|3.8 Jaguar E-Type|
|Open Two Seater|
|Right Hand Drive|
|1961||Opalescent Dark Blue|
|Work In Progress|
29 more photos below ↓
Record Creation: Entered on 8 April 2009.
Database Updates: Show dataplate edits
Registered: ENO 38
Photos of 850038
Click slide for larger image. This car has 30 photos. (Dates are when image was uploaded.)
Exterior Photos (9)
Uploaded September 2013:
Uploaded April 2009:
Interior Photos (1)
Details Photos: Exterior (3)
Detail Photos: Interior (3)
Detail Photos: Engine (5)
Detail Photos: Other (4)
Restoration Photos: Brakes (1)
Restoration Photos: Electrical (4)
We now require an email address to leave a comment. Your IP will be recorded in an effort to reduce spam. (Report problem posts here.)
2009-04-08 14:08:56 | Lofty writes:
This car was restored by David Warrow in the 1980's and has the registration number ENO 38. David had unprecedented access to the Jaguar factory and original spares inventory and many claim this car to be as near to 'as delivered' factory standard as is possible to attain. It is featured on the cover and in the text of Philip Porters book 'Original Jaguar E-Type'.
2009-04-08 17:17:56 | Bill writes:
If Phil Porters book is the source this entry might be wrong: the book cover shows E NO 30, indicating E-Type number 30 => 850030
2009-12-20 00:04:14 | Jonathan Sheard writes:
I think that 850038 was an opalescent dark blue car that belonged to Edinburgh publican Ean Walker and was registered EAN 111. I had intended to purchase the car from Ean in late 1967 or early 1968 but it was stolen and wrecked. It ended up in Sonny Swinton's scrapyard in Loanhead, Midlothian. Does my memory serve me right?
2013-09-01 18:26:23 | Stan writes:
I just got the catalogue from Bonhams for the September 14th sale in Goodwood. There is a E Type Roadster, Series 1 with Chassis 850038 and Registration KJH 20 offered as "single ownership since 1963" Photo Shows a dark blue/red car.
Any idea??? Would be interesting to learn more...
2013-09-04 18:49:24 | pauls writes:
URL for above auction:
14 Sep 2013 14:30 BST Chichester,Goodwood
Collector's Motor Cars
lot number 215
Single family ownership since 1963; 32,000 miles from new
1961 Jaguar E-Type 3.8-Litre Series 1 'Flat Floor' Roadster
Registration no. KJH 20
Chassis no. 850038
Engine no. R1187-9
£120,000 - 140,000
US$ 190,000 - 220,000
€140,000 - 170,000
Dating from the first few weeks of production, this vehicle is one of the earliest surviving right-hand drive Jaguar E-Type roadsters (the chassis number sequence commenced at '850001'). Many of these very early cars were sent by the factory to Jaguar dealers for use as demonstrators, and chassis number '850038' (the 38th right-hand-drive roadster) was despatched to Appleyard's in Leeds. The accompanying JDHT certificate states that the E-Type was manufactured in June 1961 and records the first owner as 'Jaguar Distributors Demo car'.
In the present ownership for some 50 years, it was purchased from a client of the family's Newcastle-upon-Tyne garage business, a Mr Straughan, who in the summer of 1961 had asked them to find him one of the new E-Type sports cars. They purchased Appleyard's demonstrator for him and Mr Straughan kept the car for 18 months before deciding that he would prefer a Jaguar Mk2 saloon. His E-Type was taken in part exchange. The keys to 'KJH 20' dropped through the vendor's letterbox on the morning of 25th December 1963, making that year's one of the most memorable of Christmases. Shortly after, during the Big Freeze of 1963/64. The vendor recalls the car's engine block was sadly damaged and was replaced. It should be noted that the Swansea V5 registration document records only the vendor and his father as owners, Mr Straughan's details having been omitted.
During the winter of 1963/64, the engine coolant froze and cracked the block, which was then replaced with correct 3.8-litre unit. For the next 10-15 years the E-Type was kept securely garaged and only driven occasionally on dry weekends by the vendor's father, plus annual trips to Scotland for salmon fishing. After the vendor's father's death in the 1980s, the E-Type remained in storage, unused, until 2004.
