Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Modified inner sills Mk 2

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    sheffield
    Posts
    11
    Post Thanks / Like

    Modified inner sills Mk 2

    There's a clip on youtube in which someone has fitted inner sills from an S Type to a MK2. They are a different design, having holes at intervals, and the idea is that they increase rigidity. Has anyone done this or seen it done, and any opinions on whether it's a worthwhile modification?

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    OSWESTRY, Shropshire
    Posts
    1,468
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hello Harry,

    I looked on You Tube and found two clips.

    What I do not know if this is an extra member to the sill, like the Triumph 2000 which has a very similar middle panel with holes, i.e. outer, centre and innner, or a replacement for the MK 2 inner sill?
    As Martin Robey make both, perhaps ask them for their opinion.

    Alec
    2004 2.5 X Type Estate, MK 2 3.8 (Long term restoration), 2.5 P.I. Triumph saloon, 564 Hymer motorhome.

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    sheffield
    Posts
    11
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by piman View Post
    Hello Harry,

    I looked on You Tube and found two clips.

    What I do not know if this is an extra member to the sill, like the Triumph 2000 which has a very similar middle panel with holes, i.e. outer, centre and innner, or a replacement for the MK 2 inner sill?
    As Martin Robey make both, perhaps ask them for their opinion.

    Alec
    Hi Alec
    I think you're spot on. I've looked at the exploded diagram on Martin Robey's website and the holed panel is the middle panel, there is also a solid inner sill. I'm not a vehicle engineer but I would imagine the modification would stiffen the body, although in normal use I can't see it making much difference. If you see the clip of the car chase between an s type and a mk 2 on Youtube from the film "Robbery", the mk 2 seems to do OK with a standard setup. . It would add quite a bit to the cost, which is a factor and may add a level of complexity to the work involved ( I'm doing the restoration myself)

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    OSWESTRY, Shropshire
    Posts
    1,468
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hello Harry,

    the S type is a heavier car and also carries the heavy independent rear suspension which may be why Jaguar stiffened the structure. Personally I don't think I would bother for a MK2?

    Alec
    2004 2.5 X Type Estate, MK 2 3.8 (Long term restoration), 2.5 P.I. Triumph saloon, 564 Hymer motorhome.

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    sheffield
    Posts
    11
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hi Alec
    I think I'm heading that way
    regards
    Hugh

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •