There you go… The other “Nickel Shortage” XK’s were 1952 models… Here is
a October '54 with painted tail lights, as well… My June '53 production
DHC has Chrome Tail Lights… So much for any “Nickel Shortage”…
Charles #677556.----- Original Message -----
From: “Roger Payne”
The 1954 Melbourne Motor Show XK120 DHC had Battleship Grey PAINTED
taillight housings.
This XK120 DHC 667120 was manufactured in October 1953 - so somewhat later
than date range suggested. Maybe being a RHD “standard-spatted” car in
conservative Grey was less worthy of rare flashy chrome at that time?, but
again a Motor Show car surely would have chosen chrome if available.
Rick H;
It doesn’t matter… I’ve decided that all “Originality Information” I
gather
will be strictly for use on my XK120 DHC. I will, of course, share this
information with the caveat that it may not be considered “correct” by
judging entities.
I will consider examples (personal pictures, hand-written details, etc.)
of colours or plating of any and all parts used on the XK120’s, if submitted
to me directly (to my attention in the subject line) via this list.
I seek and will accept valid, and verifiable “empirical evidence” if such
evidence is reported in sufficient quantities as to be deemed a
representative
sampling, as opposed to a single source.
My interest is to restore MY 1953 XK120 DHC to an “As Left Factory
Condition” to the best of my ability and with the help of the members of
this XK Forum… Without whom, nothing would be possible.
Many of you gentlemen, and ladies, know of my, shall we say,
“obsession” for correctness, this is evidenced in the past by my searching
the world, literally, and obtaining (and sharing) ALL 277 Technical
Service Bulletins (some 800 printed pages!), seeking out and sourcing
the “correct as currently possible” Registration Light Lens Rivets for the
Lucas #469 Light Assembly, as well as the “correct colour, type and size”
of the three Distributor Felt Oil Wicks (many of y’all didn’t even know
they were in your distributors!)…
If there are Jaguar judging entities through-out the world who have
already researched some, all or much of the type of information I seek,
and have it in the form of a Restoration Guide or a Judging Guideline,
I would most assuredly be willing to obtain said info.
I shall endeavour to continue to be just as obsessive in hunting down
bits of minutia regarding our XK Jaguars and sharing said minutia with
you, as long as I have your help and the physical/mental
where-with-all to do it.
Thanks for all your past help…
Charles #677556.----- Original Message -----
From: holland-rick@juno.com
Charles,
The painted tail lamp housings were on the Amish cars…
In reply to a message from Bishop sent Thu 28 Jan 2010:
Charles… would you be prepared to allow someone to republish in
book form all the technical buletins? This would be a very
valuable resource for everyone. thoughts ? Godfrey–
godfrey
pender island bc, Canada
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –
This is not going to help pin down the exact time frame but it’s another
documented case of a 1952 XK120 with body colored tail light Housings.
I saw this very well kept car at a JOCLA concours back in the mid-1980’s. It
was later featured in the June (198?) Sports Car Illustrated magazine. (The
article does not list the Chassis Number.) It was originally but briefly
owned by Howard Wheeler who reportedly raced it once at Torrey Pines. At the
time the SCI article was written, it had been owned by Joseph and Margaret
Smith for 36 years. The text specifically mentions the originality of its
painted tail lights and aluminum painted wire wheels. I don’t know what
became of the car or of Joe Smith. Perhaps some of the JOCLA listers do.
I have the complete SCI article but here’s the most pertinent picture.
From: F8driver@pacbell.netF8driver@pacbell.net
Subject: [xk] XK120 Painted Taillight Housings
To: “XK- Lovers” xk@jag-lovers.org
Date: Friday, January 29, 2010, 9:59 PM
This is not going to help pin down
the exact time frame but it’s another
documented case of a 1952 XK120 with body colored tail
light Housings.
I saw this very well kept car at a JOCLA concours back in
the mid-1980’s. It
was later featured in the June (198?) Sports Car
Illustrated magazine. (The
article does not list the Chassis Number.) It was
originally but briefly
owned by Howard Wheeler who reportedly raced it once at
Torrey Pines. At the
time the SCI article was written, it had been owned by
Joseph and Margaret
Smith for 36 years. The text specifically mentions the
originality of its
painted tail lights and aluminum painted wire wheels. I
don’t know what
became of the car or of Joe Smith. Perhaps some of the
JOCLA listers do.
