My clutch is on the way out I have a 1967 240 what it the size of the clutch plate 8.5 or 9 inches is it a diaphragm or the older 3 forks.

 

I think I have to clutch from my 240 in my workshop, was new 38 years ago, I will look at it tomorrow if I remember, I think 8.5" and diaphragm, Pat

 

On a 1967 240 it should be 8.5" diaphragm type, fitted from Engine number 7J1001

 

pictures attached, may be the same as some other cars from the period, Rover? 8 1/2" center plate,

 

So would that mean that my 1968 240, definitely has an 8.5" Diaphram type? I'm just about to get into starting this job, but finding info sparse or missing. Any info or advice you can give (and resource links) would be really apprecaited!

 

I would expect it to be an 8.5" diaphram type, I fitted a 9" from memory but I had to re-drill the flywheel dowel holes again from memory!

 

If I were you ,wait until you get the old one out as it was found that mine had been modified with the unit from the bigger engine. According to the JEC adviser,parts supply was sporadic in the past so it was a common fix.

 

Would they do that on a factory? This one is all original. Had only 80,000 miles when I got it. Still has the English plates on it from Jersey island. It was not driven much in the last 30 years at all. If the factory did random installs then that's another story. Problem is I'm having a froends buddy donut as a favor for me, but it's not like than can keep things in their shop until all is figured out. So I'm kind of in a spot either way.

 

I can't imagine they would do it in a factory. However Jersey is a small island ,(I have been there) so probably a lot more gear changing was carried out than a similar mileage on the Mainland. This it is possible that the clutch has already been changed.
My car only has 52000m and that had the modified clutch.

 

Great point.

I found on Barratt that I can get a complete "Early model" clutch but not a "Late model". Any other sources or tips on parts to get?

 

Probably best to get a release bearing too. I also needed a new Overdrive solenoid.

 

If your clutch is slipping the minimum you would need is a centre plate and a release bearing, beware that a lot of reproduction release bearings re very suspect quality! best to try to find a NOS item, they seem to be common to other vehicles, as for the centre plate, 8 1/2" is I believe the same as a Rover?

 

Okay... so i did get the shop to open it up. It was all original and it was the 8-1/2". So I ordered the parts, and all was going well with the install until....
Long story as I try to provide full backdrop

68 Jag 240. RH Drive.
All original, 82,000 miles
Clutch went. 8-1/2"
Ordered a number of new parts from SNG Barratt, including the TOB (or so I thought).


My problem, I think, is around the throw-out bearing… mainly due to dimensions, but I’m not ruling out other errors.

I wish I was the one doing the work, but time and facilities is the issue, so my buddies father-in-law has a transmission shop, and they do regularly work on old cars. All that to simply say I’m felling good about competence and honesty. But that’s different than specific experience, so here I am.

Ordered several parts including the TOB (photo of parts included).

The clutch was down to the rivets. So there is that whole amount of travel gone.

The TOB:
The manual called for a c.23251, and specifically shows a number 76130 - which I noticed is the number stamped on the original TOB that I pulled off (pic).
I would LOVE to get my hands on NOS for this part. Borg & Beck doesn't list it anymore.
SNG directs the C23251 to HD1099 (also in pic)

When I went to order that C23251 (HD1099) TOB from SNG Barrett, there was a note on the HD1099 page that said some owners may need a longer throw than the standard 25 mm distance from the bearing surface to the center of the pivots, and that another is available that is 30 mm (c235752). So I measured the old one and it was about one and a quarter inches, which is close to 30 mm. But I really had no idea what it might have been when new as I’m not sure how much they wear over time. I’m surmising it might have been maybe 33+mm when new??? This old original was stamped as Borg & Beck 76129, which I can’t even find a reference to anywhere when searching online - only in the manual, so I was confident this was the original TOB).

NOW THE PROBLEM:
They started reassembling it and when he got the tranny back on he could not disengage the clutch despite pushing the fork all the way in. So that was kind of odd. He used a prybar to move fork and it bottomed out against the housing, yet he couldn’t turn it freely. Wasn’t letting go.
The old worn bearing, beside the new bearing is actually 2-3mm longer than the new one from flat to center pivot. But considering the form was bottomed out, is that enough to make it all or nothing?

So yes, somehow finding the elusive Borg & Beck 76129 makes sense, HOWEVER, something still doesn’t jive in my brain...

If bottoming out at the fork doesn’t disengage it, then are we saying an extra maybe 5mm of travel (that I’m guessing a new 76129 bearing might have over the new 30mm replacement I was provided) is going to be the saving grace? In my little brain, I would think the 95mm slave cylinder wouldn’t need be adjusted all the way out for a new clutch, to allow some future additional throw adjustments as the clutch wears. And I don’t think the slave is able to push the fork all the way to the housing anyway.

So it strikes me as something else is wrong???
I wasn’t there to watch the install, and though I trust these guys, people make mistakes.

