classic motorcycle forum
Motorcycle Discussions => British Bikes => Topic started by: cardan on October 25, 2022, 07:24:53 AM
-
The folks doing the catalogue for Shannons Spring Auction have gone into overdrive on lot 58: https://www.shannons.com.au/auctions/2022-shannons-spring-timed-online-auction/B5TX191B2Q4F6VBD/
With engine number 351/42256 (Villiers 9D, presumably) and frame number C1268, isn't the bike likely to be a Acme built by Bennett & Wood in Sydney rather than a product of the Chell Motor Company Limited of Moorfield Road, Wolverhampton?
I think we decided that 351 was the Villiers code for their 9D Acme motors - is there a date? I think some Acmes had frame prefix B and others C, but I'm not an Acme expert.
"The only Chell with an Australian history, the bike must be one of the rarest and most unusual British lightweights in the country and a great addition to any collector."
A story explaining how the owner spent $16,000 on the restoration 12 years ago would be fascinating.
Chell, or Acme?
[Edit: I wonder if the "42" at the start of the engine number means 1942? I've seen a later Acme with engine number 351/1287...]
Leon
-
I know nothing about these bikes, but would it likely that the engine was manufactured in 1942?
I reckon Villiers might have had other priorities around that time..
-
Yes I'm not sure, but Acmes were produced in Sydney up until 1942, then followed a gap until manufacture recommenced in 1947. So in the classifieds there are many "1942" Acmes, but just what engines were used I don't know. One of the customers for Acme was the Postmaster General, so maybe there was some special arrangement...
Despite being built on opposite sides of the world, the Chell and the Acme were essentially identical to look at, no doubt built from the same "set". http://www.historywebsite.co.uk/Museum/Transport/Motorcycles/Chell.htm
Leon
-
A story explaining how the owner spent $16,000 on the restoration 12 years ago would be fascinating.
Indeed !
Perhaps it was cramming all those "pistons and rings" in there - for a single cylinder.
You'd also wonder how the chassis number was thusly, if only a few were built.
As you rightly note ...
Wonder if B&W had a big stockpile of engines ?
-
P.S. Note that the factory Chell pic has tubular silencers.
And your memory is good on the number details.
Previous discussion on ACMEs
https://www.classicmotorcycleforum.com/index.php?topic=3602.5;wap2
(don't know why the archive stuff has lost its format style)
So 351/ and C frame prefix is clearly postwar Acme.
-
That description is sheer romance isn't it. It's not as if you have to go far in Sydney to see an Acme. The Powerhouse Museum has had one on display for years although it is a proper prewar example with the 1939 B frame prefix and 1938-39 AAA prefix Villiers engine, not the postwar version with postwar numbers as listed by Shannons.
My personal favourite in the description is the bit about most Chell being scrapped for their aluminium content!! What aluminium content? The only aluminium content is in the Villiers engine and as production of the 9D engine continued throughout the the war, (James ML military lightweight anyone?), why bother melting one 9D engine down to make another?
One could go on but essentially it's the same old blurb served up yet again without any thought given to it. For example, by 1939 speedometers were a legal requirement for all motorcycles over 100cc yet you'll notice that makers invariably advertised and sold them as an extra accessory as reported here. Current day writers just repeat the old guff without thought. It makes you realise that todays consumer protection laws arose out of some very dodgy practices.
Finally, just for Leon, were Acme produced in Sydney up until 1942 or did it just take until 1942 to sell off the initial 1939 batch? The last Cottman Colt was first registered in 1943 but Cottman only received the one batch of machines late in 1939 shortly after war had been declared. It took years to clear them all. There were many wartime controls on both purchase and operating civilian vehicles back then. Even if you could buy, one registration each year was on an 'as needed' basis plus you had to get ration tickets for petrol. Every obstacle was put in the way of any civilian having a set of wheels for private and casual use. If you weren't aiding the war effort you were off the road.
