Another mystery car
Discussion
The Marzal was a concept car, the "Fairlady" from a TV show, so not serious cars at all. Granted, the DMC had no structural need for gullwing doors, but definitely one of the few.
I'm still amazed that the readers of Classic & Sports Car magazine, who have always provided amazing detail on the most obscure vehicles, have come up with no answers.
I'm still amazed that the readers of Classic & Sports Car magazine, who have always provided amazing detail on the most obscure vehicles, have come up with no answers.
The Marzal gullwing doors were considered for the production Espada, so I think it was a serious proposal.
I take your point that they were probably more difficult to achieve than conventional doors, but they could be simply a style choice. At the end of the 1950s, early 1960s, gullwing doors were seen as futuristic.
I take your point that they were probably more difficult to achieve than conventional doors, but they could be simply a style choice. At the end of the 1950s, early 1960s, gullwing doors were seen as futuristic.
Edited by borrani72 on Tuesday 9th April 12:47
anonymous said:
[redacted]
It would be one of the finest bits of retouching in the history of retouching. My current theory (as of 30 seconds ago) is that it was someone's one-off special that didn't last long enough – it crashed and burned or whatever – to make any impact on the consciousness of the motoring world.
Yertis said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
It would be one of the finest bits of retouching in the history of retouching. My current theory (as of 30 seconds ago) is that it was someone's one-off special that didn't last long enough – it crashed and burned or whatever – to make any impact on the consciousness of the motoring world.
I know, I know, it's just another one which isn't "our" car, but I just found this whilst looking for sometjing else. It's a Brookes, built only in 1956, and that's all there is on the net. It's not mentioned in Georgano's Beaulieu Encyclopedia, and I think it's yet another GRP body available for fitting to a Ford or Austin chassis. If you squint and pray to the wish fairy really hard, it does look a little bit like the blue car. More than some of the suggestions so far, that's all I'm going to say.
I’m not sure if you are a genius or totally bonkers
The series alpines were a steel bodied monocoque were they not?
So are you saying this was a factory prototype that no one has ever seen, or are you saying that somebody took a sunbeam and altered it .
I just cannot imagine anyone going those lengths in the 1960s to cut and remake the door apertures must have taken some doing.
The series alpines were a steel bodied monocoque were they not?
So are you saying this was a factory prototype that no one has ever seen, or are you saying that somebody took a sunbeam and altered it .
I just cannot imagine anyone going those lengths in the 1960s to cut and remake the door apertures must have taken some doing.
So this is on the 50s/60s Special Builders Facebook page ... "it is not a photoshop, it is a photo in a book on Buses. I am with Rob Daniels it is a prototype Ashley Harrington."
FYI Rob Daniels runs the Fairthorpe Owners Club 50's Specials Register .. Tony Stanton who i know as the man who knows most about Rochdale Olympics (over 30 years in the world of fibreglass cars) agreed with him ...
FYI Rob Daniels runs the Fairthorpe Owners Club 50's Specials Register .. Tony Stanton who i know as the man who knows most about Rochdale Olympics (over 30 years in the world of fibreglass cars) agreed with him ...
Edited by 838HNK on Sunday 14th April 20:17
Re Ashley Harrington.............
There was an Ashley MKVI. It was a chassis with an 8 foot wheellbase, primarily intended for their Sportiva body as an alternative to the Ford chassis. It came with a fibreglass floor moulding with integral rear seat structure.
Applying the ratio of wheelbase and wheel size to the mystery car, if its' wheelbase were 8 feet, then the wheels would be 18". This seems unlikely as smaller wheel sizes where becoming more common, and the Triumph TR based Ashley models had 15" wheels. Plus the chassis was intended as a four seater.
I also discovered this. An Ashley alternative to the Harrington Alpine. I suspect this is where the 'Harrington' name on Facebook may have been remembered from?
And this perhaps the 'prototype' referred to.....
Did they develop a production version?
Coachbuilder Thomas Harrington and Sons built four different fastback conversions for the Alpine, the earliest dating from 1961. The Alpine was launched in 1959. I would guess that the Ashley version was later. Below, and early example of a Harrington.
