Ebay 201539254509
Is it original ?
Yes or no ?
Moderators: John@sos, charlesp, Charles uk, RickUK, Petergalileo
Re: Yes or no ?
Nice enough, low number and cheap enough but what puts me off is the inaccurate bulls#*t description, how can you take anything this seller says as true.
It would be nice to know who these misinformed "British Seagull enthusiasts" really are! There is no excuse, the correct information is out there.
eBay rant over, you can tell I've had my fingers burnt before.
It would be nice to know who these misinformed "British Seagull enthusiasts" really are! There is no excuse, the correct information is out there.
eBay rant over, you can tell I've had my fingers burnt before.
Re: Yes or no ?
Seems ok ish, but a lot of Bullsh@t in the advert. C model, so moderately collectable, however it is just an early 102, not really special and not particularly valuable.
"From Original British Seagull records in our possession we can date this Engine to 1946 exactly" - actually the SOS identifier..
We believe that this was an Original MoD Specification Engine - Total nonsense, no fact there whatsoever
The 'bow tie' two bladed propeller is Original - again wrong!!
It is used but is presentable and has features not found on other British Seagull Model 102 Engines. Such as the dual brass drain plugs in either side of the cylinder head and grease nipples in the gearbox to add the oil with no drain or filler cap
- Again complete nonsense. Both common to early post war period engines.
Wrong clamp of course. Looks like some bodgery around the gearbox end cap too, and incorrect fuel line. I don't see any battleship grey in the pics
So to me an interesting engine early post war yes, but noting that a reasonable SD with copper top went for £100 ish last week.
"From Original British Seagull records in our possession we can date this Engine to 1946 exactly" - actually the SOS identifier..
We believe that this was an Original MoD Specification Engine - Total nonsense, no fact there whatsoever
The 'bow tie' two bladed propeller is Original - again wrong!!
It is used but is presentable and has features not found on other British Seagull Model 102 Engines. Such as the dual brass drain plugs in either side of the cylinder head and grease nipples in the gearbox to add the oil with no drain or filler cap
- Again complete nonsense. Both common to early post war period engines.
Wrong clamp of course. Looks like some bodgery around the gearbox end cap too, and incorrect fuel line. I don't see any battleship grey in the pics
So to me an interesting engine early post war yes, but noting that a reasonable SD with copper top went for £100 ish last week.
Re: Yes or no ?
So what you are saying is, the information may not be true. 
Re: Yes or no ?
That copper topped SD that sold last week for £100 even had a bronze bracket and clutch lever!
Re: Yes or no ?
Something going on with the bottom of the exhaust tube. Has the later magneto top plate. Is that a marston transom clamp? I don't recognise it. Nice tank though. The drive shaft clamp on the water pump housing has been drilled out and a nut and bolt used. I think it is a fair buy and think the C and D's are under rated in their historic value.
Re: Yes or no ?
Yes not many of these about. It's the advert and some of the things we see and hear that's gets people like me and Rene ranting! Not sure about the clamp, are they anzani clamps? No idea.
Re: Yes or no ?
I've been known to gild the lily before now 
Re: Yes or no ?
At a guess, I would say the transom was off a mallard.
-
headdownarseup
- Posts: 2484
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:26 pm
- Location: bristol
Re: Yes or no ?
I've put my tuppence forward to the seller too (for what it's worth)
B£$$%&*T all over the place i'm afraid.
S.O.S. is the place for more accurate information,and has been for quite some time, not some bunch of oap's with lots of spare time on their hands looking for ways to make some cash out of junk.
I've had my beedy eyes on this outfit for some time now and some of the motors they're churning out as "restored" are...... well, enough said really.
True Hugz and Oyster, the D and C models are interesting enough, early enough from an historic point of view for restoration, not many about these days according to my data so far. (a few down under though! still trying to work that out)
Jon
B£$$%&*T all over the place i'm afraid.
S.O.S. is the place for more accurate information,and has been for quite some time, not some bunch of oap's with lots of spare time on their hands looking for ways to make some cash out of junk.
I've had my beedy eyes on this outfit for some time now and some of the motors they're churning out as "restored" are...... well, enough said really.
