Rear tub transom width variation

[Mustlust]

The parts manual indicates that the wider body back rest panel cap pn 300865 runs up to chassis number 06110304. My 1950 has the more narrow capping, although I’m 06109984, I.e., a serial number 320 vehicles later.
What are the chances my narrow capping is original and LR were just using up parts before the change? I understand that in the early days they were a bit ‘relaxed’ with parts as they transitioned through various changes.

[JDNSW]

Especially if it is Australian assembled - very likely. As is the possibility that what you have is not the original tub.

The Series 1 tub was not as durable as later ones, and it would not be surprising for it to have been replaced with a second hand one that had had less abuse at some time in the last sixty or seventy years.

[Mustlust]

Can anyone confirm whether the seat base for the 80” changed at all throughout the early years. The parts book would indicate that other than the really early numbers, the seatbase design was standard throughout the 80” run.
My query stems from wanting to know if a seat base from a 52 is compatible and a suitable join to a 49 rear tub.

[123rover50]

There is a difference in the centre panel cover plate for the pto. The early up to 50 had a rectangular cover plate and later 50 on had a roundish shape cover plate.
Keith

[Mustlust]

Ok, thanks Keith. So, once the seats are in, there is no physical or visual difference between the 49 and 53 seat base?

[B.S.F.]

I believe that on earlier seat boxes the hinged gearbox inspection cover is riveted to the seat box and part of it. On later models 2 tabs on the cover slot into the seat box.
.W.

[1950landy]

184893 184894 From my book Land Rover the early Years by Tony Hutchings. Read top of second column about seats.