Door Strikers

Advice from ‘120 fixed head owners please. I’m in the latter stages of a
rebuild and am having trouble  fitting door locks. The assembly in the door
seems OK and I’m pretty certain is the original. There apears to be no
adjustment here. The strikers are new and came in plastic bags with the
car. The problem is that the striker seems to be too far forward and the
door won’t close properly and the catch doesn’t seem to reach the hole on
the striker. The striker fits on the “B” post with very little available
adjustment and no amount of packing or fiddling around seem to work.  Is it
possible I have the wrong strikers? The strikers I have (should be part nos
2311/1-2310/1)are wedge shaped with a droop snoot at the pointed end. They
are 1 5/8″ long, 13/16″ deep and 1 1/4″ wide at the back. The back plate is
approx 3 3/4″ x 1″. I would be grateful if any 120 FHC owners could confirm
that this is what they have. The parts are handed and I’m pretty certain I
have them the right way round. It’s a silly thing but it’s seriously
holding things up. Advice gratefully accepted. – Roger Learmonth

Roger – I agree that sometimes the smallest and silliest things do delay a
restoration task as you have discovered. I can talk 120 OTS but not FHC
work.  I have experienced a similar holdup on my 150 FHC restoration. We
couldn’t get an adjustment on the bonnet and finally traced the problem to
worn pins of the hinge assemblies. Try to find good bonnet hinge
assemblies! Anyway, these units are now disassembled and at a machine shop
for rework. Yep, the seemingly little things do indeed delay the bigger
tasks. I try to
remember this and closely inspect small parts and assemblies in order to
plan for delays in reworking these parts so it doesn’t hold up the total
project. A much modified Critical Path approach.   Incidentally, for the
DIYers interested in a paint project, I hope to complete my task soon and
will tell the story if anyone is interested. – Bob Oates

Roger:  I checked your measurements against mine and I agree with all
except one. The widest part of the wedge is 1 1/8″ at back vs. your 1 1/4″.
I don’t know if that makes a difference. – Carl Hanson, 1951 XK120 FHC

Thanks Carl, Sorry to be a nuisance but can you tell me if the
packing/distances piece between the striker plate and the “B” post is
wedgeshaped and how far the back of the wedge piece of the striker is from
the metal that takes the furflex. Grateful for your help. – Roger Learmonth

Roger:  I can’t help you with that, my car is all apart and I was measuring
the strikers in the palm of my hand!  Rob Reilly could be helpful for this
— his car is complete.  Sorry. – Carl Hanson

For Roger: I thoughtlessly deleted the digest that had your striker
dimensions, but mine measures 3.75″ x 1″ with four holes in a staggered
pattern, the droop nose wedge shaped part is 1.75″ outboard to inboard,
with the fantail 1.25″ wide. There is a notch cut at 1/2″ from the droop
nose, and a 3/8″ hole offset downwards. Does this sound like what you have?
I think probably so. The parts catalogue calls out packing shims in two
thicknesses as required, but mine has very little packing here.
Incidentally, this striker is another part that was carried over from the
Mark V DHC (but not saloon). My strikers sit in a depressed area on the
shut face panels. I’m wondering if you have replaced the shut face panels
and your new ones don’t have this
depression or it’s too shallow? – Rob Reilly

Rob, I think you have it, my depressions are most probably the wrong
dimensions. I have made up some wooden, wedge shaped packing that alters
the angle of the striker plate to match the door. When these are right,
I’ll remake in Aluminium. – Roger Learmonth

The recent string regarding XK120 FHC door strikers started by a question
from Roger L . got me going on cleaning up these items on my “project” FHC.
My strikers need to be re-chromed, so I took them apart. The bolt shaft
from the brass striker extends through a bore in the plate which is
attached to the shut face on the B-pillar.  The shaft is enclosed in a
steel sleeve (held firmly by a combination of crimping and a toothed
washer)  and a rubber sleeve. The rubber one appears to be bonded between
the steel sleeve and the bore. OK, OK, I know this is more detailed than
most of us get into, but after all, questions like these are the reason for
the xk-lovers!  First of all, has anyone attempted restoring this item?
Does anyone know the purpose of the rubber sleeve?  Does it provide some
flexibility in torsion in case the striker is not aligned perfectly?  Has
anyone tried to replace the rubber sleeve after rechroming the pieces?  If
so, where did you find it?  Failing to find a replacement, I assume I can
simply pour some sort of liquid rubber back into the gap after realignment
of the pieces.  Any comments? – Carl Hanson, 1951 XK120 FHC

Carl, Thanks for the description. I seem to have the right bist but a
slightly screwy “B” post. FYI these parts are available new. – Roger

Carl, After chroming my pieces I simply used a short section of flexible
rubber tubing cut to length. I had to slightly enlarge the hole with a
drill as it was too snug to function. It does seem that the purpose of this
is to allow some rotational movement for alignment. There may also be a
minimal amount of vibration dampening although in the overall scheme of
things I can’t imagine it would make any difference at all. – regards, Jeff
Kelley-Day,  ’54 XK 120 DHC