vin number

[Jon Pegler]

I have also been surprised by some of the engine and frame numbers Ducati used on the singles in 1967 and 1968.
I have known of a 250 w/c registered for use in the UK in July 1968 with an engine number of 105543.
I have a 250 Mk 3 w/c with an engine number of 106328, although it is not the original motor for the frame, which has a number of 96749.
Why were w/c frames issued with 9---- numbers when n/c engines went well above 10---?
Anybody know?
The very early w/c frames had the lower of the rear engine mounting bolts 10mm diameter, whilst the top rear mounting bolt was 8mm diameter.
If Art has a very early w/c machine, this may be an indication of it's age as I think this feature was only used for about a year.
Photo of w/c 250 Mk 3. Frame no.96749. Engine no.106328

Jon

[Eldert]

this frame has the later reinforcement loop behind the top rear engine bolt

very early frames did not have this

i have a widecase 250 Monza without the reinforcemend loop and the frame number is 99601
i bought this bike in 1974 so its safe to presume it left the factory like that .

Eldert

[Jon Pegler]

Eldert,
I am aware of the earliest w/c frames not having the reinforcement loop, having seen a few in the past. .
I was once told that this was the first 500 frames produced.
I believe Nigel Lacey may have one too.
It seems odd that your frame without that loop has a later number than my one which has the loop.
What is the explanation for that?
Answers please.

Jon.

[Eldert]

Hi Jon

i dont have a explanation , i am just as puzzled as you are .
my bike was first registerd in 1970

Eldert

[DewCatTea-Bob]

[quote= Jon Pegler ...
" I have known of a 250 w/c registered for use in the UK in July 1968 with an engine number of 105543. "

____ Jon, yours & Eldert's posts have provoked me to bother with looking-up my oldest w-c.parts-book to see if it pins-down the factory changes with motor-numbers any more closely. ...
__ First I must admit that when I stated (in my previous-post) that the first w-c.motors of 1967 came with motor-numbers "by the 108000s-range",, I was then really thinking by '106000', but I then didn't want to state info that might possibly be incorrect, so I more safely went-with the 'by-108000' figure-statement (while stupidly thinking I was merely making an upward-adjustment of just 200 [instead of 2000]).
Now caring to get the actual numbers stated right, I've since found that the factory parts-book only sates a motor-number for w-c.350-models (which is "05,105"), but the book itself doesn't list any motor-numbers for the 250 models. _ However I found some of my-own notations added to the w-c.250 pages (which I had made note-of sometime back in the '70s and had since forgotten about), and they state that the first widecase motor-number began with the-number '104501' (hand-printed on the page listing the main electrical-parts [which were still the same as stock on the 1966-Scrambler n-c.model], and-also on the pages showing the body-work parts), and that that w-c.model-version continued until the 105000 motor-number. _ So that (rather narrow) range of 500 w-c.models were the only ones which are really definitely 1967-models ! _ And after that, I'm really not sure what motor-number represents the first of the 1968 model-line, but I'd guess somewhere around 105500 - 106000, (as they certainly must've made more than just 500 w-c.units for the 1967 model-year).



" Why were w/c frames issued with 9---- numbers when n/c engines went well above 10---? Anybody know? "

____ I-myself sure-don't, but I suspect that it may have to do with the fact that frames intended for the USA.market were-not numbered.



" The very early w/c frames had the lower of the rear engine mounting bolts 10mm diameter, whilst the top rear mounting bolt was 8mm diameter.
I think this feature was only used for about a year. "

____ I happen to know that the top-rear m-m.bolt remained just 8mm through 1970 !



" I have a 250 Mk 3 w/c with an engine number of 106328, "

____ Since it's frame includes the later-added reinforcement-tubing, I believe that distinction indicates it as being a 1968-model.


Dukaddy-DUKEs,
-Bob

[DewCatTea-Bob]

[quote= Eldert ...
" i have a widecase 250 Monza without the reinforcemend loop "

____ Then that should make it a 1967-model !
What is it's motor-number ?
__ And wish I knew you had such a model much sooner, as I've always wondered about the charging-system employed on early w-c.Monza-models !
Does it have the old n-c.type system with the pair of yellow wire-leads, or the later w-c.system with 1-red & 2-yellow wire-leads ?


Enlightened-Cheers,
-Bob

[DewCatTea-Bob]

[quote= Jon Pegler ...
" It seems odd that your frame without that loop has a later number than my one which has the loop.
What is the explanation for that? "

____ My-own guess is that, unlike the motors, the frames' numbering was dependent upon the country which the frames were meant to-be registered within,, (as the frames for the U.S. weren't separately numbered [from the motors], as like for other counties). _ This would somewhat stand to reason, if the location of frame-numbers were found in different places or on different types of frame-tags,, (as-like the U.S.version's 'foil-tag', located on front of the head-stock,, is 'different').
So I'd say comparison of you-guy's frame-numbering ought-to be done, to see whether there's actually any such difference (between your two separate countries) to possibly explain the particular odd ordering of those frame-numbers of both-yours'.


Dukaddy-DUKEs,
-Bob

[asmith411]

Here are some photos before disassembly..........................

20140927_095840 - Copy.jpg

20140929_134534 - Copy.jpg

20140929_134604 - Copy.jpg

20140929_134815 - Copy.jpg

20140929_134738 - Copy.jpg

As a note, I emailed Ducati in Italy if they had any information on the motor number, i.e. when it was manufactured. They called me from Italy insisting that they can't release any information until I provide have a vin number which they claim is on the frame somewhere. They are't very helpful. ???????????????

Art

[Ventodue]

Here are some photos before disassembly

Very nice, Art - a genuine early wide-case Scrambler .

I emailed Ducati in Italy if they had any information on the motor number, i.e. when it was manufactured.<snip> They aren't very helpful.

It's more like they don't know (or care too much, if I'm being truthful) . With the honorable exception of Livio Lodi, the Museum curator (and yes, I'm sure, a few others ... ), there isn't a great deal of knowledge about, or enthusiasm for, the company's past products or its history. Suffice to say that over the years many attempts have been made to help Ducati to provide services aimed at supporting owners of old machines; but each time, these attempts have been largely rebuffed (or ignored) by the management of the day.

Personally, I think that's a shame. But then again, the ownership of Ducati knows has changed so many times over the years. On top of which, many original factory records were destroyed during the period immediately preceding the Castiglioni purchase.

Enjoy your Scrambler! And do have a look here (and join, if you wish!): http://www.ducatiscrambler.com/

[DewCatTea-Bob]

[quote= asmith411 ...
" Here are some photos "
any information on the motor number, i.e. when it was manufactured. "

____ Too-bad you didn't post your pic sooner, as I then could've more certainly informed you that your Duke is more likely a 1969-model !
__ Sorry for previously stating it was a "1967", as I was then mistaking (cuz my mind was then stuck thinking that your motor-number was just hundreds of units newer [than the first wide-case], rather than the 'thousands' newer which it actually is) !
__ I've posted an altered-version of your most pertinent pic, to help indicate the differences between your 250Scr.model and an early-1967 w-c.model.


Updated-Cheers,
-Bob