|Open Two Seater|
|Right Hand Drive|
|Work In Progress|
8 more photos below ↓
Record Creation: Entered on 6 August 2019.
Database Updates: Show dataplate edits
Owner: Tom Zwakman
Updated September 4th, 2010. Not legal proof of ownership.
Photos of 660001
Click slide for larger image. This car has 9 photos. (Dates are when image was uploaded.)
Exterior Photos (8)
Uploaded February 2020:
Uploaded November 2014:
Uploaded April 2010:
Uploaded February 2006:
Interior Photos (1)
We now require an email address to leave a comment. Your IP will be recorded in an effort to reduce spam. (Report problem posts here.)
2006-02-07 00:12:05 | pauls writes:
Car offered for sale at:
YEAR : 1949
CHASSIS N.O. : 660001
STEERING : RIGHT HAND DRIVE
HISTORY : THIS IS THE ONE AND ONLY FIRST OF THE FIRST XK120 ROADSTER EVER MADE AND WELL KNOWING UNDER REGISTRATION N.O. HKV 455 , RACED BY PRINCE BIRA AND NOW UNDER FULL RESTORATION TO EXACT SPECIFICATIONS AS IT LEFT THE FACTORY.
WE DISCOVERED THE CAR IN SCOTLAND ON A PRIVAT CAR SCRAPYARD WHERE IT BEEN FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS ON ONE PLACE , NOW WE HAVE START TO GIVE HER A SECOND AND BETTER LIVE AS SHE DESERVE A BETTER FATE THEN ROTTING AWAY WITHOUT ANY ATTENTION , WE ASSUME ALL REAL JAGUAR ENTHUSIASTS WILL BE DELIGHTED BY HAVING THIS CAR OUT THE YARD BACK INTO OUR CIVILIZATION , HOWEVER SOME WELL KNOWING WRITERS SEEM TO BE DISAPPOINTED THAT WE ARE AGAIN THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE DISCOVERED ANOTHER GREAT MASTERPIECE OF JAGUARS
2006-02-08 09:57:44 | Anonymous writes:
I am very pleased to hear that this car still exists!! As a decades-long owner of an XK-120 OTS I have read of this car's early history but all writings seemed to indicate that the car was parted out fairly early on. I do not understand why anybody would be unhappy with this discovery. I would hope that Mr. Zwaakman would provide photos and other documentation to put doubters at rest. COngratulations on your find!!!
JPS- USA, #671792
2006-08-09 10:28:10 | Richard Garcia writes:
Being the xk raver that I'm known to be I can only be drooling over the idea that the over important HKV 455 would rise from its own ashes. Though very trustworthy litterature and official Jaguar factory records report 660001 being "RTP" in other word written off. Why shouldn't messers Zwakman have the remnants authentified by world authorities like Philip Porter, Paul Skilleter or Terry Larson ? Would I own such a piece of history my prime worry would be to have it unshadowed by world known experts before any restoration is undertaken. So what is it (in real !) ?
2006-09-26 08:06:49 | pauls writes:
Same seller different URL
2006-09-30 22:56:14 | John Elmgreen writes:
Quote from Jaguar Heritage magazine of February 2006, published on behalf of the Jaguar Daimler Heritage Trust, Coventry, author not stated, but "Additional material supplied by Anders Ditlev Clausager" who is Chief Archivist:
"It was used for a few months more at Coventry for different trials and was broken up sometime in 1952. It had performed exceptionally throughout its short life, but was not deemed worthy enough to warrant preservation. Things were different in 1952 and the idea of preserving a car that was in production was alien, besides there was no provision within Jaguar at the time to accommodate a museum piece."
From Philip Porter's Jaguar Scrapbook, page 65: an unattributed copy of what was apparently an internal memo within Jaguar entitled "Company Cars 31 August 1953", listing a number of XKs and other models apparently used within the company:
"Prototype Mark IV XK 120 F.H.C. has adopted Chassis No. 660001.
