Well, is it a Marston, or is it a British Seagull?
This is a current debate elsewhere, and one would think it an easy matter to discover. After all, we have serial codes that’ll tell you, don’t we?
The short answer is – no it’s not easy, and no we don’t have definitive codes. Even if we did there would still be room for debate.
The transition from Marston to British Seagull was a gradual matter. There was, it’s true, a finite date upon which British Seagull was formed formally as a company under law, yes there was a finite date when the deed of sale of all the stocks and spares and suchlike were purchased, and yes there was a date – unknown with any precision– when the first outboard bore the word ‘British’ in place of the word ‘Marston’. Nobody has any idea how many completed motors were covered by that deed of sale, nor how many completed gearboxes or cylinder blocks etc.
These dates don’t coincide –it didn’t all happen one afternoon. This was no ‘hostile takeover’ – far from it.
Bill Pinniger had been one of the original ‘concessionaires’ of Marston Seagull outboards right from the start, from his Merlyn Motors premises in Bristol. There was another ‘concessionaire’ in Ireland.
After the first couple of years, selling the ‘tear-drop’ outboards that we all covet, (and which are indubitably ‘Marstons’), Pinniger and his partner John Way Hope reckoned they could improve the design, and there is evidence to suggest the it was mainly their joint input – from about 1933-34 onwards – that resulted in the 102cc range such as the OJ, OP, ON etc.
Marston’s decided to pack up the outboard business, and effectively there was only one possible bidder – The partnership of Pinniger and Way-Hope.
The actual takeover was a benign affair, no hurry, no hassle. And, of course, no factory. Pinniger & Way Hope had no premises save their rather small sales office in Bristol. I am still researching dates, and it is – as some of you know – the devil of a job to be certain, so I’m not going to guess on a public forum! But I am pretty certain that the premises in Hamworthy in 1938 (about 500 yards from where I’m sitting) were no more than an ordinary residential house with an office in it.
In other words they were not manufacturing anything. Sure, they assembled a few, but it was by no means a factory. They assembled them in a small shed just down the road. But they didn’t do any machining.
Early on in the war they were virtually dormant. By then they actually had better premises, on the Quay in Poole itself, but whilst a prestigious address for a marine company, it still wasn’t a factory. Both Pinniger and Way hope went off to do other things, and the outfit was effectively put on a ‘mothballed’ basis.
So at this stage they still didn’t have any way of manufacturing anything.
All this time they were selling the same 102 motors that they had helped to design, unaltered save at one point (I don’t know when) when the ‘Marston’ on the tank decal turned into ‘British’. They were still using the same Amal carburettors, the same petrol cocks, the same gearboxes. And the same Villiers magnetos, complete with the stamped ‘JM’ numbers. JM, of course, stands for John Marston. As far as the other Charles, myself, and a couple of others can tell this JM number is a straight run of serials, only used on the outboards we’re talking about, never on anything else.
Whilst mentioning ‘JM’ numbers it’s important to point out that the total number of outboards produced can be plotted with these numbers, taking into account the numbers produced for the war effort. Key items like the SNP in my workshop are telling – when an item was only made in one single year and you are confident it has its original magneto you can peg that magneto to that year. Attempting to extrapolate forwards and backwards has its difficulties – for example we have no real clue as to how many were produced (if any) while the factory was dormant. On the low mean annual production figures that we have calculated that can throw dates out to a dramatic extent.
So we have, in 1939, a range of motors – OP and ON – which bear a JM serial on the magneto, Marston’s serial letter codes, cast and machined by the original manufacturer or his agents, but bearing a British Seagull decal on the tank.
The real break with Marston’s occurred in 1942, when the SN and SNP were manufactured. They were overall very similar to the ON and OP – the letters are a clue. But by now Marston’s were turning out all manner of war related items, so the castings and machining were brought ‘in-house’. The manufacturing came to Dorset, and was spread about anywhere they could find spare capacity. You can tell that standards are different, and we know that the re-opening of the premises on the Quay was the turning point in the British Seagull story. But it’s interesting that the letter coding changed at this point.
It wasn’t until they occupied the factory on Holes Bay more than a decade later that they were set up as a proper manufacturing concern, and even then they didn’t make everything themselves
It’s fair to say that the ‘S’ may well indicate a spring drive, I simply don’t know. I believe that it signifies the first outboard manufactured by British Seagull.
