[xk] XK120 FHC 679032, sunroof

khyber · February 10, 2009, 10:59pm

In reply to a message from Roger Payne sent Mon 9 Feb 2009:

Roger

I have G1023 on 807003 so will have a look but as the car is not at
home I will not be able to do so until weekend of 21/22 Feb.

Cheers–
John McM XK 140 DHC 807003, XJ6 SIII
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Roger_Payne · February 11, 2009, 12:07am

Thanks John (and Urs H. earlier),

G engines don’t come much earlier than G1023, so this will be
crucial/definitive information.

G1161 is earliest I have been able to have confirmed so far (thanks Urs),
and it is steel as expected for G1001 to G1907.

So would like a few more sightings, and then I guess the challenge is
exactly what are the differences in steel sump fitted to G1001 > G1907 and
later steel sump fitted to all other XK140s from G1908 onwards.

I suspect difference is internal re oil pick-up/oil pump area, and nothing
visible on outside, but need to compare both alongside each other to be
sure, unless someone already knows???. Any ideas anyone?

Roger Payne - XK140MC OTS; E-Type 4.2 S.1 OTS; DSV8.
Canberra.-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xk@jag-lovers.org [mailto:owner-xk@jag-lovers.org] On Behalf Of
khyber
Sent: Wednesday, 11 February 2009 9:59 AM
To: xk@jag-lovers.org
Subject: Re: [xk] SUMP HELP

In reply to a message from Roger Payne sent Mon 9 Feb 2009:

Roger

I have G1023 on 807003 so will have a look but as the car is not at
home I will not be able to do so until weekend of 21/22 Feb.

Cheers

John McM XK 140 DHC 807003, XJ6 SIII
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Rob_Reilly · February 11, 2009, 1:32pm

Hi Roger,
One clue could be that the Mark VII book lists C7313 as being “complete with
trays”, which I take to mean they are spot welded in place, therefore must
mean a pressed steel sump.
Rob Reilly - 679187

Roger_Payne · February 11, 2009, 9:56pm

With some recent discussion on list re GAITORS for Rear Springs, I have felt
comfortable that I was getting some extremely accurate reproduction ones
made up locally, but yesterday found out that was no longer going to happen.

There are regularly gaitors - repros and damaged-old-stock ones -
advertised on Ebay, and separately by various vendors, but of course
impossible for me to ascertain over internet, just how ACCURATE or otherwise
these are.

Can anyone please comment on who is best source of ACCURATE reproduction
XK140 Gaitors. Quality/accuaracy of reproduction is paramount, rather than
cheapest price. I have all my original grease-nipples/washers so they do
not matter so long as grease-nipple holes are in the exact right place, but
leather pattern, stitching, lining and correct clips are essential.

Equally, direct to me of course, and not on list, I would appreciate advice
on who not to buy from, as many vendors offer them.

Roger Payne - XK140MC OTS; E-Type 4.2 S.1 OTS; DSV8.
Canberra.

Ed_Nantes · February 15, 2009, 1:40am

In reply to a message from R_and_J_Reilly sent Wed 11 Feb 2009:

Rob,

Possibly not. The parts book for later pushrod SS / Jaguars shows
only the sumps sold as a complete item with baffles included but
they were alloy sumps with steel baffles.–
Ed Nantes SS
Melbourne, Australia
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Rob_Reilly · February 16, 2009, 3:13pm

In reply to a message from Ed Nantes sent Sat 14 Feb 2009:

Hi Ed,
You may be looking in different books from mine.
My Mark V book shows C451/1 sump, and separately lists C2940
tray complete with baffle.

So let’s review this thing again.
The XK120 book shows the C2359 flat bottom and C2359/1
stepped bottom sumps, and C4487 front tray (complete with
C2340 baffle), and C2392 rear tray (complete with C2342
baffle), and C2392/1 rear tray (complete with C2342/1 baffle).

I interpret these baffle part numbers to mean the baffle was
made separately in the press shop, but then when spot welded
to the tray it becomes an integral part of the tray part number.

The book says without explanation only that C2392/1
superceded C2392. Was this related to the stepped bottom
sump? Or was it just a bigger clearance hole for the
dipstick? Mine hits the tray sometimes.

The Mark VII book lists C2359/1 sump, but fails to list any
trays at all for this sump. Mark it down as yet another
mistake in the books. Engines associated with this sump use
the C2228 floating suction oil pickup same as all XK120.

Getting back to Roger’s original question, C7313 sump
(complete with trays) appears to use the asbestos rope seal
at the front along with C2238/1 timing cover. This sump was
introduced along with a change in the oil pump,
incorporating new oil delivery and suction pipes and
eliminating the floating suction pickup, but it is still a
geared type pump.

