Question on RHD judging

YOWZA Robert it was a general statement that was meant to get off the topic of LHD VS RHD and deal with the real major differences which are the 2.4L version which is greatly different. There are majod differences in major parts there but when it comes to RHD LHD of the same variant the differences are little and mostly just mirror changes.

Now that it has been fully explained to me that I need to keep "documentation" with the car, I'm all set!
I actually had someone tell me my radiator was wrong......"by the "Guide", there are supposed to be 4 ribs that go all the way over".

This person must not have understood, as my research since shows on a MKI/MKII, that was changed in 1957 on the MKI when they went to separate fill/top hose fittings!

It has been one helluva learning curve for me, and just knowing where to find the data in the "Jaguar 2.4L Spare Parts Catalog" has helped.

I sure would like to see closeups of the brake fluid reservoir mount for a RHD 2.4L.
From what I can see in not-quite closeups, mine is correct, but there certainly is no tubular standoff!

Would REALLY be nice if somewhere in the UK Jaguar Data there were all the part numbers liosted with engineering drawings and photographs!

Dave

Yowza Mr. Cavicke,
Please, I meant no offense. I realize the Guide is an amazing amount of work by a collection of people, especially George Jones and I'm thankful for it's existence.
My original concern centered on the 2.4 owner who was trying to ascertain originality on his vehicle. The Guide has numerous examples of wording that states theat this particular detail or aspect is the only one.
When the owner explained to someone that the items that were deemed incorrect by the strict wording could be found in the Jaguar 2.4 Parts Manual, he was told he could fill out the appropriate paperwork, photographs,etc to ammend/correct and it would be reviewed for submission.
I worry that the Guide will be utilized as a reference on these other "variants" that were not researched. There are no disclaimers, asterisks or any other reason to think there might be something different on these cars as the wording used is overly precise, (which is a misnomer as if it's incorrect by being incomplete it can't be overly precise)!
Yowza George Camp, I could not disagree with you more. There are many differences between the LHD and RHD starting with the way that Jaguar routed and mounted things once the pedal box/contrrols were moved from one side to another. Different brackets, mounts, etc just so the ancilliary systems have enough clearance to function and be serviced in a timely manner.
The 2.4 Litre engine also presents it's own issues to add to all of this. Remember the engine is not as tall as the 3.4/3.8 so many things that normally are beneath the top of the block are affected.
I was talking to our Club's head Judge last night and was wondering....... I was thinking about asking the UK people if they have put a guide similar to the one the we have as it makes no sense to put forth the effort if the end result already exists over in the UK.
My biggest concern was that the JCNA was making a member jump through hoops to legitimize the authenticity of the 2.4 because a 3.8LHD Guide was incorrectly applied and considered as the end all/be all of reference guides for all MKII "variants".
No offense was intended. So could the UK Guide(if one is available) be utilized in a timely manner ?
Oh and yes, there are more than just a couple of RHD here in the States. There are six that I know of in Connecticut. It's still unnerving for me to be passed by one, wondering where the H!@# the driver has gone.
Good Health to You and Yours, Bob Lovell

The problem I had (had, past tense) was trying to figure out what was right for my vehicle, one of almost 22,000 built as 2.4L RHD MK2's when looking at "The Guide".
It probably confusicated my gray cells even more when I find one book listing the "scope" of a production change one way, the next book differently, and the actual "Production Change" seemingly different than both books!

As Dick has said, they are working on it.
Surprisingly, the number of folks with RHD 2.4L MK2's in this organization is not limited to me.

I didn't know.
I certainly don't want folks to think I do.
I am spending a LOT of time on the phone, e-mails, transmitting photos, asking about "Production Changes", and going through my Spare Parts Catalog for the 2.4L page by page.
I was somewhat surprised, initially, to find the "choke cable" in the back under "electrical", and REALLY surprised to eventually find the "Dynamo Adjusting Link" under "Timing Chain"!
I am new to this, and simply trying to figure out how to un-do 30 years of Local Petrol Station maintenance.