The car had been stored with the detachable hardtop in place, and when the vendor decided to refit the original soft top, the latter was found to have deteriorated. Stan Swan of The Trim Centre, Nuneaton, a Jaguar interior specialist, was entrusted with the production of a new hood and, later, a full interior re-trim. Stan had worked in Jaguar's Experimental Department at Browns Lane for 20 years until he started his own business, and recognised 'KJH 20' as one of the batch of 60-or-so early cars earmarked for despatch to Jaguar dealers. He revealed that these early models' interior panels were all hand made and had the maker's name and numbers on the backs of them.
Recognising that his E-Type was of greater historical significance than previously supposed, the vendor decided to embark on a total rebuild. The entire car was dismantled and, although in good condition, the body was sent to Jaguar specialist Alan Proctor of Worksop for a bare metal strip-down, minor repairs and a repaint in original opalescent blue. One of the final tasks undertaken was a strip-down and check over of the engine, which having only some 32,000 miles on its bores required relatively little work. The latter was undertaken by Beamish Morgan Ltd of County Durham whose bill plus those relating to other aspects of the restoration is on file. The mechanical work was carried out in the workshops of the vendor's motor dealership. A photographic record is available and the car also comes with its original hard top, handbook, competition tuning manual, maintenance chart, maintenance vouchers, service manual, spare parts catalogue, jack and hammer (in bag), hood bag and cover, tool kit and car cover. The vendor's detailed account of its history is there too (perusal recommended).
Its restoration only recently completed, this exceptional early 'flat floor' roadster is offered with tax, MoT and Swansea V5, and wants for nothing but a new owner.
2013-09-18 05:03:57 | Chris Short writes:
Viewed the car 850038 at the auction. Doner car used as there appears to be no original part left. Engine block number started with a Z?
Interesting picture painted about the car in light of the above.
2013-09-25 13:05:19 | J W C writes:
I worked on 850038 E-Type DHC at various times between 2009 and 2012. I had been asked by the elderly owner to advise him on any items under the bonnet of this early car which may have been changed over the years during ordinary use and which should be corrected now that the car was a vintage classic.
He was intending to sell this car along with his late fathers Austin Healy 3000 Mk1 (also sold at Bonhams Goodwood Auction) because he was intending to retire late in life and sell his garage/showroom. All three of his fathers cars had been on show in his car dealer showroom for many years and had been viewed by many local enthusiasts over the years. The car was well known locally and featured in an issue of E-Type magazine several years ago.
The car appeared to have been restored in no particular hurry slowly over a number of years in that the body had been re-painted, the upholstery had been re-done and the carburettors rebuilt some years earlier. The car had not been subjected to a full strip down and so hidden area's of the body had not been repainted. Since I was not involved I cannot comment on the quality of this earlier work.
Many of the comments listed on this site are clearly erroneous and refer to other cars and registration marks. It is true as one comment states that the engine block was not original but this is stated in the offer so no misleading information here.
However the cylinder head was original as were the carburetors and the very early linkage. If the car had been subjected to a "doner" restoration as is also suggested it is very odd that they did not at the same time replace the badly fraying and dangerous wiring harnesses which was my first suggestion or paint the inner sections of the bodywork.
There were several changes that had been made over the years. For example someone had replaced the aluminium covered RB310 dynamo control box and matching early dynamo with the later plastic covered RB340 (which had to be mounted upside down to match the old wiring harness) and later smaller diameter (but more efficient) dynamo. On my advice the originals were replaced but it is somewhat bizarre (especially given the craze for modern upgrades offered by E-Type specialists) that the classic car business desires originality all be it "inefficient" for some cars but not others.
There were other changes from standard hardly surprising on a 52 year old car model that really only started to come back on the scene in the late 1980's. For example the early style submersed fuel pump mounting designed to hold the very early Lucas fuel pump with vertical mounting lugs had been modified to accept the later Lucas pump with horizontal mounting lugs. I have only seen one NOS version of the earlier pumps on Ebay in 7 years. Also the fuel level sender was after market and I also repaired this.
The windshield washer pump mechanism had been modified with a modern pump unit but needed attention. The owner gave me the original pump spindle unit which is now on my 1962 3.8 .No doubt there were other issues that I did not spot as I did not see under the paintwork but the general history given in the Bonhams offer is correct including the ownership history but unsurprisingly no one thought to record when and why the items I mention came to be fitted. It is hardly surprising that it was thought unimportant 30 or 40 years ago.
