Unusual Austin for sale?

[Mike Costigan]

I would expect the original entry for a boat-tail to read 2-seater or two seater. It's strange that the certificate even mentions hood colour, I have never seen an entry quoting hood colour - even the entries for the Ulster, which was much more bespoke when it came to colours, never mention hood colour.

[Colin Morgan]

Thanks Mike - I used to have a copy of the Austin production entry for a 1930 car I owned over 20 years ago, obtained from Gaydon. This was not a certificate, but a photocopy of the original record, plus a few on the same page above and below. Each car had a single-line entry. However, it looks like I gave the copy away when I sold the car so don't remembered what parameters it covered - but it did say 'Coupe' in one of the columns, which is about all I can remember now. I think the paint colour and interior colour/material were two of the other columns.

Has anyone else a copy of an original record, please, with the column headings?

[Ruairidh Dunford]

I have a certificate from Gaydon, for a saloon, that reads:

"6. Colour

a)exterior Grey
b) trim Black
c) hood (top) Not applicable"

[Colin Morgan]

Thanks Ruairidh - that is helpful.  Now the question is, what does it say for Tourers and Two-seaters?  If it always (or sometimes) says 'Not Appliable' for the hood colour - perhaps because they were expected to be black - then it this doesn't add anything to the argument of whether or not this particular car left the factory as the expected standard boat-tail or with its hard top.  

However, if the records always give a hood colour for Tourers and Two-seaters - even if is just 'black' - this throws a bit of doubt on the car having left as a standard boat-tail tourer as it would have had the colour recorded rather than having 'Not applicable' in the record.  

So, there might be a bit more mileage in this.  It would be good to have a clear answer - which must be there to see in the build records?  A glance down one of the pages of entries would settle it.

[Mike Costigan]

These are the headings from the Production Records:

   

[Ruairidh Dunford]

My Gaydon certificate also contains:

"Specification - RHD Home Market

Destination (Dealer) -"

[Colin Morgan]

Relating this back from the information on the certificate, it would give the likely entries as:

Car No: B1-4860,  Chassis No: 111xxx,  Engine No: 113xxx,  Date built: 2nd June,  Type: Two-seater,  Colour: Blue, Trimming: Black,  Date Advised: 6th June

This suggests there was no hood colour information given in these records - the record for this car would therefore read the same as any Two-Seater boat-tailed Seven at the time?

If there is a body number on the car, and this corresponds with what would be expected, then that would close the case in terms of identification?

Yes, there are also "Specification: RHD Home Market" and "Destination (dealer): Home Sales" on the certificate.

[Colin Morgan]

Seems, according to the vendor, that this car is going to be at the NEC next week in case anyone wants to have a look at it. (I am not able to attend the NEC and am not involved in the sale in any way - just interested in the car's history - so usual disclaimers.)

[austin]

Dad, (Henry Harris) spent time in Gaydon going through the records. (Looking for Ulsters)



B3 Ledger by henryharris, on Flickr

[JonE]

It's strange that the certificate even mentions hood colour, I have never seen an entry quoting hood colour - even the entries for the Ulster, which was much more bespoke when it came to colours, never mention hood colour.

Perhaps the certificate template is one for later more numerous cars, and they just adapt it?
It looks like you are getting more for your money - another line - even though there is no information!

Please someone look at the transmission tunnel stamp if you go.

---

Another thought seeing Henry's EA list.
The B1 list has a couple of incidences of 'Two seater' but they are supported by additional notes saying 'unsupercharged' in the final column.

There are also clusters where an extant, known EA car within said cluster could render it highly unlikely that a lightly/ambiguously noted 2 seater was not a non-sports.

But I wonder if there COULD be incidences where apparent non-sports two seaters not in a cluster could be potential Ulsters (or masquerading Ulsters) through slightly deficient ledger writing in 1930?