Chassis Numbers

[Mark Hineline]

Works for me Bob. I think it actually makes the whole business more interesting.

(I hope no one regards the above as just "mmm hmm.")

On Nov 2, 2005, at 1:38 PM, Bob Grunau wrote:
As Terry, and others have said, it is not unusual to have ownerships, data plates and chassis numbers mixed up on old MG cars. A few examples:

[DougPulver@aol.com]

Mark,

I too think it does make the "whole thing more interesting". Just make sure you know what you have before you spend $25,000 restoring a car that you then have a registration problem with.

TC5850 came to me from Canada with "1947" on the title. The lady at AAA took my word that it was actually a "1948" car (after I showed her a list of TC vin numbers with the month of manufacture that I carry in my wallet). She then changed it on the title issued to me from the state of California.

Best of luck.

Doug

[Bob Grunau]

As somebody a lot smarter than I said several years ago " Shit happens". Now where did I hear that? Nop offence to anybody.

Bob Grunau

[Rothgene Roth]

Another explanation for two MG TCs with the same number is that some may be registered by engine number and some by frame number, perhaps this is the case.

Gene Roth

[Dave Lodge]

Hello Thom,

I have no idea. What is los?

Regards, Lodge

OH -Oh Their is trouble abrewing about TC 3409. Are their two of them? Vas ist los?
Tally Ho!
Thom

[Dave Lodge]

Thanks for that Bob. But now I'm REALLY confused!

All the best, David Lodge

[Mark Hineline]

I took delivery of my frame in the parking lot the TA truck center in Ontario, CA, and drove it the last hour home. The five-week saga is almost over; now I just have to identify the number.

Here's a photo:

http://www.ocotillofield.net/TCproject/3489.jpg

The zero in "3409" might be an eight: 3489. Or the "9" might actually be a zero and a scratch: 3400.

Mark
TC 34??

[Mark Hineline]

Wire brush elimates the "zero is an eight" theory. In two sources of light:

http://www.ocotillofield.net/TCproject/3409a.jpg

and

http://www.ocotillofield.net/TCproject/3409b.jpg

It looks more light a nine than any other number, but is it a definitive nine? Did frame stamped nines look like this?

Mark
TC 340(9)

[D&J Edgar]

Mark,

Congratulations on finally getting your frame. First of many hurdles to be cleared I am sure.

In regard to #, the 0 pictured is of considerable different height than the T, C, 3, 4 and what looks to be a 9. Any one else out there with different size number stamping? Could the 0 have worn out at the factory and they only replaced the one stamp rather than the set?

Closest TCs I could find number wise with a 0 in it (other than Meismer with exact same number) is Jeff Redman with TC 3306 and Brian Wheeler with TC 3550. Maybe these two chaps can see if their 0 is of different size too.

Anyone else out there with other miss matched number sizes to confirm if this is normal?

David Edgar, TC 5108
El Cajon, California

[49 MG TC]

No question in my eyes. The number is 3409.

Are all frame numbers supposed to match the Car number?

Bud Silvers
TC 8192 - Low n slo in the Black Forest of Colorado

[Doug Pelton]

Mark,
I have TC 7670 and just looked at the numbers.
First: the zero is undersized exactly to the same proportion as yours.
Second: the 6 on my car is the same exact as your 9 except upside down.
Conclusion: Looks like 3409 to me.
Cheers'

Doug Pelton
Mesa, AZ
TC 7410 EXU
TC 7670 EXU

[Mark Hineline]

Bringing everyone up to date: in late October I purchased a frame through ebay. Due to some minor missteps, it has taken about five weeks to get the frame from Chicago to San Diego.

When I announced the purchase on this list as frame number TC 3409, I heard at once from Mrs. Alma Meismer, who wrote to me and to the list that her late husband's TC is registered as 3409. As I hadn't yet inspected the frame, I couldn't speak to the matter.

Now I have, and it is clearly TC 3409. In due course, it may be necessary for Mrs. Meismer to inspect the number on the frame of her car or to have someone inspect it for her. It is possible that Rolland Meismer restored the car using a different frame.

Perhaps someone on the list will be passing through Iowa some time in the next three years or so and will offer to inspect the frame number on Mrs. Meismer's frame?

