Forum

[Scalyback]




Contemplating RE print codes

Most RE parts books, instructions and the like have print codes on the back of them. Oddly, Meccano also used virtually the same system, so I have managed to suss out the print codes, using Meccano's as a basis. Let's check out a Meccano code on the bottom left...





[center][/center]

16/963/10m.


16 well, that is different to the RE codes, and from examining loads of Meccano's literature, it seems to indicate the product range, Hornby-Dublo in this case

963 Month/year. In this case, September 1963
10m Quite often, the 'm' was left off, but it is French for Mille or 1000. this would have been a 10 thousand print run.




Now, let's go look at the RE code from a meteor Minor Parts book...

[center][/center]

661/2½M. 658.

661the first part seems to be sequential when comparing a bunch of parts and instruction books, so I would suggest this is the print job number, unique to each publication and increasing each time.

2½M. The M (as above) is for mille. This print run was for 2 and a half thousand books. Same as Meccano codes.

658. Month/year. In this case, June 1958, same as Meccano codes again.


Now, a few more examples to show the correlation between the print job numbers and the date...



[center]

Airflow fitting instructions, Aug 1958
[/center]


[center]

Supplement to Kevin's parts book, December 1958




A little hard to read, 715/2½M. 659. Kevin's instruction book, June 1959.

So now we see the relationship between the increase in the print job number with the advancing date.



I may well be wrong and if so, please correct this below, but, I think I may have sussed this out correctly!













Your out of date, possibly Microsoft browser does not support the audio element.









REOC 15084

Tabellarius de verbis. Ostensor gaudium

[Rattlebattle]

Soooo.....Royal Enfields are made from Meccano, right?

[nigelphoto]

Rattlebattle - Royal Enfield and Mechano are from the same 1930's British engineering mindset. If you understand one, you have no problem with the other!

[Scalyback]

When you motorised a Meccano model, the nuts and bolts would often come loose and bits would fall off... Sound familiar?

[Mark M]

Thanks for that Scaly, I knew about the production dates but not the print run thing. We are lucky with the RE Parts Books as they are well (and accurately) illustrated unlike many other marques where parts are just listed by number. There are difficulties though, for instance the page which illustrates footrests and other associated components seems to have simply been copied from a Twin version for several years in the 50s leading to Bullet owners looking for that pesky curly footrest meant to go round the Twin's left exhaust pipe! And the bottom fork yoke was strengthened witha brace, probably in 1958 but the illustration never got updated. Then there are the drawings with no number and vice versa! A further clue is the suffix A on a part number which means that the shape of the part changed in some way but it is still interchangeable with the earlier version. Enfield seem to have produced the books well after the launch of a model, and there are also the "mystery" books which may, or may not have appeared, anyone ever seen a 1955 500 Bullet Parts Book? And the Competition models never had one at all making a "restoration" of a Works Replica hard or easy depending on your point of view!

REgards, Mark

[jefrs]

Same printers? "Printed in England by Hudson & Son Ltd, Birmingham" ???