After stripping down the carburetors and the fuel pump and re-tuning the former I managed to get the car fired up for the first time in many years to much cheering in the showroom.
I took many photographs and measurements of features of this car and my data was used in the restoration of at least of two other early cars including No.11 FHC and one early DHC to fit the outside bonnet locks to new bonnets on these cars.
There is a somewhat bizarre narrative developing in the E-Type world creating a sort of "faux" exclusivity depending on luck or wealth to the dismay of many ordinary owners. First it was the "very early cars with outside bonnet locks etc." no matter how inconvenient these early features were. Then the relative rarity apparently (does it matter?) of original RHD cars. Now it appears even this is not sufficient it has to be "very early original untouched RHD cars which are to be restored by so called prestige specialist restoration companies with a commercial interest. The mind boggles.
Was the car really worth £225,000? Well that is an altogether different issue but in general the story is correct.
2013-09-26 04:30:25 | Chis Short writes:
The point I believe being made from comments around this site relates to originality, there is correlation of price to this matter.
Points noted above and I do not believe any body has used the word misleading, as pointed out above a clever use of words painted a picture, I viewed the car and could not find any original parts on the car, even the rear axle configuration was not early, over the years parts are changed but all of them.
Have a look at chassis 850057 and 850060, 8750029, there are still original cars out there as stated previous to the cars coming to the market place. the question as they are so original in particular 850057 do you restore or not, this car would be worth the money left alone.
A car can be restored many times,once touched and in some cases they have to be you have lost that piece of history.
Interestingly there are a few more early external lockers that have not come to light yet.
As for the price of 850038, auction fever! no due diligence!
2013-09-26 07:50:48 | J W C writes:
As I have stated many of the early pre-auction comments on this car are erroneous and clearly refer to other cars or registrations. Yet later comments around the auction confuse these comments with the actual car in question.
Mr. Short comments that he could not find an original part on the car which is quite a statement to make after an examination at an actual auction. In contrast I have lived within half a mile of the owner for 20 years and made countless visits to his garage showroom to work on the car over a 3 to 4 year period. Clearly the examination at auction was not very thorough because otherwise it would have shown up the original serial number on the cylinder head and the engine frame number although I accept that the latter is susceptible to forgery.
Mr. Short comments on other none original issues but does not give much detail as to what they are except in the vaguest way. What exactly are they? I know of a few that I have not mentioned including the mudguards which were changed because of the condition of the originals.
I pop riveted the rubber seals onto the new ones. During examination at auction did he have the headlamps and scoops out to see what was behind there? I did. Did he examine the wiring harnesses behind the headlamps, behind the centre dash panel or around the horn relay? All area's where I worked as I repaired old electrical faults. Was the car over a pit or on ramps? The suggestion that this car had been subjected to a "donor" car restoration is nonsense.
I think I have made clear that I think the whole "early car, original RHD car, inside or outside bonnet locks" narrative is a nonsense and I have no financial or other interest in the outcome of the auction. The vendors late father were he alive would now be over a hundred years old. The car was maintained over the years by his garage mechanics who if they are still alive will be very elderly as is the vendor. As a consequence and unsurprisingly details are lost to history
Clearly in the past when repairing faults in the pre vintage classic era repairs were carried out in a way that I would not have done on any of my E-Types. For example the windshield washer motor/pump assembly had failed and a modern type of pump jerry rigged into the cover assembly but even this setup was broken. However this was good for me because the box of original bits and pieces was given to me so that I could select items that allowed me to get my 1962 cars washer working again. But then again no one was writing a lucrative book or pumping up a classic car restoration company.
I am absolutely lost as to the point of the conspiracy theory surrounding this car. As I have said the story as presented is generally correct give or take the vagaries of the human memory. It is not a "clever" presentation and the commentator has no historical knowledge to support the claim. It is a car that had been used whatever the weather by the vendor's late father when these cars were of little historical value. It had not been kept as an ornament but used though not for very many years.
As far as I could see the vendor had no deep intrinsic interest in either the E-Type or the Austin Healy 3000 or his late fathers Baby Austin A35 all of which stood in his showroom in full public view for many years. His interest appeared to be simply that they were "his late father's cars" and they were kept for that reason alone. Once the business was sold there was nowhere to keep them.
Last year I received a telephone call from a London based prospective buyer who wanted my view of the car. Subsequently this gentleman had a representative of a major reputable and well known E-Type restoration company examine the car and a list of issues was raised.