Now I’m not making a claim that anything manufactured before 1942 qualifies as a Marston. Nor that anything after 1936 is a British Seagull. But everything before 1942 bears a Marston serial starting with ‘O’ Everything before the HSD of 1946 bears a ‘JM’ number. And the 102 Marstons were designed by the men who became British Seagull.
What I am saying is that for me there is no clear date on which ‘Marston’ becomes ‘British’.
Early History, the changeover, and a few ponderings.
Moderators: John@sos, charlesp, Charles uk, RickUK, Petergalileo
I have a suspicion that the SN and SNP are very scarce. Mine is a crude thing, indistinguishable from an SD in outline, but, for example, the crankcase is very 'agricultural'. It's finished very coarsely, and has a blow hole filled with solder!
What sort of transom bracket has your SD? Mine came without one, sadly.
What sort of transom bracket has your SD? Mine came without one, sadly.
Do I have to take off the flywheel to find the JM no.
It has never been off
The SD has the standard old transom bracket.
The SN1 is a strange one as the tiller set up is the same as the later seagulls,
The motor was found at a carboot sale out western Queensland, It had not been started for years and had spend its time leaning up against a wall in an open shed. the carbie faced out to the weather so the moisture got into the bore and it was seized. The piston was in poor condition so i replaced it with one out of another SD model that i have, The carby was really bad so I replaced that out of the same SD, I have had a couple of other minor repairs done. The ignition is original including the plug lead and points.
This is my main and favourite motor. I have had it now for about 4 years and it gets a real lot of use.[/img]
It has never been off
The SD has the standard old transom bracket.
The SN1 is a strange one as the tiller set up is the same as the later seagulls,
The motor was found at a carboot sale out western Queensland, It had not been started for years and had spend its time leaning up against a wall in an open shed. the carbie faced out to the weather so the moisture got into the bore and it was seized. The piston was in poor condition so i replaced it with one out of another SD model that i have, The carby was really bad so I replaced that out of the same SD, I have had a couple of other minor repairs done. The ignition is original including the plug lead and points.
This is my main and favourite motor. I have had it now for about 4 years and it gets a real lot of use.[/img]
-
Charles UK
-
Charles UK
Chris that doesn't look like the right number, that looks like a casting number.
Normally we would expect to find the JM number stamped on the top face of the flywheel just under the ally cover & the same number on the magneto baseplate.
It seems that the flywheel & baseplate were made as a matched pairs, all the way through the Marston range & up to the end of the SD's when they changed to the flat topped flywheel.
I'm guessing that they were made in matched pairs to make sure there was a suitable clearance between the flywheel magnets & the coil pickup laminations.
I think the reason for the change to the smaller flywheel & simpler magneto setup apart from cost savings, was that the heavy early flywheel caused excessive wear to the top main bearings, bring the flywheel magnets closer to the coil pickup laminations & in extreme cases into contact with each other, much to the detriment of the laminations.
I always push the flywheel port to starboard a few times to feel for how much play there is in the top main bearing & then rotate the flywheel while pushing sideways in every direction by hand, to see if I can make it touch the laminations before starting up one of these motors for the first time.
The point's settings for these early Coolie hat flywheel cover type ignitions, are not 20 thou like the later versions, but are set at 18 thou & gradually decreased, until you get the best spark, down to a minimum of 10 to 12 thou, somewhere between these 2 figures you will end up with a spark that looks strong enough to weld with!
If you have one of these ignition setups, Please handle with care as the newest one must be 60 years old & only about 12 thousand of them were produced by Seagull & Marston.
Normally we would expect to find the JM number stamped on the top face of the flywheel just under the ally cover & the same number on the magneto baseplate.
It seems that the flywheel & baseplate were made as a matched pairs, all the way through the Marston range & up to the end of the SD's when they changed to the flat topped flywheel.
I'm guessing that they were made in matched pairs to make sure there was a suitable clearance between the flywheel magnets & the coil pickup laminations.
I think the reason for the change to the smaller flywheel & simpler magneto setup apart from cost savings, was that the heavy early flywheel caused excessive wear to the top main bearings, bring the flywheel magnets closer to the coil pickup laminations & in extreme cases into contact with each other, much to the detriment of the laminations.
