When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Ok George, I thought we had cleared up the "old-stock" issue.
Jaguar are producing cars in LHD and RHD, sales are slowing (1966) so they decide to badge-engineer the Mk2 to a 340 (this is correct ?)
So why re-engineer the LHD Mk2's and NOT the RHD version ?
Let's agree on the boot, but let's say it was replaced , it is still a MK2 with a new boot lid and badge, is that correct ?
The Mark X was re-engineered and sold as a 420G (apologies for the missing G in my last post) why is this not a probability for the MK2 in the US.
It would make no sense to manufacture a MK2 and specifically brand it a 340 for the US when they were producing it for the ROW, it does make perfect sense that as sales in the US and the ROW were slow that they would re-engineer old LHD stock both in the UK and the US.
The MK2 and Mark X were "old cars" and been around a while, so the "face lift" was to boost sales with new models, hence the 240, 340, 420 and 420G
The Mark X was re-engineered in the US and sold as a 420G Correct ?
How does one judge a 340 in the US, is it judged as a 340 or a MK2 ? If it were judged as a 340 it would lose points as it would not have several features of the 340 because it was actually a MK2 with new boot and badge ?
Ok George, I thought we had cleared up the "old-stock" issue.
Jaguar are producing cars in LHD and RHD, sales are slowing (1966) so they decide to badge-engineer the Mk2 to a 340 (this is correct ?)
So why re-engineer the LHD Mk2's and NOT the RHD version ?
My guess.....
If we agree (and I'm not sure we do!) that the USA version of the 340 exists only because USA distributors asked that it be created then it stands to reason that a RHD or ROW equivalent doesn't exist because there was no such request from ROW distributors.
I'll admit, though, that I've sort of lost the rabbit in this thread. I was tickled just to learn the the USA 340 was simply a lower spec Mk2 with 340 badges installed.
How does one judge a 340 in the US, is it judged as a 340 or a MK2 ? If it were judged as a 340 it would lose points as it would not have several features of the 340 because it was actually a MK2 with new boot and badge ?
Easy answer. It would be judged as a USA-spec 340 !
Having said that it's a fair bet that some judges have gotten tangled up in the confusion over the years.
I can't find any evidence to say that the 340 US was created by request of the US, I do have evidence that the Mark X was re-engineered into a 420G by the instruction of Jaguar UK.
The 340 does exist in the ROW, it is the date that the 340 appeared in the US that not clear, it seems to be some point in '67, but the actual date is unclear, the marketing info seems to indicate it is later in the year, but George says it is earlier, but I don't know what the source is for this, if it is the fact that his son's car was built in '66 this does not show when it was first registered as a 340.
Regarding the lower spec MK2 badged as a 340, were they all lower spec, or are some same spec and re-badged ?
I have an early 340 UK model, and this has a few bits that are MK2 such as the seat belt catches, probably old stock used on early 340's as a guess, so this subject intrigues me.
The judging guide for the 340 states about the convoluted radiator hose on the 340, but the US 340 would not have that as an example, as it was a Mk2 so would not have the straight port head etc. There is no reference to the 340 US in the guide, all references are to ROW details as far as I can see. Therefore I would assume it has to be judged as a MK2 using the guide.
Well George, quite frankly I do not know how many times this subject has been covered. My guess, after reading your response, is quite a lot. I have unfortunately, been assigned the task of trying to find out about this car as it belonged to my dad and he has recently passed away. I was trying to find out 1. How to list the car for sale MK2 340, MK2, or simply 340. (as mentioned in the original post)
2. What the value might be for a price to sell the car. I found this site and thought, I'm sure there is a ton of knowledge and advise here. My father loved this car. I am just trying to do right by him and not get taken advantage of by under or over pricing the vehicle.
I have learned a ton from everyone who has responded. I thank each and everyone of you for your input. But I still don't know what to call it or how to price it.
Reen, I am trying to get to grips with the actual facts, if the 340 US is as it appears simply re-badged / re-engineered as a 340 for the US market, then it's value should be in-line with the MK2 and not devalued by many as the 340 is.
If we can ascertain the actual facts then you could market the car as a US Mk2 340, as it should have the same value as the Mk2, if it has leather etc. so not Ambla and carries all the other attributes of the MK2 (smooth cam covers etc.) then with the facts about re-badging (if it as I suspect), should not decrease it's value.
I have a 340 UK which carries less value than a MK2, I would prefer value wise to have a MK2, but the next best thing would be a re-badged MK2 with evidence to show that this really is a MK2. The Heritage Cert would almost definitely back this up.