Harrington also operated as a Rootes Group (Hillman, Singer, Sunbeam, Humber) agency, so were able to sell their conversion through several selected dealerships - perhaps this is why the Ashley version doesn't appear to have progressed beyond the advertisement.
I tend to agree with uk66fastback that if Ashley had built the mystery car, then it would be known about. They were a small company operating from two sites. One a showroom, the other the factory. The factory had two 'layup' rooms, the larger producing bodies, the other, smaller parts.
They were developing the old Ashley bodies into the Sportiva and also moving into the more lucrative fibreglass hardtop market at the time. I doubt they had the interest or resources to develop an all new model at the same time. And even if they did, why keep it so secret - companies like Ashley depended upon publicity for their very existence?
borrani72 said:
uk66fastback said:
A guy on one of the Facebooks groups says it is an Ashley Harrington 'prototype' or something ... I'll have to go find what he said ...
Found it ...
I think it were made by a company like Ashley more evidence would be available ...
I've done a little research on Ashley Laminates, and found a couple of related things.Found it ...
I think it were made by a company like Ashley more evidence would be available ...
There was an Ashley MKVI. It was a chassis with an 8 foot wheellbase, primarily intended for their Sportiva body as an alternative to the Ford chassis. It came with a fibreglass floor moulding with integral rear seat structure.
Applying the ratio of wheelbase and wheel size to the mystery car, if its' wheelbase were 8 feet, then the wheels would be 18". This seems unlikely as smaller wheel sizes where becoming more common, and the Triumph TR based Ashley models had 15" wheels. Plus the chassis was intended as a four seater.
I also discovered this. An Ashley alternative to the Harrington Alpine. I suspect this is where the 'Harrington' name on Facebook may have been remembered from?
And this perhaps the 'prototype' referred to.....
Did they develop a production version?
Coachbuilder Thomas Harrington and Sons built four different fastback conversions for the Alpine, the earliest dating from 1961. The Alpine was launched in 1959. I would guess that the Ashley version was later. Below, and early example of a Harrington.
Harrington also operated as a Rootes Group (Hillman, Singer, Sunbeam, Humber) agency, so were able to sell their conversion through several selected dealerships - perhaps this is why the Ashley version doesn't appear to have progressed beyond the advertisement.
I tend to agree with uk66fastback that if Ashley had built the mystery car, then it would be known about. They were a small company operating from two sites. One a showroom, the other the factory. The factory had two 'layup' rooms, the larger producing bodies, the other, smaller parts.
They were developing the old Ashley bodies into the Sportiva and also moving into the more lucrative fibreglass hardtop market at the time. I doubt they had the interest or resources to develop an all new model at the same time. And even if they did, why keep it so secret - companies like Ashley depended upon publicity for their very existence?
Could it be an Alpine?
I think it's worth a quick recap of how this conclusion was reached.
STEP 1
You stated that the mystery car had 15” wheels. This was based, if I recall correctly, upon the estimate that they were larger that those of the Thames 300E van in the picture, which has 13” wheels.
STEP 2
You bought and scanned an Ace Mercury wheel disc from a Jaguar with 15” wheels. This had a diameter of 420.5mm.
STEP 3
You took the mystery car photo' and calculated the ratio of the wheel disc diameter to the wheelbase – which you stated as 7' 2”. (This later changed to 2180, and then back to 2184mm).
STEP 4
You searched for cars with a similar wheelbase that could be the base vehicle, and found a selection of possibilities.