Time is not the essence. I will not be attempting to register this car for three years, at least.

In the meantime, and until the matter is resolved to everyone's satisfaction, I will sign myself:

Mark
TC 3409a

[Dave Lodge]

Hello Mark,

I think you've definitely got hold of a "9" The third digit is questionable. Be a devil and try a wire brush. The suspense is killing me!

Regards, David Lodge

[sculptart@aol.com]

Mark,

I think you can be assured you have No. 3409 chassis. It is VERY clear from the photo. Another possibility occurred to me, two chassis with the same number by mistake.

Good luck with the restoration and keep all of us posted over the years.

Happy Holidays from Colorado, Ben, TC 4260

[Dave Lodge]

"1704 calling planet Earth. Will check next week-end"

Regards, David (I'm-the-Urban-Spaceman) Lodge

Mark,

Congratulations on finally getting your frame. First of many hurdles to be cleared I am sure.

In regard to #, the 0 pictured is of considerable different height than the T, C, 3, 4 and what looks to be a 9. Any one else out there with different size number stamping? Could the 0 have worn out at the factory and they only replaced the one stamp rather than the set?

Closest TCs I could find number wise with a 0 in it (other than Meismer with exact same number) is Jeff Redman with TC 3306 and Brian Wheeler with TC 3550. Maybe these two chaps can see if their 0 is of different size too.

Anyone else out there with other miss matched number sizes to confirm if this is normal?

David Edgar, TC 5108
El Cajon, California

[D&J Edgar]

Well I'll be. I just went out to look at my frame number (5108) and discovered my 0 is also of smaller proportions. I never noticed that before. Guess that is normal? Anyone out there with a full size 0?

David Edgar, TC 5108
El Cajon, California

Mark,
I have TC 7670 and just looked at the numbers.
First: the zero is undersized exactly to the same proportion as yours.
Second: the 6 on my car is the same exact as your 9 except upside down.
Conclusion: Looks like 3409 to me.
Cheers'

Doug Pelton
Mesa, AZ
TC 7410 EXU
TC 7670 EXU

[Mark Hineline]

Notice also that the "C" is significantly bigger than the "T". These were probably two different sets of stamps, mixed together. Maybe the original zero and one of the letters "went to war," like the green ink on packs of Lucky Strikes.

Mark
TC 3409a

Well I'll be. I just went out to look at my frame number (5108) and discovered my 0 is also of smaller proportions. I never noticed that before. Guess that is normal? Anyone out there with a full size 0?

David Edgar, TC 5108
El Cajon, California

[BDavis]

---Ben wrote----
...Another possibility occurred to me, two chassis with the same number
by mistake.

My money is on Ben!
Suppose the stamper chap had found out his girl friend was pregnant, spent the evening in a pub celebrating, came in to work the following morning with a roaring headache, carelessly inverted the last stamp, bashed it with his hammer, realized his mistake, feared being sacked by the boss and NEVER breathed another word about it? Conclusion: Two TCs # 3409. Zero TC # 3406. OMG! This is the definitive dilemma faced by the OP!

bbbbbbbill in freeeeeezing nashville

[Rick Storms]

I would expect that the "C" to be slightly higher that the rest of the letters, the same would be true of the letter "O", "Q", "S" and "G". It should extend slightly lower as well. This is normally done in "correct" printing so the weight of the letter is equal to other "heaver" letters such as "D", "W" and "M"'s. It's a visual thing. However, since the advent of "true type" fonts (ones used on your computer and other print media), we see less of this on a daily basis. I would have expected the "0" (zero) to follow the same rules, alas I guess it's the same as all other "gosh I wonder why my car isn't like the others" syndrome.... it's really what was ever on the shelf at the time.....

Rick Storms
TC's 6776, 8230 (mostly in parts)

[Mark Hineline]

In that case, my frame is like the postage stamp with the Curtiss Jenny flying upside down. I can sell it, buy a perfect restored TC with the proceeds, drive on the tour of the Flint Hills this year, and buy everyone a round.

Mark
TC 3409a

On Dec 6, 2005, at 7:20 AM, BDavis wrote:
Conclusion: Two TCs # 3409. Zero TC # 3406. OMG! This is the definitive dilemma faced by the OP!