1926 Jowett type C

[TedAllen]

I received an EMail from a guy I know from a motoring forum I belong to. He knows I have a Javelin but his question is way belong my knowledge.

Anyone help ?......................

I'm chatting to a guy who's got a problem.

He reckons the idler jet's been split by someone screwing in the adjuster too tight.

He says it looks like someone's tried to solder it together, without success.

He's had a look around t'interweb and found there's three different type of Zenith carb fitted to that model, but hasn't identified which one's on this (it's not been removed to find any numbers).

I said I knew a guy who may be able to help!

I've got the engine number (C6638C). Could you identify the type of carb from this (assuming it's still standard) and the possibility of sourcing replacement parts?



I'll see if I can get his name....it doesn't look as if he is in the club or he would have directed his question to the Jowetteer or JCS. I think my pal is based in the Hereford/Leominster area.....doesn't guarantee the car is in the same area, though.

Ted

[ian Howell]

Ted:-

I can't help directly but I think this is a very early number - the early cars were in batches of 12 up to WWI.

Possibly the first number after the 'C' means 1926 but George will be able to enlighten our darkness.

[TedAllen]

Thanks Ian.

I've since found out that this car is the one in the Shuttleworth collection. My contact is a volunteer there.

There's a photo on the collection's website.

[george garside]

the engine number is 66386 (rather than 6638C) and it is indeed a 1926 model short four. It appears that its original reg NM 8092 (as per 1994 JCC register) has been flogged by the Shuttleworth lot!

none of this helps with te carb query but I have no recollection of 3 makes of caarb being fitted in1926?!

george

[ian Howell]

Sorted then!!

But isn't it sad that APPARENTLY an organisation dedicted to preserving our heritage shiuld find it necessary to split a vehicle from its registration number?

I have been told - unofficially - that it is possible to 'lock' a vehicle to its number but this doesn't seem to happen that often (or at all?).

Perhaps it is expensive - or owners may want to retain to option if they sell the vehicle.

Perhaps it would be feasible to combine some sort of legislation that would allow 'barn finds' to retain their number if it has not been reallocated and to combine this with automatically 'locking' registration numbers to vehicles that are given 'Historic' status.

Any thoughts?

[Alf Heseltine]

Ian, one of the conditions that DVLA applies to the retention of original numbers on vehicles that have been 'off the register'
is that the number cannot be transferred to another vehicle. This is normally stated in section 3 on the V5c.

The club had a direct link to the relevant department in DVLA, the late Ian Priestley did all the work.

Alf.

[ian Howell]

Alf:-

Thanks for that. That might solve some of the problem but what about the transfer of numbers from vehicles 'on the Register'?

I still think it might be 'nice' if owners could opt for the numbers to be locked to the vehicle. this might discourage some dealers from buying vehicles and then selling the numbers separately from the vehicle itself.

Of course, the option not to do this would need to be retained for people who transfer cherished numbers from one vehicle to the next when they purchase a replacement.

[george garside]

to me the simplest and best way would be to make all number plates non transferable for any reason. This would at a stroke kill off the dubious practices of some number plate dealers - in fact it would kill off number plates dealers full stop!

The vanity merchants who for whatever strange reason like to show off that they can afford a 'personal' plate could always stick an extra dummy plate on their backsides eg IMASH 1 T , 1 FART, or whatever they choose.

george

[PAUL BEAUMONT]

With the passing of Ian P the contact with the DVLA passed to his deputy Geoff Wills. Geoff is top tog in this department and seems to be quite busy just now with sever cases.

Paul

[TedAllen]

Back to the OP. I had a couple more EMails from my friend....I'll paste here....can anybody help or advise.

Would you believe I was looking at a single-seat Jupiter today, in a dusty old shed? Not the Le Mans car, but one of the other two, allegedly.

I've been challenged with sorting out the rough running of the old 1926, type C, light four.


I got chatting with the driver of a Bull-nosed Morris while his wedding passengers were having their photos taken.

He told me he had an old 2-cylinder Jowett in his shed and offered to let me have a look at the carburettor.

I can't begin to tell you what was in this 'shed'. The Jowett (not the Jupiter) was a more recent variant than the one I'm dealing with and the carb wasn't comparable.

We've stripped the carb (again) and cleaned the crud out. I've fitted a fuel filter and flushed the tank (what the hell, I'm not paying for it). We've decided the Zenith 30H ain't the original carb. It's got its fixings on a vertical plane, whilst the manifold has horizontal plane fixings and an adaptor plate to convert. The internal diameter of the inlet manifold's around 25mm, so there's no advantage in fitting a 30mm carb. I've found an old 22mm Zenith carb in the junk box (with horizontal plane holes) that I suspect's the original, it's beyond repair. What came out of the tank smelled like cellulose thinners, so we've no idea what someone put in there.
I found another Zenith 30H in the junk with a much less worn butterfly spindle than the one on the Jowett, so swapped it. I applied a generous amount of grease around this (still worn) spindle, filled with fresh avgas and it runs like dream.

