WNG petrol tank or not?

[alan.moore]

I have just stripped the paint off the tank fitted to my '42 WNG and have found chrome plating where the knee grip plates were fitted. I know that the tank may not be from the same date as the bike but I am sure that WNG tanks were not chromed. Looking through the sales literature the NH350 for one year only, 1951, was fitted with the same style of tank (no instrument panel and small tank badges). The 1951 NH tank is listed as 2 3/4 gallons part number 5000-51 whilst the WNG tank is 5000-40 2 5/8 gallons.

So.... are these two tanks the same and if not what are the differences.

The literature seems to show that this style of tank was only fitted to civilian bikes in 1951 (NH, VH and VB) .

Cheers
Alan

[simon.holyfield]

Wouldn't a 51 civilian tank have a pressure gauge hole?

[alan.moore]

Simon,
The photos I've seen do not have an oil pressure gauge and none listed in the parts book. Drags says some may have one ?. The same tank was used for later years as well but not chromed just painted and after 1951 had the winged motif behind the Ariel badge.

[paul.jameson]

The fact that you have studs holding the knee grip plates on says pre-war or early war years to me. Post war tanks had threaded bosses inside the tank so used bolts to hold the knee grip plates on.
So why the chrome? I would suggest that when the bike was sold for civilian use the new proud owner fancied a chrome tank with painted panels so that his bike looked more like the modern (post war) civilian machine.

[nevhunter]

The VCH uses the same tank. (Shape and size) Most W/NG tanks don't have the enamelled badge mounts. They used transfers. That tank could have been plated at any point in it's life after it left the factory. Nev

[alan.moore]

Regarding the size of the petrol tanks, looking at the parts books and sales literature for the WNG, the VCH and NH the capacities are slightly different:

WNG tank capacity is 2 5/8 gallons (5000-40)

NH is 2 3/4 gallons (5000-51)

VCH is 2 1/2 gallons and in parts books is listed separate to the NH one as 'petrol tank small' (5000-52)

I am surprised that Ariel produced three tanks of the same design / shape with such a small difference in capacity but based on their desciptions this appears to be the case.

Regarding Paul J's mention of the change for the knee grip mounting plate fittings changing from studs to bolts early war: from what I can see in the parts books the stud and nut were still being listed for 1949 (5087-37) whilst the bolt is listed in 1951 (securing bolt 0513) so maybe the change was slightly later than thought?

Cheers
Alan

[nevhunter]

The only variation appears to be the reliefs at the front near the frame steering head, where cables and wiring go on some but there's no provision for it on others. Some have 2 bolt/nuts/ studs per rubber knee pad. some have only one. the majority appear to be bolts into a blind hole welded in fitting There is a 51 plain tank longer than the 3 I'm suggesting look to be the same pressing, and looks nothing like it It's a much more rounded shape. (Better looking) ALL fit the same frame mounts. The longer 51 one(s) go back past the nose of the seat more. None of the tanks are repro's Nev

[john.mitchell]

I am surprised that Ariel produced three tanks of the same design / shape with such a small difference in capacity but based on their descriptions this appears to be the case. Alan

Was it not 4? There was also the tank produced for the 1939 250 OH and OH 4999-39 with the oil gauge in it which looks very similar

[paul.jameson]

I had two different panel tanks on my 1948 Square four at different times, the first being a "500 Single" sized tank and the second a Square Four sized tank which came to me from Canada. Both had the bolt fixing for the kneegrip plates rather than the stud arrangement.

Now it is perfectly possible that I am wrong, but it is also possible that Ariel didn't get round to changing the parts lists until some time after this particular change had been made. After all, it was pretty minor in the overall scheme of things.

[nevhunter]

It just came to mind the VCH probably has a bigger cutout at the bottom to clear the 500 engine. That would easily account for the reduced volume. (small as it is). even though the tank is sitting a bit higher as well. My son got in touch with an ex Ariel works "person" who worked in the "special projects " section which I understand was a small corner somewhere with sparse funding. This fellow moved to Australia (not as a convict) and HAD a plunger frame with a VCH engine and a magnesium BA gearbox project lending from new stuff he had been given as a token of service or at cost or something. It's about 40 years ago that the contact here was made, and I recall him saying to my son that VCH's weren't that common and nice to know there was an intact one about and that he was involved with their manufacture. I will see if I can dig up the name of said person as no doubt someone among you may then recall his name and position in the big scheme of things. Nev