invacar LightBulbFun's Invacar & general ramble thread, index on page 1, survivors lists on Pages 24/134 & AdgeCutler's Invacar Mk12 Restoration from Page 186 onwards, still harping on...

[DVee8]

@LightBulbFun, £500

https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/1473193159774849

[LightBulbFun]

6 hours ago, AdgeCutler said:

The owner of this car has just been in contact with me in preparation for restoration. Looks at a glance to be in great shape anyhow and I hope it is a sympathetic job. I'll mention Autoshite to him, see if he may climb aboard? 

Oh awesome! it would be awesome if he was to sign up! and document his own journey with it! 

I agree a nice sympathetic restoration would be good for HEV109H given how its still in good shape relatively speaking after all these years  

 

would be interesting to hear more of its story,

 

from what I Have been able to research so far I understand, that in 1979 the Microcar people of the UK (Tony Marshall, & Malcoolm thomas)  traded it with someone in the Netherlands for what they perceived as a rare Microcar at the time, a Kleinschnittger and the UK Microcar people "oh you want one of these Common as muck Invacars? sure!"

however fast forward 40 years later, and the Invacar Mk12E is way rarer then the Kleinschnittger they got in exchange! I have wondered if HEV109H has  been with the same owner in the Netherlands all this time since then or not, I do know he has other microcars so its not out of the question  

its in lovely original shape complete with factory plastic wing mirror and all! and i really do wonder what its story was back in 1979, I notice for example it has a DHSS Reserve sticker in the windscreen, it is worth noting that back then it was much much easier to save an Invacar from the Ministry, then it was in the 1990's and 2000's 

its just sadly, very few people did! but HEV109H is one of those rare examples, and in fact thinking about it, I do wonder if HEV109H is the first Ministry Invacar Mk12 to have escaped so to speak  

[GR8 PL8 M8]

2 hours ago, LightBulbFun said:

from what I Have been able to research so far I understand, that in 1979 the Microcar people of the UK (Tony Marshall, & Malcoolm thomas)  traded it with someone in the Netherlands for what they perceived as a rare Microcar at the time, a Klienshunigger and the UK Microcar people "oh you want one of these Common as muck Invacars? sure!"

however fast forward 40 years later, and the Invacar Mk12E is way rarer then the Klienshunigger they got in exchange! I have wondered if HEV109H has  been with the same owner in the Netherlands all this time since then or not, I do know he has other microcars so its not out of the question   

I can't help but think you meant to type "Kleinschnittger"? Web searching "Klienshunigger" only brings up this post.

[LightBulbFun]

5 minutes ago, GR8 PL8 M8 said:

I can't help but think you meant to type "Kleinschnittger"? Web searching "Klienshunigger" only brings up this post.

Oops! yes thats what I get for semi-blindly copying and pasting old research notes so to speak  

(I did google it to double check it was the right thing and got what I was looking for, but I missed the fact that google was doing its "Showing results for xxx instead" thing)

duly corrected! 

[quicksilver]

On 11/7/2022 at 10:39 PM, LightBulbFun said:

still a neat shot! one of those would be fun to reproduce  

I will admit at very first glance I thought you had found a picture of MHJ54P at long last! but alas not! 

it does amuse me, that no one seems to have a picture of MHJ54P! given normally theres been enough bus enthusiasts throughout time, that you mention any other bus and someone will have a photo of it somewhere!

(for example I was talking to Stuart about the Retroreflective number plate trial scheme of 1964 IIRC, and he mentioned that some buses where used but he did not have many good pictures, so I went through the usual resources and quite quickly found a few good photos for him )

MHJ54P is a lot smaller than that - it's only a 29-seat Duple-bodied Bedford VAS. It lasted until 1996 and moved around the country a fair bit so I can't believe nobody photographed it during its 20-year career.

[busmansholiday]

1 hour ago, quicksilver said:

MHJ54P is a lot smaller than that - it's only a 29-seat Duple-bodied Bedford VAS. It lasted until 1996 and moved around the country a fair bit so I can't believe nobody photographed it during its 20-year career.

