Oh Kelvin...
On this subject, I thought I'd point out that two columns in the
production data chart on page 5 of the current Moss MGB catalog (MGB-12)
are incorrectly labeled. This error cropped up several editions ago -- it
was correct in MGB-3!
If you are using this chart for reference, please be aware that:
- the 4th column from the left, labeled "First RD/GT built ea. Calendar
Year", should actually be "...ea. Model Year"
- the 5th column, now labeled "...Model Year", should therefore read
"...Calendar Year".
If you doubt me, look at the first entry, for 1962. What it *should*
state is that roadster GHN3/L/101 was built in May 1962 (Calendar Year)
as a 1963 model (Model Year). What it does, in fact, state is that #101
was built in January 1963 as a 1962 model!!!! I think you will agree this
is absurd. Obviously, if you prefer, you could switch the column data and
leave the labels as they are -- your choice.
I suppose I should have pointed this out privately to a Moss rep when I
first noticed it, but I just made a note in my catalog and it slipped my
mind, until the occasion I just had to consult it (the chart, not my mind
-- I consult that sometimes on a daily basis).
Cheers,
Max
Andy -- the chart confirms your date, too -- if you switch the labels.
>Yep, I'd go along on that. Mine is GHN5UH422540G which means the other was
>built some ~6500 cars later? If that is accurate? Have to dig out Clausager
>and see how they doled out the VIN's etc. Mine was built in Nov of 76.
>
>Safety Fast
>Andy P.
>>Max Heim had this to say:
>
>>Hmmm, that number doesn't make sense as a '65. In fact, it's a 1977
>>roadster. Is someone pulling your leg?
>>
>>mgraziano@mindspring.com had this to say:
>>
>>>Vin # GHN5UH429046 G I believe it's a '65.
>>>
>>>If anyone can pull up any info i.e. previous owners, current registration
>>>(it's a NY car), etc... I'd appreciate it.
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>
>>>Mike
>>>
--
Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Mountain View, CA,
it's the red one with the silver bootlid.
|