As the purchase failed to materialize the vendor wrote the prospect off and listed the car with Bonham's. Subsequently the prospective buyer called and said he wanted to go ahead and buy the car so whatever the experts found did not put him off but it was too late. The car was with Bonham's for months so plenty of time for any prospective bidder to check the car out.
Last month at a major car show there was a good selection of E-Types including an early fully professionally restored open top with outside bonnet locks and a 1963 open top car which had been owned by the current owner since 1970 and apart from a rebuild of the radio console which I carried out otherwise never touched. This latter car was absolutely original with a faded but good patina to the paintwork and leather seats.
So untouched was this latter car that the owner who bought it as the second owner never bothered in all of those years to have the radio console repaired after it had been hacked about by the first owner to fit some electronic gadget until 2011 when I repaired it.
The judges at the "Best in Class" competition ignored this untouched car and awarded the prize to the fully restored none original car. It's a funny old world.
2013-09-28 13:05:45 | C S writes:
I did not need a Pitt to examine the car, if you have a knowledge of early cars and to be honest even a novice with information available would be able to make a list as long as your arm of items that are not correct on the car.
I do except over the years items are changed due to wear and possible accidents, even modernisation bur there are to many fundimental problems
2013-09-30 07:01:17 | J W C writes:
Well still no details of the negative issues from the experts short or "as long as an arm". Probably just as well because I might just have a photograph to counter any negative claim. So here is some of a list from the novice including 13 added photographs.
I have pointed out that the cylinder head serial number was original as was the chassis number stamped into the front picture frame. I can add that the body number plate on the bulkhead above the brake reservoir bottles indicated the correct number and appeared undisturbed at least for very many years.
In addition the engine pulleys were of the older style and did not ihave the later spring loaded jockey pulley. Still on the front of the engine the crankcase breather outlet was correct pointing to the nearside of the car though the foil breather pipe was new in 2009.
Although modified the Bakelite motor cover on the windshield washer bottle had a 1961 date scribed into the rear surface as is usual for a Lucas cover.
The later RB 340 charging controller which had been fitted was as I have indicated mounted upside down because the old (and deteriorating) harness would not reach if mounted the correct way up. Importantly the holes for bolting up the longer RB310 alloy cased controller can be clearly seen to the left in the photograph I have uploaded showing the upside down RB340. A later photograph shows the re-fitted original RB310.
Another photograph I have uploaded shows the typical outside bonnet lock side buffers however importantly this photograph also shows that the car does not have the roughly 1 inch diameter holes in the side front face of the bulkhead which are on later cars usually plugged with a rubber blanking plug. I have never known for sure what the later holes are for but perhaps for rust proofing.
Two other photographs show the very early submersed Lucas fuel pump support. This has been modified sometime way back in the past in order to mount the later Lucas pump which had horizontal mounting lugs whereas the very early one had vertical mounting lugs. Later cars simply had two rods to support the pump. Another photograph shows the pump in my workshop under repair. The problem was that the bypass spring had opened up and swallowed the ball leading to fuel being re-circulated in the tank and not being delivered to the carbs. I repaired this by reversing the spring. In order to remove the pump from the tank I had to drain several gallons of stinking stale fuel.
Another photograph shows the original Kelsey Hayes servo with the vacuum test port at the 9 o'clock position. On later cars the servo was actually made by Dunlop and the test port was at the 11 o'clock position.
Two other photographs show the separate bonnet louvers from the top and underside of the bonnet. As with the outside bonnet locks these photographs and other measurements were used to modify new bonnets in the restoration of two other early 1961 cars one a FHC and one a DHC.
There is a photograph of the old style brake and clutch fluid reservoir bottles. An important point about these photographs is that they indicate something of the "restoration" of this car. Brackets and small detail etc had not been restored and many rubber pipes vacuum and water were very old. The point here is that this "restoration" was not being orchestrated by a "detail man" or a knowledgeable enthusiast out to fool someone.
Yet two more photographs show the very early style linkage on the restored carburetors. The carburetors and manifold had been sent away for professional restoration before I worked on the car. They are highly polished but had stood for a long time with old fuel eventually seizing up the jets. I had to strip them down and use a small wooden dowel to carefully "tap down" the jets to free them up.
