https://www.bell-steel.co.uk/

The link above goes the Bell website which has contact info.

 

Many 2.4 engines had straight down manifolds. Jaguar was all over the place in those days ~ see Taylor comment.

Example:

 

All 2.4 engines in the MK2 had the straight pipe manifolds, they never used anything different just the same as all 3.4 and 3.8's had the swept back manifolds. The only difference was early manifolds had a different gasket arrangement as outlined above.

 

You will find that some 2.4's did come out of Brown's Lane with swept back manifolds. But that was the exception rather than the rule. Homer you are correct that the majority of Mk2's came with straight down manifolds.

 

I would not say this if I did not have a friend with a 2.4 with swept back manifolds on an early Mk2 with a whole genuine 30,000 miles on it that always wins the "Preservation Class" at shows that was exported from Browns Lane to the then Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe). The car is untouched and pre the Rexine covered centre panel in the dash. Centre of dash is painted black.

 

What does that prove though? The OP has a 3.8 with straight manifolds. Your friends car will have had some work done on it at some point, possibly significant, my 3.8 MK2 had had three engines before it was 2 years old!

60 years is a long time and just because you have seen one car fitted with them doesn't mean it was built like that from the factory as a standard car, its very easy to get an exhaust made to whatever shape and size you want. None of the parts books show a swept back manifold for a 2.4 so unless someone has some documentary evidence to prove it them i'm afraid I don't believe they built them like this as standard.

This is what Jaguar thought they fitted.



Of course its possible that someone wanted the swept back manifolds and special ordered it like this with a custom made exhaust.........

 

No comment. Many mistakes in the Parts Manuals. The S Type Parts Manual is a horror story right down to thermostats where they show the right diagram & wrong Part Number. The same could be said for Technical Bulletins where they are frequently a year late & wrong regards what happened on the production line. I am talking about a one owner car from new that moved to SA when the trouble started in Zim. Entire history known.

 

So the car was built around 1960 (based on it having a painted dash centre) making it 63 years old, the person bought it new was lets say 20 years old at the time making them well into their 80's now.

What you are suggesting is that this octogenarian has a perfect memory for what happended upto 60 years ago and that the car still has its original exhaust (because a replacement one wouldn't fit properly without serious modification and surely they would have remembered that) and manifold and that they are a far more reliable source of what manfolds 2.4 cars came from the factory than the Jaguar documentation from the time.

 

Homer don't go there. Glyn has a tendency to stick to what he believes and this will not end well. I think you have made your point that old people have bad memories and I can attest to that being old myself. Glyn makes a valid point that you don't agree with but this type of argument will never end, will become bitter and and someone will end up with a warning from the Moderators.
Can we assume that no one actually knows everything and not everyone is right or wrong and that we all have our opinions based on our knowledge and experiences. We know from our research into S Types that there is no such thing as a normal factory built car from the mid 1960s. The design parts changed from month to month and sometimes due to strike action they fitted parts that were available at the time that might not have been the part the designer intended should be fitted but from a different model on the assembly line. Factory bulletins were issued years later detailing the changes but were not always accurate and a car that was destined for export could be radically changed to fit with the laws of the country it was being exported to in this case Rhodesia.
Accept that what Glyn is saying might be the truth and leave it at that.

 

Sadly this is the reason why this forum is no longer anywhere near as popular as it once was and a lot of the previous members have left even though they still have their car, its also the reason why very few new people who come here stick around. Its the reason why I rarely post despite still owning two MK2's and having worked on many 1960's Jaguars over many years.

Unless people on this forum change their ways it will just degenerate (as it pretty much has) into a handful of people all spouting nonsense in their little click.

 

Octogenarians write things down & keep a rolling record over the years. 'nuff said. My car was a one owner car by a Doctor that kept immaculate records that he gave me when he sold me the car. Even the original Wilmot Breeden Keys on there original Coventry, made in England fob.

 

Sorry Homer is this directed towards my comment or towards Glyns?

My own personal feeling is the forum is strong and full of opinions which might be correct or totally wrong but it is also full of technical advice freely given by people who really know their stuff because they have, as I have, had every nut and bolt off their car and then rebuilt it from the ground up.
There will never be a technical question on this forum page which does not get an answer. Most of the time with photos. Some people have a problem, submit a question, have it answered and have no further use of the forum so don't come back. I do this on the XF page only visiting it to ask a question and to get an answer.

Opinions are not always fact and everyone has their own just accept it and move on as you will never change it.

 

I have a pair of the swept back manifolds with all intact studs if you decide to go that route. Came off a 1963-built 3.8 S type. $345.00 shipped or $260.00 picked up for the pair. A good blasting will leave them like new.

 

I have checked my MK2 3.4/3.8 parts manual which included illustrations of the manuals used.
Refer to Homers previous post reference parts numbers and what was fitted to cars by body numbers.
C13863 & C13865 were vertical output manifolds fitted to early 3.4/3.8 cars.
C18396 & C18396 were swept back output manifolds to later cars.

 

Bill,
In the S Type parts manual the part numbers for the manifolds are C18398 and C18399. One number added to each so different parts. These are swept back so there is a different although possibly very small between the Mk2 swept back and the S Type swept back manifolds but don't ask me what it could be.
Guessing it could possibly be the change in flange to accommodate the doughnut gasket on the S Type if the Mk2 2.4 had the flat gasket?

 

The Parts manuals & Very late (frequently over a year) tech bulletins contain many mistakes. These have never been corrected even in the latest versions of the manuals. As Cass mentions there is no such thing as a standard S Type as proven time & time again on the Register. I'm sure the same thing applies to Mk2's

 

Back to the OP's original question. I'm sure Bell made that exhaust system to fit one of the Mk2 configurations. A mistake by Bell is extremely unlikely.

On a lighter note I was re-reading the aging Doctors notes on my car and he even recorded changing the tyre valve caps from plastic to metal caps with the facility to unscrew the valve itself.

Schrader valve caps.

 

Update on my fitting of the Bell system.

I have received and fitted the 4" 1.75 inch SS extension to the front downpipe. It fits perfectly, maybe could be a little longer but it will work just fine using the double wide clamps discussed earlier in the thread. The rear down pipe is perhaps an inch too long but it slides into the muffler deep enough.

The issue all along is not that the system does not fit because of the car being originally a 2.4 now with 3.8, but simply because the two downpipes are not of the correct lenght for this application. They fit perfectly into the "vertical" manifolds, have plenty of clearance as they transition to horizontal. The muffler and tail pipes fit just fine. Only issue there is the recess in the rear valance under the bumper is scalloped only for one pipe, since it was a 2.4 originally. I'll fix that in the future. Also I did have to make a custom rear tail pipe hanger attached to the left rear inner fender will to secure the twin tailpipes, no issue doing so.

Barratt has still not provided a reason for the pipe lengths, although they did respond they are working on it, and I will reach out to Bell directly Monday morning.

I went ahead and fitted the system with the extension sleeve fix it to get the car back on the road. I suspect getting the answer and the correct pipes may take quite some time.

I'm happy with the results and will post photos of the final installation and details of the first road test.

Thanks
jjsandsms

 

The reason the downpipes don't fit correctly is that you have an exhaust for a 3.4/3.8 which is designed to fit the swept manfolds and have fitted it instead to a set of straight manifolds.

The different angles of the outlet pipes and their relative positions are why they don't fit, if you look at the 3.4/3.8 manifolds they exit further back and at an angle which is why one of your pipes is too short. The down pipes have a flexible section and I suspect if you look at it its meant to be straight and its now bent at an angle.

You have these 2.4/E-Type manifolds



The exhaust you have is almost certainly for these 3.4/3,8 manifolds



Its not that you can't do what you have done and is probably the cheapest option but its why it doesn't fit as you expect. Just be careful that the flexible secitons aren't under undue strain.

 

I initially would have agreed with you Homer but the OP has stated and shown in his photo (post #1) that the down pipes come up inside the engine bay and sit in a vertical position to fit the 2.4 / E Type style straight manifolds. I can understand what you are saying that by bending the flexible section you could alter the angle of the down pipe to fit the swept back manifolds but the OP has stated that this is not what he has done.
Reading between the lines it appears to be a manufacturing fault by Bell and it would not surprise me if they have attached the correct down pipes for the 2.4 straight manifolds to the flexi pipes and rear section of pipes that were supposed to be for the swept back manifolds of the 3.8. Only Bell will know but would they admit to it?

After market parts tend to have fitment problems. My exhaust from Double "SS" exhausts in Cullompton Devon was made specifically for the S Type. The owner of Double "SS" actually has an S type and apparently used the original exhaust from his car as the template. But when I offered it up one pipe was too long between the first box and the centre box which meant I had to trim an inch off to get it to fit. Better that it was too long than too short though.