Am I correct in assuming that in a proper new install, the slave cylinder adjustment at the thread should easily have room to extend further to deal with future clutch wear?
​​​​​​​
If the friction plate was installed backwards (I understand that is possible), would that explain the inability to disengage the clutch?
Is there something else it could be?

And does ANYBODY know where I could find the B&B 76130 TOB?

Thank you so much if you even made it this far, and an even bigger thank you if you're able to shine some light. I’ve been racking my brains on this, and now I need the community.

PHOTOS:
1- SNG site referencing that original B&B part number






2- SNG site mentioning the longer throw.


3- Jag Manual showing the part number (and citing the 76130 Beck & Borg number.



4- SNG order of all the parts I picked up.


5- Diagram (not too useful for you I don't think).


6- Special filter to better see the stamped part number..


7- The SNG C235752 TOB on the left, and the Original B&B 76129 on the right


8- The SNG C235752 TOB on the left, and the Original B&B 76129 on the right

Thank you in advance for anything you can help with.

 

The difference between the two thrust bearings abve us significant in terms of how far the clutch moves and could be the difference between disengaging or not.

That said I would be checking the basics like the clutch plate being the wrong way around before going too far.

Its also worth checking that the clutch fork isnt bent as this can happen, its also not unheard of for people to deliberatly bend them to try and fix clutch issues.

Also check the plate thickness is in spec, not sure what it should be but I have seen clutches on modern cars that are too thick causing drag although its rare.

 

Thank you for that. Would anyone happen to have any sources where I might find one of those obscure throw bearings? I don't mind calling around but I'm not even sure where I would start. I'm willing to call even the smallest places in any country, just to get past this. That said if I could somehow make this work with the throw-bearing that was supplied, it helps eliminate ever trying to find another one in the future, although I'll probably be six feet under by then.

 

I got my bits from SC Parts
+44 1293 847200

 

So the cast iron fork being bent sounds like it would have been a heavy duty effort to bend. Because this was -old-lady owned from original and sat for many years, and considering the wear down to the rivets, I'm suspecting she's never been cracked open.

And because the bearing I pulled out was a taller 76129 (which is nowhere on the Internet at all), and not the shorter 76130, I wonder if the whole clutch was different accordingly, even though they looked the same (visually at least).

Does anyone have Intel on what the original friction plate and pressure plate dimensional specs would have been? I'm going to pull the newer clutch out of the car again, but the old worn clutch is no real reference.

Has anyone ever had a tool and die shop make a custom fork for them and is this even a sound idea considering the original was cast?

Grabbing at straws to get educated while I figure out what could be wrong.

Jaguar Parts Manual that I'm using



1968 Jag 240 view into tranny fork

 

SOLVED!!

SNG had a variant of the part that was different from what I had in mine. The folks at Firstline, who manage Borg & Beck parts, offered the following email pasted below. Meaning that SNG should technically be showing 3 TOB sizes for the 240… the 25mm, a 30mm they currently show as an option, and a 35mm+ which is not shown or even hinted at as existing in their parts. This was a HUGE save for me.

What is confusing, is that the 76130 (which this drawing is of, and also refers to 76129 before it is processed) links to a totally different and lower profile part on the SNG Barratt site - a company I've had great experience with in the past. In the end I think I might be okay (still to install it), but was more interested for future searchers...



Borg&Beck 76129 not 761301920×1434 135 KB

Good morning Jerry,

Our engineer found this information hope it helps.

Drawing attached of the original 76129 bearing. The working height is in inches. 1.42”/1.38” = 36mm/35mm

The ‘blue’ bearing in the link I sent should be correct as we have that exact bearing as a sample.”

Kind regards,
Roger Nightingale
Technical Support Manager
Tel. +44 1869 329 768
First Line Ltd, Chalker Way, Banbury, Oxfordshire, OX16 4XD, UK

Sent: 04 August 2025 20:00
To: First Line Technical Dept
Subject: Re: Mystery bearing - need help

Thanks so much for that Roger. Other than the visual photo in that link, is there a way for me to find the dimensions are on that bearing? (your engineer might have already confirmed that).

I’m thinking the 76129 bearing I pulled out might have been around 35mm+ when it was new, from flat surface to the center of the pin. But have no way of confirming if that’s the case. Do you know if the bearing you kindly linked me to is around that 35mm+ height? If so, then that link you sent is indeed my answer.

On Thu, Jul 31, 2025, 5:06 a.m. First Line Technical Dept wrote:
Good morning Jerry,

Our engineer has looked at this one hope the information below helps.

It’s not a bearing we have in our range but we are aware of it. Rather confusingly I have the part number recorded as HD1099 but that is not the same as the one SNG are advertising.

A quick search online shows jagspares .co .uk listing the correct bearing:

HD1099 CLUTCH RELEASE BEARING: V8, 240

Kind regards,
Roger Nightingale
Technical Support Manager
Tel. +44 1869 329 768
First Line Ltd, Chalker Way, Banbury, Oxfordshire, OX16 4XD, UK