Motor Number -EXU Models

[C Sherriff]

Message text written by INTERNET:WinEstes@aol.com

>I cannot believe that the engines came along with

something like a baggage tag to identify them. Therefore, I do not subscribe to the theory that the engine numbers were put on locally in countries where the cars were sold, etc. As I recall, and please correct it if you have other information, an MG factory replacement engine had no number or was somehow different. If true, this could explain why some people come up with engines with no numbers.

[Bruce J. Obbink]

I am looking at a replacement engine tag. It is about 1" x 2". Two holes in it so you can easily see if the engine you have is actually a replacement or if someone has welded over the holes, and then I think you could still see where the holes were. The plate was mounted toward the front of the block on the carb side. There are no other numbers on the engine. The tag reads: MORRIS MOTORS LTD REPLACEMENT ENGINE BORE SIZE - STD S CRANK SIZE R - 2 SHOP NO 14 Bruce -----Original Message----- From: C Sherriff [mailto:Clives_page@compuserve.com]On Behalf Of C Sherriff Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 9:47 AM To: INTERNET:WinEstes@aol.com Cc: mg-tabc@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [mg-tabc] Motor Number -EXU Models Message text written by INTERNET:WinEstes@aol.com

>I cannot believe that the engines came along with

something like a baggage tag to identify them. Therefore, I do not subscribe to the theory that the engine numbers were put on locally in countries where the cars were sold, etc. As I recall, and please correct it if you have other information, an MG factory replacement engine had no number or was somehow different. If true, this could explain why some people come up with engines with no numbers.http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[David and Joyce Edgar]

>When a car was designated by MG as an EXU chassis build, the engine >number, already on the brass plate (the baggage tag), was also stamped >into the block in the factory as American import requirements were known >to demanded it be stamped prior to import into the USA.

If America reqired engine blocks to be stamped, could blocks have been stamped by some agency to home model TC's that were subsequently shipped at a later date? If this is the case, is this still a requirement in todays world? David Edgar, TC 5108 (with tag and stamped block of 5801) El Cajon, California

[Chip Old]

On Wed, 21 Nov 2001, David and Joyce Edgar wrote:

> If America reqired engine blocks to be stamped, could blocks have been > stamped by some agency to home model TC's that were subsequently > shipped at a later date? If this is the case, is this still a > requirement in todays world?

It was never done on any of the Home Model TCs I imported in the 1970's and 1980's. -- Chip Old 1948 M.G. TC TC6710 XPAG7430 NEMGTR #2271 Cub Hill, Maryland 1962 Triumph TR4 CT3154LO CT3479E fold@bcpl.net

[C Sherriff]

Message text written by David and Joyce Edgar

>If America reqired engine blocks to be stamped, could blocks have

been stamped by some agency to home model TC's that were subsequently shipped at a later date? If this is the case, is this still a requirement in todays world?

[Frank O_ The Mountain]

In a message dated 11/22/01 02:05:40 Pacific Standard Time, 100070.740@compuserve.com writes: >>

[DickShaler@aol.com]

You may be right Terry. My 1948 TC 5905 is registered in California as a 1957 MGTC vin# XPAG6643. I too gave up trying to convince the DMV otherwise. Although when I first applied for the registration in 1957, Cal DMV just took the engine number from the brass plate and didn't require that 6643 be stamped on the block. One of the F-1s is also registered by engine number. So maybe the old saying that "if you have the chassis, you have the car" can now be: "if you have the engine you may have the car depending on where you live". Happy Thanksgiving to All Dick

[Chip Old]

On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 taterry@aol.com wrote:

> This is just speculation, but in earlier times, most cars were > registered using their engine numbers and not the chassis number. My > TA is registered that way.

That varied from state to state, back before the Uniform Motor Vehicle Code and the concept of the modern VIN were adopted by all states. At one time pre Uniform Code the Maryland Motor Vehicle Code required that the car's "serial number" be used, which was open to a great deal of interpretation since most cars have several serial numbers (chassis, engine, etc). -- Chip Old 1948 M.G. TC TC6710 XPAG7430 NEMGTR #2271 Cub Hill, Maryland 1962 Triumph TR4 CT3154LO CT3479E fold@bcpl.net

[Victoria Vernon]

HI THERE, NOT PUT ON LOCALLY BUT BY THE MANUFACTURER,SEE THE BROWN BOOK. CLEM 7218 S.AFRICA

----- Original Message ----- From: WinEstes@aol.com> To: mg-tabc@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 5:16 PM Subject: Re: [mg-tabc] Motor Number -EXU Models > I currently have a J2, KN, 2 TCs (one an EXU), 2 TDs, 2 TFs. Most of these I > have had for a very long time. Without exception all have the engine number > stamped on the block in a boss. Of course the pre-war ones do not have the > brass plate that the T-series have. These numbers all are the same as listed > in the MGCC records for these cars. Assuming an assembly process in which > batches of chassis, engines, bodies, etc. were put together rather randomly > and finally a firewall ID plate was affixed, there had to be identification > of the chassis and engine to permit the ID plate stamping apprentice to put > the numbers there. I cannot believe that the engines came along with > something like a baggage tag to identify them. Therefore, I do not subscribe > to the theory that the engine numbers were put on locally in countries where > the cars were sold, etc. As I recall, and please correct it if you have other > information, an MG factory replacement engine had no number or was somehow > different. If true, this could explain why some people come up with engines > with no numbers. > > Windom Estes, Pebble Beach, CA > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > >

[Skip Kelsey]

Terry: Calif. registered all cars by engine no. up until 1956. After that they went to chassis nos. You can have your car re-registered by chassis no. by filling out a form and having the no. checked by either DMV or any police officer. I have done it on my TD, and my Y type. Not a problem. I also had my Y type authenticated as a 1948 model. It was mfgd. in mid 48, but was sold and registered as a 49, as was the custom in those days. I had it corrected at the time that I went to the chassis no. Skip Kelsey............................................................. At 08:46 AM 11/22/01 -0500, taterry@aol.com wrote:

>In a message dated 11/22/01 02:05:40 Pacific Standard Time, >100070.740@compuserve.com writes: > > and try and find the current USA situation - and track down > what the Original requirements for customs and import in the USA > in the 1940s and 50s? > >> > >This is just speculation, but in earlier times, most cars were registered >using their engine numbers and not the chassis number. My TA is registered >that way. It was registered in Louisiana using the engine number when it was >imported in 1972 and I could not get California to understand that it should >be re-registered using the chassis number especially since the orginal MPJG >engine had been scrapped in Louisiana....so its still that way. I gave up >trying. > >Hence, there was perhaps, a desire by local authorities to have the engine >number stamped into the block to prevent the easy change of brass tags. This >would have been state by state and not a national requirement. > >Terry > > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/