The OSL prefix indicates different shifter forks than the SL, no other
differences apparently.
In the Mark VII parts catalogue there is a marginal note that when the
shifter forks were updated with new part numbers, the serial numbers
went from SL9983 (old forks) to OSL9984A (new forks). This is how the
Moss Gear Co. chose to indentify them.
I could find nothing on a B suffix.
In the JL boxes assembled by Jaguar, JL18456 is the last with old forks
and JL18457 begins the new forks, no change in prefix or suffix.
Rob Reilly - 679187>What do OSL and the B suffix signify?
Your Gearbox Number is most likely a “CR” suffix for “Close Ratio” gears
with the “JLE” prefix denoting “overdrive” fitment - so JLE34285CR
Otherwise all your numbers appear to be consistent with an XK140 of
September 1956 date-of-manufacture, where gearboxes were either “CR” suffix
or no suffix,(apart from the rare for 1956, an older OSLxxxxB gearbox).
Roger Payne
GPO Box 39
CANBERRA
A.C.T. 2601
Australia-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xk@jag-lovers.org [mailto:owner-xk@jag-lovers.org] On Behalf Of
Jeff Schroeder
Sent: Sunday, 20 November 2005 3:03 AM
To: xk@jag-lovers.org
Subject: [xk] Lets try this again! Numbers For John…
I apologize in clogging the forum up this morning guys! I guess I
need more coffee…
Here are the vitals on our 1957 XK 140M OTS. I have very little
history about the car other than when we purchased it, it had only
covered 73K miles and was almost completely rust free. The body was
not anywhere near perfect although and drove our body man to drink
I suspect.
Best Regards.
Chassis: A812780DN
Body: F12850
Engine: G8661-8
Gearbox: JLE34285L (I can’t read my writing, as this either ends
in ‘L’ or ‘C’)
–
Jeff Schroeder - 1957 XK-140M OTS
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
In reply to a message from Roger Payne sent Sat 19 Nov 2005:
Thanks Roger, I appreciate it. I’ll double check the trans number
next time I’m working on the car.
It would appear as though the car wasn’t registered until 1957. I
got some great info from a fellow lister about his car that is also
registered as a '57 (and only three numbers earlier than mine), so
I suspect this was the case on our car as well…
I suppose I need to change my signature to a '56 140 now eh?
Actually the Jaguar model year started in September. So yours is
legitimately a '57.
Mike Carpenter----- Original Message -----
From: “Jeff Schroeder” schrojef@yahoo.com
To: xk@jag-lovers.org
Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2005 7:35 PM
Subject: Re: [xk] XK140 Gearbox Number
In reply to a message from Roger Payne sent Sat 19 Nov 2005:
Thanks Roger, I appreciate it. I’ll double check the trans number
next time I’m working on the car.
It would appear as though the car wasn’t registered until 1957. I
got some great info from a fellow lister about his car that is also
registered as a '57 (and only three numbers earlier than mine), so
I suspect this was the case on our car as well…
I suppose I need to change my signature to a '56 140 now eh?
Actually, according to the earlier responses from others that know a
whole lot more about this subject than me, in the 1950’s Jaguar did not
have a model year convention. It was simply imposed, in this country,
by U.S. protocol. My car was built in November of 1951. It had always
been registered, in various states, as a 1952 model. I re-registered it
according to its production date. In Virginia, it is now legitimately a
1951 Jaguar.
