79x100

If the bike has been standing, the contents of the oil tank will have drained down into the sump. Even if drained off, if the piston has been low in the bore, there is a good chance that there has been oil everywhere. My first step would be to drain the sump and check return to the tank. Lucas MO1 magneto spares shouldn't be a problem. A good option for condensors is Brightspark - they solve the age-old problem of having to strip the instrument to replace in the future. http://www.brightsparkmagnetos.com/ Assuming that the numbers are original stampings (very many aren't), your engine at least is fairly easy to date - W30304 was fitted to a frame of the same number produced under contract C7353. It would have displayed the WD serial number C4390330. It would date from the early part of 1941 - around February / March based on delivery totals. C4390327 served with the Australians in Syria which illustrates well how bikes from the same contract could be sent at random all over the world. Frame number W89132 falls between any known contracts. There is a gap of 1117 machines between W88884 (an RAF sidecar contract) and W90001 (WD solos). There were various RAF and RN contracts between these points but they only total 544. It could be that later contract numbers used batches of frames that had already been reserved. There is little information relating to RAF contracts and pretty-well none about RN deliveries (athough I have seen records relating to the RN demob of W89611). Does your bike have 18" wheels ? - the tyres certainly look like 4.00" - 18" wheels were a feature of later-war sidecar contracts. Russell Motors are the best place to start for WD16H spares - Les Myers there is very good but doesn't do computers - best bet is a fax or phone call mid-week. Hitchcocks are the main place for Enfield.

I'd suggest a post in the motorcycle section, detailing the information and numbers that you have. Information from Ministry of Supply files is haphazard. Some contracts were partly or mainly sent to named RASC or RAOC depots for further distribution but from there onwards, little information remains. Many of the Enfields sold off just after the war were professionally refinished (sometimes at the factory itself) and no trace of the original colour remains. Given photographs of engine (including that under the magneto) and frame numbers, it is likely that one or two of the regular posters here could extract some more information.

Inevitably you're going to find a majority on a military vehicle forum who favour a service finish. The choice is yours but if you restore it in military trim then you have a foot in the motorcycle camp and also one in the MV scene. Certainly with the WW2 bikes, that's pretty lively. If you have an interest in military history and service life then it can add to the hobby...but it's not for everyone. There is a specific motorcycle sub-forum on here and you may also have come across a separate WD motorcycle forum where many of the posters here also appear. There are a couple with TRWs.

Alec, did they tell you exactly what they were going to do with the Katy ?

I run with a 16a in-line fuse which I believe was based upon the recommendations with the Dynotec regulator.

There is at least one decently turned-out UK vehicle there - a well-known CDFW - The film markings are a bit off though. https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipNlMbc9k35yXp2vz24NUJWmwnMvlbVQ6_Pf-7i1thxYLHbwkUwhDb5wk6x0R4-i9g/photo/AF1QipMBYWwniAv6y7IvCiozVIlxx_gYma5gUOANHqQ?key=QS1fSDhOdWloRmVOSV9oMGJGN3dXMUExWXp4YUJR

Norton chaincase inners look identical to Enfield except for the brackets and give the impression that they were made by the same supplier. I've seen these with both the 'eyebrow' retainer that Ron shows and the double rivetted type. It wasn't until the Commando that they actually started putting a seal in - prior to that it was more to keep dirt out. The oil level of course should actually be very low and provided that any run-off from above is deflected, it shouldn't pour out...no more than runs down the mainshaft and drips down the back anyway. The modification on Demon's case is a bit of a bodge but does look to be a way of sandwiching a sliding plate between two pop-rivetted covers - it ought to work but the rear of the clutch has clearly been catching the pop rivet heads. There is very little space between the two chain runs and alignment is a question of setting the inner case so that it avoids primary chain, clutch drum and final drive chain. It's rare to see an undamaged used example which suggests that it's not that easy to do over prolonged use. A wobbly clutch centre won't help. As I recall, you had quite a rough mainshaft bearing on the other end - if that was allowing the shaft to move further towards the timing side then the already small clearance behind the clutch sould have been further reduced. Ron will know the ins-and outs- of these Albion / Enfield clutches but on most clutches of this period, the centres are only broached to a certain depth and the resultant shoulder provides the positive location of the clutch. If it has been run loose, this will become damaged and allow the clutch to sit deeper and closer to the case. The only real cure for this is a new centre. These things often arise when everything becomes a little worn and battered. There is probably no single cause and no magic answer beyond going through it methodically.

What happened to the first-rate reply that I read to this question last night ? Google 'Headlamp re-silvering' and you'll find a number of companies. If your reflectors are brass then the cost is not too high. It makes a world of difference.