I wonder if Shannons have had any feedback?
Cheers,
-
It's hard to be perfect on this old stuff, but we could do better than the Shannon's guff.
Certainly new Acmes were being sold up until 1942, but you're right they could have been just built from the initial batch of motors and frame parts.
Not sure exactly how the numbers work: is 351/42256 just a very late 9D number?
Ditto with Acme frame numbers! I don't imagine that C1268 is the 1268th Acme built, but if I had a list of numbers I'm sure something sensible would fall into place.
So the Chell is very much post-war Acme - maybe 1948 or so - fitted with early pattern fishtail mufflers (expect "rayguns" for the 1947-on models), and of course the Webb pressed-steel fork rather than the earlier Sackville. What a pity its history has got so mixed up - it's always nice to know just what it is that you're restoring when you start restoring it.
I suppose I'll drop a note to Shannons, even though I hate doing it. Not much old-motorcycle expertise around these days.
Cheers
Leon
-
I dropped a note to Shannons.
They have added more to their description assuring us that the bike is a Chell, and a "before restoration" photo.
I was a pretty good thing: interesting that the fishtail mufflers were on the bike when found - maybe B&W had a few left up in the rafters from the pre-war bikes.
Leon
-
We wonder how much that 'transport museum in Wolverhampton' knew about B&W ACME motorcycles ??
Or indeed some of the previous owners....
That before pic needs a better view of the Chell tank logos to be at all convincing !
-
That would nail it down for sure !
https://scontent.fbne6-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/181669708_1135895710230556_5438711204606363116_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=973b4a&_nc_ohc=TyA4c6noHjgAX9dttAj&_nc_ht=scontent.fbne6-1.fna&oh=00_AT-Y0zpxXCF--sfW7Bv7UKwbAdNWurTxTnIXi4oUxcyeDA&oe=635D66A7
-
I love that B&W transfer!
To be fair, the 1939 Acme and the 1939 Chell were more-or-less identical (someone tell me who supplied the frame kit - I'm too tired to figure it out), and so a UK expert could easily conclude that the bike was a Chell. In fact it would be a fair bet if the bike were found near Wolverhampton. But in Australia Acme would be a more reasonable first guess. What is pretty ordinary is giving a 1939 date to a bike with a 9D Villiers which doesn't have an AA or AAA engine prefix. Oh well. Anyway, there's a nice Acme at an upcoming auction, but what we don't know is what fraction of his $16,000 spend the owner wants back!
Leon
-
I strongly suspect those fishtail mufflers are Coventry Eagle mufflers mounted upside down. Probably locally made replicas so nice and cheap.
We had a thriving local trade making all sorts of vehicle spares so no great drama to use some of it but arranged in a slightly different manner so it looks unique.
I’m not surprised Shannon’s are reluctant to change their blurb. If the seller claims the bike is a Chell they’re rather stuck with his claim aren’t they. They can’t really say that the owner doesn’t know what he is talking about and the bike is an entirely different marque.
It’s easy to pin the engine number down. Villiers changed their engine numbering system when they restarted civilian production after WWII. On the 9D they also changed where they stamped the number on the engine. In fact they used three different engine number positions on the 9D. Pre-war, wartime and post-war, so even without knowing the subtleties it’s easy to place the engine within a particular timeframe. I can explain the full hoo ha if you want but suffice it to say there is absolutely no doubt that the engine is post-war Acme.
Cheers
-
With what some Oz restorers charge ,Id say its quite possible to spend $16k on a lawnmower restoration.
-
Probably the same everywhere. Us amateurs doing it for the love of getting greasy can spend a whole morning on the bike and have nothing worthwhile to show for it at the end, but if you're doing it as a way of earning a crust someone has to be billed for that time whether it's productive or not.
Quickest way to cure yourself of a bike addiction....get a job working on them and dealing with their tight-arse owners. :-X
-
Yes I agree Rex - professional restoration is an expensive business. However have a close look at the Chell/Acme (see below) and it's way far from concours - those fork spindles look awfully like the original probably-worn-out parts.
