# Weird Serial Number (Real or Not )



## altapat (Jan 29, 2022)

Good day Cabers. 

A friend sent this to me to confirm if it’s legit G519 Columbia or not.

I’ve never seen this kind of stamping before. The letter M is on top ( missed on the serial no). Was this mistakenly done? Or another anomalous job converting a civilian frame.

What’s your opinion? 

Regards,
Alvin


----------



## New Mexico Brant (Jan 29, 2022)

Is the frame welded or brazed?


----------



## altapat (Jan 29, 2022)

New Mexico Brant said:


> Is the frame welded or brazed?



This photo is bit blurred. Can’t determine. I’m gonna ask the guy to send a better one.


----------



## Mercian (Jan 29, 2022)

Hi All,

It's odd, and I'd like to see more of the bike before fully comitting myself, but at the moment I'm inclined to think it's correct.

Here's why I think this (in no particular order of importance).

The numbers appear to be MG120970, K3, with a 'Sweetheart' type chainring, and straight bar.

Here's what I have recorded around that time





The main G120970 part of the number is in a feasible sequence for K3 (March 1943), and G519's were being built at that time, although it is at the end of a block of numbers.

The serial numbers of 'Civilian' bikes made at this point do not start with a G, but a W for Westfield. So it is not as simple as finding the right frame style and stamping an M on it, you would have to change the W for a G, or maybe remplace the entire srial number, in which case, why stamp the M in a strange position?

Westfield frames being built at this point are either the heavy Military, lightweight 'Victory' types, or the Compax. A civilian heavy frame at this point is unlikely (though I guess not impossible).

This serial number is the end of the 'Coffin Ring' style bikes until 1944, and just when the 'Sweetheart' style started. In fact it would be the first of this type so far recorded. Coffin type rings are far easier to find than the correct Sweetheart type, so it would be a good guess by a faker to find one and use it, and for it to be in abelivable sequence.

The 1 of the number concerned me a little, since Westfield generally use 1's with a flat top, and a base. This has no base, and a sloped top. However, the next bike recorded,W123797 from @HARPO has exactly the same 1 in the serial number (and quite irregular stamping too). The other numbers are in the stamps that I'd expect to see.




Link : https://thecabe.com/forum/threads/wartime-columbia-sports-tourist-100-original.168971/

The format of the M seems correct, though the overpaint, and angle the photo is taken at makes it difficult to say for certain, and it would be an easy letter to fake with a dremel etc, being all straight lines.

This photo from @milbicycleman is close in date, and shows what it should look like, as well as the slope top 1 again.




Link: https://thecabe.com/forum/threads/all-original-1943-westfield-columbia.76545/

Finally (for the moment), Westfield seems to have handstamped it's numbers until after WW2, and there are some quite drunken sets out there, so the number alignment doesn't worry me.

Errors did happen. Here is an M stamped far too close to the edge from @37schwinn




Link: https://thecabe.com/forum/threads/1944-columbia-compax-military-model-folding-bicycle.99850/

And a 4 overstamped 5 (with the more normal flat topped 1) from @BcCleta 




Link: https://thecabe.com/forum/threads/still-out-there-m306-almost-complete.178269/#post-1272187

I'm sure there will be more discussion, and we would be interested in seeing other pictures of the bike, and knowing, for example, if it has the correct type Morrow and Eclipse hubs (also difficult for a faker), and the date on the Morrow(though these were often changed in service, so may not prove very much).

Thanks,

Best Regards,

Adrian


----------



## Goldslinger (Jan 29, 2022)

Looking at the bike physically I would say the rear drop outs are the clearest tell. The g519 is pretty distinctive. Have him send a picture of them.


----------



## altapat (Jan 30, 2022)

New Mexico Brant said:


> Is the frame welded or brazed?



More pics…

The joints are roughly welded. G519 MG’s features.


----------



## altapat (Jan 30, 2022)

Goldslinger said:


> Looking at the bike physically I would say the rear drop outs are the clearest tell. The g519 is pretty distinctive. Have him send a picture of them.



And Here’s the rear


----------



## Goldslinger (Jan 30, 2022)

The picture is not very clear . They sure look like the real thing. The civilian ones  looks quite different. This is a 41 Westfield .


----------



## Mercian (Feb 2, 2022)

Hi @altapat Alvin.

In summary, the frame is probably correct, just misstamped.

If the chainwheel has not been replaced, then it's the earliest 'Sweetheart' type so far recorded. _( It has been replaced, not the correct type, see post 11)._

Some of the parts, other than the frame, may be original to the bike, such as the badge, the chainwheel.

It is a restoration with several incorrect parts.

Does your friend have any 'pre restoration' photos?