What's that about trailers being 'essential support vehicles' for motorcycles ? For f*cks sake, they were made for riding and a good number rode from Normandy to the Baltic !

I expect that you're right. Was it a night-fighter squadron ? That could explain the black frame. That flat on the headstock might be where they clamped on the Serrate radar detector.

This type of stamping is quite common on ex-WD engines that have been rebuilt. '398' will be a workshop identification number - usually prefixed 'B' if a Base Workshop. 'MS' indicates Ministry of Supply. 8 56 are month and year of the rebuild. In effect, this information stamped directly on crankcases mirrors that found on the brass machine rebuild plates. A rebuild as late as 1956 almost certainly indicates that it was a G3 Matchless at the time. Apart from M20s and possibly a few 16Hs, everything else from the 1940s had been long since struck off.

The stamping showing C6128 reflects the slightly later system (this contract commenced delivery in July 1940). It is possible that by this time, they were linking frame to serial number consecutively. Whatever the case, they had clearly decided to stamp only the contract number and not the individual serial number. Motorcycle contract numbers generally started with a 'C' as per the serials but occasionally they slipped up and used the 'V' (Vehicle) prefix and later on changed to 'S' when vehicles for all services were ordered through the Ministry of Supply.

JAG 63F has somewhat inevitably ended up on a '69 E-Type. Vehicle details Vehicle make JAGUAR Date of first registration 25 March 1969 Cylinder capacity (cc) 4235cc CO₂Emissions Not available Fuel type PETROL Export marker No Vehicle status Not taxed Vehicle colour GREY Vehicle type approval Not available Wheelplan 2 AXLE RIGID BODY Presumably it hasn't been taxed and on the road since SORN came in.

A couple of 2nd series Crossley Qs and an Austin K6 ?

Judging by the amount of filing that has gone on around the headstock, it might be reasonable to assume that the bike did a stint as a number plate dealer's mule, back in the days when any old log book could be used to retain a number. Frames produced as spare parts (which were frequently an extra 10% of contract total) don't seem to have been numbered but should have been stamped with the number of the frame which they were replacing. This one was clearly a G3L part. There is no evidence of 1941 Model AJSs being produced and it would seem unlikely that Matchless as the senior partner in AMC would have been allowed to complicate production lines and service maintenance by badge engineering which included engine differences. The Ministry of Supply ledgers exist. We can be pretty certain what was delivered outside of 'impressed' models. Ferg and Ron both have long experience in looking at WD motorcycle numbers and it looks to me too as if the engine number has been altered. In my view, it started life as 41/G3L and has been altered as someone preferred the AJS option (or had an AJS logbook handy). The timing chest is clearly AJS but any or all of the parts could have been replaced. 'Q' plates are very difficult to have removed and there is a reason why this bike has one. It is a vehicle of indeterminate age and origin...Any attempt to get it sorted now that things are even tighter would probably result in a visit from a man with a grinder and an insistence that a new DVLA 17-digit VIN be stamped on the chassis.

I questioned my Dad on this (he went from Normandy to Schleswig Holstein via Belgium and Holland with Air Formation Signals attached to the Canadians) and he is quite firm in saying that 'most' of the British and Canadian stuff in NW Europe was brown. I suspect that most people 'see' green in b/w photos and don't question further. Goose-dropping grey-green KG No.3 made way for dried cow-turd SCC No.2 ...it's perhaps not surprising that a nice olive drab is preferred.

You may struggle to obtain much of a response in the motorcycle section. Motorcyclists in general really don't like carbs such as the Solex and most of us would quickly fit an Amal...which doesn't help with a restoration to original of course. These carbs were specified for economy when compared with the typical slide carburetors which often waste fuel if not treated gently so they're probably pretty lean at the best of times. Any air leak on butterfly pivots etc. could cause problems. Have you replaced all the gaskets and seals ?

There is no fuse as standard but any sensible owner will have fitted one, especially if there is an electronic regulator fitted. Is there a working battery fitted ? If so, regardless of the charging system, there should be lights and horn. My inclination would be to start with a multimeter at the battery and check at every connector and lamp. Do you have a workshop manual with wiring diagram ? The wiring may have been modified but it's the only realistic starting point.

The Triumph factory records prior to 1940 were all lost in the Coventry blitz. The frame number of this one does seem to be from 1935. The RAOC Chilwell cards tie in with Orchard & Madden and only show one contracted Triumph sale in 1935 - the single 350cc assessment machine. Although this log-book shows 'Ex-WD', it doesn't detail how long they had owned it...I'd be inclined to suspect that although it would have been a bit past-it in 1940 (the majority of impressed machines were a year old at most), somehow this one was taken on strength in the post-Dunkirk shortages (maybe by the Home Guard) but that they soon got shot of it when they realised that they had a seven-year old 250cc sidevalve with zero spares availability (thanks to the factory bombing). Any chance of seeing a scan of the ND book cover ? The NDs all seem to have disappeared from service by the late 1930s. I have an idea that there are one or two still in existence.

