Possible Jowett purchase

[BarryCambs]

I have finally made it over to Daventry to look over the Jowett. It had become slightly buried in the garage, but looks to be all there and pretty solid, if a little tatty. It turns out to be a long 2, as suspected. I've got the log book which shows it registered in June 1929. It has 4 wheel braking, detachable heads and ball change gear box, all of which I am told came in 1929.

Last time it was driven was 1975 from London to Newmarket, so I am hoping there is nothing major mechanically. Someone did start rubbing and filling the front wings at some stage and there are one or 2 other repairs going back years which are perhaps not up to the sort of standard I'd like. It has wiring faults and the loom has been pulled about. It's also been hand painted at some stage - probably in the 50s, but it's not a great job. The exposed bits of chassis have also been painted green which looks a little odd. The engine was run about 5 years ago. I didn't ask what preparation was done before it was started, as it's probably best not to know.....

Overall, it looks ok. With 2 small children and one due in May, there is no way I have time for a nut and bolt rebuild at the moment, so the plan is for a thorough recommissioning, to get it in usable condition. We can then go with a "rolling restoration". It ain't going to be pretty, but should have a certain charm! I'm hoping in a few years, my son will be interested and we can then go for a proper restoration project as a training exercise with his Grandad.

I'm keen to make a start, but I will have to put a roof on the garage before I can move it back to Cambridge. That said, it will give me an incentive to get on with it and I'd like to think we can get it roadworthy this summer.

I inevitably have lots of questions, but I'll move to the Pre-war section for those. Many thanks to all those who helped so far.

I have filled out my club membership form this morning!

Barry

[BarryCambs]

Another couple of pictures. Had a few problems getting round it I'm afraid.

[george garside]

Hi Barry - nice to see some photos of teh car. Particularly as its been in the family from new it would be a shame to 'restore it as it looks very complete. Perhaps some gentle conservation to its condition when last in use would be more appropriate as ori;ginal more or less unmolested cars don't come up that often. For what its worth it looks to have a 1934/5 engine & 4 speed box (33 had fixed starting hanadle, yours looks as if it hasn't. Also carb and pupmp look late 34/35/ish to me. If it was me I'd keep this engine & box as they have presumably 'belonged' to the car for something like 50 years and so form part of its history - but others may disagree on this point/

george

[BarryCambs]

Hi George

Thanks for your comments. I'd agree. If it was a wreck pulled out of a hedge, then restoring it to pristine original condition would be more appropriate, but in this case, I think it would be a shame to end up with a museum piece I was scared to get wet or let kids climb over it to get to the dicky seat. My other interest is classic bikes ( i have owned a Moto Guzzi for 20 odd years) and it breaks my heart to see bikes being pushed out of vans and straight into the marquee. It seems to have become a source of pride with some collectors to have bikes without number plates on to show just how serious they are about not even starting them!

Interesting you should think it had a later engine. It did look different to all the photos of 1920 ones I had looked at. If it has been changed, it was probably well before 1950. As you say, it's part of it's history and I wouldn't be looking to wind the clock back as it were. Does the catch on the gear lever make it look like a 4 speed? I'm guessing it is the gate for reverse? It also looks like it has been converted to 12 volts at some stage. It has battery fitted each side. The last chap who used it owned an electrical engineering firm, so it wouldn't be much of a surprise.

From what I have read, it's not an original colour scheme either, or am I mistaken?

Barry

[ian Howell]

Barry: -

Not much to add to the comments from George and others, but I agree it looks a bit different under the bonnet from my 1930 Long Four (as you'd expect!). It looks as if you will easily beat me to an 'on the road' status.

I am pleased to 'hear' you think it a good idea to get the kids involved, couldn't agree more. When they did the WAIT,AND, SEE expedition across Australia they made a point of stopping at schools and Care Homes on the way and the responses were astonishing! (and mostly good!).