There are a WHOLE LOT of very helpful folks in the organization, and the help to ascertain specifics is highly appreciated.

Dave

Good reply Dick, one of the best I've ever seen in these forums. At the risk of repeating myself: you guys are doing a GREAT job!

To continue a point raised in this thread: They were called "CKD's" which if I recall correctly meant "Completely Knocked Down". We had a guy show up at a local concours here with a Mexican assembled Mk2 (or was it an early 2.4?). How the heck do you judge one of those? The answer, of course, if that you can't, because there is no way to properly document what the Mexicans did when they assembled the cars. That would be a big project!

The other weird one that showed up locally a few years ago was a "CKD" XX120 that came out of Ireland. I believe it was assembled by Frank Cavey (sp?). Also a very unique car and very difficult to figure out what the details looked like when new.

Cheers,

Daniel

Mr. Lovell,
The several Judging Guides approved by JCNA thus far have each been characterized as "works in progress" and each has been the subject of additions and corrections. I know that their authors did not intentionally omit certain models or features but instead focussed on those they were most familiar with, those which were documentable and those most common in the JCNA concours scene.

Most Judges are sensitive to the evolving nature of the Judging Guides, just as they are to the occasional fallibility of some Parts Books, and will give an Entrant substantial opportunity to make his or her case.

It's regrettable that the first edition of the MK2 Guide does not cover the 2.4 as completely as you would have liked. Of course, it was posted on the JCNA web site for comment well prior to its presentation at the 2005 AGM. I don't recall its being criticized for lacking 2.4 information at the time.

Having been recently made aware of some of the Guide's shortcomings, efforts are presently underway, by several people, to gather and document unique features of the 2.4, to likely be assembled as either an addendum or an appendix to the existing MK2 Guide. You are encouraged to participate in this effort by contacting the MK2 Judging Guide author, George Jones at: georgejones123earthlink.net .

I'm sorry that 2.4 owners may have to temporarily be prepared to refute whatever MK2 Guide information is believed to be in error. However, the Entrants of cars, for which no Judging Guides exist, have dragged reference materials around for years as part of the concours routine. As mentioned earlier, if your car was not common to the US, or it has unusual features, you must be prepared to validate items that may be questioned by those Judges who may be seeing the model for the first time.

The Judge-Entrant relationship is not intended to be adversarial. Please share your expertise as JCRC continues its efforts to improve the standardization and quality of JCNA concours judging.

Have a happy and safe Independence Day.
Dick Cavicke
Chair, JCNA, JCRC

Yowza All,
First of the Judge's Guide for the MKII obviously took a lot of time and a stellar job was done by all involved. That being said.......
The Guide was not inclusive in it's research of all "variants" of the MKII. Other than engine/chassis numbers there is very little that describes and dilineates the differences between the 2.4 Liter versions and the RHD models.
Dick Cavicke, a question for you. Why should a "variant" specific guide on the MKiI NEGATE the authenticity of the variant NOT researched within the Guide? Seems highly unfortunate that we 2.4 owners have to present documentation and photographic evidence to refute infornmation that is wrongly be applied to our cars in this reference manual. The existence of the "official" Jaguar 2.4 Parts Manual should be sufficient.
They put an asterisk after Babe Ruth's name because of Roger Maris, surely this is worthy in light that we don't want to improperly train our JCNA Judges.
Good Health to You and Yours, Bob Lovell
1965 MKII 2.4 Litre w 4-speed/OD and wire wheels, red on red with a Webasto.

"Knock Down Kits". I think.

The cars arrived, in pieces, at certain export countries and were assembled locally, thus avoiding heavy import taxes...or something along those lines

Cheers
DD

George, what are KDK's and are you saying some production Jags were made outside of Coventry?

Dave,
Please contact me direct. There's a car like yours in our San Diego club.

