Advertising Last completed movie pages
Thames 10cwt [400E] 
Class: Cars, Van / MPV — Model origin: 
![Thames 10cwt [400E]](i001117628.jpg)
![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
Background vehicle
Comments about this vehicle| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2018-02-27 01:08 |
I have the feeling this 33 is an 8 cut in half.  |
|
◊ 2018-02-27 03:23 |
To me this is a Ford Thames 800 (my family owned one in the early 1960s), but event though we have quite a few of these on file, what we have more of another make, Thames, and a model called 10 cwt. I don't think Thames is a make in its own right. |
|
◊ 2018-02-27 08:47 |
1) Link to "www.ebay.ie" 2) Link to "www.autolit.com" 3) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Thames_400E Ford of Great Britain marketed its commercial vehicles under the Thames name post WW 2, until 1965. The 400E van range was built during this period except for March to September 1965, following the introduction of the Ford D series trucks in March of that year to replace the Thames Trader. In that short period if Wiki is correct, the 400E vehicles became “Ford” badged. Even if Wiki is wrong, when the 400E was replaced in Sept 1965 the replacement van was the FORD Transit, so it seems that we can deduce a clear cut off date in this case. The start date for the use of Thames rather than Fordson is a bit more opaque, but the E83W predecessor of the subject design, introduced in 1938 as Fordson was latterly sold as a Thames, with a little badge on the bonnet side saying “A Ford Product”. In addition, the 1936 7Y 5cwt van and the 1945 E04C 5cwt van seem to have been badged Fordson, but the E494C successor of 1948 as a Thames. The case for treating Thames as a separate marque is open to interpretation, Ford appears always to have referred to itself as being the proprietor of Thames vehicles in its published literature. It should be noted, however, that for instance Morris-Commercial is referred to in this database as an individual marque, the relationship to Morris being approximately analogous to that of Thames and Ford. Commer had a previous existence before being swallowed by Rootes, and the All British Bedford was purposely aimed at having its own identity kept apart from Chevrolet (from where it emerged) and Vauxhall in the GM empire. Over to the Admins for a ruling, and the best of luck! IMO, the location being U.K., this is a Thames 10/12, or 15 cwt van model #400E. -- Last edit: 2018-02-27 12:36:27 |
|
◊ 2018-02-27 09:29 |
Colin Chapman was a great advocate in support of weight saving! |
|
◊ 2018-02-27 17:26 |
I agree Thames 10cwt (etc) [400E] I don't really want to get into the 'Ford/Thames' versus 'Thames' discussion but as you say jfs British car manufactures for some reason seemed to want to brand trucks differently from their cars. Ford England starting using Fordson for trucks by about late 1933 (previously only seen on tractors). Fordson Thames was used 1939 to 1950. Thames used alone when the Fordson name was dropped in 1950. Ford reused on its own from 1965. Ford in the UK appear to refer to the Thames range of trucks (and vans) as being "from Ford" or "built by Ford" and "Thames a Ford Product" That indicates to me that Fordson, Fordson Thames and Thames were each at one time a separate Ford UK brand; however it is open to a different interpretation, and I can also see that in overseas or export markets it may have been promoted with more emphasis on being a Ford. -- Last edit: 2018-02-27 17:28:46 |
|
◊ 2018-03-04 14:57 |
@johnfromstaffs @Sunbar @admin and others... As some may already know, I have a Ford Zodiac and a Ford Zephyr https://www.car.info/en-se/ident/704793/spots , but do I really? I'm not so sure, as one has to look very close to find any Ford information. There's a Zephyr badge on the boot, on both rear fenders, and on the facia and on the hood/bonnet one can read Z-E-P-H-Y-R. Only on the triangular wing badges (not mounted after the respray on my car) and on a indentification badge only visible when opening the hood/bonnet,one can read "A FORD Product". Also when studying period brouchures, work shop manuals and spare part catalogues, it was branded as a Zephyr. Only saying on the last page that is was published by Ford. The thing is that all Zephyrs, as well as other models in the UK Ford range, including the Thames, was marketed as their model name, rather than their mother company. But should they be separated on the imcdb? Having that said, one has to ask one important question; what is the point with imcdb? That is if it is only made for us, the members, or if it is made for other, random, users of the net as a reliable (?) source of information. If it is made for us, the members, one should after a while be able to navigate quite easily. Sometimes one can get a surprise, but not too often. If it is made for other users of the net it has to made more easy to navigate, or at least being consistent. Should one really separate all UK Ford models up to 1965? I think not. What is your comment? -- Last edit: 2018-03-04 15:00:19 |
|
◊ 2018-03-04 15:34 |