Check the serial number on the engine itself. It should be stamped on the top of the crankcase near the oil filler cap. The first digit gives the year date. If original it will be the same as the chassis number. Also note somewhere near there a couple of letters stamped in. These are the initials of the man who set up your engine before it left the factory. Tony Fearn posted details of these a couple of years back.

Good luck with the recommissioning. Keep us all posted.

[BarryCambs]

Hi Ian

I have the logbook now and the engine / chassis numbers don't match. The engine number is 436395, so from what you say it is 1934? Chassis number is 925663 if that means anything. In the box of paperwork I brought back are a couple of 1934/5 manuals along with the original, which makes sense now if it has a later engine. Thanks for the advise, as it could have been a bit frustrating to think I was working on a different engine!

Did I read somewhere the 4 speed box is synchromesh?

Most of the family have been engineers of some sort for generations and I grew up around old cars, boats etc, so I am keen for my son to get involved. That said, he is only 3, so he might be restricted to cleaning for a few years.

Barry

[george garside]

definately 4 speed the catch being as you thought for reverse. The dynabmo ,starter & coil on a 34 /5 car engine with 4 speed box would have been 12 volt, presumably why the rest of the system was changed to match (commercials were 6 volt & with 3 speed box). colours available in '29 were blue or gray for your model but it was not unknown for special order colours to be done. Again I would stick with the green as it has been part of the car for a long time and is perfectly in keeping with the period.( & to be honest I prefer it to the blue or gray!)

george

[Tony Fearn]

Hello again Barry and welcome to The Club. You won't regret joining us!

Thanks for the photos, it seems you have a wonderful mish-mash of bits and pieces on the car as George has alluded to. It's obvious that the majority of the later additions were made to keep the old girl going with whatever came to hand, and it would have needed ingenious mind to mix them all together to achieve this.

Early pre-war bits are slightly more common than the vintage ones, and at the moment are not as expensive as the latter, although they are also becoming rarer as the years pass.

One thought I had, when viewing the photos you posted, was that the flanges on the aluminium induction pipe look very thin, so take great care if you are removing and expect to replace it on the engine. (see the post in the pre-war section on 7hp cylinder heads)

I've attached three scans of photocopies of photocopies that I think are of a 1929 long-two with dickey. I notice that the colour scheme is different to George's post, so I'll stand to be corrected if it isn't 1929.

The wiring diagram is what would be expected for a long chassis 1929 Jowett, but don't take too much notice, it's only there for posterity.

P.S. Note the position of the door handles, they don't seem to be of the 'suicide dooor' type.

Tony.

[george garside]

the chassis number beginning with 9 denotes it as 1929 and the engine number is 1934 model year although it could have been mde \\7 registered in the latter hapf of 1933, model years running from the previous years Olympia motor show.

Jowetts did not see fit to use synchromesh until 1940, but the '30's 4 speed box offers an extremely easy change when compared to other makes of non synchro boxes because the 3rd 4th change is dogged at something like half engine speed whereas others did it at engine speed. clever stuff put never really publicised. Contempory motoring journals were enthusiastic. Autocar found that "gear change is at all times easy...but there are no special devices to facilitate gear changing;nor do these appear to be necessary". The Motor was even more enthusiiastic stating "the gear chanage is just about the easiest which we have ever encountered in a gearbox of the orthodox type .... the gear leaver drops into place without a sound, if just the most casual attention is given to the control of engine speed whilst changing". The Light Car reported that " ...there is always the silent third gear available for those who care to go to the infitesimal trouble of making an absurdly easy gear change"

george

[BarryCambs]

Thanks George and Ian

I'm amazed how much I have learnt about these cars in just a couple of days from member's encyclopaedic knowledge!

It seems the general consensus from the people I have shown the photos is to do as little as possible for the time being. I like George's suggested "gentle conservation". Looking over it, other than the expected tyres, ignition/cooling system overhaul the only thing that obviously needs looking at is the wiring. It's been modified and repaired over the years and the insulation has probably had its day. I will have a proper look, but I'm guessing a rewire could be the best way forward, certainly in terms of reliability.

