrong seal that is!
I’ve looked into the parts catalogue and BD 4875 is for the boot lid and not for the boot channel. As far as I can see BD 9345, which I have,
I think the problem is that you have BD9345 which, if you look at the Moss catalogue page Rob reproduced below, is affixed to the “flange on luggage lid” (see his OTS SPC sheet). The BD4875 seal fits in the gutter. I got my replacement seal from Moss when I did mine and spent some time looking at the catalogue and the remnants of what I removed from the car before finally ordering the BD4875 seal, which fits fine.
