BritBike Forum logo
BritBike Sponsor BritBike Sponsor BritBike Sponsor
BritBike Sponsor

BritBike Sponsor

BritBike Sponsor
BritBike Sponsor BritBike Sponsor BritBike Sponsor
Jwood & co JRC Engineering dealers Jwood & co
Home | Sponsors, Newsletter | Regalia | Calendar | Bike Project | BritBike Museum | Spiders Cartoons, "OLD" BritBike Forum | DVD- Manuals & Parts books | BritBike Stickers & Decals
Upgrade to: Premium Membership | Premium Life Membership | Vendor Membership | Site Sponsor Membership
Member Spotlight
BONZO R.I.P.
BONZO R.I.P.
Michigan, USA
Posts: 3,348
Joined: August 2001
Show All Member Profiles 
Shout Box
Search eBay for motorcycle parts in following countries
Australia, Canada, France, Holland, Italy, United Kingdom, USA
Random Gallery photo
Who's Online Now
43 registered members (Al Eckstadt), 233 guests, and 451 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Norman Woollons, LandoLando, MikeA, Jay Gilling, scratchedtank
10254 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
Stuart 72
Lannis 68
L.A.B. 47
Popular Topics(Views)
607,320 mail-order LSR
Forum Statistics
Forums34
Topics67,089
Posts651,023
Members10,254
Most Online3,995
Feb 13th, 2017
Like BritBike.com on Facebook

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rating: 5
Page 15 of 32 1 2 13 14 15 16 17 31 32
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #499686
07/30/13 6:18 am
07/30/13 6:18 am
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
Kevin (NZ). Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Kevin (NZ).  Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
The photo of 17513 is clipped but shows the entire engine number clearly.... but the suffix is out of frame.
I would call it a Hybrid all the same, it has a 1968 look about it.


Why, Y, Dash Y..



Support your #1 BSA Forum and our favorite sponsors

Check out BSA on e-bay: BSA Parts in UK, BSA Motorcycles in UK, BSA Parts in North America, BSA Motorcycles in North America

 
 
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #499688
07/30/13 6:31 am
07/30/13 6:31 am
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Two Alpha Offline

Life member
Two Alpha  Offline

Life member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Originally Posted By: Two Alpha
there is a plenty of evidence that says they did exist.
Well this is what we are now pursuing. But have I missed something ?

No, as you mention a few times through the post, the primary source of evidence we have are those dispatch books.

Quote:
It was built in the factory on 22nd May 1967 and dispatched to Canada on 31st May 1967 to Bert Peyo dealership.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
And the bike is now in Canada ?

Assume for a second that the initial entries in the book are legitimate, we don't have anything concrete to show just how far past the guy writing the info into the book that bike got. One thing is for sure though, assuming the initial entries in the book are legitimate, BSA had that bike back in their possession before stamping the replacement bike.


Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Where is the correct despatch date for the Firebird ?
It was at the factory to get all the 1968/69 parts and then what ?
I wonder if it's in amongst the hybrids, "in a separate section of one of the production books". I would really like to know where exactly it is in the books, it's an especially interesting case.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
As far as i am aware we still have not seen any trace of a 'first' use of a Y bike number beyond that series of red books.
Yes indeed, that's all that's left that's traceable to them. Plus there are all the Y bikes acting like a giant arrow pointing straight back at them.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
If they were at the Factory..
What is the point in taking nearly 500 new Spitfires and reducing them to spares only to be replaced by the same number of brand new bikes ?

If the original bikes existed, as I believe, the ones that ended up being replaced had to be in pretty poor shape.
We know for a fact that a number were refurbished, I have one of those.
edit: oops, mines one of the Lightnings, same deal though.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
I think the export figures for 1967 were 'inflated', possibly for the Queen's award.
They were caught out and either added bikes into the despatch logs quickly, or had to embark on a programme of catching up.

And, of course, I don't think so. Look at the rate they were pumping bikes out for the first stretch, 7000 bikes in less than two months (!), and we're not seeing any replacement bikes from those serial numbers.
They would have had the Queen's export award in the bag, why screw around with phony numbers or blank lines in the book? Just keep building and selling bikes, that was their business!

Now here's a juicy quote from a few years back, another gem from Gary...
"The late Spitfire SA's (hybrids) stand alone with the "Y" engine/no "Y" frame. No other models. The numbers are in a separate section of one of the production books and are random from 11577 to 17892."
So that's 478 numbers used for the hybrids, spread over and interspersed amongst a range of 6326 numbers!
Pre-planned so that they could add on an extra 478 bikes after the season was over and receive a Queens export award?