Dick
F8driverpacbell.net

As I posted on one thread, until I had joined up, the handle stood.

Since I joined.....
Anyway.
The history of the car is Dutch diplomat to Singapore had it.
Not sure if the entire 10 years of it's life or not, not sure if he brought it into Singapore yet (have the original Singapore registration booklet (looks like a red passport) and two sets of plates.
Then, last owner, had it in Singapore for 7 years, imported into US in Dec 82.
I ended up with it a short time ago.

I see things in the Guide that would make sense, but mine does not have and no factory holes for them!
Like the "Made in England" tag in the bonnet latch recess.
The body number is stamped there, just as the guide says, but no tag and no holes!

Now I have to read up on "Heritage Certificates".
The body plate inside the left wing is there, Jaguar, Coventry, so no Mexico or South Africa.

V-8 in a Jag.
Ahhhh.
Got a spare Flathead around here somewhere.......

Dave thanks for providing a name---it does help. Your real issue is not the RHD as they are virtually the same with the biggest differences in lighting etc. but rather the 2.4 L issue. I would suggest as Dick did you contact George Jones. I helped him a little on his guide and he did a lot of work and did it well. The 2.4L was just not imported here although I think it could be ordered so the differences are not recognized by many and might lead to a lot of questions. I would add that you start by obtaining a Heratige Certificate as your car may not have started life in the UK. Mk2s were made in Mexico and South Africa as KDKs so who knows? Good luck and talk to George---and while you are at it would you consider researching the Daimler V8? While you will eventually deal with clubs with 2.4s you might find they have V8 also and make it a 2 for 1.

Thanks, William. ;-)

Dave,

My advice on what to bring to concours to authenticate the unusual aspects of your RHD Mark 2 would be the parts and workshop manuals for your car. If you don't have them already, the JDHT CD (www.jdht.com) would likely be the least expensive route, but you'd need to be able to access the information at the concours site if there was a deduction you disagreed with. You could print out the manual, find someone selling a copy, or bring a notebook and a printer to the concours and only print out pages necessary to resolve a question.

The only proof accepted to overturn a judge's ruling on non-authenticity is factory literature, so that eliminates a lot of sources. Other than the manuals, the only other source of information I can think of would be contemporaneous sales literature.

I concur with Mark's short & sweet, concise and to the point responses. Nicely done Mark!

Having had a bit of time to thjink on this, and understanding the responses, I am wondering if somehow we can identify those in the organization with 2.4L MKII vehicles, both RHD and LHD, and have us provide photographic evidence to have another "chapter" added to the guide to cover these cars?

I have tried communicating with two British clubs for information on any club member on the Island Empire who would be willing to communicate with me to discuss HIS 2.4L MKII, one response so far, "join our club".

There do seem to be some differences in details on RHD and LHD that may need to be documented.
Maybe not.

I full well understand the amount of work involved in doing such a work, and the little thanks one receives for so doing.
BTDT.

So, tell me what you need, I'll see if I can provide.

Wouldn't you know it.
Wait 43 years to FINALLY get a Jaguar of my own, and it's an odd-ball.

DAVE

Now, THAT'S the answer I needed!
Thank-you!

I have read this stuff until my eyes seem permanently crossed, and it made no sense.
I see references to a book in the "Guide", but the book is not mandated as being present at judging, as the guide is.

I had NO idea the interest a RHD vehicle would generate locally as I drive this Jaguar around.
Glad I got a RHD version!

And the 2.4L makes me smile each time I pass a gas station!

I know the car needs work, doing mechanics now to get it to the "dead reliable" stage, then I'll worry about details.
I was trying to insure that I did not do any "repairs" that were "wrong" and would need to be done over.

It is fun dealing with the supply houses when you say "2.4L".

Thanks again!