The judging guide for the 340 states about the convoluted radiator hose on the 340, but the US 340 would not have that as an example as it was a Mk2 so would not have the straight port head etc. There is no reference to the 340 US in the guide, all references are to ROW details as far as I can see. Therefore I would assume it has to be judged as a MK2 using the guide.
If so, the "340" issue is not as well explained as it has been in this thread...although it does say "All entries apply to USA and Canadian cars unless otherwise noted" which may thinly cover the ground...but also confuse it because (as far as I know) Canada got the 'true' or ROW version of the 340. (Gah! I hope that's right. If not we have another debate!)
In my judging experience a savvy Mk2/340 (see what I did there? ) judge won't get tripped up. Typically the most experienced judge of each team is assigned to engine compartments.
A lesser experienced judge probably wouldn't notice one way or the other as far as hoses go. Sometimes the car owner can clarify things. If not, there's always the dispute resolution process. But judges I've known and teamed with won't dock someone for incorrect items unless he/she is quite sure they're on solid footing in doing so.
Of course there are many judges I haven't known as well
Thanks Doug,
That is the guide in question, and it is written for other judges to follow I guess, so I am surprised that it does not distinguish between the 340 US and 340 ROW
I absolutely agree re the Savvy MK2/340 judge, but it is the others, that, if they follow the guide would be knocking points off surely ?
There is enough confusion re this issue, would someone in the dispute resolution process know the actual answer !
I now have a copy of Jaguars in America, interesting reading, and gave me some perspective on what I think could be behind this issue, hopefully George will give some more facts/clarity on the questions I asked. I have read the article you posted earlier, and was surprised how wide the chassis number range was for the re-badge/engineered Mk2/340
Here's another thread on the 340 discussion.
At least for me, the thick and thin line bumper explanation has been cleared up.
There should be no thin line bumpers 340's with left hand drive here in the North American continent.
Any that are would be right hand drive since the thin line versions were not legal for export.
Thanks Doug,
That is the guide in question, and it is written for other judges to follow I guess, so I am surprised that it does not distinguish between the 340 US and 340 ROW
Just in my quick perusal I can see that the 340 issue was not well clarified, IMO. The guide is old, last revision 10 or more years ago I think. A month's pay says that JCNA would love for someone to take the time to update it.
I absolutely agree re the Savvy MK2/340 judge, but it is the others, that, if they follow the guide would be knocking points off surely ?
Possible, yes.
In reality I really don't think it would be an issue.
To explain this requires a bit of background which I'll provide based on *my* experiences in *my* region.
In a nutshell....
There was a time when judges hardly spoke to the the owner of the car. It was discouraged. The judging team worked in utter silence and a few weeks later the entrant received a score sheet in the mail.
As time went by it became increasingly common for judges to....oh my god....actually interact with the entrant and discuss deductions (or possible deductions) right there on the field. Of course the judges could make whatever deductions they felt were justified but as often as not it was a case of a more informed entrant educating and helping a lesser informed judge.
When I was in the judging game I often asked entrants for clarification on this item or that. If uncertainty remained the entrant got the benefit of the doubt. Most judges had the same philosophy. Your observation on radiator hoses would be a prime candidate for this sort of discussion. A smart entrant would know that the issue would likely come up again and also know that some judges are tougher than others....so he'd come to the next meet with ammunition to definitively support his case, if needed.
There are some judges and entrants who take on an adversarial stance but they're the exception in my experience. Most judges and entrants took the experience as an opportunity to learn.
There is enough confusion re this issue, would someone in the dispute resolution process know the actual answer !
Yes.
Or, in the odd case where a definitive answer can't be determined, the dispute would still be resolved...as it's the "dispute resolution department", not the "we know absolutely everything department"
I've never been involved in the process in any way but, from reading past resolutions, it seems to be fair.
Doug, thank you for taking the time to give me a very clear a definitive reply, I thought the judging was much as you first described with Judges working in silence in a veil of mist before handing over the score sheet.
I now understand it is a much more interactive experience which is a much fairer way and much more enjoyable all round.
I laughed out loud when I read your comment about my marketing decision 50 years on, hopefully my thoughts re the MK2/340 value came over rather than me trying to make some brash statement about branding !
Re-badging is a widely accepted term when a model has minor changes and is sold as a new model. It's not that fact that I am trying to clarify, it is where this took place, my thoughts are that it took place in both the US and the UK on stock that was unsold, it is also not clear yet at what point this started to happen. The Mark X old stock was definitely re-engineered in the US and sold as a 420G so why not the MK2 also ?
Here's another thread on the 340 discussion.
At least for me, the thick and thin line bumper explanation has been cleared up.
There should be no thin line bumpers 340's with left hand drive here in the North American continent.
Any that are would be right hand drive since the thin line versions were not legal for export.