I believe it went something like the following. They ran into some difficulties during the 1967 season that damaged large numbers of bikes, mainly in the 7000, 10,000, 11,000 and 17,000 ranges. The only scenario that would make rebuilding the specific serial numbers necessary would be if the damaged bikes were in an exported status.
So, the most pressing are the Spitfires, there's only one year left in which they can replace those. I think they knew that their regular production would be around 10,000 so they replaced all of the high numbered Spitfires, 478 of them, from sn11577 to sn17892.
1969 season rolls around, they have a bunch of lower 1967 numbers they need to replace so they start the regular production at sn11101 so as not to interfere.
1970 season rolls around, they switch regular production back to starting at sn00101, and build replacement bikes for the remaining high numbered 1967 Lightnings and Thunderbirds.

A costly and embarrassing exercise.

Sure the Queen's export award probably played into this, but not that they had to cheat to get it. I think they just ramped their production up too much and created a mess.

Last edited by Two Alpha; 07/30/13 7:50 am.

BSA
Matchless
Triumph
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #499689
07/30/13 6:33 am
07/30/13 6:33 am
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Two Alpha Offline

Life member
Two Alpha  Offline

Life member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
The photo of 17513 is clipped but shows the entire engine number clearly.... but the suffix is out of frame.
I would call it a Hybrid all the same, it has a 1968 look about it.


Good enough for me!


BSA
Matchless
Triumph
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #499691
07/30/13 7:45 am
07/30/13 7:45 am
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
Kevin (NZ). Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Kevin (NZ).  Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
Ok, let us now assume all these bikes did exist.

The problems I have with that are;
Why go through this exercise of building 1500 new bikes... as replacements.
Why just 1967 ? Was the quality so much better in other years ?
No-one has mentioned these bikes leaving and being returned. Nothing in the magazines of the day.
BSA got an export award for making bikes in April 1967, shipping them, bringing them back to the factory, destroying them and then making a fresh batch at the very minute they were receiving the award.. April 1968.
That is 500 bikes out of say 25,000 of all kinds.
If the bikes did exist where are the returned entries in the despatch books. They are there for other bikes that were returned.
How come all the 1969 Y bikes have numbers less than 10500. Did someone go through all these returned bikes and carefully sort them out for rebuild.
Or did they just record all the numbers and then do away with them.
Geoff Danher was at the factory at the time. He worked in the quality section in 1967. He talks of the problems with the B25's being returned. No mention of the A65 at all. Not once.
He talks of problems at Umberslade, the B25, the A70, the OIF and the T120, and even the Rocket III.
He also never saw the bikes in storage scattered about the factory by Al Cave.
Bert Hopwood wrote a book, he never mentioned this debacle. He didn't mention the Lucas supply problems beyond normal.
Why were only the A65 affected by this.
Were the B25 and B44 built so much better.
What about Triumph, how did they avoid this disaster ?
Why has this been so well hushed up ? Why has Al Cave mislead the BSAOC ? This will be a great shock to his 'mates'.
Why did the board never mention this in any of the reports ?
If they had over 1000 bikes returned and then stored before being completely remade wouldn't there be questions ?
There was back-stabbing going on at the time, wouldn't this innocent parties love to be throwing this in someone's face.

What we have here is a conspiracy. People knew and kept quiet.

It had to be for the good of the company.

Where are the 478 Spitfire tanks ?
They were removed from the Mk III's and used for spares ?
What tanks were fitted to the Hybrids waiting on the line ?

Do we think for one second that a Hybrid fuel tank is going to have a date code of May 1967 or earlier ? I doubt they reused the tanks even though the story says they were there and available.

And the Lucas components, are we to believe these were removed, packaged and used as warranty spares. They were not fitted to new bikes on the line. (I believe.)
What about all the rest of the spares, did the US market receive a shipment of much needed spares ?
The engines must have been reduced to component form.
What part of the factory did all that work ?
The US dealers never mentioned it.
BSA had problems in 1968, the shipping strikes did play havoc. Did they keep the staff employed by stripping out the bikes.
Al Cave has been reported as saying they were there for the two years.

Until recently we believed the 69/70 Y bikes were rebuilt 1967 models.
The guys in Britain knew no better. That is why the website and Dating Certificates are worded as they are.

Al Cave, and others, knew this was not the case. Why didn't they speak up, ever ...

Al Cave gave the BSAOC many documents, do they contain clues as to the whereabouts of these missing bikes?

Do some Committee members know more than they are admitting ?