Dear Mr. Curmudgeon,
Mark has given you some good advice and you have obviously been doing your homework. I'm certain that the MK 2 Judging Guide author, George Jones, georgejones123earthlink.net>
will welcome your documented RHD additions or corrections to his JCNA booklet.

Anyone entering Jaguars, that are at all unique to the North American scene, will doubtlessly be questioned by JCNA Judges about features not normally seen or those which differ substantially from the cars delivered to the North America market. Entrants of such cars must therefore anticipate having the Entry's configuration (repeatedly) questioned and, where possible, be prepared to document it's authenticity using official references as listed in Appendix C of the JCNA Rules.

I hope you and your car are treated fairly and that you have a great concours season.

Regards,
Dick Cavicke
Chair, JCNA Judge's Concours Rules Committee

You have been around this particular club for a while.
I have not.
I have read more "stuff" on the pages of this site....and I know from past experience about "documentation".

All I need to know then, is I do NOT need to bring reams of documentation sheets to "prove" this?
When the Judge's section states that THESE Judging Guides SHALL be present at a concours, well, I figured they were the "law".

Good to know that is not the case!

OC,

You seem to have answered your own question in your second sentence. It is a guide. At the very end of the Mark 2 Guide it states that this is a work in progress and that despite the fact that it was extremely well researched, there are quite possibly errors or omissions.

Don't lose site of the forest for the trees. What is the point of JCNA and concours? Per the general rule laid out in Chapter 5 -- "That standard is, 'The EntryÔÇÖs configuration and condition shall be as it was officially documented or intended to have left the factory'" -- surely the use of the word "standard" would indicate that this is the overarching rule that guides the judges. The guides are simply an attempt to aggregate information in one place to make the judge's job easier. Given that our main purpose for holding concours is to preserve examples of the marque (See the first few paragraphs of the Preface), if you have documentation to show that your car or a group of cars for another market left the factory in a way different from what's described in the Judging Guide, do you think we would blindly follow an incomplete judge's guide or allow the exception supported by your documentation?

Hopefully that puts things into context.

I did.
Then I read the "Mark 2 Judging Guide" for, well, guidance.

Let's discuss what the GUIDE says (that the judges are to go by....correct?).
And, I shall endeavour to quote as close as possible.

"Made in England" tag: mounted with pop-rivets in latch plate recess on far left side.
All I know right now is original paint in the latch recess, no holes, no marks on backside to indicate holes were there.
The question: If a car NOT imported to North America originally did not have said tag, what does it do to originality if one adds same for "judging" purposes?

"Intake Manifold. One-piece aluminum polished on top surface only, Otter switch with single-blade connector......."
No.
Two-piece aluminum manifold, NO Otter switch.

"Air Filter". Nothing describes the FACTORY air filter assembly on this and other 2.4L MKII's that I can see.

"Silencers". Twin silencers leading to twin tail pipes with chrome plated tips.
Not on MKIIs with the 2.4L. "Y" pipe at the manifolds, SINGLE all the way back.

"Brake fluid reservoir". I have photos of RHD cars and LHD cars, and I cannot tell for certain yet if there was this spacer tube on RHD, but they SEEM to be mounted to a bracket.....and does this "guide" tell me I need to remove my reservoir from the RIGHT inner wing and move it to the LEFT inner wing?

I READ the judge's guides.
AND the MKII guides BEFORE I asked this question.

I have done judging in the past.
You need knowledge and a "standard" so all cars are judged the same.

So, where do I find the judging guide for a RHD MKII with a 2.4L?

I am not trying to pick a fight.
I am not trying to upset anybodies apple cart.

I just want to know IF I decide to enter this beastie in any type of judging, how will it be judged if the guide does not cover it?

Thanks for hearing me out.

OC,

If you want to get our head around the JCNA judging philosophy, you should peruse the JCNA Judge's Guide, found here.
http://www.jcna.com/library/concours/index.php.

The opening sections of Chapter 3 cover the philosophy and the opening section of Chapter 5 covers the application. They should answer your question.