Hi John,

Sorry for not being in touch...I have emailed you as well. It's been magazine weekend again so have been busy doing that.

I can confirm that 196067 was a steel bodied 65/very early Nippy. It had full 65 spec including 65 steering column and bluemels wheel.

Anyway back to the mag :o)

Ed

Hi Roger
Thank you for correcting me. I apologise for getting it wrong.
Chris

Does that 'special' with no panels and a slab tank on the bay of E have 65/Nippy origins. Looks like a nippy carb and manifold to me

The exhaust manifold looks like a Super Accessories bunch of bananas, and I bet the inlet is from the same source, with a Ford 8 carburetter.

Further to all the comments in this thread, this has now turned up:

Nippy on eBay

It has Chassis No 196018 (1934 not 1933) and looks suspiciously like a steel-bodied car. If so, it's the earliest so far. Ho hum, back to the drawing board...

Hello from Sussex with another Nippy. well a 65, they popping up everywhere

The newly purchased 65/Nippy in aluminium does indeed bear EB 25 on the trans tunnel just behind the handbrake.

Car Number B8 1987

Chassis Number 178381

Just purchased said car and the original engine has been lost in time, or holed in time.

Car in pretty good condition, all surface rust except for the floorpan, which will require replacing. Famous last words, the chassis needs welding in one spot, though it is all saveable and an early one by my little research



Have a feeling I am going to need some help in reclaiming the original registration number as have no logbook with the car. DVLA say i need a qualified person as no backup paperwork. though the registration is painted on the car.

Provided you are in one of the A7CA's Member Clubs, then there will be an agreed person to help you.
It should be in your A7 Club magazine somewhere, or contact the Chairman (Memb Secs, have plenty to do already ).

Full details Here

and Here for list of Clubs

Good luck trying to retain the number, .....

Hi AJC, Don't rely on the chassis number as quoted on the plate attached to the nearside scuttle. Check the number on the chassis itself. These cars were often rebuilt onto Ruby chassis frames with the better extensions to support the rear of the body.

Really?
Often?

Yes took some doing though the plate matches the number on the chassis, found it using quotethisnumber pdf....beneath all the old paint and oil.....

Pictorially, what is the difference in the two chassis though? thought the Ruby one was longer than a 7

OK John, sometimes. Sorry.

To AJC, as briefly as possible - the original chassis with 6'3" wheelbase were lengthened around late 1931 to a 6'9" wheelbase, components much the same as the last of the short w/b. These were known as high chassis. The extensions still finished short of the rear axle and the only main change was alteration of the two brackets on the front crossmember to accommodate the 4-speed gearbox when introduced. When the Ruby was introduced in 1934, still 6'9" w/b, the chassis was stronger, had different ends to the crossmembers, mainly had the extensions extended up and over the rear axle to support bodies better. These were called low chassis, but were not originally used on the sold Sports versions, they still retaining the "high" chassis with short extensions. When a 65 or Nippy starts to sag due to the weight of tyre, petrol tank etc in rear, some fit the Ruby-type chassis under their cars to help support the body better. Cheers, Bill in Oz

Thank you for that clear explanation for a complete novice
Most appreciated, my learning curve is just starting.

Have as a starter for ten, or a 7, purchased Chis Gould's Book on 65's and Nippys from a certain Mr Cochrane.

With the number now gleaned and appearing from the chassis from under the nitromors, plus your and David Cochrane's description it is a old sports chassis and not a ruby, though i do see how the Ruby support would help the rear on close inspection. There is not a lot holding the rear body up!

I've seen 5 LHD cars over the years

Anyone know how may we're produced and sent to the US?

