18-01-2020, 09:40 AM
(17-01-2020, 05:21 PM)Mike Costigan Wrote: I think it's quite reasonable that the body numbers don't fit a logical sequence. First of all, the bodies probably got stock-piled at Longbridge so bodies and chassis matched together on the sales ledger didn't necessarily have a directly matched production link; and then when they got shipped to Australia, again there is further scope for bodies and chassis to become mismatched.So are we surmising that CHA-1 wouldn't have a body number that was stamped in Longbridge because it was just a chassis? And the others - very firmly attached rolling unit - would this be demounted to enable the coachbuilding bit?
(18-01-2020, 02:51 AM)Tony Press Wrote: So we have Australian cars:Again, all the right questions but with only three, there is no hope. Does Duncan's car have car number and a body stamp to add? How many potential cars does Australia "know" which could have details chased/checked? I think the other key bit of information is noting what the model type is, as the body number ranges seem to be different for saloon and tourer. What we haven't checked yet is the sort on car number rather than chassis which perhaps should be the "lead" as per the ledgers. The chassis is easier for a non-specialist to do as its just a number that can easily be made to rise or fall in a sort. But we may thus be missing detail.
Car No. A9 309, July 1929
Chassis 87642
Body number 49701
Car No. A8 6175, April 1929
Chassis 83009
Body number 54668
Car No. CHA1-4729, late 1927
Chassis 51146
Body Number 48893
Not seeing any Body Number pattern.
As for the CHA1 numbers, the largest noted is CHA1-9273- does this indicate there were some 10,000 cars with this Car Number designation?
Seems odd that Wyatt or the other Austin 7 books don't seem to mention this series- or am I missing something.
But its essential that other CHA1 cars elsewhere are chased - they are the only objects which may yield obvious evidence from their past circumstances.