New member spitfire scrambler?

[RichardL]

Kevin,

Welcome to the forum and thanks for the photos. You are going to have some good fun with that one. It bears a lot of similarities with my own A10: 2-gallon tank, QD rear hub, 1/2-width front brake, Amal 930 carb, etc.

About your engine number, I think it might be re-stamped. The area looks like it has been sanded away. The numbers are not uniform in size and are haphazardly placed. On both my A's the numbers are neat and uniform in size. It just seams to me that, at this point in the life of the BSA company, they probably own a good set of number stamps, or three. They were still quite viable and, I would think, unlikely (or less likely) to fall down at this point of pride on their flagship mark. This said, there are many guys here who have gazed upon more examples of engine numbers than I, so it might be interesting to hear their take on my theory. All that said, even if it is re-stamped, it shouldn't take away even a bit from your enjoyment.

Can't say I've been to Squamish, but I lived for a few years in Bellingham, WA and got up to Vancouver a few times. Beautiful up there. I now live outside Chicago.

Regards,

Richard L.

[WozzA]

Yes I agree with Richard...   Vancouver BC & Alberta are beautiful..     
& those engine numbers do look dodgy to me...   

[ecose]

looking closely at the pics now, if you focus on the small diagonal scribes in the metal i dont see how they can still be there if someone had to remove enough metal from the area and then re stamp
it doesnt look like it is any lower there than the areas next to it, the numbers are deep enough that one would have to remove quite a bit of metal to get rid of them

[duTch]

 looks fine to me, maybe a half arsed effort at polishing, I reckon suck and see, but get on to the mob at BSOC for a story..?

[muskrat]

#'s are definitely dodgy.
Cheers

[WozzA]

the reason I suspect the numbers have been altered is the sand casting has been ground off & the numbers are not uniform size.. as below..

[chaterlea25]

Hi,
The end numbers 632 of the engine number stampings has been mucked about with !
originally the letters and numbers were the same size and style. 
The HHC letters are smaller size

John

[bsa-bill]

could have been re stamped following a repair, the two funny ragged marks could be the edges of a weld would also explain the grinder marks - but all speculation really

[RichardL]

This is all fun and speculative forensics, isn't it? Regarding the ragged marks Bill mentions, actually there are three of them, each accompanied by the initials "WA", and, maybe, scribed in a way to intentionally identify the edges of a zone where a repair occurred. Maybe WA was a factory certified repair mechanic or just someone well known enough at the time to believe his initials would be forever recognized. Hard to imagine that this could have been a factory repair, as I think they would have just replaced the cases rather than bothering with a weld. I suppose ecose and the curious crowd (the rest of us) will know better if and when the engine gets opened up.

On another subject, after looking more closely at the other photos, I see I was wrong about what carb is there.  It's a monoblock, I believe, and not a 930, as I thought from the full side view.

Richard L.

[ecose]

i think the numbers on the carb are 389/81     did anyone notice the front hub?
is there a way to confirm/identify the engine by taking it apart

[chaterlea25]

Hi,
The front wheel is the 8in. "Gold Star" single sided type, which I believe is correct for the "Spitfire"
The rear is also the GS type again correct for the Spitfire, to the best of my knowledge
The engine internals are usually standard BSA and it would have the 357 cam fitted
Look at the number cast underneath the inlet manifold, ?
Following "Magnetomans" thread on bitbike forum it would be interesting to see if theres an "S" stamped on the manifold ??

HTH
John