Topic: JPG #183 Solved : 1953 MG TF bodied by Shipside

[Carnut]

Ops..

Not by Shipside or a Harding GT.

Yes,the bodywork still a mystery to me.

If the bodywork is a mystery to you do you know for a fact it's not the Shipside MG TD?  Have you got a picture of that car?

The Shipside GT was made by Shipsides of Nottingham, and the puzzle-car is Nottingham registered.  Coincidence?

I know that this car was first registered on 1st February 1951; its engine number is XPAG/TD/853 and the car is described on its registration document at "MG TD/TF".  I can also tell you it's blue and it's still in the hands of the same family, if not the same person, who registered it back in 1951.

What I can't tell you is who built it...

[Joćo]

Because I thought it was an open bodied car. Sorry.

[barrett]

This photo appears online and is captioned as being the Shipside MG TD. How reliable that information is I couldn't say.

The fact that it still exists (and is taxed!) is interesting, and hopefully means it won't be too hard to get to the bottom of this assuming the car is 'known' to one of the MG clubs in the UK

[Carnut]

Because I thought it was an open bodied car. Sorry.

That's all right - I don't know if that's right either.
The Shipside MG was, I believe, built for racing and probably was an open car.
Looking at the puzzle car I would say when it was first registered back in 1951 it was a normal TD, and the car was probably rebuilt at a later date with TF wheels and perhaps chassis, and of course the grille is from an MGA.  Perhaps that might explain why it's described in the registration document as an "MG TD/TF"; maybe it wasn't always so but was amended after the rebuild.

[Carnut]

And further to my last reply, it could even be possible that this is the Shipside TD rebuilt after it retired from racing, as the body is clearly later than the 1951 date when it was first registered.  That would also account for why it is captioned as that car on the site where barrett found it.

I only suggest that because of the Nottingham registration..

[D-type]

I also found a very similar-looking car, MGA-based, on line, which was referred to as 'MGA-Porsche' because it looked a bit 356-ish.  It's not the same car as the puzzle car, however.  I don't know if that might be the one you're referring to?

This one?

Despite the picture caption, I seriously doubt that this is MGA based as the "A" had a one-piece windscreen and a two piece one is a definite backward step - even the kit cars had one-piece screens by the time the "A" came along.

[Carnut]

I also found a very similar-looking car, MGA-based, on line, which was referred to as 'MGA-Porsche' because it looked a bit 356-ish.  It's not the same car as the puzzle car, however.  I don't know if that might be the one you're referring to?

This one?

Despite the picture caption, I seriously doubt that this is MGA based as the "A" had a one-piece windscreen and a two piece one is a definite backward step - even the kit cars had one-piece screens by the time the "A" came along.

The car Allemano posted could be a different puzzle.
All I can say about that car is that the registration number TYE 83 dates from April 1957..

[D-type]

April 1957 would mean MGA based

Is the club badge that LVO 2 is sporting the MG Car Club, MG Owners' Club or some other MG-related club?

[Allan L]

April 1957 would mean MGA based

Is the club badge that LVO 2 is sporting the MG Car Club, MG Owners' Club or some other MG-related club?

That's the MG Car Club badge.
The Car Club, founded in 1930 is a lot older than the Owners' Club and the Octagon CC and the style of that badge is pretty long established, e.g.

[D-type]

Is it perhaps a Lester-MG?

[Joćo]

Is it perhaps a Lester-MG?

I don't think so 

[Siata1]

A friend sent me the following notice from "Nuffield News Exchange May 1955":
An MG TD Special which was built for Mr. T.W. Shipside of T.Shipside Ltd.
Nottingham Distributors. Known as "Little John" the MG has been raced at
Silverstone by Mr. T.K. Shipside and has gained many victories. Maximum
speed is 105 m.p.h. and it can accelerate from 0 to 70 m.p.h. in 16 seconds.

[woodinsight]

Here comes the proof -
"Little John" as raced in period and registered LVO 2 the same as the puzzle car. Note that it was later bodied in the style of an Aston DB2.

[Joćo]

Shipside bodied MG TD ?

One point for you D-type and sorry for saying you were wrong.

And one point for Siata1 and woodinsight for solving this mystery.

Thank you guys!

[Allemano]

That's another good example for the spirit of Autopuzzles. While other mystery car forums still scratch their heads, here's the solution!

[Carnut]

Shipside bodied MG TD ?

One point for you D-type and sorry for saying you were wrong.

And one point for Siata1 and woodinsight for solving this mystery.

Thank you guys!

See also my replies #25, 28 and 29!

[Joćo]

Sure! You deserve a point too 

That's another good example for the spirit of Autopuzzles. While other mystery car forums still scratch their heads, here's the solution!

And I'm very happy to have amazing friends here.

[Carnut]

Sure! You deserve a point too  

That's another good example for the spirit of Autopuzzles. While other mystery car forums still scratch their heads, here's the solution!

And I'm very happy to have amazing friends here.

Thanks Joao!