Then the new C8592 sump comes in with the new rubber crank
seal and C8614 front cover and C8610 block and C8612 rotor
type oil pump. The oil delivery and suction pipes get new
part numbers C8606 & C8608 because they fit a new pump, but
otherwise appear to be pretty much like the previous pipes.
Notice all the nearly sequential part numbers. The draftsman
reserved a block of numbers for this design change.

My own drafters used to do this in the days of pencil
drawings before we got computers to do it for us. We had a 3
ring binder with pre-numbered lined paper on a shelf in the
drafting office, and they used to write in the part names or
just their own name and the word ‘‘reserved’’ on 20 or 30
lines if they were working on a big project.–
XK120 FHC, Mark V saloon, XJ12L Series II
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

khyber · February 22, 2009, 5:04am

In reply to a message from Roger Payne sent Mon 9 Feb 2009:

Roger

I checked G1023 yesterday and its pressed steel. The only cavet I
would add is that it is in perfect condition, that is not dents at
al! As Im no expert on how prone XK sumps are to damage this sump
may be a later replacement. Only problem is there is no way to tell?

Cheers–
The original message included these comments:

Another research topic I would love some concrete help on please.
Does anyone have access to an early XK140 engine, Serial Number G.1001 to
G.1907, and if so, can they check and advise if SUMP is made of PRESSED
STEEL or is it CAST ALUMINIUM. Unfortunately my extensive photo records

–
John McM XK 140 DHC 807003, XJ6 SIII
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

Roger_Payne · February 22, 2009, 7:02am

Thanks John,

I am pretty well happy there is no question at all regarding both early and
late XK140 Sumps being Steel, and pretty sure externally they are visually
the same.

It would appear there is a very minor change around the front oil seal,
which allows a larger diameter oil seal to be fitted from G1908 onwards,
along with a similar change in the Timing Cover housing.

The sump gasket halves also change at G1908 onwards, which suggests
accommodating the larger front seal.

What I remain unsure about is if there are any other changes to internal
trays/baffles which could well be the case since G1908 introduced a new
dip-stick and a new oil pump as well.

Clearly down to detail you could only hope to verify with both sumps off the
engine and together in front of you to examine side by side.

But your question about damaged sumps opens up another situation where the
actual fact does not appear to match the theory:

Supposedly Sump Shields were fitted to ALL export XK140s and special order
only for home market (UK) sales.

My experience is that these very heavy steel plate sump shields are in fact
quite rarely found, such that it is really difficult to believe they were
fitted to ALL export XK140, so maybe they were optional for all markets, not
just UK.

Roger Payne - XK140MC OTS; E-Type 4.2 S.1 OTS; DSV8.
Canberra.-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xk@jag-lovers.org [mailto:owner-xk@jag-lovers.org] On Behalf Of
khyber
Sent: Sunday, 22 February 2009 4:05 PM
To: xk@jag-lovers.org
Subject: Re: [xk] SUMP HELP

In reply to a message from Roger Payne sent Mon 9 Feb 2009:

Roger

I checked G1023 yesterday and its pressed steel. The only cavet I
would add is that it is in perfect condition, that is not dents at
al! As Im no expert on how prone XK sumps are to damage this sump
may be a later replacement. Only problem is there is no way to tell?

Cheers

The original message included these comments:

Another research topic I would love some concrete help on please.
Does anyone have access to an early XK140 engine, Serial Number G.1001 to
G.1907, and if so, can they check and advise if SUMP is made of PRESSED
STEEL or is it CAST ALUMINIUM. Unfortunately my extensive photo records

–
John McM XK 140 DHC 807003, XJ6 SIII
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –

ledo · February 22, 2009, 9:30am

Hi Roger,
Missing sump guards!! My 150 I assume would not of had one originally, being
sold new in England. With Terry Hilton’s know how I fitted one to my car.
Problems occurred when wishing to change engine oil. The sump plug being at
the front lh side was difficult to access. A socket extension bar could
reach it but oil could then go everywhere. I had made up some hydraulic hose
and screwed into the sump and capped off the other end to use as a drain
point when needed. It sits up on top off the shield out of the way until its
required. Other alternative was to remove the sump guard every time a oil
change was needed-- maybe this is the reason why so many are missing. Nine
bolts to remove and refit would of tried a lot of peoples patience . I have
also seen sumps with the drain plug at the rear rh side. This would have
been handy with a sump guard on, nothing to undo. Were there different sumps
to suit vehicles with sump guards?
Regards, John Ledbrook-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xk@jag-lovers.org [mailto:owner-xk@jag-lovers.org] On Behalf Of
Roger Payne
Sent: Sunday, 22 February 2009 6:02 PM
To: xk@jag-lovers.org
Subject: RE: [xk] SUMP HELP and SUMP SHIELD