All we have to show these bikes existed in some entries in a ledger.

I have visited two British aircraft factories, I have friends who worked in them.
I have witnessed, and heard about, the goings on......
While they may be inefficient to the extreme I can image shenanigans but not wanton waste.



Last edited by Kevin (NZ).; 07/30/13 5:20 pm.

Why, Y, Dash Y..



Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Two Alpha] #499740
07/30/13 3:36 pm
07/30/13 3:36 pm
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,330
Medford, Oregon
Gary E Offline
BritBike Forum member
Gary E  Offline
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,330
Medford, Oregon
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
...I don't want to use a specific bike as an example but one owner managed to come up with this info when he did his research.


TALLY NUMBER, CONSIGNED TO, CONSIGNMENT NOTE
5829, BSA NEW JERSEY, 1564 691
5893, BSA NEW JERSEY, 1104L 1846


I do not see any significance to the tally number or the consignment note numbers to what we are trying to accomplish. I don't know what they even mean.

Originally Posted By: Two Alpha
They both came with the -Y, 17509 from Gary, 17513 from you. You had "unsure if dash or hybrid" beside it so I put that right in there with the number....

The info on 8519 that I have is only from what Kevin had previously posted.

17509 is legit. It is a frame with a '68 front end and engine number SA 5582-Y in it. It was on eBay in 2/13.


1967 BSA Wasp
1967 BSA Hornet (West Coast Model)
1967 BSA Hornet (East Coast Model)
1968 BSA Firebird Scrambler
1968 BSA Spitfire Mark IV
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #499745
07/30/13 4:14 pm
07/30/13 4:14 pm
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
Kevin (NZ). Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Kevin (NZ).  Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
Hi Gary,
I was thinking out aloud, yet again. You must have an idea of what you favour as a possible sequence of events.
I was thinking of the possibilities with that first shipping date. Andy managed to find some detail on that Firebird we were discussing.

As everyone has seen I have no idea what actually occurred back then. I do however see that those first shipping dates are causing us some issues, - and rightly so.

We have all been attaching so much importance to them in the past. The Dating Certificates have been issued based solely on that first date.

What if the date is incorrect ?
I suspect it is and I see I am not alone.

How can we prove it one way or the other.
As well as a date we had a tally number and a shipping con notes.
The tally number was an internal thing and probably contained the works record. I am guessing anything associated with them is now long gone.
The con not though may have been recognised by Customs or the shipping companies.
I was looking for a link between bikes we know that were shipped and the others we are not so sure about.
If the numbers were to be a fabrication then they must have a pattern to them. You would not want them to stand out in the crowd.

Naturally the two similar tally numbers in the example I gave do catch the eye. The tally number could be used to date the machine, it may well have been a continuous sequence assigned to the frame or engine ?
Either way we must have 1969 models coming down the like with Month/Year codes stamped on completion.
I would be really looking at the 1967 numbers to see how the 'first' numbers all compare. Perhaps there is a code there.


I think we are all agreeing that 17509 is a legit Hybrid number. It can be in the 1968 column as well.

http://motorcycleslog.com/asp/Item.asp?soldid=151949&make=BSA&theday=3%2F2%2F2013

Last edited by Kevin (NZ).; 07/30/13 4:32 pm.

Why, Y, Dash Y..



Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #499750
07/30/13 5:05 pm
07/30/13 5:05 pm
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Two Alpha Offline

Life member
Two Alpha  Offline

Life member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Tremendous post Kevin, and I am with you for almost all of it. (referring to post 499691 )


Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Ok, let us now assume all these bikes did exist.
The problems I have with that are;
Why go through this exercise of building 1500 new bikes... as replacements.

Whether the bikes were for replacements or not, they had to have been forced by a government agency to re-use those serial numbers, it's the only possible reason why they would have done that.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Why just 1967 ? Was the quality so much better in other years ?
They were at the tipping point, where performance had gotten beyond reliability, but that high production rate must have factored into it.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
No-one has mentioned these bikes leaving and being returned. Nothing in the magazines of the day.
This was obviously not a good situation, little wonder they didn't want to advertise it.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
BSA got an export award for making bikes in April 1967, shipping them, bringing them back to the factory, destroying them and then making a fresh batch at the very minute they were receiving the award.. April 1968.
That is 500 bikes out of say 25,000 of all kinds.

So 2%, maybe this just wasn't that big a deal to them.
What raises the red flag is re-using those serial numbers in the following years.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
If the bikes did exist where are the returned entries in the despatch books. They are there for other bikes that were returned.