I'm wondering whether the Chell identification is a red herring. On this page http://www.historywebsite.co.uk/Museum/Transport/Motorcycles/Chell.htm there are images of two Chell motorcycles. The top image, from the late motor historian Jim Boulton who was usually very reliable, is "exactly" the same as the Acme. A key feature of the Chell/Acme frame is the almost-vertical seat post which joins the frame loop vertically at a lug, where the chain stays head off from a "Y" lug. All Acmes seem to have this frame feature, as does Bouton's image of the "Chell".
Most Chell info seems to come from the one article in 'The Motor Cycle and Cycle Trader', 21st April, 1939, as quoted on the website. But note that the image in this article, while similar to Boulton's Chell and the Acme, is quite different in the frame details around the junction of the frame loop/seat tube/chain stays. This Chell seems to have a continuous tube forming the frame loop under the engine and the seat tube, and the rear stays seem to join this loop somewhere well forward of where this happens on the Boulton Chell/Acme.
The two Chells are similar, but different. I wonder if Jim Boulton's Chell is something else, mis-identified.
So who made the lug set for the "Boulton Chell" and the Acme. Both pre-war (1939-1942) and post war (1947-1949) Acmes seem to use the same lugs in the frame (albeit with Webb rather than Sackville forks), so it could be that Bennett and Wood were still using prewar inventory. B&W was a big company.
Prior to the Acme, B&W's small bike were essentially Wolfs, from the Wearwell Cycle Co. in Wolverhampton (the home of Chell) http://www.historywebsite.co.uk/Museum/Transport/Motorcycles/Wearwell.htm . However the only 8D/9D Villiers WOlfs that I can see have no lower tank rail in the frame, and the detail around the junction of the seat tube/frame loop/chain stays is quite different.
Any ideas who made the Acme kit?
Cheers
Leon
-
This photo from the Chell/Acme at Shannons Auction shows the frame layout described above.
What other bike/bikes used this frame arrangement?
Leon
-
Those forks have had the standard bodge applied. They’re not the original adjustable spindles but just long bolts with no way of adjusting them. I’m going through the same exercise at the moment with a 1940 Excelsior. I bought a stalled restoration, beautifully painted but as I’m steadily discovering, nothing done mechanically. I’m spoiling the paintwork doing what should have been done first.
As usual I’ve outsmarted myself. I was at the fed up stage with my 1939 Montgomery and thought I’d be miles ahead with this shiny Excelsior but I now have two half baked lightweights sitting in my workshop instead of one.
Anyway, back to this Acme/Chell. It’s just another example of a kit built British style lightweight . Pick your make of forks, engine, hubs, frame lugs, etc, and build another variation of a standard theme. In this case we know who assembled the original package as the frame number and engine number tell us so. It’s not the first time we’ve had some dreamer think he’s got something exotic and it won’t be the last. My own pet peeve is claiming some mundane piece of old bangery is a ‘Sport’ model. And don’t get me started about the loons who think they have some exotic racing engine because it has two exhaust ports.
Sorry, rant over. It just amazes me how people turn the most ordinary items in to something exotic on no credible evidence and sometimes I let loose.
Cheers,
-
Aye.
Some time back, I went to a Pickles auction and they had a somewhat incomplete Villiers lightweight,
could have been a Waratah. It was described as a 'racing model'.
It was all I could do to not laff out loud.
The buyers weren't so convinced though, it didn't making 'racing' money ...
-
One curiousity with that 'Chell' is that the rear brake pedal is on the rhs.
The Waratah had it on the left, with a crossover shaft behind/below the gearbox.
Wonder how the Acme did it ?
Yep, the (prewar) Acme is identical.