Thanks,

Best Regards,

Adrian


----------



## DaGasMan (Feb 2, 2022)

The chain adjusters look (albeit blurry photo) like they might have
a reducer threaded in, with smaller hex head bolts being used. Or it
could be just mix and match nuts and not reducers. I guess the 
reducer theory would be rather random and unlikely.
Would need a better close-up photo of that to be sure.


----------



## altapat (Feb 2, 2022)

Mercian said:


> Hi @altapat Alvin.
> 
> In summary, the frame is probably correct, just misstamped.
> 
> ...



Unfortunately there are  no pre-restoration photos. 

Indeed there are many non G519 parts. Chainring is like a Schwinn sweetheart. Wheels, seat, seatpost and fenders are not also correct.

This was sold last week and I don’t know who owns it now. 
-Alvin


----------



## altapat (Feb 2, 2022)

DaGasMan said:


> The chain adjusters look (albeit blurry photo) like they might have
> a reducer threaded in, with smaller hex head bolts being used. Or it
> could be just mix and match nuts and not reducers. I guess the
> reducer theory would be rather random and unlikely.
> Would need a better close-up photo of that to be sure.




They look like bolts .


----------



## Mercian (Feb 3, 2022)

Hi @altapat Alvin,

Thanks for the followup.

You are right, the 'Sweetheart' ring is not the type usually seen on thses bikes, and so is a replacement. I will change my records accordingly. It is an interesting coincidence that it really does come just at the changeover from Coffin to Sweetheart rings. I suspect (though I have no written proof) that the change coincides with the issue of the third contract for MG serialled bikes.

Best Regards,

Adrian


----------



## altapat (Feb 4, 2022)

Mercian said:


> Hi @altapat Alvin,
> 
> Thanks for the followup.
> 
> ...



Hey Andrian,

How many MGs were produced in total ? And how many Daytons? Do you have documents to support the numbers? 

Thanks,
Alvin


----------



## Mercian (Feb 5, 2022)

Hi Alvin,

The staright answer is no, the exact number is not known, but rough estimates can be made.

That's a series of difficult questions, and it may be that people such as @johan willaert are able to answer it better. I will put what I think/know, and I'm happy to discuss.

The US Government printed details of all contracts over $50,000 at the end of the war, so some of the information comes from there. Unfortunatly, they quote cost and not number of bicycles, so unlees you know the individual cost of the bicycles (we don't) the information is useful only to give general size of contract, contract number, and the dates they ran. Also, earlier contracts may include set up costs, so  will appear larger than they are.

It means also that small (less than $50,000) will not show up, and we know that some military bikes were produced in small numbers, such as this USMC bike:









						1943 Dayton Huffman USMC bicycle information wanted | Military Bicycles
					

Greetings, everyone.   I'm looking for any and all information about my 1943 Dayton Huffman USMC bicycle.   I would describe it as a diamond frame lightweight men's bike with front fork truss rods and a rear axle drop-down stand. This bicycle may be described in U.S. Government Federal...




					thecabe.com
				




Also threr was a1943 order for 500 Huffman Model 81-81 Folding Bicycles which may be the same as the Huffman Model HF-777 Folding Bicycle

See Johan's page here for more details:



			Military Bicycles
		


Johann says that Lend-lease bikes of unknown models and makes were supplied to:

China  2,645
Russia 11,205

Note  Lend Lease came into effect on March 11th 1941.

I'm not sure where his information came from, but he has a nice webpage on the subject here:





__





						Lend-Lease Liberators
					





					www.theliberator.be
				




The contract details below come from the Smithsonian.















So it seems for Huffman, there are three discrete large contracts

294ORD2341    $399,000  from 4/43 to 11/43
294ORD2594    $96,000    from 7/43 to 11/43
33008ORD159  $70,000    from 10/43 to 3/44



Alvin, I'm out of time for today, you can see how big a subject it is. I will return to it later in the week, and I guess there may be other contributions.

Best regards,

Adrian


----------



## johan willaert (Feb 5, 2022)

From the 1952 published US Army Statistics for WW2.

A total of 72.105 bicycles (three different types) were made in 1942-43-44-45
The types are not further detailed, but most likely Columbia Men's and Women's and Huffmans


----------



## altapat (Feb 5, 2022)

Thanks Adrian and Johan for your answers with details and documentations. 

Now that this question has been answered, no doubt that more and more bicycle collectors and enthusiasts are madly looking for this.

Cheers,
Alvin


----------



## Mercian (Feb 8, 2022)

Hi All,

For those, like me, who had not previously seen @johan willaert  's WW2 Statistics document, and are interested in WW2 US equipment in general, it's a fascinating read.

A good downloadable copy is available here:



			http://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Stats/USA_in_WW2_Stats-Procure_9-APR-52.PDF
		


Best Regards,

Adrian


----------