The word FORD appeared on the boot lid of my 1969 Capri PUJ 647H, and there was a blue oval on the grille of my 1979 Cortina Estate JVT 586V. Later on there was a 1984 Escort GL B34 EWP, and a 1986 Escort Ghia, D579 EUE, both identified by blue ovals on the grille iirc. The 1954 Popular 103E, MDA 378, and the 1965 Cortina 1500 HUY 566C are a bit far back in my memory, I think the Pop had Enfo in Ford script on the speedometer but I don’t recall any detail on the 1963 Anglia, 963 WBF, or the 1976 Granada Estate, TKE 903R. Perhaps Ford had a rethink about product indentification in the late sixties. I haven’t had a Ford since the ‘86 Escort. -- Last edit: 2018-03-04 16:37:00 |
|
◊ 2018-03-04 16:07 |
I'm not quite sure what the specific questions are here. As far as I can tell, wiki is correct. Glass's confirms March 65 change on 400E to Ford. See also legibly Thames-badged versus Ford-badged. However noted that export names 1957 onwards seem to have been (or included) Ford Thames 800. Glass's also confirms Thames as primary commercial brand in UK at least during 1950s to mid-60s. And for me the Trader was always Thames Trader - I've never known it by any other name. My Glass's commercials guide collection is very incomplete, but the 1961 edition (coverage back to 1950) says "Fordson - see Thames" and under Thames 5cwt E494C says Sept 52 "Rad. badge altered to Thames". Same comment for 10cwt E83W in August 52. Thames ET6 entry says "Fordson deleted from radiator badge" in Oct 52. So Aug-Oct 52 seems a definite changeover point. |
|
◊ 2018-03-04 16:37 |
My question is "Should one really separate all UK Ford models up to 1965?" Otherwise why particularly separate the Thames from all the other UK Ford products, that is the cars. The Thames had many spare parts common with the Consul/Zephyr/Zodiac MK2 range, and all of the models were branded as their model name. Not as a Ford. In my possesion is a Spare Parts Book printed in April 1958, covering the "Consul", "Zephyr", "Zodiac", "Thames 10/12 cwt. and 15 cwt, Van" and "Thames Estate Car and 12 Seat Bus". Everything published by the "Ford Motor Company, Parts Division". Non of the models are mentioned by their Ford name. The question remains: Either one has to separate all UK Ford models up to 1965, or otherwise please do call the Thames as "Ford Thames". |
|
◊ 2018-03-04 18:38 |
Are you only thinking of the Thames 400E? What about the E04C van, the E83W van and chassis/cab, the ET6 truck range and the Trader truck range? All badged as Thames, but none of them sharing parts with the “Three Graces” ranges of cars, and also the fact that there was a period (1939 to 1950, see Sunbar above) when the commercials were referred to as Fordson Thames. The name “Thames” applied to vehicles many and varied. The name Zephyr etc applied only to the Zephyr car, for instance, not a wide range of differing vehicles varying from small, 5cwt, to largish, several tons. -- Last edit: 2018-03-04 18:51:28 |
|
◊ 2018-03-05 09:20 |
Actually, I don't. I'm concerned about how people with minor knowledge in different brandings, within a specific brand itself, possibly could be able to navigate the imcdb. Why not use the Ford name as a headline, and then use Fordson, Thames or whatever. That is to emphasise that Ford is the mother company. Please understand me right, I'm not writing this for my own sake, as I believe I'm starting to get a grip of at least some of the many, many, many different names various brands have used when marketing their models around the globe. I don't understand why one has to study the imcdb for years to be able to understand the car world. Why not keep it simple, and thus let more people understand. Because this is really a remarkable site on the Internet! |
|
◊ 2018-03-05 10:41 |
Level 1: Ford Level 2: Ford America, Ford Australia, Ford U.K., Ford Europe etc. Level 3: Fordson, Thames, Jaguar Land Rover, Mercury, Lincoln, or whoever they owned/marketed as at the time. Level 4: Zephyr, Cortina, Crown Vic, Eiffel, Junior, T, or whatever model name fits with the choices above. Level 5: Tudor, Fordor, de luxe, Ghia, Sapphire, or qualifier as appropriate. This does not seem to simplify anything, especially for the coders. It is impossible to gain anything more than superficial knowledge of the car world by any means. I have been a petrolhead for all the years I can remember, my mother used to say that I could tell an Austin Seven from an Austin Ruby while I was still in my pushchair. All that means is that I have some knowledge of British cars within a limited period, as you can see from my entries in this database. Foreign cars, unless it’s one I have owned, and anything built after about 1980 are a completely closed book to me, and I do not now try to identify them. -- Last edit: 2018-03-05 14:31:32 |
|
◊ 2018-03-05 15:53 |
With the benefit of hindsight it seems a marketing mess from the usually astute Ford management. I assume they were trying to differentiate the nasty, noisy 'trade' Commercial Vehicles from their 'nice'car range for 'nice' people , but did it matter even back then ? |
Add a comment Advertising Advertising
