Solved - MJW #838 - Riley RM 1.5 litre 1947 coupe by FLM Panelcraft? c.1953

Started by woodinsight, January 20, 2012, 12:33:01 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

woodinsight

I thought this one might have been posted before but apparently not....
Identify the make and year for a point and I'll offer an extra point for the coachbuilder (with proof) as I don't know.

woodinsight


Iluvatar

L'Automobile Italiana automobileitaliana.it
Facebook automobileitaliana
Instagram @autoitaliana

woodinsight


als15

Body by Zagato? Perhaps a Bristol 407?

72Must

Riley RM ca '53 , UK coachbuilder possibly FLM panelcraft ?

woodinsight

Quote from: als15 on January 26, 2012, 05:06:34 AM
Body by Zagato? Perhaps a Bristol 407?
Neither Bristol or Zagato.....

woodinsight

Quote from: 72Must on January 26, 2012, 05:31:38 AM
Riley RM ca '53 , UK coachbuilder possibly FLM panelcraft ?
Yes it's a Riley RM - originally from 1947 and rebodied c.1953.
So, one point for you.
Do you have proof that FLM Panelcraft bodied it? (I don't know).
A point for anyone providing positive identification of the coachbuilder.....

woodinsight

I've just discovered that the coachbuilder was indeed FLM Panelcraft.
So the extra point goes to 72Must and the puzzle is now solved.

Carnut

Quote from: woodinsight on January 27, 2012, 08:43:56 PM
I've just discovered that the coachbuilder was indeed FLM Panelcraft.
So the extra point goes to 72Must and the puzzle is now solved.

And I see you've captioned it correctly as a Riley 1.5 too.
I was amazed when you confirmed 72must's identification of it as a Riley RM;  I Googled endlessly for a Panelcraft or coachbuilt Riley RM but couldn't find this (although frankly Googling for a Panelcraft of special-bodied Riley 1.5 didn't produce any results either...)

Strictly speaking it never actually got a correct full ID...

Interests in life:  Cars, cars, cars - oh and ..er..cars

woodinsight

Quote from: Carnut on January 28, 2012, 09:17:28 AM
Quote from: woodinsight on January 27, 2012, 08:43:56 PM
I've just discovered that the coachbuilder was indeed FLM Panelcraft.
So the extra point goes to 72Must and the puzzle is now solved.

And I see you've captioned it correctly as a Riley 1.5 too.
I was amazed when you confirmed 72must's identification of it as a Riley RM;  I Googled endlessly for a Panelcraft or coachbuilt Riley RM but couldn't find this (although frankly Googling for a Panelcraft of special-bodied Riley 1.5 didn't produce any results either...)

Strictly speaking it never actually got a correct full ID...


My source on FLM Panelcraft indicates that they built a 'good-looking coupe body on a Riley RM chassis' and although I have no photographic from that source I do seem to remember it was confirmed as being by FLM Panelcraft by a previous owner in the letters column of an old magazine.
Thanks for drawing my attention to it Carnut but I'll leave things as they stand for the moment but add a question mark after the coachbuilder in the title. 

Carnut

Yes, if it's as early as 1947 then it must be an RM rather than a Riley 1.5.
I just had it in my mind that this was a mid fifties Riley 1.5 but I'm obviously wrong and 72must's identification was right..
Interests in life:  Cars, cars, cars - oh and ..er..cars

Allan L

We older pedants tend to refer to the RM models as 1½ and 2½ litre as we did at the time, which was just as well when BMC produced the 1.5 and 2.6 litre models which had BMC B and C series machinery and Riley badges. ;)
Opinionated but sometimes wrong

Carnut

Quote from: Allan L on January 28, 2012, 02:37:27 PM
We older pedants tend to refer to the RM models as 1½ and 2½ litre as we did at the time, which was just as well when BMC produced the 1.5 and 2.6 litre models which had BMC B and C series machinery and Riley badges. ;)

You beat me to it Allan!
I tried to add last night (but I couldn't get anywhere on my computer) that the RM should correctly be referred to as a 1.1/2 litre; only the later Morris Minor-based cars were described as 1.5
Fractions ruled the day in 1947, not decimals!
Interests in life:  Cars, cars, cars - oh and ..er..cars

Allemano

I always though it would be a 1947 Riley RM by Bertone! ???

The car is not unknown and it's registered for years in Japan as far as I know.

Allan L

Well that does look pretty well identical.
Just as a matter of interest what registration number did you blank out in the puzzle picture?
Opinionated but sometimes wrong

Carnut

Interests in life:  Cars, cars, cars - oh and ..er..cars

Allemano

If I understand one of the Japanese sources properly there's apparently still no evidence that the body was really made by Bertone. Possibly it was rather built in an "Italian style" by some London coachbuilder.

Iluvatar

Quote from: Allemano on January 30, 2012, 06:13:03 AM
If I understand one of the Japanese sources properly there's apparently still no evidence that the body was really made by Bertone. Possibly it was rather built in an "Italian style" by some London coachbuilder.
The roof and rear lights design take inspiration from Bertone Giulietta Sprint, but I agree the car is most likely a british creation...
MPC
L'Automobile Italiana automobileitaliana.it
Facebook automobileitaliana
Instagram @autoitaliana

Allemano

...and I think this rear design would have never left the Bertone workshop...

woodinsight

Quote from: Carnut on January 30, 2012, 06:01:25 AM
'PB' is a Surrey registration; weren't Panelcraft in Surrey?
Panelcraft were in Putney until c.1950 then in Battersea after that as FLM Panelcraft

woodinsight

Quote from: Allan L on January 30, 2012, 05:45:46 AM
Well that does look pretty well identical.
Just as a matter of interest what registration number did you blank out in the puzzle picture?
The original puzzle photo with the registration number shown.....

Carnut

That number is actually from September 1957.
Strictly speaking it's illegal for a car to have a registration number that is newer than the vehicle but I don't know how strictly they enforced that in those days.  On the other hand, if a vehicle was changed substantially enough from the original it might have been possible for it to be allocated a new number.

Either way though that number doesn't tie in either with the 1947 date of the original car or of the date the body was said to have been built?
Interests in life:  Cars, cars, cars - oh and ..er..cars

woodinsight

Quote from: Carnut on January 30, 2012, 02:57:03 PM
That number is actually from September 1957.
Strictly speaking it's illegal for a car to have a registration number that is newer than the vehicle but I don't know how strictly they enforced that in those days.  On the other hand, if a vehicle was changed substantially enough from the original it might have been possible for it to be allocated a new number.

Either way though that number doesn't tie in either with the 1947 date of the original car or of the date the body was said to have been built?
I guess it's possible the car was rebodied/rebuilt in 1957 and that my estimate of 1953 was wrong.

Allan L

The rule about newer number than car was only introduced some time after the change to the numbers system that identified the registration year. Prior to that if you had a personal number, when you swapped it off the car, another number for it was issued by the authority where you happened to live. I assume that's why the 1910 Star I had was LL776 which was issued in 1914 and I know it's what happened to a 1962 Daimler SP250 which was 6798 PP by the time I got it in about 1972.
Opinionated but sometimes wrong