Advertising Last completed movie pages 1975 Wolseley Saloon [ADO71] Comments about this vehicle| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2013-02-08 22:52 |
The vehicle details for KYT 20P are: Date of Liability 01 09 1985 Date of First Registration 02 03 1976 Year of Manufacture 1976 Cylinder Capacity (cc) 2227cc CO2 Emissions Not Available Fuel Type PETROL Export Marker N Vehicle Status Unlicensed Vehicle Colour BLACK |
|
◊ 2013-02-08 22:53 |
But on Wikipedia this type is listed as Wolseley Saloon (not 22 Series)... --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_%28car%29 |
|
◊ 2013-02-08 23:02 |
Glass's says 22 Series, Robson says Six (18-22 Series), and this could run and run because it was a mess at the time. I prefer 22 Series because it's clearly understood without confusion and stops them falling into other vague groups. Nice find. |
|
◊ 2013-02-08 23:02 |
I think it didn't actually have a name, I'll ask someone... |
|
◊ 2013-02-08 23:07 |
Just called Wolseley apparently, Saloon was sometimes added as that is what it was. 18/22-Series was a general name used in the early days of the Wedge. -- Last edit: 2013-02-08 23:08:52 |
|
◊ 2013-02-08 23:22 |
2200 - Link to "www.ebay.com" Saloon: http://storm.oldcarmanualproject.com/wolseleysaloon1975.htm Link to "www.flickr.com" |
|
◊ 2013-02-08 23:42 |
2200 - Classic & Sportscar Aug 2012 issue, though as unofficial common usage. Gives a production figure of 3800 - would have probably sold loads more with a proper name. |
|
◊ 2013-02-09 01:51 |
|
|
◊ 2013-02-09 15:06 |
Who has said that, Sandie? |
|
◊ 2013-02-09 17:09 |
A person on the forum where I asked about the name. As it included the information that this is a ministerial car I thought it was worth copying over. More information on these ministerial Wolseleys at: http://www.leylandprincess.co.uk/WolseleyMinistry.htm |
|
◊ 2013-02-09 18:21 |
Interesting links. According to http://www.leylandprincess.co.uk/GaydonWolseley.htm last of these was built Sept 75, so DVLA 1976 date unconvincing. Glass's says KYT xxxP was London series completely issued Aug 75; but I think there was a practice where 1-20 of each series were not issued in sequence and were held back for special requests. |
|
◊ 2013-04-01 23:00 |
Just for clarification, I am slightly perplexed by the use of the term ''Wolseley 22 Series'' as this was not at any point the name of this car. Officially as there was only one Wolseley model at this point the car was simply called ''Wolseley'', although yes it was part of the BLMC 18-22 Series of cars, the full range for which was Austin 1800, Austin 1800HL, Austin 2200HL, Morris 1800, Morris 1800HL, Morris 2200HL and Wolseley. BLMC's brochure for the car called it the Wolseley saloon. It was not felt necessary to give the car a 'name' as it was the only Wolseley and the brand had quite an established image at the time which was thought to speak for itself. The car actually sold quite well in its 6 month life. Obviously as the car was rebadged as a Princess 2200HLS after nationalisation the term 'Wolseley' or 'Wolseley Saloon' became easy to confuse with all the previous Wolseley models, so the car has typically been known as either 'Wolseley 18-22' or 'Wolseley 2200' in most publications since the Wolseley badge was dropped. At the time and afterwords most people refered to them as a 'Wolseley wedge'. My own preference would be just ''Wolseley [ADO71]'' for the purposes of this website, as this is the most acurate for what the car was sold and badged as in 1975. It was not ever a 'Wolseley Six' - that was a totaly different model - and it was never a 'Wolseley 22' or 'Wolseley 22 series'. |
|
◊ 2013-04-02 00:13 |
Cars without a name are always difficult to treat satisfactorily. The use of just the make leads to numerous attempts to give it a name (as all the references cited above), and it's more useful to agree one of them (whichever fits best) as our reference for recognition. imcdb also has a research value - if someone wants to look at all our examples, they need to have a recognisable name to be found easily. We also have a practice where if the make is known but the model unidentifiable (as opposed to just unidentified so far), the entry often becomes abbreviated to just the make. So far we don't have any Wolseleys with this anonymity (just some entered as "unknown") but it causes inconsistency. I don't have strong feelings whether this is called 22, 22 Series, 2200, Saloon or whatever other name people have applied to it, but it should have a name for ease of use and to stop the entries getting lost or disappearing. |
|
◊ 2013-04-02 13:57 |
Hi dsl, thanks for your response, I agree that for practicle reasons there needs to be an agreed name for ease of use. My concern with '22' or '22 Series' is that these terms have not, to the best of my knowledge, been used widely before and are not really associated with this car. 'Wolseley Saloon' or 'Wolseley 2200' would be the most accurate, British Leyland used both terms to refer to the car in its literature. My concern is that people searching for the car or wanting to upload a listing of one are unlikely to know where to look if '22 series' is used. Btw I know I probably sound very pedantic, it is probably a trivial thing really. Its just that as an enthusiast of the car and an owner of one I'd like to avoid it being labled with what seems to me to be a 'wrong' name. Regards, Chris |
|
◊ 2013-04-02 13:59 |
I've changed them all to Saloon. .gif ":)") |
|
◊ 2013-04-02 14:05 |
Have you thought about the -often many- different names on export markets? With keeping that in mind, you cannot generalize that discussion about the correct naming. |
|
◊ 2013-04-02 14:16 |
Saloon's fine by me  - makes sense for our purposes and to match BL references. Ingo's point worth noting, but short duration of this specific model makes exports unlikely in any quantity. However would be very interesting if any foreign names were found. |
Add a comment Advertising Advertising
![1975 Wolseley Saloon [ADO71]](/i571652.jpg)
![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