Echte veldrijden ! Wonderful photos.

FIVA is indeed the problem here. They are motivated partly by a desire to retain the exclusive aspect of the elite's historic sports and thoroughbred cars...and they have never really liked the riff-raff attached to the hobby. Added to this, they are perhaps justifiably worried by the prevelance of 'modern' cars that are now slipping through under the 25 years rule and which are often being used to get away with customising and modification. 'Classic & Sportscar' have somehow blamed 'Brussels' too. http://www.classicandsportscar.com/news/general-classic-car-news/brussels-demands-tighter-restrictions-for-historic-vehicles?utm_medium=EMAIL&utm_campaign=&utm_content=CLAS%20email%20newsletter%202%20March%202016%20%281%29::read_more_article_1&utm_source=20160302 FBHVC seem to be resisting. In Belgium, there are special 'O' plates for 'Oldtimers' and they bring with them the restriction on use for commuting etc. It's not uncommon to see these plates on lowered Golf GTis with the rear passenger area taken up by loudspeakers and they spend much of the weekends doing burn-outs on the industrial estates. The majority of insurers here will only offer TPO on older vehicles and in order to obtain some F&T cover, I've been forced to accept the SDP only use. I resent it really as I do feel that classics should be used for their original purpose. If I ride a 75 year old motorcycle to work it's because I want to but this may not be true of the 1991 3-Series BMWs and Volvo 760s that I also see with collector plates. It remains to be seen how anyone expects to define what is 'historically correct' I suspect that we all recognise a historic vehicle if we see one...but we'd all differ on the details.

It is indeed an early 5-digit RASC census number and this stamping with the large 'C' is characteristic of what seems to have been applied at Feltham during late 1939 / early 1940. By this time, RAOC were allocating census numbers in consecutive order to frame numbers but RASC were still random. The same system is also seen on C5107 RE WD/Cs Here's 3SW C63511 Subsequent to this procedure, there seems to have been a period of stamping contract numbers. I've seen this on Enfield, Triumph and Norton. I've also seen pre-war Nortons with the census number stamped but these are less consistent in style and I suspect were stamped by depots if the engines were removed for attention.

On an armoured vehicle, a circle was used to indicate "C" Squadron or Company and yellow indicated the second regiment or battalion. "Troop, Platoon or section number painted in allotted colour in or beside sign as above" These numbers and the colours don't quite seem to fit but instructions may have changed over time. Unfortunately, without a formation sign, it is impossible to pin down further.

Neil, the legislation is Belgian so it is necessarilly ill-thought-out, knee-jerk and unworkable....but any overseas vehicle which falls under the Belgian 'O' plate rules will not require a box of tricks - you just need to request a once-only exemption before travel. Currently this means over 25 years old (it will become 30 years in line with EU definitions) and use for private and pleasure only. If you haven't requested the exemption and don't have a box and are a goods vehicle over 3.5 tons then you are liable for a fine. As I understand it, the system is the same as Germany uses but with the 3.5 t entry rather than 12 t - The system has been used in Germany for some years now so it is probably not illegal as long as the locals pay it too...but they are (theoretically) rewarded with lower annual road tax. Germany has however brought back the driver's hours log books for goods-carrying vans up to 3.5t which have no tachograph. This is in response to the Eastern European 'Bobby-dodger' technique of letting two drivers run 24/24 in small trucks. Basically the old system worked and seemed fair when each Western European country had a similar proportion of goods vehicles and all used each others roads. Some days the motorway from Aachen across a narrow part of the Netherlands and then on to Antwerp is nose-to-tail Eastern European trucks who buy nothing and contribute nothing while they are here apart from rubbish at the roadsides and furrows up the inside lane.

Lex, as I read the statement from the BFOV, applying to any one of the three will ensure that it is noted on the national database. http://www.bfov-fbva.be/nl/politieke-dossiers-lobbying/kilometerheffing-vrachtauto-s-3-5-t-01-12-2015/ Residents apply to the local region. Presumably foreigners can choose. It will be a blasted nuisance for anyone loading their truck or armour onto a modern vehicle if it is one that normally doesn't venture into Belgium. For all the EU nonsense, it's actually becoming more complicated to drive abroad. They shouldn't have let in all the the Eastern European piss-bottle chuckers who have spoiled it for everyone, I suppose. By the way, it's based on ANPR cameras on the new motorway gantries. None on other main roads yet but they are intending to. The problem is though that avoiding motorways is not enough as it will be a legal requirement to have the transmitter.