Anyone remember CPA 208? A former 65 body?

Tim Braby in Brisbane owns what was sold as a 1934 Nippy Sports. It originally was registered as CPA208 on the 8/11/1934. A buff Registration book dates from 1955 and was issued by the Surrey C.C. Chassis number is 204570, the original motor M204646. Owners include John Murphy of Newdigate (from 1955), James O’Rourke of Beare Green (up to 1965), David Broughton of Hutton, Essex (1965-70), Peter Kellett of Billericay (1970-78) and Peter Green of Coopersale, Epping (1978-1993ish). It looks like a Nippy, but it has an alloy body and all new steel floor with no car number on the floor tunnel, just a chassis number. In September 1993 it was issued with a VT20 Test Certificate but with a new engine, M210772, which is fitted to the car now. It was sold to Ron and Joan Gliddon and transported to Brisbane, Queensland, Australia sometime after that date, passing then to Brian King. The car is still on the road and a member of the Austin Seven Register of Queensland. At one time the car was white.

I think it would be what the antique trade would called a “married” item, the body from one car and a chassis from another. A steel floor and firewall, bonnet and mudguards, whereas the body shell, doors and boot lid are aluminium. The outside of the scuttle and along the flitch plates are one piece of aluminium as well; a 65 steering wheel too. It is in the detail that there are subtle differences, but these maybe features of the 1933 “65” that were changed with the retooling for the Nippies, such as the reinforcing gusset.

Tim notes: “The boot has the small plate that gives access to the fuel tank sender, but looking at one of the other two cars in Brisbane the two bolts are positioned differently. I also do not have the reinforcing gusset seen on the Nippies on the base of the B pillar, but Car 178382 (in the photographic register here) lacks that feature as well. The sloping line of the top of the door as it continues on to the scuttle panel at the A pillar; on other cars I have seen this is quite small whereas on my car it is nearly 1.5 inches long”.

Despite this car not fulfilling the criteria for a Type 65, could it be the bodily remains of a lost 1933 car? Sadly we will never know the identity with the loss of the transmission tunnel. But what could be the story behind the different body design to the front of the doors?

There are no doubt a good few cars around with similar stories. Can anyone add any significant chapters for this one?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s