The radiator was unsurprisingly not the original alloy radiator but a later none alloy version. The vendor had replaced the bonnet "Tee" teardrop keyholes replaced with round ones. I thought this was wrong but the owner could not be persuaded.
In the offer Bonhams listed the company who replaced the hood as Tim Swan of "The Trim Centre". This same company also redid the upholstery later on. The offer also lists the paint / body shop where the bodywork and re-painting was carried out as "Alan Proctor of Worksop" both some considerable distance from the vendor's show room and chosen for reputation. So no secrets there and presumably if worried the new owner can check with them.
The offer also reports that recent engine work was carried out at "Beamish Morgan". This was after my work so I am unsure of the purpose of this work. However Beamish Morgan was previously I & J Macdonald the long term regional Morgan Dealer along with Macdonald Racing. Recently the company merged with premier Aston Martin restorer Aston Workshops of Beamish.
Aston Workshops have the most advanced engine machine shop I have ever seen with hi tech computer controlled machinery and skilled technician who are able to repair seriously damaged Aston engines including frost damaged alloy cylinder heads. They also carry out many upgrades to Aston engines including increases in capacity. Whatever the reason for being there 850038 was in good hand.
That is pretty much all I have to say though I have more detailed photographs awaiting further claims about the car. I do not have photographs of the flat floors and flat rear bulkheads but I can say that unlike another well known car they have not been cut out and modified.
As for the new post with regard to EAN 111 I am unsure as to why the December 2009 post is of interest at least with regard to 850038 registration KJH 20. It is clearly a different car. Curiously however a DVLA website investigation shows this registration as assigned to another Jaguar listed as having an engine capacity of 3980cc first registered and manufactured in 1997. Since the road tax fee is listed this does not appear to be a re-registered road tax free classic. Probably a modern 4 litre car.
2013-09-30 09:29:36 | c s writes:
Thoust protestuff to much.
A bunch of photographs of old parts cannot hide tha facts.
I do not doubt your sincerety based on this car as you know it,may I suggest you have a look at all the reference material out there and make a list of the blinding differences between the car you know and reference material.
As mentioned earlier there are many fundemental issues, to have an explanation for each of these matters would be interesting.
I have no intention of listing the problems as they will come to light.
When all is said and done the main point is that the Identity of 850038 has been preserved which can only be a good thing
2013-09-30 16:15:08 | Anonymous writes:
in 2009 there were no details of exterior paint,these details only recently posted
Is this a coincidence or was the car scrapped, V5 and a bulkhead ?
2013-10-01 06:00:43 | J W C writes:
Hilarious, Still no facts just opinion but no protest from me and no opinion either, too dangerous. Just facts and photographs of old "original parts" from an old car full of old parts. I had thought that was the whole point.
There is no reference to the "real" 850038 car on this site until 2013. All previous posts confuse various registrations on the basis no reliable facts. For those interested in facts as opposed to nonsense prior to 2013 look for a copy of E-Type magazine from I think early 2009 which featured the car with very old photographs. This just might be what kicked off the nonsense that followed.
As for opinion which verges on allegations of dishonesty contributors should be careful. "Our learned friends" might just see such comments as "a clever presentation" and "a donor restoration" as potentially "actionable" and very expensive as the wife of the speaker in the House of Commons recently found out..
2013-10-01 09:55:56 | pauls writes:
Thanks for your first hand info JWC. The facts emerge from discussions like this. I too think the selling price was crazy but there is no accounting for folks with lots of money and little knowledge about a subject. Transactions that make little sense to us average owners happen every day.
2014-08-10 11:33:15 | Jonathan Sheard writes:
With regard to JWC's comment about my recollection of Ean Walker's car. His observation is entirely correct, the registration number is, I understand, currently on Mr. Walker's XK8.
Mr. Walker has had the registration number on a succession of Jaguars in the intervening years.
Perhaps my forty-five year old memory is slightly out and the car was 850039, about which we have no information.
can someone provide information on 850039 please?
2015-07-28 11:38:03 | Anonymous writes:
Just reading comments made by JWC, I viewed the car and I believe comments made by anonymous above relate to the pre production parts, those items that distinguish the early external lockers from the later cars.
I could not find any on this vehicle, yes there were plenty of period common parts but none as referred to above.
2021-02-22 16:45:20 | David Worrow writes:
JWC... The early submerged pumps were mounted horizontally on a vertical plate, the later ones were mounted on studs, not vice-versa!