STEP 5
You concluded the mystery car is an Alpine – a car with the same 13” wheel diameter as the Thames van, which, in STEP 1 above allowed you to conclude that the mystery car had 15” wheels. Following on from this you bought and scanned a 15” wheel disc – STEP 2 – which allowed you to
calculate the wheelbase – STEP 3 – after which you searched for possible donor vehicles – STEP 4, and then concluded – STEP 5 – that the mystery car is an Alpine, a car with the same 13” wheel diameter as the Thames van, which, in STEP 1 above allowed you to conclude that the mystery car had 15” wheels. Following on from this you bought and scanned a 15” wheel disc – STEP 2 – which allowed you to calculate the wheelbase – STEP 3 – after which you searched for possible donor vehicles – STEP 4, and then concluded the mystery car is an Alpine – a car with the same 13” wheel diameter as the Thames van, which, in STEP 1 above allowed you to conclude that the mystery car had 15” wheels. Following on from this you bought and scanned a 15” wheel disc – STEP 2 – which allowed you to calculate the wheelbase – STEP 3 – after which you searched for possible donor vehicles – STEP 4, and then concluded the mystery car is an Alpine – a car with the same 13” wheel diameter as the Thames van, which, in STEP 1 above allowed you to conclude that the mystery car had 15” wheels. Following on from this you bought and scanned a 15” wheel disc – STEP 2 – which allowed you to calculate the wheelbase – STEP 3 – after which you searched for possible donor vehicles – STEP 4, and then……………………..
The entire case for the Alpine rests upon the wheelbase being accurate.
Here's your post from February, pointing out the importance of getting this measurement accurate……
The wheel disc scanned was not the same type or size as fitted to the mystery car. They are not 425mm, but 397mm.
15" Triumph wheel disc has the same outer rim as that on the mystery car - same number of vents - same proportions and details
Diameter is 397mm, and the disc sits inside the wheels' outer rim.
15" Jaguar disc (as scanned by Sorted) sits on the wheel rim and has a diamter of 420.5mm. Proportions differ from mystery car.....
You state that
"The wheel trims seem, as per B72 comment, to have had varying overlap on tyre so difference between 13 and 15 inch wheel has a plausible explanation".
For this to be correct, the wheels would need to be 13” items, and the discs, unlike the Triumph/MG items that are smaller than the outside of the wheel as they sit INSIDE the wheel rim, would need to be 2” OUTSIDE the wheel rim. In other words, covering an inch of the tyre side wall all the way around.
Highly unusual certainly, though not entirely without precedent (though I might suggest, possibly not the soundest basis for the whole Alpine theory STEP 1 through 5, as above)........
None of this, however, explains the apparent discrepancy in the calculation itself.
I think it's worth a quick recap of how this conclusion was reached.
STEP 1
You stated that the mystery car had 15” wheels. This was based, if I recall correctly, upon the estimate that they were larger that those of the Thames 300E van in the picture, which has 13” wheels.
STEP 2
You bought and scanned an Ace Mercury wheel disc from a Jaguar with 15” wheels. This had a diameter of 420.5mm.
STEP 3
You took the mystery car photo' and calculated the ratio of the wheel disc diameter to the wheelbase – which you stated as 7' 2”. (This later changed to 2180, and then back to 2184mm).
STEP 4
You searched for cars with a similar wheelbase that could be the base vehicle, and found a selection of possibilities.
STEP 5
You concluded the mystery car is an Alpine – a car with the same 13” wheel diameter as the Thames van, which, in STEP 1 above allowed you to conclude that the mystery car had 15” wheels. Following on from this you bought and scanned a 15” wheel disc – STEP 2 – which allowed you to
calculate the wheelbase – STEP 3 – after which you searched for possible donor vehicles – STEP 4, and then concluded – STEP 5 – that the mystery car is an Alpine, a car with the same 13” wheel diameter as the Thames van, which, in STEP 1 above allowed you to conclude that the mystery car had 15” wheels. Following on from this you bought and scanned a 15” wheel disc – STEP 2 – which allowed you to calculate the wheelbase – STEP 3 – after which you searched for possible donor vehicles – STEP 4, and then concluded the mystery car is an Alpine – a car with the same 13” wheel diameter as the Thames van, which, in STEP 1 above allowed you to conclude that the mystery car had 15” wheels. Following on from this you bought and scanned a 15” wheel disc – STEP 2 – which allowed you to calculate the wheelbase – STEP 3 – after which you searched for possible donor vehicles – STEP 4, and then concluded the mystery car is an Alpine – a car with the same 13” wheel diameter as the Thames van, which, in STEP 1 above allowed you to conclude that the mystery car had 15” wheels. Following on from this you bought and scanned a 15” wheel disc – STEP 2 – which allowed you to calculate the wheelbase – STEP 3 – after which you searched for possible donor vehicles – STEP 4, and then……………………..
