An odd question, perhaps, but does anyone have a clear photograph showing the side view of a mark 1 Ruby, square on? I can find plenty on line which are at jaunty angles, but the only clear ones seem to be mark 2 models. The mark 1 pictures all seem to be taken at angles.
02-08-2021, 12:14 PM (This post was last modified: 02-08-2021, 10:58 PM by Tony Griffiths.)
They are indeed correct, Jamie. As is the rest of the car, an early example, as Ruairidth can confirm. We bought it in 1970, with just three owners in the logbook.
It's interesting to see how artists in the publicity department made changes to the Mk.1 Ruby's car's appearance - the 1935 cover shows a slight cut-way to the trailing edge of the front wing, while the 1936 cover clearly shows a Mk.1 with Mk.2 front wings.
I started looking for pictures of my Ruby which I used for insurance purposes, front, side, rear and then found the question had been answered.
However one thing I have always thought is that the ride height at the rear end of my Ruby looked high and having looked more closely at the pics Ruairidh had posted they do look higher.
I had to change the rear springs because the car originally sat lopsided with one rear spring flatter than the other.
I have just checked the vertical height from the centre of the rear wheel up to the bottom edge of the rear wings and it measures 17” as near as damn it.
Does this seem excessive or about right??
Cheers Denis S
(02-08-2021, 02:57 PM)Denis Sweeney Wrote: I have just checked the vertical height from the centre of the rear wheel up to the bottom edge of the rear wings and it measures 17” as near as damn it.
Does this seem excessive or about right??
Cheers Denis S
Just measured mine, both sides, and the average is 16 1/4 inches.
Although not a Ruby, I have checked the vertical height of the rear of the RP and find it to be 14 3/8 ins both sides. Are my rear springs getting tired, do you think?