Do you reckon anyone in the Jowett club can suggest what carb was fitted as standard?

Don't know what it'll run like when all the grease on the spindle's been sucked in, but do you know of a Zenith 22 to 25 mm 'H', in good condition that our curator can afford?

I'm trying to get on the Jowett forum. I think I've jumped through all the hoops requested and I can read it, but it won't let me contribute. Do I have to be a paid-up member of the club?

We've found another problem with our '26, It's trying to dump all its oil on the floor. The breather valve has the remains of a leather flap inside (we think we can make another), but there appears to be a 'star shaped spring' missing. The body also has a broken mounting lug and a crack. We think we understand how it maintains a negative pressure in the crankcase and why ours is doing a good imitation of the Torrey Canyon. A replacement assembly would be the ideal solution (what chance?), but a picture or diagram of how it's supposed to be assembled would be a great help, which is why I'm trying to get on the forum.

[ian Howell]

WOW?

A single seat Jupiter could be VERY interesting!

What a shame that it APPEARS that the car has been 'messed about' with by an ostensibly responsible organisation. (My apologies if the cellulose thinners came with the car on acquisition!).

As to the carb and crankcase valve - the valve and the 'star' spring are readily available from JCS to CLUB MEMBERS only, due to insurance restrictions. I don't think that leather valves were ever fitted (were they George?).

The carb shouldn't be too much of a problem to source if it can be identified, I doubt if they were unique to Jowetts. Other 1926s in the club might be able to provide a photo, even if there are no visible part numbers on the bodies (but I believe there should be?).

I would like to think that the more help that is offered to Ted's friend, the more likely he would be to join the club, or could there be an 'association' with the Shuttleworth Collection if that is where the car is.

On a related subject - is the car in the Caister Collection (Jowetteer this month) really 1927? That radiator surround looks like the stainless steel one on my 1930 Fabric Saloon and I have been given to understand that these were only fitted to 1930 models (and I suspect, a few later commercials as was Jowett practice).

Has anyone visited the Caister Collection and asked about chassis/engine numbers?

Looks like it could be a good venue for a Section meeting.

[Tony Fearn]

The breather valve has the remains of a leather flap inside ...........but there appears to be a 'star shaped spring' missing.

Hello Ted.
I found this line drawing of a vintage engine, and the pancake-like casting on the oil filler tube as far as I remember contains the fine, soft leather flap acting like a breather vane.
I can't remember how it's held against the breather hole, but I don't think it's with a star-shaped piece.
The pre-war breather set-up is different. This does have a thin and flexible 5-bladed spring steel star held against the breather holes which is stiffened by a smaller star-shaped piece. There's a photo of this set-up in the Technical section of the JowettGallery,/pre-war/ Maintenance manual 1935 - 1939.

vintage engine line drawing.jpg

Some of the vintage-owning members posting on this forum should be able to be more specific, and even post photos if you elaborate and post photos of what you're talking about yourself.
Tony.

[ian Howell]

Well! So many changes in so short a time - say from 1925 to 1930.

Many of the changes seem to have involved modifications to tooling or new patterns for castings. This is a very expensive procedure and with the relatively small production numbers the cost reduction that came with the change to detachable cylinder heads (cylinders later cast in the UK and no longer from Belgium) must have been very welcome.

I suspect that some of the changes that Steven Poole introduced may have been primarly aimed at reducing production costs at a time of economic austerity (Sound familar?!.

[Forumadmin]

Ted's friend has registered on JT so hope to see a response soon. Sorry for delay but been in th a Aus Outback.

[george garside]

Steve Pools redesign of the flat twin was perhaps overdue as the original Edwardian engine had been around from the 1906 prototype and had been in production for 20 years. It may or may not have resulted in decreased production costs but I don't think that was its prime purpose.

Amongst other things it got rid of the external oil pump that needed priming following oil change, it enabled decoking without a fair amount of dismantling, it eliminated the noisy bell crank valve operation and replaced the cone clutch with a single dry plate job.

Probably just as importantly it looked much more modern when compared to it Edwardian predecessor and was to have a similar 20 year life span before being superceded with the CC Bradford engine. The CC engine also formed the basis of the IOE CD engine and may well also have had a 20 year lifepan Jowett hadn't gone down the pan ?

george