Thanks Jeff, I forgot that thread, the cert in that thread showed that the car was built a year before dispatch, this to me adds to the fact that old stock would have been re-engineered and sold as a 340 and even a year later. Also on Old Irish, his car was built in Jan 67 and sold in May '68 so these cas were sitting around a while !
Thanks Jeff, I forgot that thread, the cert in that thread showed that the car was built a year before dispatch, this to me adds to the fact that old stock would have been re-engineered and sold as a 340 and even a year later.
Re-engineered yes, but not rebadged.
There was never any indication that the mount holes were filled on the boot lid to accommodate the 340 chrome emblem, going from MKII.
At least according to the discussions here...
Remember that ad, "How Many Licks Does It Take To Get To The Centre of A Tootsie Roll" ?
Badge engineering and re-badged seem to be in common usage to describe small changes to models, renaming and re-launching.
I use the term in that way, but it is definitely not past the capabilities of a craftsman to weld up the holes and it would appear they were never there. Unless every US 340 owner strips the paint off that area and gets a metallurgist to examine the boot we will never know for sure (Tootsie roll). They certainly drilled holes in the side of some Mark X's and fitted a chrome strip and this was done in the US, so it is only conjecture as to how and where it was done with the Mk2's.
Jaguar head Archivist seems to think it was not done at the factory, if it was done at the factory, why are there no records at all in the Jaguar archives!
The Mark X was changed in the US, there seems to me to be quite a lot of evidence indicating that the MK2 change may well have been done stateside, but nothing conclusive. There is evidence that at least 3 late '66 Mk2's were changed, and a further 16 from '67 ranging across nearly 800 cars by chassis number and this from a total of approx 1200 LHD cars produced in that time frame. Chassis numbers P180640 to P181438, it would be interesting to know if there are cars out there in this chassis number range that are badged as Mk2's.
The Mark X and 420G had consecutive chassis numbers so the debate is not clear cut there.
Badge engineering and re-badged seem to be in common usage to describe small changes to models, renaming and re-launching.
I use the term in that way,
Semantics can be a real itch
To me, "re-badging" would definitely connote removing one badge and installing a different badge. Just as "rechroming" a wire wheel would be removing the old chrome and applying new chrome. If xxx-thing is done, and at some later point is done again, I'd use the "re-". The car was repainted, the news story was rewritten, the business deal was renegotiated, etc.
So, if I asserted that existing Mk2 badges were removed and then replaced with 340 badges, I'd say "the car was re-badged as a 340". If I were to assert that the 340 badges were installed at the time of build I'd say "the car was badged as a 340".
This isn't to say I'm right and you're wrong. It's merely Sunday morning musing on my part. When we start getting in such detail on a subject our choice of words can make a difference. In a broader conversation we'd never think twice about it .
I think "badge engineering" can be safely used in a broad fashion....and then drilled-down into detail when needed. And the term certainly applies to the topic at hand!
but it is definitely not past the capabilities of a craftsman to weld up the holes and it would appear they were never there.
Agreed
Unless every US 340 owner strips the paint off that area and gets a metallurgist to examine the boot we will never know for sure (Tootsie roll).
Well, I'm guessing the backside of the panel wouldn't be so expertly finished off and would thus show signs of metal work. "Guessing" being an essential word here.
And, considering the age and paint types, I'd think that we'd see evidence of the repaired area being repainted. Or perhaps entire boot lids repainted? If we could find a slew of these cars in original condition and observed on many of them some sort of paint/color/fading discrepancy in the emblem area or boot lids, we might be on to something.
Jaguar head Archivist seems to think it was not done at the factory, if it was done at the factory, why are there no records at all in the Jaguar archives!
Even the best-intentioned archivist can suffer a faulty memory or two. And documentation that doesn't exist can't prove anything, naturally. It just gives us more to speculate about.
Elsewhere in the car hobby/car restoration world it's generally accepted that unexplained oddities and undocumented changes will surface from time-to-time. Some things will forever remain a mystery, it seems.
We've all heard the stories of assembly-line workers running out of stock on xxx-item and "grabbing whatever part would fit" as an explanation for some mysteries. It's plausible; I'm willing to accept it in some cases. In other cases I find it to be an all-too-easy "go to" answer.
Dead right re the oddities Doug, I had a ford as my first car, it had a rear axle off an estate car, wrong front brakes, the list went on, it was a very late car for the model, and they must have wheeled out all the parts bins and cobbled it together, getting parts was a nightmare, I had to take bits off and go in the store to identify what it was !!!
Rebadged is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as "Relaunch (a product) under a new name or logo. ‘the company will rebadge its 2-door saloon for sale next autumn’ "
I will however use the term re-engineered. It is of no real consequence if the holes were filled or a new boot fitted, it is the fact or not that old stock was re-engineered, and where this was done, the fact that they did this to the Mark X in the US and that there are no factory records re these Mk2 340's leads me to think that it was done stateside.