Actually though, since I wrote the above only a few minutes ago I've received an email from the T-series registrar of the MG Car Club, which I've quoted below.  This rather changes the answer a little!:

QUOTE
LVO2 was created by Ken Shipside who was  a Nottinghamshire MG dealer, in 1953, based on a TF chassis; this was his idea of how a closed MG coupe should look. The grille pre-dated the MGA. It was not a practical car, having no boot space, and only one example was made. It is not known to have survived, and it is likely that, being a dealer, the registration number was used on a variety of cars. Ken Shipside had previously raced a TD Special, also registered LVO2, (known as "Little John") and this would explain the 1951 registration date.
UNQUOTE


Seems therefore it's not "Little John" but a later car onto which the registration number had been transferred!

[Joćo]

Thanks Carnut! So it should be : 1953 MG TF by Shipside?

[Carnut]

Thanks Carnut! So it should be : 1953 MG TF by Shipside?

That seems to be the case, according to the one who should probably know best!

[woodinsight]

Sure! You deserve a point too  

That's another good example for the spirit of Autopuzzles. While other mystery car forums still scratch their heads, here's the solution!

And I'm very happy to have amazing friends here.

Thanks Joao!

Actually though, since I wrote the above only a few minutes ago I've received an email from the T-series registrar of the MG Car Club, which I've quoted below.  This rather changes the answer a little!:

QUOTE
LVO2 was created by Ken Shipside who was  a Nottinghamshire MG dealer, in 1953, based on a TF chassis; this was his idea of how a closed MG coupe should look. The grille pre-dated the MGA. It was not a practical car, having no boot space, and only one example was made. It is not known to have survived, and it is likely that, being a dealer, the registration number was used on a variety of cars. Ken Shipside had previously raced a TD Special, also registered LVO2, (known as "Little John") and this would explain the 1951 registration date.
UNQUOTE


Seems therefore it's not "Little John" but a later car onto which the registration number had been transferred!

This just illustrates that you can't always rely on a British registration number for positive identification.
An indicator perhaps but not full proof. I confess I didn't consider this when I posted "Little John". 

[Allan L]

This just illustrates that you can't always rely on a British registration number for positive identification.

No but even though in the 1950s we knew of people who had several cars with one taxed and insured registration between them, I would claim that it's only the relatively recent trading of numbers that has really wrecked the "system" when veteran cars that had had the same plate for 100 years have the number sold on and a modern "age related" number issurd.

[woodinsight]

This just illustrates that you can't always rely on a British registration number for positive identification.

No but even though in the 1950s we knew of people who had several cars with one taxed and insured registration between them, I would claim that it's only the relatively recent trading of numbers that has really wrecked the "system" when veteran cars that had had the same plate for 100 years have the number sold on and a modern "age related" number issurd.

Agreed...

[Carnut]

I agree 100% with you two guys.

Registration numbers have always been a sad fascination for me, and when I was a lad it was just an interest.  If you wanted 'MW 1' you went to the registration office and asked if it was available.  If someone had it already they might so 'No, it's gone, but if you want MW 2 you can have that one'.  You paid your £5 and that was that - it was yours!

I have '1 NEH' on my TVR, for which I paid the princely net sum of £20; one of my better investments as it's now worth about £30,000 if you believe the prices in the adverts.. Not that I would EVER sell it!

Nowadays it's totally ruined by utterly stupid prices so it's become the usual rich man's game, and most of those only want the numbers for vanity reasons - like that well-know socialist Sir Alan Sugar, sorry Lord Sugar, who isn't remotely interested in cars yet has to have 'AMS 1' on his Rolls-Royce..

Actually the whole buying and selling game and forcing up prices to sky-high levels was started right here in Hull by a guy named Don Marks and his brother Russell, who started Car Marks of Hull way back in the 1970s.  I know Don quite well and told him exactly what I think of what he's done, but I'm not sure we've had many words since...!  Incidentally he drives a Rolls-Royce and his brother has a Ferrari, amongst all the other cars in their stable.. So they've done all right thank you very much..

Rant over!

[woodinsight]

I agree 100% with you two guys.

Registration numbers have always been a sad fascination for me, and when I was a lad it was just an interest.  If you wanted 'MW 1' you went to the registration office and asked if it was available.  If someone had it already they might so 'No, it's gone, but if you want MW 2 you can have that one'.  You paid your £5 and that was that - it was yours!

I have '1 NEH' on my TVR, for which I paid the princely net sum of £20; one of my better investments as it's now worth about £30,000 if you believe the prices in the adverts.. Not that I would EVER sell it!

Nowadays it's totally ruined by utterly stupid prices so it's become the usual rich man's game, and most of those only want the numbers for vanity reasons - like that well-know socialist Sir Alan Sugar, sorry Lord Sugar, who isn't remotely interested in cars yet has to have 'AMS 1' on his Rolls-Royce..

Actually the whole buying and selling game and forcing up prices to sky-high levels was started right here in Hull by a guy named Don Marks and his brother Russell, who started Car Marks of Hull way back in the 1970s.  I know Don quite well and told him exactly what I think of what he's done, but I'm not sure we've had many words since...!  Incidentally he drives a Rolls-Royce and his brother has a Ferrari, amongst all the other cars in their stable.. So they've done all right thank you very much..

Rant over!

Exactly!
I'm surprised we haven't had a thread on number plates, their use, abuse and manipulation (specifically in the UK)