Discovered - Sammy Millers Original Bultaco Sherpa 669Nho

[sparks2]

Yes Sam's own development 325 before they went into production, which he probably used to prove most of his own aftermarket parts...  He also used a Mikuni on it.

Also his last Bultaco before he went to Honda.

[sparks2]

Is registration 669 NHO 1962 or earlier because I believe 1963 was the first year of numbers issued with a year letter so A = 1963 and so on. 

If 669 NHO is a Model 4 Bultaco were they the first trials bike Bultaco produced or was the Model 10 the first, also the round shaped fuel tank was that fitted to the early models then changed to the squarer design?

AAH.......THE JOY OF REGISTRATION NUMBERS (or 'Should I have got out more?')

In those far off days UK vehicle registration numbers (or marks) were issued by the local authority motor tax office for the area in which the vehicle was to be registered. To avoid duplication each individual motor tax office had a 'block' or 'blocks' of registration marks from which to issue.

So, although the larger local authority motor tax offices had more blocks of numbers (thus more available registration marks) to serve a greater population, the number of registration marks available to any one authority was always finite.

By 1962 it was becoming clear that some local authorities were fast running out of available registration marks to issue. (The UK had just experienced the 'Never Had it So Good' era (according to Harold McMillan, the then Prime Minister) when unprecedented numbers of people were taking to the road in the new relatively cheap BMC minis, Morris Minors, Ford Cortinas, etc, etc.

So it was decided by the Ministry of Transport, the government body with overall responsibility for vehicle registration, that local authority motor tax offices could, as from January 1^st 1963, issue registration marks from their local 'block' or 'blocks' but with a suffix 'A'.

The suffix was to change to 'B' as from January 1^st 1964.

Thus many more individual marks were made available for issue.

Where these were available, local offices could carry on issuing 'non suffix' registration marks.

During these years (1963-1964) it was discovered that the new vehicle buying public prefered to have a 'suffix' registration mark on their new vehicle and were thus favouring dealers in those areas that were issuing the new style 'suffix' marks.

So, as from January 1^st 1965, ALL local authority motor tax offices were instructed to issue marks with a 'C' suffix.

So, quite unintentionally, the system had arrived at the 'age identifier' element of the vehicle registration mark.

Where 5 or 6  digit registration marks (with age identifier suffix) tended to be issued to motor cycles it was always an informal /casual arrangement or understanding between local office and dealers to help dealers fit a registration mark onto the limited space of a motor cycle number plate.

Not sure what a 'factory' number plate is or ever was. A registration mark was issued from the local 'block' or 'blocks' of numbers by the local authority motor tax office which initially registered the vehicle. Whether that application to register the vehicle was made by a dealer, manufacturer or private individual didn't matter. Even Sam the Man didn't get to choose his number.

Note:- One unique registration mark or number to one vehicle. (A requirement that seems to have been widely abused).

Note:- One unique (as far as practically possible) frame number or Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) to one vehicle.

(Also a  requirement that seems to have been widely abused).

Was it like queue jumping, one law if you were famous, and another if you weren't??

Many more registration mark issue changes were to follow in the years to come, however I hope the above will go some way to the understanding of how 669 NHO came to be issued in November 1964.

It would seem that 669 NHO, initially at least, was a (heavily) modified M4, and this would make perfect sense.

I actually knew someone who bought an early M10 and it came with an M4 owners handbook (I still have the handbook somewhere), I don't suppose Barcelona had had time to produce a specific M10 book.

There would seem to be two series of production M10, the initial series with the more rounded tank and a slightly later second series with a flat bottomed tank, borrowed from the M4, with different hubs fitted at some stages and maybe a few other minor changes (which is where SM's second Bultaco EAA 60D started life and then morphed into something completely different).

Yours

Sparks

PS The above is only my interpretation but what would I know? You will no doubt be reading the actualitae elsewhere of course.

Apoligies for spelling mistakes, factual and grammatical errors (what do you expect from someone who failed their 11 plus and with a current reading age of 7).

 

Edited November 30, 2015 by sparks2

[sherpa325]

I may be naive, but I would have assumed that Miller would have had several bikes and just swapped the rego plate onto the bike he was competing on that weekend. EOR 2K from all the photos I have seen was a miller highboy framed bike, so i am not sure how the frame and engine numbers would correspond if at all. It would be interesting to know where this bike sits in the evolution of the 325 engines as it appears to have all the model 92 upgrades, whereas some other photos I have seen have 325 engines in Model 80 frames.

Cheers Greg

[nigel dabster]

Just one thing Sparks are you saying Dorset or whoever issued 669NHO and NHO 669 A would be issued in the same year?

[sparks2]

Hi Dabster
I'm not saying 669 NHO and NHO 669 A were issued in the same year.

What I'm saying is that 669 NHO and NHO 669 A could have been issued in the same year, as they are each distinct registration marks.
In 1963 / 1964 it was left to the discretion of the local authority office whether they issued the new style suffix marks or carried on issuing non suffix marks, where available, or a combination of the two. (sorry, if that wasn't initially clear).

And NHO 669 B and NHO 669 C could have been issued in 1964 and 1965 respectively.

My record shows that the suffix 'HO' was issued by Southampton County Council, so where Dorset's  got involved, heaven knows.

Don't draw too many parallels with today, as we've had the dead hand of DVLA centralisation since 1974.

Thanks for showing an interest.
Kind Regards
Sparks

 

Edited December 2, 2015 by sparks2

[nigel dabster]

Sam not employed by bultaco? What never paid by bultaco?

[nigel dabster]

Hi Dabster

I'm not saying 669 NHO and NHO 669 A were issued in the same year.