HKV 455 and original Blue 660001 Open 2 Seater is to be broken up."
This of course contradicts the statement above that the car was broken up in 1952.
Undated factory note quoted at Scrapbook, p119: "HKV455 660001 On loan to Dunlop (crashed) - reduced to produce by Service Dept "
26 Jan 53: Norman Dewis: "collected blue 2 seater from Dunlops HKV455" (source: Scrapbook p111) - presumably after the crash.
So what happened next? Who knows? If the 'chassis' and whatever other pieces are held (not stated) are 'restored' then it may well become near to impossible to independently verify authenticity.
2007-01-14 02:28:35 | John Elmgreen writes:
Further article about this car by Paul Skilleter, in August 2006 edition of UK club magazine, Jaguar Driver, p4. He is not aware of evidence that the car may still exist.
2007-01-15 00:40:13 | Roger writes:
I love puzzles like this. Having said that, I'm not sure I'd want to own such a puzzle.
2007-10-10 14:46:51 | Jake writes:
Never trust anyone who types in UPPER CASE ONLY. He's a blowhard.
2008-01-22 10:25:28 | Anonymous writes:
when buying this car ask for the as found photos !!!!!!.
You will be joining a very exclusive club as this is the second or is it the third car claiming to be 660001 !!!!!!
2009-07-22 18:07:07 | antq_av8r (Michael D) writes:
I would strongly suggest that the finder/owner of what part of 660001 chassis was supposedly discovered have the part verified by all of the above mentioned experts. A find of this magnitude must be verified as authentic. If in fact it is determined to be part of 660001 then it should be preserved as is. It's a well known fact that the car was destroyed then broken up by the factory. Any re-creation of it from what little is left is just that... a replica of 660001. Time will not erase the history of 660001, it will never be forgotten to the point that if it was to be recreated, would ever be considered authentic.
2010-04-02 22:56:42 | pauls writes:
As of this writing Zwakman is still offering the car and quite proud of it as the asking price is EUR 500,000 and has added the photo of the testing device connected to the rear of the car. Web link has changed to the below:
2010-04-03 04:46:59 | Tom Zwakman writes:
660001 is clearly so valuable that many people don't want to see it in my position as to their judgment I do already own to much special Jaguars. Clearly this jealous behaving and hopeless actions does betrayed their own character here which show how pitiable and pour people they really are. Yes we are proud that we do own the only surviving parts left of the famous & glorious 660001, for more info see www.zwakmanmotors.com. My Regards to all real Jaguar Enthusiasts Tom Zwakman.
2010-11-16 08:19:16 | james writes:
john elmgreen's comment is most significant.Readers may be interested to know that factory drawings of the (as yet unreleased) XK140,were marked "XK120 Mk IV"
As I understood it,660001's was scrapped in 1953,partly due to the body starting to break up. This doesn't mean the chassis was scrapped at the same time and it doesn't mean the body really WAS scrapped (it could easily have been taken away and just left in a yard to rot)
From the Porter quote,it would seem the chassis was used to create the running prototype XK140 FHC (the one with the short "120" style roof) This was a typical way Jaguar's got a concept car up and running.
2010-11-16 08:38:04 | james writes:
further to my earlier comment,i see that 804001 is already on xkdata and shows the aforementioned 120 style roof. A comment is also posted about it being used as a test rig for dunlop brakes. We already know 660001 was used for this very purpose. I wonder what 804001's chassis looks like.
2010-12-10 09:01:16 | Anonymous writes:
8 000 000 sterling for a XK120! when you know the price of a c type or d type with race history...
this asking price is ridiculous even if it is 660001 wich as to be proven...and the best would be to make some pictures before restauration, wich is not th case...
2011-05-04 16:28:37 | connaisseur writes:
Looking at the pricing, obviously most cars are not seriously for sale, as the prices are about ten times what is the current rate on the market. Still, it is his own collection, and it is his own money.
