XKSS

[lowdrag]

Over the winter months CKL will be turning this:-



Into this:-



Colour choice made (not black though) and some interesting stories to tell, plus photos will be published as the work continues.

[lowdrag]

I've had the D-type 10 years now and while I love it I can't tour with it - no wipers, hood or luggage space. I've still got the E-type, but an XKSS has always been an itch that one day I had to scratch. Now I have a car that will hold its own on track days and also with which I can tour. No more hail in the face either! I think that this will be about the first time since the 1950's that such a conversion has taken place, so it'll be interesting.

[lowdrag]

For Mr. Hogan's benefit it might help to know that CKL have perfected the art of welding fibreglass, otherwise the conversion would not have been possible. They will laser-cut the fin and head-rest, then weld in extra fibre where necessary. In fact contrary to common belief there is a substantial amount of work involved in the conversion: central cockpit bar to remove, spot to take out and weld in new fibreglass, dashboard is different, tunnel is different, indicators will be needed, windscreen and surround to be made and fitted, rear and front vestigial bumpers, and so on, plus of course detail work like the grease gun fitment, wipers and motor, and quite a few other things I've forgotten for the moment.

Edit: last time I looked RainX worked on glass but not plastic?

[lowdrag]

2slo said:

While you're on, define sycophant. Then get the tee shirt.

Obvious. It is in two parts:-

syco; as in The Birds and other Hitchcock films. Also defines an illegal day off from work.
phant: rear end of ele.

Result is one dangerous arse!

Tshirt please.

However, if this is going to continue in this fashion I'll walk away and not bother to post on the subject again. I was hoping to post something that might be of interest over the winter months, not start another futile war of words.

[lowdrag]

In answer to the above, there are several reasons for so doing. Some years back I bought a long nose Lynx D with the intention of converting the short nose into an XKSS. The difference between converting and trying to buy a Lynx XKSS is around £75,000, hence the thought at the time. But I for some reason didn't like the long nose very much and loved the short nose too much, so the long nose was sold and I went off on another track and built the "Kettle" C-type.

Then comes the recession; I'd long planned my retirement based on interest rates of 7% and an exchange rate of about 1.40€ to the £. Both went out the window, so the C-type had to be sold and I no longer had the money to buy - even if one could be found - a Lynx XKSS. Cutting the coat to fit the cloth isn't easy, and something has to give. A Lynx XKSS is an extremely rare car, ten being made, and they are even more rarely on the market. Lynx D-types, on the other hand, are comparatively numerous - mine is #44 of the line in 1989.

The only people I would entrust this conversion to are those who originally built my D-type, and that is CKL Developments, whom I've known, loved and trusted for ten years and who are ex-directors of Lynx. I don't go into this lightly, because there is a side of me that feels it is sacrilege, but I am not getting any younger and don't do many track days now, mostly because here in France they mix ancient and modern, and the last time I was overtaken by a GT3 who then braked sharply, him with ceramic six-pot brakes and me with a small boat anchor by comparison. My reactions aren't what they were, and I get more pleassure from a day out or touring than this kind of idiocy. Now I'll be able to have a car that I can use on the track, that I can tour with, and which given the over-300bhp will surprise quite a number of more modern cars at a traffic light grand prix.

So in the end there will be 10% more Lynx XKSS's around, 11 in number, and one less D-type, but then in the day Jaguar converted two D-types to XKSS format for owners and two XKSS's were converted to D-types. I am only making history repeat itself. If I win the lottery this weekend I'll stop the conversion and buy myself a real XKSS and that'll nip the thread in the bud, but it is rather unlikely to happen.

So bear with me and try and understand that I have loved cars and motoring since I was born and grew up in a garage. This isn't something I've undertaken lightly, and it has taken me five long years to agonise and finally make the decision.

Edited by lowdrag on Tuesday 1st November 12:56

[lowdrag]

That wasn't a dream, it was a nightmare! No, hand made in alloy and then chromed. I won't tell you how much they cost complete with screen since I don't want to risk you having another mightmare!

Edited by lowdrag on Wednesday 16th November 08:18

[lowdrag]

Now the furore has died down we'll start with how the car is today and follow the changes through. I suggest you find some photos on the intranet and compare because the differences are numerous but sometimes subtle. There is a lot of work before us.


Thsi was done for fun, but I'll keep it on the fin which I shall hang in the main room here which is 0ver 6 metres high. Will look good over the dining table!








These photos were taken the day before we loaded her on the trailer and delivered her to CKL.

[lowdrag]

Interesting that. One learns every day. Here are some photos of what will be the finished article, but not in these colours. I've no idea why, but the majority of the Lynx XKSS cars are black/red.





Anbd this will be me at the wheel do remember, if that's me I'm 81 now! living in California, the car had no hood or luggage rack.

[lowdrag]

Thanks for the kind regards, but with CKL behind the project I sleep easily at night. I am working on a few oddball ideas (like I came across a Spitfire bomb release switch I am thinking of putting on the tunnel as a starter button) but I think I'll keep you all in suspenders until the caterpillar comes out of its' chrysalis. Suffice to say that there is already at least one rather interesting story (make that incredible) to tell about the bits and pieces acquired, but that story is embargoed for the moment!