I have the complete SCI article but here’s the most
pertinent picture.
Were any of the taillight housings leaded into the body? I seem to recall the ones on the car I looked at being a smooth transition, but it was dark and a long time ago so I could be mistaken.
“Mark 1” Mark Stephenson Phoenix, AZ
52 XK120 S673129; 59 Mark 1; 84, 85, 86, 95 XJ6-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xk@jag-lovers.org [mailto:owner-xk@jag-lovers.org] On Behalf Of F8driver@pacbell.net
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 8:00 PM
To: XK- Lovers
Subject: [xk] XK120 Painted Taillight Housings
This is not going to help pin down the exact time frame but it’s another documented case of a 1952 XK120 with body colored tail light Housings.
IMHO, the only tail lite housings that would be condusive to leading or
“frenching” would be those aftermarket castings of brass or bronze type
alloys.
The originals (aluminum or close) are not easily tinned and soldered
(leaded in). If anything, I would guess to a “home brewed” affair using
a “Bondo” or even a air drying “spot glaze” to hide the seams in housings
mounted without the “rubber gasketing”.
Regards,
Rick
writes:On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 23:42:41 -0700 Mark Stephenson Marks@jaguarot.com
Were any of the taillight housings leaded into the body? I seem to
recall the ones on the car I looked at being a smooth transition,
but it was dark and a long time ago so I could be mistaken.
“Mark 1” Mark Stephenson Phoenix, AZ
52 XK120 S673129; 59 Mark 1; 84, 85, 86, 95 XJ6
Over on the saloons list they are talking about a late 51 or early 52 pastel
green metallic Mark VII chassis 710845 in New Zealand, and it has painted
taillight housings.
IMHO, the only tail lite housings that would be condusive to leading or “frenching” would be those aftermarket castings of brass or bronze type alloys.
The originals (aluminum or close) are not easily tinned and soldered (leaded in). If anything, I would guess to a “home brewed” affair using a “Bondo” or even a air drying “spot glaze” to hide the seams in housings mounted without the “rubber gasketing”.
Regards,
Rick
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 23:42:41 -0700 Mark Stephenson <@Mark_Stephenson2>
writes:
Were any of the taillight housings leaded into the body? I seem to
recall the ones on the car I looked at being a smooth transition, but
it was dark and a long time ago so I could be mistaken.
“Mark 1” Mark Stephenson Phoenix, AZ
52 XK120 S673129; 59 Mark 1; 84, 85, 86, 95 XJ6
OLD thread, about painted tail light housings…question came up again…so I looked up 3rd edition of JCNA XK120 judging which now seems to allow for 51-52. I have not found any source basis data for that–as in substantially proven that painted were from factory…and when etc. Any updates? as to how JCNA 120 judges came to conclude and allow? Thanks Nick
There are no Jaguar factory documents about this. There is a Lucas document catalogue 400C mentioning the shortage of nickel.
So basically all we can do is collect observations of cars with painted tail lights, and try to make a guess as to dates.
My own car 679187 built Nov '51, also 679190 and 669002 built Nov '51 are examples.
Not many restorers choose to keep them that way. Most either are ignorant about it or choose chrome. 679195 was restored with painted, but has since been changed to chrome. 679205 also had painted.
The Nickel order came into being on or about the 13th of June 1951, so stocks would have been started to be used up after that. I’ll keep looking for when it was lifted.
P.S. the Nickel Prohibited Uses (Board of Trade) Order , 1951 came in about the same time and was still in effect 10th March 1953 but was promised to be repealed shortly after.
P.P.S The order prohibited manufacture after 22nd of June and fitment of any stocks after the 1st of October 1951
UK Government statement in February 1955 - ‘In consultation with industry, consideration has been given to ways of helping to overcome the shortage of nickel, and steps are being taken which should reduce the expected shortage during 1955. Supplies are still, however, unlikely to be sufficient to meet demand, and, while no doubt all concerned will do their utmost to increase them, it will be necessary to economise in the use of nickel for some time to come.’
The owner of 679410 states that he replaced the painted tail lamp housings with chrome housings when he restored the FHC. See owner comments for BAT auction.