Back then every photo you took cost money, whether it was B&W, colour print or slides. A proxy little Bedford VAS rarely triggered many enthusiasts shutter finger. I'd struggle to find shots of them I took, even the ones I drove. 

[FakeConcern]

Not related to cars, Inva, Micro or otherwise, but @LightBulbFun, you may know what this is.

Strange filament

Says something on the glass, Made in England dates it...

 

I can't remember how we came to have it or why it didn't go in the bin, but anyway...

What is it?

[High Jetter]

Wait for it.....'it's on page 1,468 of the light bulb fun thread'?

[LightBulbFun]

48 minutes ago, FakeConcern said:

Not related to cars, Inva, Micro or otherwise, but @LightBulbFun, you may know what this is.

Strange filament

Says something on the glass, Made in England dates it...

 

I can't remember how we came to have it or why it didn't go in the bin, but anyway...

What is it?

oh very cool! its an Osglim (Osram GEC) Beehive Neon lamp  

an early form electric discharge lamp, about 5W http://www.lamptech.co.uk/Spec Sheets/D G Ne Osglim Beehive.htm

your example looks to date from the 1940's as its still Osglim branded but lacks a pip top of the earliest lamps, above "Made In England" is a 2 digit number, if you can make it out I can date your lamp to the Month and year it was made  (to make the etch a bit more readable if you get the lamp nice and cold, say stick it in the freezer and then breath on crown of the bulb, the condensate from the breath can often bring out faint markings)

 

is there a voltage marking on the etch anywhere? if you cant find one, be VERY careful testing it, MOST had internal ballasting resistors for running directly off 200-250V mains, but some where produced without ballasting resistors, for when the lamp was to be used in some specialised equipment, for example early mechanical TV's used resistor-less lamps as the modulated light-source for their Nipkow disks 
 

and if a non ballasted lamp is plugged directly into the mains it will explode!

most discharge lamps have whats called a negative resistance characteristic, in that the more power that flows through them, the lower their resistance drops, and this causes even more power to flow, and thus the resistance drops even further, in a runaway until something gives up usually quite violently! and all happening in a split second (electricity moves/happens fast!) and thats why most forms of discharge lamp will require some sort of current limiting device to work properly

 

these lamps are pretty well sought after by collectors these days, my oldest example shown bellow dates to 1935,  I am really glad yours was not chucked in the bin, far too old and rare for that! and I see its not had much use either, as the glass is nice and clear with no signs of major electrode sputtering deposits  

 

On 02/03/2020 at 20:00, LightBulbFun said:

 

on the opposite end of the discharge lamp spectrum I dug this lamp out from storage to grab some information it has on it for another collector, and I figured while I had it out it would be rude not to light it  

my November 1935 Osglim GEC Beehive neon lamp  this particular example is unusual in that most had an internal ballasting resistor in the cap, however this one was made without and contains a warning etch telling you to use a 2270 Ohm resistor with the lamp if you are using it on mains voltage

(another collector has a similar lamp where its internal resistor has sadly burnt out so was looking for the correct value of resistor to use)

such a resistorless lamp would of most likely been used in something like a very early Television receiver or other such device

(osglim is not a typo, its because back then GEC only held the rights to use the Osram name on its Tungsten filament lamps)

 

[FakeConcern]

54 minutes ago, High Jetter said:

Wait for it.....'it's on page 1,468 of the light bulb fun thread'?

How did you know this?

30 minutes ago, LightBulbFun said:

oh very cool! its an Osglim (Osram GEC) Beehive Neon lamp  

an early form electric discharge lamp, about 5W http://www.lamptech.co.uk/Spec Sheets/D G Ne Osglim Beehive.htm

your example looks to date from the 1940's as its still Osglim branded but lacks a pip top of the earliest lamps, above "Made In England" is a 2 digit number, if you can make it out I can date your lamp to the Month and year it was made  (to make the etch a bit more readable if you get the lamp nice and cold, say stick it in the freezer and then breath on crown of the bulb, the condensate from the breath can often bring out faint markings)