What I'm saying is that 669 NHO and NHO 669 A could have been issued in the same year, as they are each distinct registration marks.

And NHO 669 B and NHO 669 C could have been issued in 1964 and 1965 respectively.

My record shows that the suffix 'HO' was issued by Southampton County Council, so where Dorset's  got involved, heaven knows.

Thanks for showing an interest.

Kind Regards

Sparks

 

 

Thats exactly what i thought you meant but couldnt see how it worked in getting any extra numbers without!

 

[sparks2]

Hi Dabster
I have supplemented my last post (please read again) to make the point clearer.
Regards

Sparks

Edited December 2, 2015 by sparks2

[johnjsy]

Hi all,a most interesting topic to follow,but a slightly off camber comment from me. Other countries have much simpler & better registration systems. For instance with your first vehicle in Switzerland you are issued a number for life.Change your vehicle,you retain your number.How easy is that ? How sensible. Regards,John.

[old trials fanatic]

I may be naive, but I would have assumed that Miller would have had several bikes and just swapped the rego plate onto the bike he was competing on that weekend. EOR 2K from all the photos I have seen was a miller highboy framed bike, so i am not sure how the frame and engine numbers would correspond if at all. It would be interesting to know where this bike sits in the evolution of the 325 engines as it appears to have all the model 92 upgrades, whereas some other photos I have seen have 325 engines in Model 80 frames.

Cheers Greg

Wouldnt that be illegal ? A bit like a certain family i know having to wait for plod to move off on a road trial before they could continue as they both had the same registration number on their bikes. Agreed it was common practice back in the day and may even be so now 

[old trials fanatic]

Sam not employed by bultaco? What never paid by bultaco?

Probably wrong as usual but wasnt Sam employed by the Rickmans ? 

[twinnshock]

Hi all,a most interesting topic to follow,but a slightly off camber comment from me. Other countries have much simpler and better registration systems. For instance with your first vehicle in Switzerland you are issued a number for life.Change your vehicle,you retain your number.How easy is that ? How sensible. Regards,John.

 

John,

Sensible system but you can keep it.

 

The UK system a bit complicated but would this thread be a bit boring if we had your system. Many bikes and cars identity is defined by the UK registration. Sammy's GOV132 would be another good example. (Both of them! and ignoring the previous bikes to carry the number)

I own a 1935 BSA car. in the owners club we often refer to specific cars by the registration and this does not change when sold. The old registration also looks right on the vehicle In my  example two letters and 4 numbers. I can also confirm that some offices were issuing the older 2 letter 4 number registrations long after other offices had moved over to 3 letters 3 numbers.

 

Several posters have referred to the question was Sammy employed by Bultaco. Obviously the man him self could answer this but I seem to have read that at the time in question he was employed or at least had a contract with the Rickman brothers who had a workshop in New Milton not Bultaco and were at the time the official importers. Putting two and two together I think this would explain Sammy Miller moving from Birmingham to Hampshire about this time. I would also would not be surprised as to it being the Rickman brothers who registered the bike. Another point to bear in mind is that in the UK you do not need to be the owner of a bike or car to register it. You would be the registered keeper not necessarily the owner.

 

Stuart.

Edited December 2, 2015 by twinnshock

[sparks2]

Hi all,a most interesting topic to follow,but a slightly off camber comment from me. Other countries have much simpler and better registration systems. For instance with your first vehicle in Switzerland you are issued a number for life.Change your vehicle,you retain your number.How easy is that ? How sensible. Regards,John.

Hi

If you think this is difficult, try the New UK State Pension.

This applies in 4 months time and nobody, but nobody, understands.

And yet it appears to be fully rigged so nobody will get more or less than on the current system.

So what is the point of a new system ??

 

Answers on a postcard, Please.

 

Edited December 2, 2015 by sparks2

[jon v8]

John,

Sensible system but you can keep it.

 

The UK system a bit complicated but would this thread be a bit boring if we had your system. Many bikes and cars identity is defined by the UK registration. Sammy's GOV132 would be another good example. (Both of them! and ignoring the previous bikes to carry the number)

I own a 1935 BSA car. in the owners club we often refer to specific cars by the registration and this does not change when sold. The old registration also looks right on the vehicle In my  example two letters and 4 numbers. I can also confirm that some offices were issuing the older 2 letter 4 number registrations long after other offices had moved over to 3 letters 3 numbers.

 

Several posters have referred to the question was Sammy employed by Bultaco. Obviously the man him self could answer this but I seem to have read that at the time in question he was employed or at least had a contract with the Rickman brothers who had a workshop in New Milton not Bultaco and were at the time the official importers. Putting two and two together I think this would explain Sammy Miller moving from Birmingham to Hampshire about this time. I would also would not be surprised as to it being the Rickman brothers who registered the bike. Another point to bear in mind is that in the UK you do not need to be the owner of a bike or car to register it. You would be the registered keeper not necessarily the owner.

 

Stuart.

Interesting post,I think you may well be right.A while back I had a very early 247 Montesa,with a registration number close to that of the bike that "Sparky" Telling rode and I think won the Scottish on.I went to the Wiltshire records office and looked through their books,there it all was,Sparky's bike and mine a few numbers on.All on record and easy to access - should be the same with Sammy's bike ?

[pro sport]

Sorry sparks,

I assumed Dorset because Sam's shop was in Dorset, but Southampton would certainly have been geographically much closer!

Sammys Shop was in New Milton, Hampshire or it certainly was when I visited him there. I have also seen his address as Highcliffe which is also Hampshire so Southampton would have been the recording office for registrations.