79x100

Prior to the Second World War, the vast majority of English motorcycle manufacturers do not appear to have made any attempt to match engine and frame numbers. Investigation of the factory ledgers shows that the numbered components were stockpiled and issued as necessary. Most factories kept a consecutive engine build list but it bore little relationship to despatch date. During the late 1930s, it becomes clear that blocks of engine and frame numbers were reserved for WD contracts but round about September 1939 it would seem that the Ministry of Supply began to insist on 'matching' engine and frame numbers (and this is probably where the whole matching numbers nonsense began). With no computerised build systems and only the most rudimentary of production 'lines', it is clear that the factories could not have hoped to marry matching engines and frames somewhere near the end of the production process. It seems evident that the matching engine and frame numbers were stamped on completed machines. The factories of course still needed to have an internal numbering system for quality and batch control and they appear to have applied these where they would not normally be easily visible. Norton stamped 'WO' prefixed engine numbers on the front of the timing chest and frame build numbers on the headstock lug where it would be covered by the fuel tank. Enfield stamped their engine build numbers below the magneto and applied the 'duplicate frame number' where the pre-war engine build number was stamped. If there is a roughly sequential numbering system on the ML seat lugs then it is almost certainly a frame build number. It's unlikely that they worked a 'first in - first out' system but if enough were noted, the database could indicate if headstock frame numbers were in roughly the right range for the frame build number. it is however a lot of work and requires a fair cross-section of machines and most owners are simply not interested.

Bank transfers are fairly common within the eurozone as they are free of charge and in Continental Europe, credit card use is probably less than in the US or UK and the merchant commission higher so traders don't really like it. This particular trader is clearly not a fly-by-night although I find many of his descriptions to be creative to say the least...The big disadvantage of a bank transfer of course is that there is no protection and if your payment were to co-incide with a business going into receivership then it would be the devils own job to get anything back as you'd be right down the list behind the taxman and the banks.

If you have panniers then a straightforward answer is to fit a removable board across the back between them ( a bit like a motorcycle version of a trailer board) with a modern lamp and reflector plus your number plate and it can then easily be unplugged and removed for displays.

No British motorcycle lens made prior to 1973 other than perhaps specifically intended for the European market would have an 'E' mark. We fought two world wars in what proved ultimately to be a vain attempt at avoiding that sort of nonsense. If you're in a country that applies retrospective legislation then it would seem that you'll have to fit something made by Hella.

Black, with toe-caps. More like a high leg ammo boot.

No, not a motorcyclist's boot. They are a private purchase (to ordnance pattern) Officer's field boot.

Ron has got seven Enfields to put the measuring caliper on tomorrow just in case any of them have got the wrong tap ! :-)

Ron, I was being deliberately cautious as I don't really know Enfields and I had seen by chance a reference to part no. 26512 relating to a WD/C Burtons list this tap but no illustration. It looks the same in the parts book as 26965 to me. Maybe they were originally chromed ? 26512 PETROL TAP WITH FILTER - Standard Selling Price £35.00 PLUNGER TYPE/1/4" GAS

5050-30 is an Ariel part number, as they indicate...the tap on your bike is an Enots Hexagon type as used typically by Norton in 1/4"BSP and also by BSA and AMC (I believe threaded 1/8"BSP). 26965 as per the price list and confirmed by Ron's NOS parts label is certainly a WD RE tap. All you have to do now is confirm that it is correct for your model and contract.

Well that bearing is absolutely shagged anyway ! The oil looks like mayonnaise so it's not surprising that it has rusted. The oil level still looks too high to me, if the height of the filler is related to the mainshaft bearing. Bearing (sorry !) in mind the seriousness of a seized gearbox on a motorcycle, my preference is always to strip and check the box on an unknown machine. With new bearings and bushes all round, you'll have peace of mind.

No confirmation of the manufacture of new headlamps but various sources refer to the reduction of black-out regulations from September 1944 onwards. Field modifications were made to take this into account. This extract is from the official 'Adminsitrative History of 21st Army Group :- "Speed of manufacture was in many cases greater in BELGIUM than in ENGLAND where any new project had to be placed on a priority list. For instance, at the end of September it was decided that in view of our air superiority an increased amount of light could be used by vehicles at night in the rear areas. It was therefore necessary to design a method by which vehicles could use more light in the rear areas but could conform to operational requirements when in the forward areas. 200,000 headlamp modification sets, each consisting of sixteen different items, were designed and supplied within four weeks, whereas a minimum of three months for the task had been estimated by the Ministry of Supply in UK".