 

is there a voltage marking on the etch anywhere? if you cant find one, be VERY careful testing it, MOST had internal ballasting resistors for running directly off 200-250V mains, but some where produced without ballasting resistors, for when the lamp was to be used in some specialised equipment, for example early mechanical TV's used resistor-less lamps as the modulated light-source for their Nipkow disks 
 

and if a non ballasted lamp is plugged directly into the mains it will explode!

most discharge lamps have whats called a negative resistance characteristic, in that the more power that flows through them, the lower their resistance drops, and this causes even more power to flow, and thus the resistance drops even further, in a runaway until something gives up usually quite violently! and all happening in a split second (electricity moves/happens fast!) and thats why most forms of discharge lamp will require some sort of current limiting device to work properly

 

these lamps are pretty well sought after by collectors these days, my oldest example shown bellow dates to 1935,  I am really glad yours was not chucked in the bin, far too old and rare for that! and I see its not had much use either, as the glass is nice and clear with no signs of major electrode sputtering deposits  

 

 

Wow, interesting information! Mrs Concern and I were very impressed.

Mrs Concern thinks it was in the house when we moved here in 2001, the lady we bought the house from had lived here for about 40 years.

Looking at the bulb with a torch, we are pretty sure the two digit number is 21. Can't see any markings for the voltage so we won't try it out!

If you'd like it I can post it if it's likely to survive or you can wait until we visit our friends in East London (usually has a party we go to for Christmas/New Year) and I'll deliver it, either way PM me if you want it.

Apropos of nothing in particular I think I saw you post a picture taken near to Morpeth School where I was a teacher for over 20 years so assume you live fairly near to that!

 

[LightBulbFun]

1 hour ago, FakeConcern said:

Wow, interesting information! Mrs Concern and I were very impressed.

Mrs Concern thinks it was in the house when we moved here in 2001, the lady we bought the house from had lived here for about 40 years.

Looking at the bulb with a torch, we are pretty sure the two digit number is 21. Can't see any markings for the voltage so we won't try it out!

If you'd like it I can post it if it's likely to survive or you can wait until we visit our friends in East London (usually has a party we go to for Christmas/New Year) and I'll deliver it, either way PM me if you want it.

Thanks! glad to have been of service so to speak!  

a date code of 21 translates to September 1943  (I almost wonder if it was bought for blackout usage?)

and thank you very much for the offer of the lamp ill PM you regarding that!  

(I do note that it has an insulating sleeve on one lead in wire which is normally a good indication of a ballasting resistor being present, but still best be safe)

1 hour ago, FakeConcern said:

Apropos of nothing in particular I think I saw you post a picture taken near to Morpeth School where I was a teacher for over 20 years so assume you live fairly near to that!

not a million miles away! although not my usual area, however I noticed its near Fish Island which is where I went looking for the DNX Model 70 all the way back on Page 1! so perhaps its photos related to that that you saw? 

[Remspoor]

8 hours ago, LightBulbFun said:

(I almost wonder if it was bought for blackout usage?)

[AdgeCutler]

22 hours ago, DVee8 said:

@LightBulbFun, £500

https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/1473193159774849

This is a Batricar of Stroud. An early type of mobility scooter as we know them today.

[stendec]

On 11/8/2022 at 1:10 PM, Blake's Den said:

Hey @LightBulbFun, this has popped up on an auctioneers website that I follow :https://www.easyliveauction.com/catalogue/lot/9287aae29190b12e4c0bdb1a5c658770/1f1638c9faeb7c2641b7b1e9c67628d0/two-day-auction-of-collectables-antiques-jewellery-f-lot-1220/

It is XPD 805 which is a Argson. A quick google search of the numberplate shows some photos of the same vehicle so I guess that this one is known to you already.

Auction was on 9 Nov, hammer price £950 and already up on the 'bay for a wee bit more (£2,995)

[LightBulbFun]

4 hours ago, stendec said:

Auction was on 9 Nov, hammer price £950 and already up on the 'bay for a wee bit more (£2,995)

fucking typical! did not even bother with any fresh photographs 

and the description is complete bullshit too!