True Hugz and Oyster, the D and C models are interesting enough, early enough from an historic point of view for restoration, not many about these days according to my data so far. (a few down under though! still trying to work that out)
Jon
Re: Yes or no ?
I asked the seller about the records he has, as we might be able to glean usefull info as follows:
Hi, can you post photos of the original seagull records you have in your possession to give some provenance to your advertised engine history please.? Also what makes you think the engine was previously owned by the navy? Do you have the history of the engine? Thanks.
Hi, nice try ! If you think that the 'Old Boys' are going to share records with the World Wide Web that they have cherished for over 50 years then you must be joking !
The Receptionist at Seagull was well known to the 'Old Boys' and she typed up an original set of serial numbers just for them, such was their relationship with the Company. We have records that even our good friend John at S.O.S doesn't have because such is the longevity of the 'Old Boys' dealings with British Seagull.
This engine came with a batch of 18 others from a workshop in Plymouth run by another Seagull 'Old Boy' who was retiring in his 70's due to the imminent demolition of his workshop. We believe because of the features of this engine that it is ex Navy, it bears all the hallmarks and comes from the right City to be just so. But you will have to make up your own mind.
I think I have seen a copy of the "Receptionists notes" already on the forum, I have a copy myself.
Quite entertaining this on a saturday night.
Hi, can you post photos of the original seagull records you have in your possession to give some provenance to your advertised engine history please.? Also what makes you think the engine was previously owned by the navy? Do you have the history of the engine? Thanks.
Hi, nice try ! If you think that the 'Old Boys' are going to share records with the World Wide Web that they have cherished for over 50 years then you must be joking !
The Receptionist at Seagull was well known to the 'Old Boys' and she typed up an original set of serial numbers just for them, such was their relationship with the Company. We have records that even our good friend John at S.O.S doesn't have because such is the longevity of the 'Old Boys' dealings with British Seagull.
This engine came with a batch of 18 others from a workshop in Plymouth run by another Seagull 'Old Boy' who was retiring in his 70's due to the imminent demolition of his workshop. We believe because of the features of this engine that it is ex Navy, it bears all the hallmarks and comes from the right City to be just so. But you will have to make up your own mind.
I think I have seen a copy of the "Receptionists notes" already on the forum, I have a copy myself.
Quite entertaining this on a saturday night.
Re: Yes or no ?
So its a refurbished 102, I don't know a lot about war time 102's, so what's wrong with it.
To my untrained eye, should it not have a coolie hat for a 46, "best for" cover, wasn't about till the 50's?
No brass or bronze anywhere on it, plus a bow tie prop, plus some other little things.
It's a bit late for the Dunkirk run, shame.
To my untrained eye, should it not have a coolie hat for a 46, "best for" cover, wasn't about till the 50's?
No brass or bronze anywhere on it, plus a bow tie prop, plus some other little things.
It's a bit late for the Dunkirk run, shame.
Re: Yes or no ?
My now dead father started in the English Royal Navy during WW2 and stayed on going up the ranks before getting his wings and being part of the Fleet Air Arm. He spent many decades in the navy and never once saw a British Seagull in service. As he told me they were far too underpowered. He immigrated to Oz to fly the chopper in Skippy ha ha.
-
headdownarseup
- Posts: 2484
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:26 pm
- Location: bristol
Re: Yes or no ?
Basically this motor looks to have had a hard time. Loads of things have been swapped on it.
Shame, as it could be an easy sort out with the correct and un-molested parts. (cylinder might be quite tricky though)
I hope it doesn't sell for too much more than it is right now.
Dont get me wrong, there's still some nice parts worth saving on it, but as it is, it's too much of a "bitsa".
Jon
Shame, as it could be an easy sort out with the correct and un-molested parts. (cylinder might be quite tricky though)
I hope it doesn't sell for too much more than it is right now.
Dont get me wrong, there's still some nice parts worth saving on it, but as it is, it's too much of a "bitsa".
Jon
Re: Yes or no ?
Here is a line drawing of a '46 (C) with bayonet tank and Mk1 magneto. Maybe some of the early C's had the jm magneto.Keith.P wrote:.To my untrained eye, should it not have a coolie hat for a 46, "best for" cover, wasn't about till the 50's?