Even with your big bore kit, Ron ? You really should put a Norton on the road !

Has it been over-filled ? I don't know Albion boxes (and I don't want to !) but clutch pushrod height seems quite high to be the oil level in a countershaft box.

The 276 type carbs with separate float chambers do have rather a lot of places to leak from. It's probably a good idea to obtain a set of seals and washers and give it a good going over. Joint faces etc. should be clean and free from burrs or distortion. One of the major causes of leaks is dirt in the float chamber - it doesn't take much as the needle seals metal-to-metal and the buoyancy of the copper floats is borderline. If the level rises too far, it will overflow via the mixing chamber. If you haven't worked on this type of carb before, it would be a good idea to ask for step by step advice. It's possible to case quite a lot of damage by attempting to remove the jet block using too much force. You'll get used to it all. After a riding season of onwnership you'll be able to strip an Amal blindfolded !

Visiting the archive shouldn't be a problem, especially if you choose a weekday. They're very helpful.

There are likely to be ex-Chilwell 'Contract Receipt Cards' at Bovington - They seem to have them for most wartime vehicle contracts including 'B' vehicles. There is more chance on early-war contracts that the cards will show the blocks of chassis numbers allocated but it does seem that for most makers, they were not 'married' to census number so actual allocation remains guesswork.

Something very similar occurred when the same auctioneer (who specialises in bankrupty sales and foreclosures, not collector's items) dealt with the disposal of the business assets of the deceased former Belgian Norton motorcycle importer. Whilst he was alive, he was a man known for avoiding a paper trail. I know what I think....

This apprears to be the '7' on the beach at Malo before it was moved. It had already lost its wheels but still had doors and displays the Middlesex registration HMY 372 which would suggest a 1936 in-service date based on my motorcycle records. The '15' AoS serial indicates a battalion within the senior brigade of an infantry division but I can see no formation sign. The casualty appears to be French The original can be seen on a German site :- https://www.dhm.de/lemo/bestand/objekt/tote-soldaten-bei-duenkirchen-1940.html

Apparently a number of the gun tractors saw pre-war service in India.

"Strange and excitable" would be a good description too ! :-)

Ron, so they did raise it at the back as well as extend the forks ? That's only going to exacerbate the short mainstand problem though. Is the toolbox a standard 'C' item ? Where will you have to extend the tubes ? Will it require re-working of the lugs ?

It doesn't seem like a hornet's nest to me, simply an on-line brainstorming session which is just what internet forums should be about ! I'm thoroughly enjoying it. The Miller Dyno-Mag doesn't seem to have been a fantastic bit of kit. Probably designed to circumvent Lucas trade names ('Magdyno') and patents. It seems odd that some rather expensive makes such as HRD, Velocette and Scott used Miller equipment and yet Joe Lucas became the butt of all the jokes. Visually, the Miller unit does resemble the pre-1937 ring-cam Lucas MS1. I'm sure that you're correct in dating the change to the same point as the switch to the CVC regulated dynamos. It would seem to be the change to the face cam design which brought with it the taller end cover. There remains the fact that WD/Ds had MO1 magdynos and we still don't really know much about their specific points covers. This is an April 1935 dated Magdyno marked MSLV-O with 3rd brush dynamo on a Norton ES2. It certainly shows increased clearance between points cover and inner chaincase when compared with the MO1 but it wouldn't be correct for the Experimental RE as they ceaased supply in 1937.

Jan, What is the difference between and L1/O and an AQ/4 magdyno ?...a special nut and the Plate, Drive End - 463989 is the standard item but this can't have made a difference to the points cover clearance. ...or are there then any inner chaincase differences on the proper pre-war WD/Ds ?

Is it possible that during the transition from the pre-war coil ignition Model D to the Magdyno-equipped WD/D, no proper solution was found to the points access problem....or is there a different spec cover lurking out there somewhere ? Only the LV7 lists might give the answer...are there any for WD/Ds ?

Direct-injected polyurethane soles. We've had terrible trouble with safety boots at work in the odd smaller and larger sizes that sit on the shelf...after five or six years, it's usually possible to pull unused soles off by hand - I've seen it happen with the natural 'brown' and with black soles. They're supposed to be chemical-resistant but can't stand a few years in a warm atmosphere. I don't know how the manufacturers get away with it really.