I think we've only ever seen this on one page in the book, were these home market bikes? I'm not sure where this information is.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
How come all the 1969 Y bikes have numbers less than 10500. Did someone go through all these returned bikes and carefully sort them out for rebuild.
Yes, of course.
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Or did they just record all the numbers and then do away with them.
This would have been done with the ones that were beyond being refurbished.
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Geoff Danher was at the factory at the time. He worked in the quality section in 1967. He talks of the problems with the B25's being returned. No mention of the A65 at all. Not once.
Hope you get to chat with him, he must have some knowledge of the situation with the twins.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Bert Hopwood wrote a book, he never mentioned this debacle. He didn't mention the Lucas supply problems beyond normal.
We know this would have gone straight to his desk, little wonder he didn't write in any detail on it! Here's a quote from page 218, "On reflection, very little went amiss during a period of great change, when production figures had risen by almost 40%." smile
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Why were only the A65 affected by this.
Were the B25 and B44 built so much better.
We know this revolves around export bikes, both in 1967 and later. A very high percentage of these bikes were A65's, the amount of "others" would be negligible.
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
What about Triumph, how did they avoid this disaster ?
The "rolling road" for one, plus we're talking about two completely separate factories here. Triumph's reputation for quality was much better than BSA's, at that time.
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Why has this been so well hushed up ? Why has Al Cave mislead the BSAOC ? This will be a great shock to his 'mates'.
The BSAOC has bungled the story all right, they need to get it right.
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Why did the board never mention this in any of the reports ?
If they had over 1000 bikes returned and then stored before being completely remade wouldn't there be questions ?
There was back-stabbing going on at the time, wouldn't this innocent parties love to be throwing this in someone's face.
All the more reason to quietly clean up the mess, get it under the carpet as quickly as possible.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
What we have here is a conspiracy. People knew and kept quiet.
Let's see the background papers for Heaton's thesis, let's see Al Cave's papers, let's see the production books.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
It had to be for the good of the company.
Of course, let's remember that when we think that the company may have been putting bogus numbers or leaving empty lines in the 1967 books, in an attempt to cheat their way to the Queen's Export Award.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Where are the 478 Spitfire tanks ?
They were removed from the Mk III's and used for spares ?
What tanks were fitted to the Hybrids waiting on the line ?

Do we think for one second that a Hybrid fuel tank is going to have a date code of May 1967 or earlier ? I doubt they reused the tanks even though the story says they were there and available.

And the Lucas components, are we to believe these were removed, packaged and used as warranty spares. They were not fitted to new bikes on the line. (I believe.)
What about all the rest of the spares, did the US market receive a shipment of much needed spares ?
The engines must have been reduced to component form.
What part of the factory did all that work ?
The US dealers never mentioned it.
BSA had problems in 1968, the shipping strikes did play havoc. Did they keep the staff employed by stripping out the bikes.
Al Cave has been reported as saying they were there for the two years.
The most likely scenario is that, after destroying the drive side case, they flogged the bikes off in a fairly whole condition to a larger shop in England. Probably to someone that had previously worked at BSA of course. Get what they could, get the scrap out of the way.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Until recently we believed the 69/70 Y bikes were rebuilt 1967 models.
The guys in Britain knew no better. That is why the website and Dating Certificates are worded as they are.
Yes, indeed.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Al Cave, and others, knew this was not the case. Why didn't they speak up, ever ...
How old was Al when that story was posted on the BSAOC website? Did Al ever even see it on the website?

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Al Cave gave the BSAOC many documents, do they contain clues as to the whereabouts of these missing bikes?
Let's hope so, and let's have a look please.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
Do some Committee members know more than they are admitting ?
I think the chances of that are quite good. Speak up gents, history deserves the truth here.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
All we have to show these bikes existed in some entries in a ledger.
The BSAOC has maintained that the first bikes existed all along, their problem was with the later ones!

Slowly, but surely, we're getting there.


BSA
Matchless
Triumph
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Two Alpha] #499752
07/30/13 5:10 pm
07/30/13 5:10 pm
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Two Alpha Offline

Life member
Two Alpha  Offline

Life member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
I'll move 17509 over, the 1968 front end points to it being a hybrid all right.