2014-01-06 06:38:02 | Roy writes:
Why anybody would buy this car, considering it's highly dubious past, is beyond me. This car is more than likely not the original 660001. The £8m price tag is with the sole intention of trying to give the car some credibility
2014-01-06 11:13:11 | Tom Zwakman writes:
It's quite obvious how some people give it a try to blacken 660001.
It's also quite obvious that they have no good reason or even piece of ground to do so as they have no clue about the car and never seen any of it.
To be clear I do have the full history documented and all remains bought by me are free of any dubious back ground and 100% clear proven the remains of 660001.
It's a petty that a nice website like XK data becomes so filthy of nonsense by hopeless acting of jealous people what will even not tell their identity.
However it reflects the highly importance of this car.
My regards to the real enthusiasts.
2014-02-06 13:01:32 | Roy writes:
Sorry King Tom I do not have to believe everything you say. Thankfully not many people do. I am one xk lover who will not stroke your ego. If the car was genuine you would of sold it years ago
2014-02-06 13:37:47 | t.zwakman writes:
re above comment,
Dear Roy , do we know each other ? have you seen the car with me ? do you know that much people ? I don't think so !
In other words you are telling no sense at all.
Further the car is still under restoration and we will not agree any form of sale before it's ready and used by ourselves at several events so of course we haven't sold it.
Also your reaction came inn within 5 minutes of an reaction from a Mr Stuard Ward at another XK of mine #670021 , what a coincidence !!
My regards to all real enthusiasts.
2014-02-06 14:37:48 | t.zwakman writes:
If above comments are made out of sincerity and Jaguar predilection than herewith I invite all above anonymous messengers to ad their name and address and e-mail address in full so we can see who have something to hide.
Best regards to all real Jaguar enthusiasts.
2014-02-12 10:49:19 | Roy writes:
Tom, the answers to all your questions is 'yes'. Also, you offered the car for sale to me roughly 4 years ago. I refused due to the lack of proof of history. I am told many other people have done the same
2014-02-15 09:21:45 | Tom Zwakman writes:
Dear Roy, So you say you know me and visit me and did see the car and history with me which I doubt and know you are telling fairy tales.
But if you did so you must know the address and year were you did see the car and that's not at my base works so if you will approve what you are saying just let me know what address you have visited in which year.
If you don't do so you have publicly proven to be a liar.
Also you did not yet identify yourself.
I look forward to your reply.
My best to all real Jaguar enthusiasts.
2014-02-16 08:50:03 | Tom Zwakman writes:
See also comments at #670021.
My best to all real Jaguar enthusiasts.
2014-03-21 17:09:58 | Roy writes:
Tom, I am certainly not the one needing to prove anything. Good luck selling your replica
2014-03-21 19:45:35 | Tom Zwakman writes:
Dear Roy, however I did give you the opportunity to proof your above untrue statements you now clearly show here you can't prove any of it which makes you only a cheap fibber.
Its also a mistake to conclude that I have to provide prove of a car I do own, its quite simple I have the car and its documents and history and so interested parties do see what they buy and nobody can blacken that.
I know that this must be disappoint you but that's the way it is.
At last, with so many one-off's and prototypes as I have I don't need any replica's.
My best regards to all real Jaguar enthusiasts.
2019-01-19 06:46:47 | Anonymous writes:
I now have a copy of the original buff log book. I have discussed it with Mr Zwakman and offered it for sale on behalf of the owner. The log book shows the date the engine was changed and the new engine number, plus the colour change and that date too. I asked Mr Zwakman to confirm the engine number in the car, but his reply was to ask me to tell him the number and then he'd confirm if it was correct. I am not that green however.
2019-01-19 06:52:29 | Anonymous writes:
Interestingly, the log book shows a number of tax stamps, and the actual RTP date is far later than people have supposed.