The entire case for the Alpine rests upon the wheelbase being accurate.
Here's your post from February, pointing out the importance of getting this measurement accurate……
The wheel disc scanned was not the same type or size as fitted to the mystery car. They are not 425mm, but 397mm.
15" Triumph wheel disc has the same outer rim as that on the mystery car - same number of vents - same proportions and details
Diameter is 397mm, and the disc sits inside the wheels' outer rim.
15" Jaguar disc (as scanned by Sorted) sits on the wheel rim and has a diamter of 420.5mm. Proportions differ from mystery car.....
You state that
"The wheel trims seem, as per B72 comment, to have had varying overlap on tyre so difference between 13 and 15 inch wheel has a plausible explanation".
For this to be correct, the wheels would need to be 13” items, and the discs, unlike the Triumph/MG items that are smaller than the outside of the wheel as they sit INSIDE the wheel rim, would need to be 2” OUTSIDE the wheel rim. In other words, covering an inch of the tyre side wall all the way around.
Highly unusual certainly, though not entirely without precedent (though I might suggest, possibly not the soundest basis for the whole Alpine theory STEP 1 through 5, as above)........
None of this, however, explains the apparent discrepancy in the calculation itself.
borrani72 said:
Hi restoman,
You make an excellent point. Things have got very confused.
Speaking only for myself, I know I tend to waffle-on a bit about the detail of the photo-matching, measuring etc, so my apologies if it's all got a bit muddled.
The prime reason for all my waffling though is that the alternative was simply to state an answer, without providing any evidence to back-up my conclusions. This didn't seem right either.
Having given the matter some thought, I decided that the old maxim - a picture is worth a thousand words - still holds good, so I have re-stated just the essential idea regarding the wheelbase, but with pictures. Hope this helps……….
In the top part of the picture, the half-discs are copies from the front wheel, those below are of the rear wheel. In the mystery car picture, the rear wheel is naturally slightly smaller due to the perspective, so multiple copies end at slightly different points along the side of the car, perhaps 10mm apart. The wheelbase is a little under 5 x the diameter of the wheel disc.
This is, essentially, how the calculation of wheelbase is made from a known size of wheel-disc.
Taking the average between these positions (above), the actual wheelbase may be calculated at about 4.98 x the diameter of the wheel disc.
Below is the same approach using Sorted's CAD model. I am unclear why the forth disc ends near the front of the tyre, rather than just inside the rim of the wheel-disc as it does on the mystery car photo'? This would appear to add about 6%, or 5”, to his wheelbase calculation.
This, plus Sorted using a larger wheel disc (of the same make, but a different pattern to that on the mystery car) accounts for the 10" longer wheelbase of his CAD model.
You make an excellent point. Things have got very confused.
Speaking only for myself, I know I tend to waffle-on a bit about the detail of the photo-matching, measuring etc, so my apologies if it's all got a bit muddled.
The prime reason for all my waffling though is that the alternative was simply to state an answer, without providing any evidence to back-up my conclusions. This didn't seem right either.
Having given the matter some thought, I decided that the old maxim - a picture is worth a thousand words - still holds good, so I have re-stated just the essential idea regarding the wheelbase, but with pictures. Hope this helps……….
In the top part of the picture, the half-discs are copies from the front wheel, those below are of the rear wheel. In the mystery car picture, the rear wheel is naturally slightly smaller due to the perspective, so multiple copies end at slightly different points along the side of the car, perhaps 10mm apart. The wheelbase is a little under 5 x the diameter of the wheel disc.
This is, essentially, how the calculation of wheelbase is made from a known size of wheel-disc.
Taking the average between these positions (above), the actual wheelbase may be calculated at about 4.98 x the diameter of the wheel disc.
Below is the same approach using Sorted's CAD model. I am unclear why the forth disc ends near the front of the tyre, rather than just inside the rim of the wheel-disc as it does on the mystery car photo'? This would appear to add about 6%, or 5”, to his wheelbase calculation.
This, plus Sorted using a larger wheel disc (of the same make, but a different pattern to that on the mystery car) accounts for the 10" longer wheelbase of his CAD model.
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff