14-01-2020, 07:15 PM
I'm getting confused now. (Lovely pics by the way Steve). An AD number would never have a letter prefix that early on - it would just be a number and it would always be in the tunnel surely, linking just to the body? There don't seem to be many AD body numbers recorded at all on the register. Naive question but would these have separate body number series i.e. things listed as AD Tourer and AD Van?
What are other people's thoughts on the 49101? It feels to me like it doesn't date from 1929. And what about thoughts on the 1624? I suppose it might be seen to link with the other bodies in the register when comparing similar.. if we had more bodies recorded to extrapolate.
It is one of the present difficulties of the Register that whilst it has former and present registrations (not really terribly important in the grander scheme of things) we may be missing an original body on the formal record linking to original stats... lost partially in another body type?
What are other people's thoughts on the 49101? It feels to me like it doesn't date from 1929. And what about thoughts on the 1624? I suppose it might be seen to link with the other bodies in the register when comparing similar.. if we had more bodies recorded to extrapolate.
It is one of the present difficulties of the Register that whilst it has former and present registrations (not really terribly important in the grander scheme of things) we may be missing an original body on the formal record linking to original stats... lost partially in another body type?