Reading Jaguars in America, the section that alludes to this is from a meeting with the author, Lyons, English and others where he was in no short terms told that the US needed to buck up it's ideas and sell more Jaguars, he was even told that they should cut the office costs and move from NY to Queens to another office, at this meeting Lyons was quoted as saying "The new Mark X will have a side strip and other new trim; new upholstery; and the car stock in the USA will have to be altered accordingly"
Lofty English was also quoted as telling John Dugdale that he had made Chuck Hornburg take back 75 Mark X's with him to the US.
In this context it does not sound to me that the US market were requesting new models, but rather they were being told to take old stock and then re-engineer it in the US.
This is all supposition and joining the dots rather, and as you say we may never really know the full facts, it is just my opinion, I would love to know the answer, and find some documentation to prove it finally, as said in Old Irish a footnote in Jaguars history maybe ?
Well.....my confusion, (which started this debate) I saw 340 on the trunk of the car and the manual that came with the car called it something else. I know the chassis number lends to the MarkII based on what I have read in this forum. Seems that they Re-manual-ed the handbooks as well.
Reen it can be confusing without the history. Your 340 should have the exact manual you have shown as technically (badge excepted) it is a MK2 with a MK2 vin.
The 340 manual is pretty rare in the US but can be found at times-What is even more rare is the 240 manual. there were 340/240 cars imported into North America but to Canada and Mexico. While it is fact MK2 cars were assembled in Mexico I have not seen anything that suggests this was continued with the 240/240.
As far as the 420G cars just having chrome (SS actually) bolted on in the US please see the IPL for the 420G. It is some 20 pages of foolscap single spaced of new parts--it of course falls back on J 36 for other parts as normal with Jaguar. Quite a bit more than a couple lines of chrome. While there have been stories of MK X cars being "re-stamped" as 420G cars no real evidence has been shown other than bodies still in white metal receiving that at the factory prior to paint and assembly--that seems reasonable as there are far too many changes from the MK X to the 420G to allow a simple stamp and rivet!
Have also included a scan of the IPL for the 340/240 that the Coventry foundation rec. from Jaguar Canada. It is some 47 pages of single space fools cap (part of the reason the scans are cut off as foolscap is slightly larger than US legal)
Doug--you are right--now that we have had interaction a lot of knowledge has been gained. The protest process works well and causes a lot of useful research which can benefit all. That said there are those that rely on second sources for 'truth'. As I said in an earlier post of the majority secondary source books on Jaguar are largely written by authors from the UK. Only Skilleter looked closely at the US market. One of the best things I have purchased in my collecting was the Hornburg archives. The information there is very useful. Hornburg then had a contentious relationship with J and did not offer the archives to them--I have given them to the Coventry foundation.
Doug I agree the "parts bin" grab is used as an excuse. I think folks tend to think of the Jaguar assembly line at that time as they do their own garage. Fact is the workers were provided what was needed at their station in terms of tools and parts. They did not have unlimited access to the parts warehouses. Now the rectification department did!!!! Cars sent there for a flaw could have possibly benefited from a 'substitution' as those folks had a full working knowledge of the cars and parts. The other issue that works against the 'parts bin' theory is the British auto worker and labor unions. This became very clear in the Leyland era but was already in force in the 60s. Without a change order all would come to full stop. As Tilly said those change orders may or may not be in the UK archives--who knows but it would have been documented even at a local level and the replacement parts provided--with tools and instructions.
Finally you do not need a metallurgist or a strip down to find holes or repared holes. Paint depth gauges are very precise and small these days. Any lead plugging a hole--or anything except steel would register. Or you can do what was done years ago on this topic and insert a small camera-even if the surface is well done there will be a worm of some sort.
Reen lastly if the interior shot is of your car there is a clear indicator it was a US car---it has the Lucas 4 way flasher that became mandatory in 1966 I believe. Could look up the Bulletin but out of allotted time at this point!
Doug one point for you--my son's car took a first at the recent JCNA IJF. The Judging team did not blink once that it was a 340 (US Version). I have no idea how many cars were made that way but it must have been signficant (in Jaguar numbers) as they crop up everywhere. I am looking for a picture of a Willow green 340 that was there. It was absolutely original/paint and all. It was a Hornburg car purchased from the orig. owner. At the risk of turning this into a total donnybrook the indicators were low to high as they were mounted---
11-04-2017, 03:09 PM
I know the chassis number lends to the MarkII based on what I have read in this forum. Seems that they Re-manual-ed the handbooks as well.