BSA
Matchless
Triumph
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Two Alpha] #499769
07/30/13 7:52 pm
07/30/13 7:52 pm
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 208
netherlands
L
lemans Offline
BritBike Forum member
lemans  Offline
BritBike Forum member
L
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 208
netherlands
I have a A65 SA 13576, matching engine number with -Y
first registered march '68.
polyester tank, 190mm goldstar frontbrake, borrani rims

I'll have a look at the tank dating code

reg A

Last edited by lemans; 07/30/13 7:54 pm.
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #499807
07/31/13 12:12 am
07/31/13 12:12 am
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,330
Medford, Oregon
Gary E Offline
BritBike Forum member
Gary E  Offline
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,330
Medford, Oregon
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
...As well as a date we had a tally number and a shipping con notes.
The tally number was an internal thing and probably contained the works record. I am guessing anything associated with them is now long gone.
The con not though may have been recognised by Customs or the shipping companies.
I was looking for a link between bikes we know that were shipped and the others we are not so sure about.
If the numbers were to be a fabrication then they must have a pattern to them. You would not want them to stand out in the crowd.

Naturally the two similar tally numbers in the example I gave do catch the eye. The tally number could be used to date the machine, it may well have been a continuous sequence assigned to the frame or engine ?

I see no correlation with the Tally Numbers nor the Consignment Note Numbers as shown in this image. An earlier Engine Number stamp date has a later Tally Number, and both machines were dispatched the same date.



1967 BSA Wasp
1967 BSA Hornet (West Coast Model)
1967 BSA Hornet (East Coast Model)
1968 BSA Firebird Scrambler
1968 BSA Spitfire Mark IV
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #499813
07/31/13 1:58 am
07/31/13 1:58 am
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
Kevin (NZ). Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Kevin (NZ).  Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
I am probably clutching at straws though Gary. We simply don't have enough to work with here.

The guys in the UK do though. The VMCC library is there and the BSAOC have their own copies of the fiche I believe.
There was talk of transferring the records on to some database but I think we can all appreciate the enormity of that task.

You have kindly provided a pic showing shipping details of a couple of early 1967 season Hornets.


In the shipping columns we have 5426 and the date 15 Sept 1966.
The C number is the consignment note for that particular machine and is obviously unique.
They would have been issued in sequence as would the tally numbers I am guessing.
The order we are seeing in the books is just the chronological order the bikes arrive at the despatch office.
It appears the shipping ledger is more like a diary and primarily is a day by day record.
By the time the bikes arrive at the office some of the earlier 'order' could be days out of whack.

When I look at the 1969 page I see exactly that.

872, 873, 874, 875 and 876 are all quickly discernible.
If there was going to be some hijinks or irregularities in the earlier 'despatch' dates we may have to be a little more studious than previous pairs of eyes.

I can't say for sure if there is a trend, and I have no idea if the any of theses sequences were being used for other models in the range. So apart from the B44 etc we may even have a second line producing the twins.

I have been ringing someone who worked at the factory, still can't get past the answerphone.
Someone should be able to fill in the gaps for us.

This is only difficult to solve because it has been left far too long. Roy Bacon and his team could have had all this answered 20 years ago, as could the BSAOC I would suggest.

I would think we are trying to convince ourselves that either the first bikes existed or they didn't.
It is as simple as that.

Once we have worked out where we stand there then we may also be a step closer to the how's and why's.


Why, Y, Dash Y..



Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #499823
07/31/13 4:04 am
07/31/13 4:04 am
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Two Alpha Offline

Life member
Two Alpha  Offline

Life member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
I would think we are trying to convince ourselves that either the first bikes existed or they didn't.
It is as simple as that.

Once we have worked out where we stand there then we may also be a step closer to the how's and why's.

Agreed.
The correct answer might be self evident if we had decent access to the books.
We've had a few great guys on this forum provide snippets of the books for us, what we really need is someone who lives near a copy of the books and is willing to do a few days of fairly intense research for us.
Surely there's someone reading this who lives near enough, and obviously there would be expenses involved. I'll be glad to chip in the amount of a BSAOC dating certificate! That's got to cover at least a few refreshments.


BSA
Matchless
Triumph
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #499830
07/31/13 4:49 am
07/31/13 4:49 am
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
Kevin (NZ). Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Kevin (NZ).  Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
We should thank Lemans for his post. It is a Dash Y Spitfire of 1967 but something like the date codes in the tanks may end up being relevant.

While it would be nothing definitive if the Hybrid tanks were made with the SB tanks (SB outnumber Hybrids 3 or 4 to 1).
We could say that the Hybrids were then just MkIV's as we currently suspect.
If however..... the Hybrids all have tanks made a year or more earlier than the SB Spitfires we would have good reason to suspect that an earlier bike did exist.
If the Hybrids all had tanks coded April 1967 and earlier I would be very easily convinced the 478 earlier Mk III bikes existed.
Especially if the 1968 SB bikes had later calendar date codes, ie after June 1967.
Given the Hybrids were the last Spitfires ever made we would expect them to have the last of the tanks.