The only thing I think I'd be tempted to change is the battery layout. Given the improvements in battery technology, it would seem to make more sense to use a single 12 volt, rather than two 6 volts, especially as the battery leads need replacing anyway. This would also free up the second battery box (presumably not original) to use as a tool box.

It's a long story, but I had the misfortune to be driving British built lorries in the 1980s, so the driving experience should be fairly familiar. Crash gearboxes were still used on the artic units by the mid 80s. Presumably everyone was too busy moaning about people buying foreign to have time to redesign them. Still, it certainly improved your driving skills, as the clutches were way to heavy to use apart from emergencies, so clutchless changes were easiest. I remember my left boot wearing through in a groove to match the clutch pedal after a couple of months driving a Leyland Roadtrain!

I didn't realise 12 volt systems were in use so early, especially as some manufacturers were still on 6 volt well after the war. It also seems odd they would use different systems on the cars and commercials.

Barry

[george garside]

pre war (& possibly earlypost war but not sure) commercial vehicles were taxed according to their unladen weight. Jowetts went to great lengths to offer the largest vehicle with the lowet weight . Hence lighter 6 volt battery, lighter 3 speed box, and it is believed that they even weighed all the wheels and selected the lightest ones for the commercials!

t
exaample
'34 jowett 7hp, 10cwt van. 107.5 cubic ft . weight 11.75 cwt/ tax £10

'34 austin 10hp. 6cwt van 63 cubic ft. weight 17cwt. tax £15

'34 austin 12hp, 10 cwt. 88 cubic ft weight 19.5 cwt. tax £15

george

[ian Howell]

Barry: -

Just to encourage you - I completely rewired my Long Four in just over a day. I used black cotton-covered wiring which is in fact modern coloured pvc cable with a cotton sleeve presumably knitted over it. Either way it looks 'right' but has the advantage of modern insulation technology. The trickiest bit was the dynamo and cut-out, but I just carefully followed the wiring diagram. You presumably have the advantage that the routes for the cables are clear from the remains you have. Make a careful note before you strip them out.

I admit that, apart from metal clips (which I made up from copper strips) onto the chassis, I have only 'loomed' the cables with plastic ties until I am sure that there are no changes to be made, then I will cover the loom with vintage woven tape.

Because of the state mine was in when I got it (in 1966), I have had to make two rear lights from scratch and rebuild one sidelight from bits I scrounged from Peter Rodgers in a swap arrangement.

As I have said on a number of occasions, I am repairing, not restoring the car. Like you, I just want to use it, but time goes by so quickly . . . .

[george garside]

Tony
you are right about the colours!
george

[Chris Spencer]

Barry - Welcome on board - Like the other members that have commented - I too would preserve the car as it is / found rather than restore it - this will make a great 'vintage oily rag' car (basically a car that has had odds done to it in order to keep / make it roadworthy but the car remains unrestored - 'The Automobile' magazine holds a 'Oily Rag Run' every year for cars of this nature.

[BarryCambs]

The more I think about it and given the comments on here and from people who have seen the photos (interestingly including those with no interest in cars) the more I'm convinced that "gentle conservation", "repair" and "Oily rag" is the way forward. Think of the money I'll save too! It certainly means there's a good chance she could be back on the road by summer, unless any real problems surface. The fact it is complete, if not entirely original, and was only taken off the road due to the owner's death, gives me a good head start.

If I can find somewhere nearer to move the car, we can do a proper survey and make a start, while I try and get the garage here done. At that point, I'm sure I will be badgering for advice constantly, so thanks in advance.

Apparently my club membership is already on its way. I'm hoping someone reasonable close will have an original of around this age I could have a look over, but I have no idea how many of these are still around?

Barry