I am trying to established just how many harmonic balancers there are and which ones were fitted to which cars
I have pulled all my loose ones out and can only effectively 2 different versions by Metalastik part number 177 and 211
There are 2 different versions of one part number and the second part number there is a version with the 1-10 degree markings on it
Terry,
Quite a selection you have there!! Your basic conclusion that there were 2 versions for the XKs is correct although Jaguar used a third version 51/227 but that was only used on the 2.4 Saloons.
Have a look at this article: http://www.bobine.nl/jaguar/02-engine/crankshaft-damper-assemblies-for-xks/
If you have any additions or remarks, I’m always open to improve the content…
Bob K.
dear bob
superb content and detail as per usual will study and come back with any queries
regards terry
Big Jim’s spent a lot of time recently trying to get to the bottom of this with a view to replacing his 211. I’m interested as well as my original 211 is not a part I want to use again on my engine as the rubber is not in good condition. The argument Jim has met is that of conflicting advice from the specialist suppliers regarding the merits of new dampers or reconditioned old ones.
Cue Big Jim…
I don’y know what I can add ?
One supplier ( who sells new ones ) says there are cases of recon ones failing . The suppliers that sell recon ones says that is not so …take your pick .
Mine is an SE so should have “COMP” stamped on it . My front face is quite rusty and cannot see any stamping . I think it is said that the rubber compound on the COMP version is special . Why did Jag make a special and a not so good ? I cannot see any difference between the two .I suppose the make up of the two rubbers is not known , so all new/recon dampers are the same and maybe better than original rubber ?
I am going for an exchange recon at 1/3 the price . One supplier in the uk has 26 in stock , maybe I can find one that has “COMP” on it !
1 Like
who has 26?
I was quoted something like 450 pounds from big UK supplier recently
Keep in mind that this is an oscillation DAMPER, not a BALANCER. So this is not a case of good and not so good, but a difference in elasticity required to tune the damping to the particular resonant frequency required by the higher RPM limit of the SE models.
1 Like
I cannot believe that any reconditioner, or modern-day manufacturer of reproductions, uses different compounds for different application dampers. In fact, in my experience of reproduction or reconditioned parts for Minis, Mustangs, Healeys, Triumphs etc. I am sure that all of them will use the cheapest material available.
The quality of rubber repro parts these days has never been lower, and whilst I can’t prove it, I do not believe that Jaguar parts are better than any others. Possible exceptions to this might be (but is by no means guaranteed) competition parts - but anything that looks like the standard original part will, from my experience, have been made as cheaply as possible.
OK bob where does part number C7636 as per page 2 of SPC oct 1950 fit in?
terry
Terry,
Unfortunately I don’t have (access to) SPC J8 of October 1950. The later SPC’s, however, are rather precise and explicit in mentioning the exact engine numbers for which resp. C.2464, C.5809 and C.8020 have been used on the XK 120.
If C.7636 did exist, I don’t know for which engines it had been applied. It also doesn’t really fit in the engine number sequence:before October 1950. The survey:
- Early balancer C.2464 used from start till May 1953 (still mentioned as such in the amended J8 version of June 1954)
- The “COMP” balancer C.5809 was introduced around June 1951 but only used on competition and later SE versions (and a few other XK 120s)
- Later balancer C.8020 replaced C.2464 from May 1953 onwards.
So where would C.7636 fit in this sequence, especially when it was (apparently) already available in October 1950? It may have been a temporary replacement for C.2426 but it has a later code number than C.5809 which only became available in (Spring?) 1951. And why would later SPC’s ignore this C.7636 balancer version and still refer to the earlier C.2464?
So in short: I have no idea…
Bob K.
I spoke to a Jag restorer today and he says just fit a used 4.2 damper as they don’t fall apart. The pulley will have to be changed as it ends up too far out.