Over this winter I shall be posting photos just as I did during the gestation of the C-type, and I hope that at least some of you will follow and enjoy the sequential photos. There'll be, as usual, the ups and the downs, but far less than the last time, and when the car emerges I hope you'll all approve.

[lowdrag]

I'm no engineer sadly, but here's a photo of a Consul rear screen. Is it or isn't it? Therein lies the question. I mean, it's glass and it's curved.

Edited by lowdrag on Wednesday 16th November 08:17

[lowdrag]

Chunky, I guess you mean Dunlop R5's. There are actually two types of this tyre, the R5 and the R5L. The former is marked on the sidewall "not legal for road use" so we always used to put the tyres on the wheels with that on the inside. Then Dunlop brought out the R5L which is road legal since it has thicker sidewalls. Remember that these tyres came out before radials were really in common usage (before anyone argues I know that Michelin invented the radial long before) and that crossplies, unlike radials, have stiff sidewalls and don't really flex. Dunlop's answer was to make thinner sidewalls, so that the tyre could flex, but the downside of this is that on the road contact with a kerb could and would blow the tyre. hope that answers your question. Oh, don't confuse these with the RS5 which was a road tyre standard equipment on the E-type until late 1964 when the SP Sport radial was adopted.

Edit: I forgot to mention that any crossply also has the propensity to tramline. Like you are in the nearside lane of the motorway where trucks have dug ruts and the tyres can literally tear the steering wheel out of your hands as it follows the contours. You have to be very awre about this, but the R5, with the thinner sidewall, copes better than the R5L. But what the hell, I use Blockley's anyway these days. Last longer and seem to drift better on the track.

Edited by lowdrag on Saturday 12th November 12:33

[lowdrag]

From the horse's mouth comes the real truth - the screens are not from a Consul but were made independently. I am hoping to have a "spare" screen frame which was just "hanging around" by the end of the day.

[lowdrag]

Read your emails before posting David!

[lowdrag]

Calm down dears! The horse in question does not come from Sussex, and since the person in question has substantial personal knowledge of restoring several XKSS's many years back I tend to believe him. I'm afraid that so many of the accepted "truths" came from people who were getting on in years, and might have made a mistake. I am pursuing this further, and will post further. It might be that they were a Consul rear window (we seem to be agreed that it couldn't have been a front screen) but it might also be that the bConsul screen is almost identical to an XKSS screen. I've no idea, but just calm it until I find out more please.

[lowdrag]

I'm afraid that I am one who never subscribes to the dictum that what is written is always correct. When Norman first saw my C-type he thought it was too long, but later changed his mind and said it was too wide. Now it couldn't possibly be too wide since the centre tub is pure C-type, as is the chassis which was copied from one of the surviving very original cars, and the rest must follow that line. Norman isn't in the flower of his youth anymore, but for his age he is wonderful, and anyone who saw him step into E2A at the Festival for the first time in 50 years and promptly opposite lock the car at the first bend will agree with me that he is bloody marvellous; but memory starts to play tricks - mine does anyway. I do know that the alloy bumpers are particular to each car, since all the bodies were hand made and so the alloy bumpers had to be fettled to fit each one individually. It's like one E-type bonnet won't fit another either. The bumpers I have acquired will therefore need fettling and rechroming before fitting. I shall where possible be following through the business of the screen, but frankly to me it doesn't matter at all if it is from a Consul or not. I need one and that's that.

[lowdrag]

Maybe that takes us further, since the Consul is 5' 9" wide and the XKSS 5' 5.4" wide. However, allowing for the curvature of the XKSS sides it would seem that the screen would be too narrow for a Consul rear window. Thanks jith.

[lowdrag]

A bit of further information. All the bumpers were hand made for each car in alloy, and I believe the first couple weren't chromed but the rest were. Not too clear on this point though. Since each D-type was hand made, it follows that you can't take one set of bumpers off one car and fit them on another since they were all made to fit individually. My own bumper set, for example, were made for a specific XKSS but will have to be changed a bit and then rechromed. As regards the windscreen, in 1976 when a restoration was carried out on an XKSS they trawled the scrapyards for a Consul item and found it didn't fit. Seems to be one of those bits of misinformation that have become part of the "official" history. The good news is that Pilkington's still make XKSS screens at a relatively reasonable cost of £470 inc VAT. How's that for a car of which only 16 were made (or 26 if you include the Lynx replicas)?

[lowdrag]

a8hex said:

I wonder these days which are rarer? Consul or XKSS?

Well, according to www.howmanyleft.co.uk there are exactly 100 Mk II Consuls left of whch 69 are on the road.

[lowdrag]

Work has now started, the car being moved into the bodyshop hot on the heels of unmangling Desirée Wilson's efforts with the lightweight E-type at the Revival. We are on track to finish the car at the end of April. Not sure which year though ;)

[lowdrag]

I heard from a friend who went there and he told me that the fin and head rest are off plus there are the other pieces around the car waiting to be offered up. As soon as I have photos I'll post them.