We still have no physical connection between those first shipping dates and any of the bikes they purport to belong to.

How difficult can this be ?

1500 bikes and not a trace of them.

At what stage do we accept that there is a slim chance of two bikes in circulation with the same S/N sequence.

We should know about it by now and perhaps can stop looking.

I am corresponding with a chap in America at the moment who is adamant he has a 1967 bike that shows in our database as a Y bike.

While it could well be the missing link I think we all now the likely outcome there.
Much as we saw with Phil about 8 weeks ago.
The bikes tell the true story.

EDIT *****
I have a bit of a pucker factor running at the moment.
His numbers ARE indeed right amongst a large group of 1967 Dash Y bikes.
What makes it worse for me is that it is sitting smack between the two blocks of 1969 Y bikes. AND ALONE !!

The spreadsheet should indicate his bike is a 1967 Dash Y bike.
He is adamant it is.
Then again he can't remember what the bike looks like and I think he determined the model PURELY from what he saw in the red books.
If it is a 1967 then he is positive he saw a 1969 entry for the same number.
He may well own the missing link. Good news for some and I will have a lot of sucking back in.

*******


We have to agree the bikes don't exist and then look at the various possibilities and options.

All the pages covering those Hybrids and 1969 Y bikes must hold some clues. It will be between 4 and 10 photocopies or scans.
We have to be at that point now..

Last edited by Kevin (NZ).; 07/31/13 7:50 am.

Why, Y, Dash Y..



Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #499839
07/31/13 6:02 am
07/31/13 6:02 am
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Two Alpha Offline

Life member
Two Alpha  Offline

Life member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
At what stage do we accept that there is a slim chance of two bikes in circulation with the same S/N sequence.

I realized this had to be the case a long while back, the two bikes could never have been intentionally in circulation at the same time.

Trying to find the early bike, the one that originally carried the number that was assigned to a later Y bike,
would have been an absolute waste of time. Surely no one has been seriously expecting to find one.

If we're going to accept anything let's accept that BSA would not put a 1967 number on a 1968 or later bike while the original bike with that number was still in circulation.

Having accepted that, please don't think that it has any bearing on whether or not the first bike existed in the first place, it surely does not.

Suggesting that we should expect to find a "physical connection between those first shipping dates and any of the bikes they purport to belong to" really is a red herring.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
All the pages covering those Hybrids and 1969 Y bikes must hold some clues. It will be between 4 and 10 photocopies or scans.
We have to be at that point now..
I really don't think the 1967 bikes that were refurbished, have two dispatch dates and are still in circulation should be excluded from the conversation.
They are part and parcel of the same problem, just with a different solution.

I think bikes like mine prove the existence of the earlier bikes, I also think that you are beginning to suspect that I might be right.


BSA
Matchless
Triumph
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Two Alpha] #499840
07/31/13 6:12 am
07/31/13 6:12 am
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Two Alpha Offline

Life member
Two Alpha  Offline

Life member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Check this one out!

A65SA 4999Y
edit: Ignore the link, the original listing is long gone now.

I've asked him for clarification on that engine number.

Last edited by Two Alpha; 12/22/13 2:40 pm.

BSA
Matchless
Triumph
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Two Alpha] #499843
07/31/13 7:15 am
07/31/13 7:15 am
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Two Alpha Offline

Life member
Two Alpha  Offline

Life member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Just a few additions and a little housekeeping, thanks for the numbers guys!

BSA Twin Serial Numbers 1967-1970

Last edited by Two Alpha; 08/14/13 6:10 pm. Reason: update link

BSA
Matchless
Triumph
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #499844
07/31/13 7:37 am
07/31/13 7:37 am
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 208
netherlands
L
lemans Offline
BritBike Forum member
lemans  Offline
BritBike Forum member
L
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 208
netherlands
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
We should thank Lemans for his post. It is a Dash Y Spitfire of 1967 but something like the date codes in the tanks may end up being relevant.


I'm so sorry. way back in the early days, when repairs had to be easy and quick (I have the bike 34 years now) I applied some layers of glass-fibre and so on to repair a pair of broken bolts and general leakage. So the autograph, which is definitely there has been covered up.

blush

Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Two Alpha] #499853
07/31/13 9:51 am
07/31/13 9:51 am
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,137
Sydney, Oz
S
Shane in Oz Offline
BritBike Forum member
Shane in Oz  Offline
BritBike Forum member
S
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,137
Sydney, Oz
Originally Posted By: Two Alpha
Check this one out!