"great condition and been in the same family ownership for the past 40 years"

Lets see in the past 40 Years its been owned by the DHSS/IVS, the Manchester Transport Museum and an Unknown Disability Charity which fell apart before it got abandoned in a dark garage and left to deteriorate 

"first registered in May 1955 so was one of the last mobility vehicles made by Stanley as they were bought out in 1954"

and I guess I should not mention that the Harper Mk1-6 was produced at the Stanley works? (hence why they are all Surrey registered) or that the Mk7, was literally rebranded back to the Stanley Mk7 that was produced from 1960 to 1965... (although ironically AFAIK that was produced at Harpers own works LOL)

 

Much grumble! (but thanks for the heads up)

[stendec]

Yeah, and the original auction said that it was being sold for charity, I would be surprised if any of the proceeds from the current Ebay sale go to charity.

[egg]

Highlighting again the difference between:

buy, do nothing, sell for 3 times the price

and

buy, clean fix and generally add value, sell for a profit if you're lucky

I suppose leccy bills don't pay themselves....

[Crackers]

Person 1 advertises person 1's own property for sale at a price they deem approriate, with historical inaccuracy in writeup, in hope of making profit on niche item with small but growing enthusiast base.

Not entirely sure I see the problem here...

[chadders]

2 minutes ago, Crackers said:

Person 1 advertises person 1's own property for sale at a price they deem approriate, with historical inaccuracy in writeup, in hope of making profit on niche item with small but growing enthusiast base.

Not entirely sure I see the problem here...

There's also the risk that it might not sell and then they're saddled with it. It's not the sort of thing that you can just put at the back of a drawer is it.

[busmansholiday]

13 minutes ago, Crackers said:

Person 1 advertises person 1's own property for sale at a price they deem approriate, with historical inaccuracy in writeup, in hope of making profit on niche item with small but growing enthusiast base.

Not entirely sure I see the problem here...

 

8 minutes ago, chadders said:

There's also the risk that it might not sell and then they're saddled with it. It's not the sort of thing that you can just put at the back of a drawer is it.

Absolutely agree. Anybody on here complaining about things being flipped needs to grow up and smell the coffee. These things were for sale at a public auction so they had the opportunity to bid on them themselves if they were seriously interested in them. If they didn't, then don't complain.

[egg]

Coffee smelt m'lord. I've done it myself I'm sure on other objects, just not cars!

I suppose in the old days no-one knew this happened because there wasn't this long digital trail (which is now a couple of decades long). 

I'm too peace, love and sharing for this world, but I knew that already.

[stendec]

There is the danger of turning into Martin Shkreli.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe what annoys me me the most is that I didn't think to do it.

 

[Crackers]

57 minutes ago, stendec said:

There is the danger of turning into Martin Shkreli.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe what annoys me me the most is that I didn't think to do it.

 

In big pharma, maybe. But Big Invacar doesn't exist. So not really.

[LightBulbFun]

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/295331323807

so this Morris minor that @Cavcraft posted in the eBay tat thread caught my eye because it was nice to see that  it had manage keep its Period Essex registration mark all this time

except its an import and freshly registered with the DVLA!!! which is really concerning!

 

 

so to those who remember my DVLA ramblings, may remember how I explained that the DVLA issue 123ABC style age related registrations by incrementing the last letter (rather then the first, serial, letter as is normally done)

for example the current issue started at 101XVA-998XVA, then 101XVB-998XVB 101XVC-998XVC and so on

and what this does is it changes the "location marker" of the reg, and the reason this all very significant is, in doing so they do run into locations that did issue 123Xxx in period and thus the DVLA normally skip those

but 1XVW-999XVW is as above a period  registration mark issued from June 1961 to August 1961! see for example on the DVLA, 500XVW or 835XVW as examples of the mark as it was issued in period

never before have I EVER seen the DVLA issue previously issued marks as age related plates

simply because there is no way of knowing if a previously issued mark indeed does still belong to a car out there somewhere, so they will normally skip over already issued marks to avoid accidentally duplicating an existing mark

 

and this is really concerning that the DVLA have suddenly done this, because I dont know now what happens if someone has a period xxxXVW car and they want to V765 it?

(and xxxXVW being an Essex mark could easily contain a block of Invacar Mk12's for example!)

