Thread: Early Series 1 Land Rover Question

Record keeping was not top of mind when the Landrover was being developed in a very short time in the immediate post war period of shortages and rapid changes. And some of the vehicles were rebuilt with extensive changes (sometimes including new chassis numbers) and then sold as new cars. As an example of this, I think all the Amsterdam cars had dashboard transfer controls - all were converted to the more familiar floor red knob and pull ring before being sold.

It is quite possible that detailed research using documentation from various sources can change accepted history details (for example that HUE 166 is "the first Landrover"). This is a bit of a rubbery concept anyway. Where does this leave the fabled "Centresteer"?

This was not in any real sense a Landrover - it was a rebodied Jeep built to demonstrate ideas to the board. Literally a "Concept" car and was almost certainly restored back to a jeep; after all, it didn't even belong to the company, but to one of their executives. And cars of any kind were in short supply in 1947.

Originally Posted by JDNSW

Record keeping was not top of mind when the Landrover was being developed in a very short time in the immediate post war period of shortages and rapid changes. And some of the vehicles were rebuilt with extensive changes (sometimes including new chassis numbers) and then sold as new cars. As an example of this, I think all the Amsterdam cars had dashboard transfer controls - all were converted to the more familiar floor red knob and pull ring before being sold.

I am sure there was urgency to get the vehicle to market and on a shoe string budget but they did seem to have a skilled workforce at hand. There are tantalising snippets of records shown in the JUE 477 and HUE 222 links but they don’t show column headers (Are these records available publicly anywhere?). In the case of JUE 477, the column of what appear to be chassis numbers are out of sequence which suggests that it may have even been collated after the fact.

Originally Posted by JDNSW

It is quite possible that detailed research using documentation from various sources can change accepted history details (for example that HUE 166 is "the first Landrover"). This is a bit of a rubbery concept anyway.

I can also understand that the owners of these vehicles have a vested interest in their respective claims. In the case of Mr Radcliff I think he knows a marketing opportunity when he sees one but I also believe that it is based on his genuine passion. And yes, I do have a certain amount of envy of his road trip. Having said that, I have never driven a Series 1, let alone for hours on end…..across a desert.

I have driven thousands of miles in Series 1s, albeit not in real deserts. But even the first Landrovers were very capable, with one real advantage over later ones - they were lighter and smaller. So I have no trouble thinking he will do it.