A65SA 4999Y

I've asked him for clarification on that engine number.


Yes, that one could be interesting.

It looks like it has a 1969 motor with a pre-1966 rocker cover.
I doubt the seller knows if the engine was original to the bike, though.

Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #499857
07/31/13 10:26 am
07/31/13 10:26 am
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
Kevin (NZ). Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Kevin (NZ).  Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
Ah, so Shane is lurking...

I agree with that 1966 cycle and 68/69 engine. Difficult to see what the Spitfire parts are there.

What do you make of the spreadsheet Shane ?

You are normally so opinionated as well. ;

Good to hear you reporting in

Cheers


Why, Y, Dash Y..



Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Shane in Oz] #499949
07/31/13 9:23 pm
07/31/13 9:23 pm
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Two Alpha Offline

Life member
Two Alpha  Offline

Life member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Regarding A65SA 4999Y

That really is what's stamped on the raised pad!

Don't think it was stamped there by BSA though.

The seller was kind enough to provide a picture.

Last edited by Two Alpha; 08/01/13 2:31 am. Reason: add picture.

BSA
Matchless
Triumph
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #500001
08/01/13 3:02 am
08/01/13 3:02 am
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,330
Medford, Oregon
Gary E Offline
BritBike Forum member
Gary E  Offline
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,330
Medford, Oregon
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
...You have kindly provided a pic showing shipping details of a couple of early 1967 season Hornets.


In the shipping columns we have 5426 and the date 15 Sept 1966.
The C number is the consignment note for that particular machine and is obviously unique.
They would have been issued in sequence as would the tally numbers I am guessing....

No, the tally numbers are not in sequence, nor are the consignment numbers.

Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
...The order we are seeing in the books is just the chronological order the bikes arrive at the despatch office.
It appears the shipping ledger is more like a diary and primarily is a day by day record.
By the time the bikes arrive at the office some of the earlier 'order' could be days out of whack...

I disagree. The machines were built in number order. The dispatch dates are what are out of date order.


1967 BSA Wasp
1967 BSA Hornet (West Coast Model)
1967 BSA Hornet (East Coast Model)
1968 BSA Firebird Scrambler
1968 BSA Spitfire Mark IV
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Two Alpha] #500008
08/01/13 3:59 am
08/01/13 3:59 am
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Two Alpha Offline

Life member
Two Alpha  Offline

Life member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 619
North Coast, BC, Canada
Just added another batch of numbers, thanks to Gary and Kevin.

BSA Twin Serial Numbers 1967-1970

Last edited by Two Alpha; 08/14/13 6:08 pm. Reason: update link

BSA
Matchless
Triumph
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Gary E] #500024
08/01/13 9:29 am
08/01/13 9:29 am
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
Kevin (NZ). Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Kevin (NZ).  Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
Originally Posted By: Gary E
Originally Posted By: Kevin (NZ).
...You have kindly provided a pic showing shipping details of a couple of early 1967 season Hornets.



[quote=Kevin (NZ).]...The order we are seeing in the books is just the chronological order the bikes arrive at the despatch office.
It appears the shipping ledger is more like a diary and primarily is a day by day record.
By the time the bikes arrive at the office some of the earlier 'order' could be days out of whack...

I disagree. The machines were built in number order. The dispatch dates are what are out of date order.



I don't agree Gary,

The only order I am seeing is Tally order.
The engine serial numbers may be assigned in sequence but the engines are not fitted to the frames in any particular order.


This has always been my understanding of the twin production, it was Stuart the other day that helped my understanding with the date and model codes being added at a later date.

If we look at the Y bikes of Dec 1969 / Jan 1970 construction then we have 3 examples.

12215, 12192, 12318, 17964 are all Y bikes and those numbers would have been stamped on the casing.
Similarly XD03441, AD04586, AD04722 are normal bikes with that large pad.
AD04364 does not have that casting.

Another distinctive casting feature is the 'ringworm' that was cast over the old trans oil filler early in the 1969 season. This is normally associated with PC numbers and appears at the same time as the first of the raised pads.
I have a pic here of an end of season bike with that feature, a GC number I think.

I understood the engines were set aside to 'cure' (possibly the cases, either was) we see two examples where later numbers have been stamped. There has to be a clue there.

When I look at the 1969 despatch page I see the Tally numbers run in much better sequence on a day to day basis than the engine/frame numbers.