Do note the tyre pump - standing vertical there.
https://assets.shannons.com.au/B04RVF3H6600FVC/F659D0F515IW3XF4/4epvvkedoxgk6e42/jpg/2000x1500x3/vehicle/1939-villiers-acme-125.jpg
-
My 1929 Excelsior has the brake pedal on the left with the rear brake drum on the left. My 1940 Excelsior has the brake pedal on the right with the rear brake drum on the right. My 1951 James had the brake pedal on the left with a crossover shaft to a rear brake on the right..
It doesn’t make an atom of difference. The feel is the same regardless.
-
So what is the front fork on the "real" 1939 Chell. It has a rib pressed along the centreline? Looks the same as the fork on the 1939 Montgomery https://machinerysales.cheffins.co.uk/lot-details/index/catalog/1102/lot/491099/1938-125cc-Montgomery-Terrier-MOTORCYCLE-Reg-No-NSK-529-Frame-No-8603-Engine-No-AA3100-An-older-restoration-the-hand-change-3-sp
Is it the same as the fork on the 33d6 Montgomery?
Leon (who has square eyes from looking at so many 9D-Villiers-engined motorcycles...)
-
That (unconnected) speedo drive sticks out like a sore thumb. Not original surely?
-
1930’s pressed steel forks drive me nuts. As far as I can make out the major manufacturers were Webb, Sackville, Druid and Brampton. I’m confident I can identify Sackville and some Webb but that’s about it.
I think Sackville used the same fork pressing for most if not all their forks but rang the changes for almost everything else. They seemed to make a range of forks from basic to de luxe using the same foundation for all.
Webb appear to do much the same except they also had a range of fork pressings.
Broadly speaking it appears to be much the set up as the British Hub Company where the same basics were used to produce a gazillion variations on a theme.
In short I have no bother sorting them out but precise identification is another thing altogether. I’ve never found any decent information on pressed steel forks anywhere.
And I go along with Rex. I don’t think that speedo drive is original. Mine is a ‘39 Montgomery and it has nothing like that. Speedometers were not a legal requirement on British bike’s until the late 1930’s so little provision was made for them at factory level until they absolutely had to.
-
That's OK - the key take-away is that the fork on the Chell is different from the Sackville used on the Acme in 1939. And the rear stand is different, the frame is different, and the tank...
I've searched as best I can and can't find anything at all in the UK that looks like the Acme, save the mysterious "Chell" illustration attributed to Jim Boulton. It would be funny indeed if was an illustration of a machine built by a British firm for Bennett & Wood in Sydney! My best guess would be that the parts came from the Wearwell Cycle Co. in Wolverhampton, but if so you'd expect there to be a Wolf that looked like an Acme, and I can't find it. Mystery unsolved.
What about an Acme racer - I suppose it was built for "Formula 9D" racing. https://nationalmotorcyclemuseum.com.au/gallery/australian/Acme-Ika-477.htm
Cheers
Leon
-
All good - the Chell is now catalogued as an Acme.
https://www.shannons.com.au/auctions/2022-shannons-spring-timed-online-auction/B5TX191B2Q4F6VBD/
Leon
-
I see the usual Acme/Bantam story surfaces in the description. As Villiers introduced their 10D in 1949 and stopped making the 9D B&W couldn’t have kept making the Acme as it was anyway.
It worked out very neatly for Bennet & Wood. The Bantam came along at exactly the right time. As one door closed another opened without any effort on their behalf.
A firm has to be lucky sometimes.
-
Now that the bike is not so 'special' be interesting to see what it sells for.
-
$A5,600, or a bit over 3,000GBP at the current exchange rate.
https://www.shannons.com.au/auctions/2022-shannons-spring-timed-online-auction/B5TX191B2Q4F6VBD/
I suspect this is more than it would have brought as a Chell, but who knows. With cream panels and ACME transfers it would be quite a nice-looking little bike, so not a ridiculous amount of money. There were better bikes in the auction that brought less - I liked the 1935 AJS 250 that was the next lot...
Leon