I always push the flywheel port to starboard a few times to feel for how much play there is in the top main bearing & then rotate the flywheel while pushing sideways in every direction by hand, to see if I can make it touch the laminations before starting up one of these motors for the first time.
The point's settings for these early Coolie hat flywheel cover type ignitions, are not 20 thou like the later versions, but are set at 18 thou & gradually decreased, until you get the best spark, down to a minimum of 10 to 12 thou, somewhere between these 2 figures you will end up with a spark that looks strong enough to weld with!
If you have one of these ignition setups, Please handle with care as the newest one must be 60 years old & only about 12 thousand of them were produced by Seagull & Marston.
Seagull Research
Charles, I can't wait to read the full story, you certainly have done some excellent research there.
I never delved into the History as deeply, but I realised there were many 'grey' areas! well done for putting it all so clearly!
I never delved into the History as deeply, but I realised there were many 'grey' areas! well done for putting it all so clearly!
Chapter One - dealing with the Marston years, was pretty complete until something else cropped up a few days ago, and is pending a visit and a possible fair few additional bit. Plus of course a new crop of photos, which is a matter of a fair number of miles.
Chapter Two - the Wartime Years - is as complete as I can make it. Sadly there are NO documents in existence that can show any of British Seagull's service history, so only a hint of what was going on.
Chapter Three is Post War, and I'm almost happy with that - up until the introduction of the Centuries and the move to Holes Bay. Again, there are more photos to take, but all that needs is better light. I have all the examples I need.
Chapter Four - 'British Seagull in their Heyday' - is my best effort to date, and covers the manufacturing, the tools they used (I have photos of lots of these), the lads in the factory, the management, and of course the advertising. This is all written, and collated with most of the illustrations (some of which are really good ) I'm missing only a few, one of which is a photo of the rather unsuccessful attempt at boat building (and marketing) but as the boat builder concerned is local I'm sure I can fill that gap.
The four above have been used with a very few past Seagull employees as a 'reminder' and have brought a number of things to light. I bring the manuscript home after a few days...
There are two remaining chapters, covering the post Way-Hope years and the decline after the closure of the Fleets Bridge factory. Still a bit of work to do on the later models, but that's in hand.
It sounds well progressed, but I'm aware that the amount discovered decreases with each new nugget of information. Once you have the big bits (like copies of the brochures, which are well known) then attacking the next gap can take ages. Occasional breakthroughs - like Andy and myself discovering a whole new (to me) factory together with a few of its staff from the forties - are rare and rather set you back a bit, as well as moving you forward. On that day we also discovered the chap who drilled all the holes in the bronze brackets in 1945/6 - what's more we could show him one from that year that must have passed through his hands. He was delighted - the more so because he was on a brief visit to the UK from Canada, where he has lived for years!
I am still looking for anything from World War II that relates to British Seagull. We have plenty of engines, but not a document, not a photograph, not a reference in the archives.
I would still very much like to track down a couple of vague refences. One refers to the rumoured twin produced during the war. The other refers to an 'inboard outboard' produced in the latter stages of the war.
But at least we're getting there with the JM numbers!
Chapter Two - the Wartime Years - is as complete as I can make it. Sadly there are NO documents in existence that can show any of British Seagull's service history, so only a hint of what was going on.
Chapter Three is Post War, and I'm almost happy with that - up until the introduction of the Centuries and the move to Holes Bay. Again, there are more photos to take, but all that needs is better light. I have all the examples I need.
Chapter Four - 'British Seagull in their Heyday' - is my best effort to date, and covers the manufacturing, the tools they used (I have photos of lots of these), the lads in the factory, the management, and of course the advertising. This is all written, and collated with most of the illustrations (some of which are really good ) I'm missing only a few, one of which is a photo of the rather unsuccessful attempt at boat building (and marketing) but as the boat builder concerned is local I'm sure I can fill that gap.
The four above have been used with a very few past Seagull employees as a 'reminder' and have brought a number of things to light. I bring the manuscript home after a few days...
There are two remaining chapters, covering the post Way-Hope years and the decline after the closure of the Fleets Bridge factory. Still a bit of work to do on the later models, but that's in hand.