If we look at 17915, it is an AC bike where all others about it are EC models.
The others are all S/N 22000 series.

The Tally numbers at this point are not far out of whack.

All 970 series are on that page. They are the last of the 1969 models finally being cleared out in Sept 1969.

The Tally numbers are roughly in some kind of order until about 930 and then it jumps to 970'ish.

We can see the tally number is unique to each bike.

This is 1969 calendar year and we know the Y bikes are coming off those same lines during this period.

I would be expecting them to have the same Tally sequence, the difference this time being they are squeezed into the 1967 books. Not as we see here as an add-on to the 1969 season run.

We do have an example of a Tally number for a 1969 bike.
5893 for a bike shipped at the end of February.

The Tally number we are seeing in 1969 is 'last three' format, a common practice in Britain. The fuller number should very likely be indicated every so often in the logs.

We have a despatch date, that is pretty well established as one set point.
The tally number must have been assigned a little upstream of that, not too far. The good think with this though is that it is sequential.
The engine serial number sequencing was was back upon completion of engine build.
The S/N date coding was done on the engine and frame as they were coming off the line and it basically set, it is just very broad at 30 day intervals.

There is plenty of info there to be able to crack the code of missing bikes and whether the tally numbers were allocated to Y models coming down the line. I would be surprised if they were not.

The Y bike allocation of S/N was down way back at engine build.

If we look at the spreadsheet and the last of the 1969 Y bikes.
Ok, they are in S/N sequence at this point but we can surmise which bikes were the last to produced before the 1970 features appear.

What are the odds that 10139Y, 10144 and 10481 were coming down the line at the same time as the EC 22000 series.

Of those columns in the shipping ledger we can work by the dates.
1969 Y bike shipping date against comparable 1969 book with normal bike.

I expect the tally numbers to be shared between the two types of bike on the line.
The bikes, on this page, were all trucked so the shipping details are different.
A Feb 1969 despatch had details of 1104L 1846.

Now, what we are really seeking is the 'missing' 1967 bikes.
A similar exercise of comparing numbers should produce similar results.
This time I would be looking for a discrepancy rather than a similarity.
Ie. Do the tally numbers of the Y bikes run in sequence with the Dash Y bikes that should have been getting produced about them.
we know from the 1969 books that all the numbers kind of line up on the same calendar date.
If the Y bikes stand out as being different then perhaps we have our answer. This is from books 274 and 275 this time.

I would suggest that 7886-Y would be a good example here.
We know that bike was made as it still exists.
How about those Y bikes of 1969 with very similar numbers ?
When we look in the book we would expect to see dates, tally numbers and possibly consignment details to be similar as well.





Why, Y, Dash Y..



Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #500068
08/01/13 3:46 pm
08/01/13 3:46 pm
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,330
Medford, Oregon
Gary E Offline
BritBike Forum member
Gary E  Offline
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,330
Medford, Oregon
Kevin,

We will never agree here. Your information is all based on the 1969 books. My information comes from the 1967 books which is the subject of our concern, at least I think or maybe thought it was. There is no rhythm to the sequence of tally numbers in the '67 books other than they eventally do get bigger.


1967 BSA Wasp
1967 BSA Hornet (West Coast Model)
1967 BSA Hornet (East Coast Model)
1968 BSA Firebird Scrambler
1968 BSA Spitfire Mark IV
Re: Calling all Dash Y and Y bike owners.. [Re: Kevin (NZ).] #500069
08/01/13 4:04 pm
08/01/13 4:04 pm
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
Kevin (NZ). Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Kevin (NZ).  Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,799
Christchurch, NZ
Yes, you may be right Gary. I will put some more thought into that one.
I was thinking the 1967 sequence would be in a rough and haphazard style but with standout strange numbers.
If those numbers were then seen to match the same dates from the 69 batch being at exactly the same time and shipped through the same books then I may have had something.
We won't see a good sequence on each page, there are only 41 lines per page and many more bikes than that being produced each day.

In this case the 200 pages were filled in a little over 100 days I imagine.

Thanks again for the insight and guidance. Cheers.


Why, Y, Dash Y..



Page 15 of 32 1 2 13 14 15 16 17 31 32

Moderated by  Allan Gill, Jon W. Whitley 


Home | Sponsors | Newsletter | Regalia | Calendar | Bike Project | BritBike Museum | Spiders Cartoons | "OLD" BritBike Forum | DVD- Manuals & Parts books | BritBike Stickers & Decals
Upgrade to: Premium Membership | Premium Life Membership | Vendor Membership | Site Sponsor Membership
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.1.1