I am reassembling a 1964 E Type, 4.2. I have a Coventry 3.8 service manual which calls for the fabrication of a rod with two holes one 29/64ths and one 41/64ths at 17 and 13/16ths centers to hold the lower wishbone in the correct position to adjust the torsion bars. My issue is that, on the '64, the holes were drilled to 7/16 and 1/2 to fit the same positions and when the wishbone was lowered until it touched the frame, it came up about an inch and a half short of connecting the fabricated rod. Question here is did they change something in the geometry between the 3.8 and 4.2 to cause this?
Thanks!

Submitted by stewarttom51@y… on Thu, 03/11/2010 - 18:32

Thanks George and Patrick...
George,
I looked at the frame again and it was just a close fit between the lower arm and frame. I tightened the bolts that fasten the radiator mount frame to the front sub frame and it pulled the metal a little bit more towards the front allowing the lower arm to move down further (with a little bit of rubbing on the frame as we had discussed). I now have the torsion bars set in their pre-weight-on-car position.
Thanks again!

Submitted by SE98-32482CJ on Tue, 03/09/2010 - 16:54

Well Tom anxious to hear from you. As we discussed 1E34201 would be the 4200th car built--the EJ is correct for an all syncro box. The engine would be 10449th built but that 10014 number is odd--the body sequence started at 4E20001 by my records so if the data plate has been replaced it is possible they stamped it incorrectly and it should have been 4E20014 but that is a strech to explain this oddity.

Submitted by stewarttom51@y… on Tue, 03/09/2010 - 15:57

OK...got some numbers from the data plate that should help out.
Car No. 10014
Body No. 1E34201
Eng No. 7E10449
Gear Box No. EJ679

Actually, the lower arm can be moved through its entire arc. When you lower it completely, it hits on the frame above the torsion bar stub.

Submitted by SE98-32482CJ on Tue, 03/09/2010 - 10:11

Tom can you see the SN of the transmission? Can you read the trans SN from the data plate? Your gearbox should be a full syncro box with the serial EJ0XX--I have the correct number but please check first.

Submitted by SE98-32482CJ on Tue, 03/09/2010 - 09:25

Tom your car must be 1E30014. It can not be 1E300014 as that is too many digits. So if that is correct it is an early 4.2 coupe but while built in late 64 it is a 5 MY. Of the two major changes to the E type for the 65 MY one big one was the introduction of the all syncro transmission (the other the 4.2 engine). While a very few all syncro trannys were given to 3.8 cars I have never heard of a Moss box being placed with a 4.2. While anything is possible this would have had to be a special order and the build sheets should support that claim. While the transmissions are adaptable to either car it is not a simple swap of the trans alone--bell housings are different as are starters etc. In any case we are trying to lower your lower A arm-while a picture might help I think you are describing the arm fitting tight in the frame socket --can you determine if the interference is in the front or rear of the a arm? Have you put some force on the arm to get it down? (do not mean anything that would bend metal) but the A arms are a tight fit and can bind a little when fully extended. Let us know.

Submitted by stewarttom51@y… on Tue, 03/09/2010 - 08:25

The bar is in, but it is not bolted to the reaction plate yet. The owner has installed an aftermarket reaction plate with an adjustable bracket for the bar. Right now, when I lower the wishbone, it hits the frame before it can go low enough to engage the adjusting rod. The 00014 is the actual last five numbers in the serial number. It is suppose to be the 14th 4.2 to roll off the assembly line. This one still has the old truck transmission (3.8) and not the syncromesh. I'll try to remember to get the full serial number this morning. It is also a Coupe.
Thanks!

Submitted by SE98-32482CJ on Tue, 03/09/2010 - 06:52

Tom do you have the torsion bar in now? Do you have the retaining nuts tightened? If the bar is not in and the nuts are loose (do not tighten until all is set) you should be able to swing the lower arm very far down. When you say 00014 are you just using zero for a place holder?

Submitted by stewarttom51@y… on Mon, 03/08/2010 - 21:46

Thanks George,
This is supposedly the first year 4.2, serial number is 00014. May be a MY, however, the new dimensions you are quoting will not work because even at 17 and 13/16th, the the centerlines on the rod are about an inch and a half too long and I am unable to get the lower wishbone to swing down far enough to engage the rod.
I appreciate your assistance!
Thanks,

Submitted by SE98-32482CJ on Mon, 03/08/2010 - 20:57

Tony let's work this out--but first we need to figure out what you are working on--there were No 4.2 E types in 1964. Perhaps your car was built in 64 but it is a MY 65. So that said what is the car/ vin number? Is it a coupe or a OTS (roadster) and has it / does it have air conditioning? The 3.8L cars were (1961-1964) The 4.2 car (1965-1967) in the suppliment to the 3.8 Manual E/123/8 on page J.X.s.1 states the settings are the same until car number 1E35382/1E17532/1E50875/and 1E77407 . These cars and after had a larger torsion bar fitted and the setting for the links are 173/4 for the FHC and OTS and 18 for the 2+2--if ac is fitted the 2+2 gains an additional 1/8 inch.

Submitted by SC38-21185J on Mon, 03/08/2010 - 20:42

Tony: I do not have my workshop manual in front of me, but yes, the distance between the two centers changed on the 4.2. litre cars. I'll look for the distance, and get back to you if no one else does.

Patrick

Submitted by SC38-21185J on Mon, 03/08/2010 - 20:41

Tony: I do not have my workshop manual in front of me, but yes, the distance between the two centers changed on the 4.2. litre cars. I'll look for the distance, and get back to you if no one else does.

Patrick