NG 850

[cammy]

There are certainly no wooden wheel arches and I can find no eveidence that there ever has been. There seems to be less wood in NG than in VG and I believe this is because the steel cladding is supposed to supply the extra strength.

[Ian Grace]

Interesting - thanks. Did you manage to discern a body number under the rear seat, or is that timber too far gone? It should be on the front cross-member of the rear seat structure - under the passengers' knees, as it were.

[Ken Martin]

My March 1930 coachbuilt saloon has steel inner rear wings integral with the side panels like the picture below from a contemporary Fisher and Ludlow ad. Unless NG850 is a prototype would have expeceted the body to be the same.
Ken

[DF9053]

Great picture Ken, was this the beginings of the Morris Specialisation process that came on stream in the mid thrities?

On DF9053 the rear arches are fabrications like the fabric saloon, also the waistline moulding is not pressed in but a spearate aluminium piece stuck on. The body on DF is reputed to be a prototype. Clearly this approach would work for NG's rebuild if the tin worm in this area is too bad.

cheers
Jeremy

[Ian Grace]

Ken,

Great picture - would that be the very rare six-light Minor?

[cammy]

What a great picture.I will lookto see if I can find evidence that the construction was similar. There seems to be movement between the wings the back plates and the outer skin but that maybe only because everything has rusted. When I can get the bolts holding the wings off (only 2 are functining) no doubt more will be revealed. Meanwhile Ian there is a number on the cross member but hardly legible so I will attempt to enhance it in daylight.

[cammy]

Well, a bit of Brasso and daylight and we have a body number of sorts. BUT the NG conundrum goes on as it looks as though the number begins SVL so although Ian said that the chassis looked OHC was NG a side valve Minor and if so should I replace the wierd supposed J engine and then put the J engine into an MG?

Incedently the wooden cross member is snapped at one end and I was going to make a new one but does the team think I should repair it if possible and thus retain the number? Answers on a £20 note please.

[chris lambert]

Clive,
Are there just the three digits (278) visible?
Chris

[halbe]

I would try and save the crossmember , if you succeed I'll bring you a nice bottle of wine in july
More pictures please

Halbe

[cammy]

Chris, I have cleaned the wood a little more and as I hope you can see there are only 3 digits. Does this mean it is early or a new series?
Halbe I have decided on your say so to try and save the piece and then use it as the central point from which to start rebuilding the body because as you know the hatch is also saveable. If I succeed we will need to drink the wine together. Thankyou. A picture of the restored item will one day be found here (I hope). As a start I have given the woodworm notice to quit.

[halbe]

Hello Clive,

I have Body M10940 which is a totally different number
I'll be watching this space for the expert opinions.

Let's have that drink this summer!

Halbe

[chris lambert]

Clive,
I am not familiar with the numbering sequence of side valve bodies and the members area of the website has not provided any further clues. The cammy Minors all had bodies that were imprinted with the prefix MP followed by a sequential series of numbers. If your body is a side valve body as seems likely, it is a very early one. Of course your car was manufactured in 1931 at a time when both types of cars were being made side by side for a few months. We know that the 'run out' overhead valve Minors were fitted with all sorts of oddments as the factory cleared their parts bins, perhaps they resorted to using side valve designated bodies to fullfil back orders, as at that time both bodies were identical? The alternative is that another (S/V body) was fitted at a later stage of the car's life, perhaps after a crash.
Chris

[Ian Grace]

Interesting. All the saloons in the Register have MP numbers ecxept Jeremy's which is "P040". It is thought that the SV and OHC saloon bodies were identical and all came from the same body shop between spring and autumn 1931 when parallel production was under way. The evidence is that we have a SV Minor with an MP body number and the date of manufacture matches up with the body numbers in sequnece on OHC Minors at that date - if you see what I mean. The ndifference cam in the paint shop where '31 SV saloons were ofered in different colours that OHC saloons. So I have no idea what this number signifies! Perhaps when we have gathered more saloon body numbers, some logic or pattern may emerge. Any further thoughts, Ken?

[chris lambert]

Looking at the side valve chassis register I only came across that one body number. Are there any s/v saloon owning forumists out there that can check their body numbers? Toby!?

[Ken Martin]

Ian
Sorry I can't add anything to this numbers discussion.
Jeremy's car number is very interesting and appears to confirm its prototype status. Why was it let out of the factory and into the open market though?
Ken