Bill, following your outline descriptor for 6-3 into 6-9 chassis', and high into low chassis evolution: when did the front forging evolve from four-in-line cowhorn holes to the angled pairs of radiator horn holes? Were ALL long chassis' angled?
Were the front cross member centres 'dropped' for cars built with four-speed gearboxes whether high-chassis or low?
Third query: how many varieties of long-chassis rails were produced? You noted the long high-chassis replacement with Ruby profile rails. What is the difference in size? Is there a much different profile or are they simply with or without the upturned extension to the rearward inner edge? Is there an easy way to distinguish them?

The front forging was changed for the new Ruby type in 1934.

I think there were 4 front forging types;
V. Early, no shock absorber mounting and no cow horn mounts.
Early, no shock absorber but with cow horn mounts.
1929 - 1934 coil ignition, chrome rad. shell (also Sports, Vans and Military to 1937?)
Ruby type (angled)

The long chassis was produced from about 1932 until 1939 in two basic forms.

Not all long wheelbase chassis were 'angled'
1932 to 1934 with four inline cow horn holes (Sports, Vans and Military somewhat later)
1934/39 Ruby types used the angled forging

Cross members.....
Early type with closed ends was used for magneto types.
1929/1934 straight (also sports, vans and military to 1937?)
1934/39 Ruby type with 'drop' to allow for gearbox removal from inside car.

Long chassis rails.....
1932/1934 (also sports, vans and military to 1937?) shallow top hat return.
1934/1939 Ruby type extended top hat return to rivet to Ruby rear extensions

Henry noted

I think there were 4 front forging types;
V. Early, no shock absorber mounting and no cow horn mounts.
Early, no shock absorber but with cow horn mounts.
*
1929 - 1934 coil ignition, chrome rad. shell (also Sports, Vans and Military to 1937?)
Ruby type (angled)

*Not that germane to the discussion but there is -1925 - 1928, shock absorber and cow horns

Tony

It might be worth mentioning that the 65/Nippy chassis has a shorter rear crossmember than the standard frame to allow the body sides to pass it. The standard frame extends under the rear of the running boards.

Could it be that none know the answer?

Location: Eastern Front (POLAND)

just perusing this old thread and the chassis order spreadsheet on the Register.

Can anyone explain why 65s had car numbers of AEB * and B8 * or B9 *, seemingly at the same time, or rather not in successive series?

The only determining constant for chronology in the spreadsheet must be the chassis number, as registration date could presumably be very variable? Or would chassis be stockpiled and used in a different order?

Earliest 65 I've found in the spreadsheet chassis 165448 (an error?) then 167602 with an AEB10 car number. (20/1/33 reg) then lots of B8- car numbers, but yet the latest (193712) is back on an AEB number... preceded by a 193013 car on a B9-!

Is it perhaps because the database isn't verified, and there is a lot of variation in what provided?

Or am I missing something?

Location: W.Sussex

Ok, scratch last. I can see the BODY number is badly recorded, if it exists, in lots of cases.

As the EB65 portion of the Register database is so small, its an interesting exercise taking a snap of this and then applying a sort on ascending chassis number before forming a new column for supposed body number based on the best guess of what has been supplied for the Register entry in any of the other columns! Splitting the whole into registration dates of either 1933 or 1934 gives an interesting pattern. Most in either the top or bottom half of the range respectively, but with more variation than one would expect, suggesting they built a lot of cars and then waited until there was more demand, which isn't shown by the entire A7 ascending chassis number register.

I guess as the timescales involved are actually so short in real terms, looking for any sort of pattern with a background of a complicated supply chain is a bit of a useless preoccupation. But its a good way of getting to know the extant cars and matching them to past records. Its remarkable that long 'sold' items.. I.e going back 4 or 5 years.. are still archived on the web (from things like The classic car site listings and ebay) on google searching.. Despite the fact they arent accessible through the sites themselves.

It is a bit like playing Bingo...

Some thoughts on the production figs from the most recent Survivors database statistics, here, just to stimulate further conversation!

Location: W.Sussex

this is the car directly prior to Nick Boorman's. The email address just bounces back now; anyone know what's happening with it and whether AJC managed to get it re-registered?