It sounds well progressed, but I'm aware that the amount discovered decreases with each new nugget of information. Once you have the big bits (like copies of the brochures, which are well known) then attacking the next gap can take ages. Occasional breakthroughs - like Andy and myself discovering a whole new (to me) factory together with a few of its staff from the forties - are rare and rather set you back a bit, as well as moving you forward. On that day we also discovered the chap who drilled all the holes in the bronze brackets in 1945/6 - what's more we could show him one from that year that must have passed through his hands. He was delighted - the more so because he was on a brief visit to the UK from Canada, where he has lived for years!
I am still looking for anything from World War II that relates to British Seagull. We have plenty of engines, but not a document, not a photograph, not a reference in the archives.
I would still very much like to track down a couple of vague refences. One refers to the rumoured twin produced during the war. The other refers to an 'inboard outboard' produced in the latter stages of the war.
But at least we're getting there with the JM numbers!
Charles
Sounds terrific and well done! I have just finished putting together an history of a specific Lotus car and decided in the end to publish it as a web site. This is because Lotus' paperwork and sense of history were both in short supply in the early 1970s! So I am hoping additional information will be forthcoming once the site goes live later this month. At least the factory still exists!
With regard to war time 'Gulls, as I understand it they were often used for bridge building over rivers to power rafts and may have been used for the D Day landings and harbour building. If that is the case, it would have been the Royal Engineers who would have been responsible for using them. If you have not already done so, it may be worth contacting the RE Museum and Library (http://www.remuseum.org.uk/). They would have some records of the use of outboards and could probably put you in touch with some of the men who used them.
Tim
Sounds terrific and well done! I have just finished putting together an history of a specific Lotus car and decided in the end to publish it as a web site. This is because Lotus' paperwork and sense of history were both in short supply in the early 1970s! So I am hoping additional information will be forthcoming once the site goes live later this month. At least the factory still exists!
With regard to war time 'Gulls, as I understand it they were often used for bridge building over rivers to power rafts and may have been used for the D Day landings and harbour building. If that is the case, it would have been the Royal Engineers who would have been responsible for using them. If you have not already done so, it may be worth contacting the RE Museum and Library (http://www.remuseum.org.uk/). They would have some records of the use of outboards and could probably put you in touch with some of the men who used them.
Tim
I have indeed tried those avenues - and coutless others.
There are loads of pats RE's who remember using them - the phrase is 'where there was water there were British Seagull motors' - but there is no official record of who bought what, when, and what for.
At best everything is anecdotal, at worst it's a fairy tale.
I have tried to use only primary research - the motors themselves, official records, photos, and first hand accounts. Once you dilute it from that you leave the path very quickly. I'm sure you must have found that out in your own endeavours.
Lotus eh? Europa? Elan? (Didn't an unkind person once say that the only two man made objects visible from space were the Great Wall of China and the shut lines of a Lotus Elan?) I used the dream of owning an Elan Sprint, done up in the Gold Leaf colours. Magic, eh.
A few months ago, a local lady responded to my pleas about British Seagull and offered me her late husband's collection of boating magazines, which I gratefully accepted.
Buried in amongst them was a seventies copy of 'Mayfair'. An hour or so later I realised I'd spent more time reading about the JPS Europa than I had ogling the girls...
Time, eh!
There are loads of pats RE's who remember using them - the phrase is 'where there was water there were British Seagull motors' - but there is no official record of who bought what, when, and what for.
At best everything is anecdotal, at worst it's a fairy tale.
I have tried to use only primary research - the motors themselves, official records, photos, and first hand accounts. Once you dilute it from that you leave the path very quickly. I'm sure you must have found that out in your own endeavours.
Lotus eh? Europa? Elan? (Didn't an unkind person once say that the only two man made objects visible from space were the Great Wall of China and the shut lines of a Lotus Elan?) I used the dream of owning an Elan Sprint, done up in the Gold Leaf colours. Magic, eh.
A few months ago, a local lady responded to my pleas about British Seagull and offered me her late husband's collection of boating magazines, which I gratefully accepted.
Buried in amongst them was a seventies copy of 'Mayfair'. An hour or so later I realised I'd spent more time reading about the JPS Europa than I had ogling the girls...
Time, eh!
-
Charles UK