Petert <peter.tho...@brightchro.me.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
> Anyone have any idea if there is anywhere where I can date car > registration numbers? i.e. those issued before 1963 in England & Wales. > It would be helpful in dating some old photo's I have
Identifying the cars the plates are on would probably give you a close enough date.
(adds uk.rec.cars.classic) Any pics you want to start us with?
On 15 Oct 2009 14:01:32 GMT, Adrian <toomany2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Petert <peter.tho...@brightchro.me.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like >they were saying:
>> Anyone have any idea if there is anywhere where I can date car >> registration numbers? i.e. those issued before 1963 in England & Wales. >> It would be helpful in dating some old photo's I have
>Identifying the cars the plates are on would probably give you a close >enough date.
>(adds uk.rec.cars.classic) >Any pics you want to start us with?
But some cars were produced for years - Series E Morris 8, was IMMSMR, was first produced before WW2, The A35 ran for a while also.
I would like to pin the photo to a date that it couldn't have been taken before - nothing too accurate, the month would do
Petert <peter.tho...@brightchro.me.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
>>(adds uk.rec.cars.classic) >>Any pics you want to start us with? > But some cars were produced for years
Sure. But it's rare that a car will be produced without any kind of a facelift for more than a few years - and, even then, it's unlikely that it'll be the only car in the pic. And, if it is, who's to say it was new, a couple of years old or considerably older when the pic was taken?
> Series E Morris 8, was IMMSMR, was first produced before WW2
1938-48, but very few cars would have been produced between '39 and '45 - and there'd be other clues as to whether the pics were pre- or post-war.
>, The A35 ran for a while also.
'56-59 saloon, -62 estate, -69 van.
> I would like to pin the photo to a date that it couldn't have been taken > before - nothing too accurate, the month would do
Wow. That's some seriously optimistic precision...
I very much doubt you could get a plate identified to a _month_ - and, even then, you'd be relying on at least one car in the pic being brand spankin' new...
>Petert <peter.tho...@brightchro.me.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like >they were saying:
>>>(adds uk.rec.cars.classic) >>>Any pics you want to start us with?
>> But some cars were produced for years
>Sure. But it's rare that a car will be produced without any kind of a >facelift for more than a few years - and, even then, it's unlikely that >it'll be the only car in the pic. And, if it is, who's to say it was new, >a couple of years old or considerably older when the pic was taken?
>> Series E Morris 8, was IMMSMR, was first produced before WW2
>1938-48, but very few cars would have been produced between '39 and '45 - >and there'd be other clues as to whether the pics were pre- or post-war.
>>, The A35 ran for a while also.
>'56-59 saloon, -62 estate, -69 van.
>> I would like to pin the photo to a date that it couldn't have been taken >> before - nothing too accurate, the month would do
>Wow. That's some seriously optimistic precision...
>I very much doubt you could get a plate identified to a _month_ - and, >even then, you'd be relying on at least one car in the pic being brand >spankin' new...
I would know that a particular photo wasn't taken before a particular date
Peter <peter.thomas1...@gmail.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
>>> I would like to pin the photo to a date that it couldn't have been >>> taken before - nothing too accurate, the month would do >>Wow. That's some seriously optimistic precision...
>>I very much doubt you could get a plate identified to a _month_ - and, >>even then, you'd be relying on at least one car in the pic being brand >>spankin' new... > I would know that a particular photo wasn't taken before a particular > date
Sure, but a week after that date or five years after?
The very first plate I tried (pre-suffix, one of my fleet) was not only completely wrong about where the plate was issued, but didn't even take a guess on when.
I tried another. It guessed at a year - and was wrong by a couple of decades.
> The very first plate I tried (pre-suffix, one of my fleet) was not only > completely wrong about where the plate was issued, but didn't even take a > guess on when.
> I tried another. It guessed at a year - and was wrong by a couple of > decades.
I tried a few of my former cars Information correct for a 1957 Standard 10 Jowett Javelin shown as 1952, the year after it actually was Triumph Mayflower was correct at 1952
So I agree it was not spot on, but mine wasn't as bad as your test.
> > The very first plate I tried (pre-suffix, one of my fleet) was not > > only completely wrong about where the plate was issued, but didn't > > even take a guess on when.
> > I tried another. It guessed at a year - and was wrong by a couple of > > decades. > I tried a few of my former cars > Information correct for a 1957 Standard 10 > Jowett Javelin shown as 1952, the year after it actually was > Triumph Mayflower was correct at 1952 > So I agree it was not spot on, but mine wasn't as bad as your test.
I tried my first car which had an Irish plate and it gave a spread of dates which included the correct one.
-- *The only difference between a rut and a grave is the depth.
Dave Plowman d...@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound.
>> > The very first plate I tried (pre-suffix, one of my fleet) was >> > not >> > only completely wrong about where the plate was issued, but >> > didn't >> > even take a guess on when.
>> > I tried another. It guessed at a year - and was wrong by a couple >> > of >> > decades.
>> I tried a few of my former cars >> Information correct for a 1957 Standard 10 >> Jowett Javelin shown as 1952, the year after it actually was >> Triumph Mayflower was correct at 1952
>> So I agree it was not spot on, but mine wasn't as bad as your test.
> I tried my first car which had an Irish plate and it gave a spread > of > dates which included the correct one.
>Petert <peter.tho...@brightchro.me.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like >they were saying:
>> Anyone have any idea if there is anywhere where I can date car >> registration numbers? i.e. those issued before 1963 in England & Wales. >> It would be helpful in dating some old photo's I have
I had a book on Personalised plates(think it was by Noel Woodall???) which listed thousands of personalised plates and who they belonged to. In the back of the book was a list of all the Registration authorities and the letters they used and an even longer list of registration letters and the dates they were issued. I passed it on to a work colleague who was for ever asking me to borrow it. (He and many of his pals have vintage bikes) A search on ebay or amazon may reveal books for sale.
"Leroy Curtis" <le...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>>Petert <peter.tho...@brightchro.me.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like >>they were saying:
>>> Anyone have any idea if there is anywhere where I can date car >>> registration numbers? i.e. those issued before 1963 in England & Wales. >>> It would be helpful in dating some old photo's I have
>I had a book on Personalised plates(think it was by Noel Woodall???) >which listed thousands of personalised plates and who they belonged >to. In the back of the book was a list of all the Registration >authorities and the letters they used and an even longer list of >registration letters and the dates they were issued. I passed it on >to a work colleague who was for ever asking me to borrow it. (He and >many of his pals have vintage bikes) A search on ebay or amazon may >reveal books for sale.
> > The very first plate I tried (pre-suffix, one of my fleet) was not > > only completely wrong about where the plate was issued, but didn't > > even take a guess on when.
> > I tried another. It guessed at a year - and was wrong by a couple of > > decades.
> I tried a few of my former cars > Information correct for a 1957 Standard 10 > Jowett Javelin shown as 1952, the year after it actually was > Triumph Mayflower was correct at 1952
> So I agree it was not spot on, but mine wasn't as bad as your test.
I was quite impressed it knew two of my previous were re-registrations (HFG 489T and BHY 130H) but it got the year wrong on 9994 MY - it was 1960 not 1961.
Locations were all correct on all the ones I tried.
|