 

I highly suspect that this has been done in error,

with someone at the DVLA just blindly going from one letter to another

although it is worth noting that strangely XVV does not look to have been issued as an age related series it should of (xxxXVV was never issued in period so is safe to issue as an age related series) but XVU has been suitably issued as an age related series,

so I almost wonder if someone got XVV and XVW mixed up and issued the wrong series?

 

but regardless of how its happened, its still really bloody concerning! because what happens if someone does actually happen to find the real Car that 775XVW was actually issued to back in the day? and what for example that car was another Morris minor and now the DVLA is seeing someone try and V62 for a Morris minor with the "wrong chassis number" ? this is why the DVLA would never normally re-issue old marks and why its really concerning to see it has happened!

 

I almost wonder if anyone knows who I might be able to contact at the DVLA about this....

 

 

as a side note somewhat Ironically someone has (sadly) plated Robbed an ex Factory (Invacar) Registered Greeves Motorcycle so its gone from Essex mark to Essex mark!

it will be interesting to see what happens when they get to xxxXVX as that is also a period Essex registration mark issued in full back in the day, so I really hope they dont fuck it up twice by also issuing it as an age related series!

[chadders]

So if I understand all of that correctly someone would have trouble registering a car that almost certainly no longer exists?

Most people have had to deal with far bigger problems in their lives so personally I don't think it's a !!! or even a ! one, in the unlikely case that it actually happens.

[JJ0063]

There’s so much writing there I can’t keep track but a couple of points to make

Has this 775 XVW definitely been issued before? If it has, how do you know this isn’t the original vehicle that has either been exported and imported again, or been off the radar and come back to light?

Ultimately unless you work for DVLA or own a vehicle you have a worry about, I doubt they’re going to want to hear from you 

There are a whole host of reasons a plate can end up on a car. Anything from unissued, now released age relateds, to previous registrations retained for whatever reason, to cherished numbers and more. You’re assuming a hell of a lot based on what you think you know 

[DodgeRover]

Central records will be aware of what registration series have previously  been used up. That much information certainly survived the move to Swansea.

[Crackers]

I wouldn't worry too much.

[LightBulbFun]

5 hours ago, chadders said:

So if I understand all of that correctly someone would have trouble registering a car that almost certainly no longer exists?

I can think of plenty of cars from 1961 that could well still be about... imagine you buy/barn find a nice early Jaguar E type that was registered 101XVW, and has been laid up for over 40 years so the record is not DVLA main computer live, only to find out that your registration mark has been issued to a Tractor...

  

and if you think an E type would never get laid up like that, just look up VEE12J

4 hours ago, JJ0063 said:

Has this 775 XVW definitely been issued before?

it has indeed various sources including Essex's own archive records corroborate this, again its an Invacar related so I know the Essex series particularly well  

4 hours ago, Nyphur said:

Can the car not have been previously exported (to Ireland say) and now reimported onto its original plate? Or does it not work like that?

 

4 hours ago, JJ0063 said:

how do you know this isn’t the original vehicle that has either been exported and imported again, or been off the radar and come back to light?

this could/can happen, as long as you have sufficient historic proof you can reunite a car with its old registration mark via the V765 scheme

but this Morris is clearly a just recent import and not a V765 Job, I also went and checked most of the rest of the series just incase of this, and it was clear that from 101XVW up to currently 843XVW it has all been issued as an age related plate to freshly registered vehicles and those just robbed of their plates (see for example the Greeves Motorcycle given above) I just posted the Moggy as an example since thats what brought my attention to it 

2 hours ago, DodgeRover said:

Central records will be aware of what registration series have previously  been used up. That much information certainly survived the move to Swansea.

indeed they normally do, which is why this has set off so many alarm bells for me!, I do wonder if some office clerk has made a Clerical error? as mentioned weirdly xxxXVV has NOT been issued as an age related series when it should of, so I do wonder if the 2 have been mixed up

 

 

for example xxxXVO is a Nottinghamshire registration series which was also issued in period and as anyone can see the DVLA have correctly NOT issued it as an age related series (but XVN and XVP have been because they where not issued in period)

[brandersnatch]

Does any of this really matter? Your fictional E-Type would surely still be issued with a registration number and be allowed on the road?