#1
|
|||
|
|||
Morris Commercial ? identification.
Just idle curiosity really. This photo first appeared in "The Motor Cycle" of 27/3/1941 and was subsequently reprinted in "Classic Bike"
Identification of the Norton WD16H is not a problem but the truck is puzzling me. I have been informed that the Census number relates to a 15cwt Morris Commercial but must confess that I am unfamiliar with the bonnet styling and cannot identify it from my limited resources. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
the Picture Rich wanted to post
here it is
Pete |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Truck
I'll open the bidding on a Morris 15cwt of around 1936 vintage, nice picture full of atmosphere
Pete |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Re: the Picture Rich wanted to post
Quote:
The Census number appears to be Z34849 which places it as a Morris Commercial 15 cwt built to Contract No. V2695........a very early one and I would guess the first main batch after the trial ones. Richard |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks Pete, you're a Gentleman.
Thanks as well for the identification. Looking at the printed copy, I think that the number may be Z24845 (I'm pretty sure about the last digit) Presumably this would not alter the contract information ? The period archives of the UK Motorcycling publications have some wonderful evocative shots in although many of them are obviously posed. I have another nice shot with a Canadian vehicle in the background taken from Classic Motorcycle. If Pete doesn't mind I will send that on as well (and line him up a beer if he's ever over here in the east of Belgium ) Rich |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Morris Commercial CS8
Here is another early CS8, that has been given a modified windscreen, while in use with the British Army in Italy. Although the aero screens have gone, the vehicle still retains the less angular early style bonnet and mud guards which on early models had a thicker edge.
__________________
Larry Hayward |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
No, it definitely starts with 3, if it was as you say, it would make it an Austin 4x2 ambulance. Last digit is irrelevant in this case as it falls well within the batch. I have the "B" Vehicle Census number list to hand with Contract numbers. Richard |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Belgium beer eh ? bit partial if I say so myself, not too good for the old waste line these days, but if imbibed in moderation can indeed be most efficacious Pete PTO&G |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
This ones a belter
Another picture from Rich, one I have never seen before either I think you'll enjoy this one !!
Rich would like to know what the truck is, and if possible the units for both truck and bike. I'll let someone else kick this off I'm too busy dribbling over the BMP download of it. Pete |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Re: This ones a belter
Quote:
__________________
Film maker 42 FGT No8 (Aust) remains 42 FGT No9 (Aust) 42 F15 Keith Webb Macleod, Victoria Australia Also Canadian Military Pattern Vehicles group on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/canadianmilitarypattern |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
The eyes have it?
Am I right in saying that the front bumper support has TWO leaves, and therefore it's a C15? It smells to me like a Southampton-assembled ..if # 11 Cab, or assembled in Chiswick by LEP Transport Ltd. Note the CZ, so Canadian order, but the number looks very much like other known early Canadian CMPs.
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The eyes have it?
Quote:
No... 2 leaves, one either side of the bumper means Chev rather than Ford. The 16" wheels mean 15cwt rather than 8cwt. From the way the light and shade work on the bonnet it looks to be a cab 11.
__________________
Film maker 42 FGT No8 (Aust) remains 42 FGT No9 (Aust) 42 F15 Keith Webb Macleod, Victoria Australia Also Canadian Military Pattern Vehicles group on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/canadianmilitarypattern |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
A thought
A clue.......... have a look at the rear body, tool box and tank
Pete |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
C15?
The census number is similar to a known # 11 F15 CZ 4204296 G/S, and a C15 CZ 4211892 [I have just found] and the body/tank is similar to the Ford, so that's my guess! On that basis it would have been Southampton-assembled.
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Re: A thought
Quote:
H.
__________________
Regards, Hanno -------------------------- |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks for your views on this one. I realise from the little green man's comments that I should have titled this thread "Nice vehicles hidden by boring old motorcycles" I should, perhaps, start a new thread if I can find any more.
There is a bit more more detail visible on the original. The Norton C4103150 was built under the first wartime contract C5109 covering machines W1000 - W6999 dating from 1939/40. I am restoring W4216 which turned up unrestored in Belgium (I'm putting C4102617 on mine) and am in contact with the owner of W1742 which reappeared in France with a Seine / Paris registration, so many of this early batch must have been among the 20,000 odd motorcycles lost by the BEF. The bike doesn't look to have gone through the workshops and the satin-chromed levers and alloy parts still look pristine so I don't think it could be after late 1940. I haven't been able to find the picture in a period publication to date it more accurately. The petrol tank shows a light-coloured maple leaf forward of the census number. The number itself, on a white-edged black background is puzzling me as I had understood that was the pre-war practice when machines still had "civilian" number plates. Most early war bikes have the "C" number painted on the number plate blade which is missing from this bike although the studs are still there. I have not seen photographic evidence of this type of application later than numbers begining "39" Incidentally was there a reason that the sequence begining "40" (for 1940) was never used ? The Lance Corporal on the bike has insignia on the upper sleeve but I have no Canadian reference books. It is "thinner" at both ends and has a broader section in the middle so is not like a British shoulder title. The machine in the background also appears to be a Norton and looks to carry no. "79" which, on black, would indicate a Provost Company if my understanding of Hodges and taylor is correct. Rich |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Re: A thought
Quote:
Another question.....on which of the sixteen tasks may he get pulled up for by an eagle eyed MT NCO? Pete |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Rich |
|
|