I have recently noticed this number on my exhaust system
anyone got any ideas who or why you would bother putting the chassis number on the exhaust?
who and why
Moderators: StephenRC45, Dave45
who and why
as its been a little quiet on here of late . thought I would throw this at you all...
I have recently noticed this number on my exhaust system
anyone got any ideas who or why you would bother putting the chassis number on the exhaust?
I have recently noticed this number on my exhaust system
anyone got any ideas who or why you would bother putting the chassis number on the exhaust?
markings
Hi guys, On my bike there is a multitude of hand engraving all over the engine cases and engine parts, J105 is engraved on nearly everything associated with the engine, the original owner of my bike was a manager at Honda Australia and the engine was rebuilt at low kms with HRC stuff by Honda Australias race team, I have talked to both and neither had engraved the engine/engine parts.
One of the "J105" engravings is just above the factory engine number, can others look to see if they have the same.
One of the "J105" engravings is just above the factory engine number, can others look to see if they have the same.
who and why
Hello Mark.
A few quick observations:
1: The pipe appears to be a very clean (non-oxidised and new?) part.
2: The number appears to be that of an early issue RC45.
3: The numbers (style) are characteristic of those “stamped” using the block-lined-up-type-stamp by the Honda factory.
4: It would be 'impossible' to sufficiently block indent the number into the surface of an exhaust pipe (hard material) unless there was a close fitting cylindrical billet supporting block inside the pipe before the pipe was bent (unless the number is close to a straight open ended cylindrical section). In addition, when the stamping was made the stamp indents would be deeper at the ‘contact crown’ of the pipe.
5: The numbers don’t appear to have been stamped (in accordance with 4).
6: The numbers do appear to have been (tattoo) engraved, As Jamie_c has mentioned.
Why anyone would bother to engrave an early issue number, and take the (unnecessary? depending on motive) time and trouble to try and make it superficially resemble - thus appear to be - a factory block stamp, on an exhaust pipe, is indeed a “who and why” question.
Regards,
Roger.
A few quick observations:
1: The pipe appears to be a very clean (non-oxidised and new?) part.
2: The number appears to be that of an early issue RC45.
3: The numbers (style) are characteristic of those “stamped” using the block-lined-up-type-stamp by the Honda factory.
4: It would be 'impossible' to sufficiently block indent the number into the surface of an exhaust pipe (hard material) unless there was a close fitting cylindrical billet supporting block inside the pipe before the pipe was bent (unless the number is close to a straight open ended cylindrical section). In addition, when the stamping was made the stamp indents would be deeper at the ‘contact crown’ of the pipe.
5: The numbers don’t appear to have been stamped (in accordance with 4).
6: The numbers do appear to have been (tattoo) engraved, As Jamie_c has mentioned.
Why anyone would bother to engrave an early issue number, and take the (unnecessary? depending on motive) time and trouble to try and make it superficially resemble - thus appear to be - a factory block stamp, on an exhaust pipe, is indeed a “who and why” question.
Regards,
Roger.
who and why
Hi Mark, quite a mystery then, unless the number was inscribed for reasons of security - so that in the event of 'loss' it would trace back to the then true owner - a good idea actually.
Also thanks for the vapour blasting tip.
Regards,
Roger.
Also thanks for the vapour blasting tip.
Regards,
Roger.
who and why
Ok Mark, many thanks for that.
Regards,
Roger.
Regards,
Roger.
who and why
@moto16, laser etched? Always a possibility, but doubtful as (you’ll probably appreciate) a laser is a continuous high energy emitter (even with the pulsed variety the pulse frequency is usually so high as to seem continuous).
Given that there are clear ‘dimples’, within some of the ‘strokes’, with some strokes also seeming to have been ‘gone-over’ more than once (and the form inconsistency with some of the them) I still think a mechanical hand-held ‘tatoo etcher’ has been used. In addition, wielding a loose laser capable of etching metal surfaces is extremely dangerous - as beam attenuation (beam energy loss) over distance is very low.
A little anecdote, my daughter’s Ph.D was laser based, and my son, who is presently writing his thesis up, is also heavily involved with lasers – they’ve been contemporary post-grads using the same lab and a couple of years ago they related an event they witnessed and which befell another post-grad (colleague).
Apparently, the colleague, in attempting to adjust his laser equipment took a ‘short-cut’ by moving the laser emitter while it was on; it seems he fumbled and the beam (unitary microns in section) travelled the length of his fore-finger (at the speed of light of course) and exited at the knuckle. No problem at all… until about 10 minutes later when he was writhing in agony on the lab floor.
Regards,
Roger.
Given that there are clear ‘dimples’, within some of the ‘strokes’, with some strokes also seeming to have been ‘gone-over’ more than once (and the form inconsistency with some of the them) I still think a mechanical hand-held ‘tatoo etcher’ has been used. In addition, wielding a loose laser capable of etching metal surfaces is extremely dangerous - as beam attenuation (beam energy loss) over distance is very low.
A little anecdote, my daughter’s Ph.D was laser based, and my son, who is presently writing his thesis up, is also heavily involved with lasers – they’ve been contemporary post-grads using the same lab and a couple of years ago they related an event they witnessed and which befell another post-grad (colleague).
Apparently, the colleague, in attempting to adjust his laser equipment took a ‘short-cut’ by moving the laser emitter while it was on; it seems he fumbled and the beam (unitary microns in section) travelled the length of his fore-finger (at the speed of light of course) and exited at the knuckle. No problem at all… until about 10 minutes later when he was writhing in agony on the lab floor.
Regards,
Roger.
who, when, why & what!
I do not have the answer to who & why.
All I can say is the fact some of the numbers have joining tab spaces means they are made from a stencil type template then engraved through. If you zoom in on the 0000 they are all slightly different but have similar characteristics, that points to the use of a hand held machine hence giving the chance of variations in number shape/thickness. Thankyou very much and goodnight.
All I can say is the fact some of the numbers have joining tab spaces means they are made from a stencil type template then engraved through. If you zoom in on the 0000 they are all slightly different but have similar characteristics, that points to the use of a hand held machine hence giving the chance of variations in number shape/thickness. Thankyou very much and goodnight.
who and why
I think kr’s ‘right the button’ with hand-held, hence non-uniformity of the numbers. But however the numbers were (manually) applied, it still represents a mystery as to why anyone would bother with such a process… unless the number relates to a bike that was/is ‘out of the ordinary’ and the 'bod' who engraved the number had some sort of reason/motive for the process. But if that’s a fair possibility, what could the reason/motive possibly be?... I do so enjoy a whodunit (and why)!
Regards,
Roger.
Regards,
Roger.
-
Busy Little Shop
- Advanced Member
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 7:07 am
- Location: California USA
Re: who and why
Roger... It possible that the reason is simply OC or DC...roger wrote: But if that’s a fair possibility, what could the reason/motive possibly be?... I do so enjoy a whodunit (and why)!
Regards,
Roger.
who and why
@Dean:
That’s certainly a fair (valid) point, but if the purpose of the number was simply to segregate one exhaust system from another, within a limited group, I’d have thought keeping it simple and easy, e.g., just a ‘unique mark’, would have sufficed - and if on one component of an individual system then the same mark on all of the components.
@Larry:
The reason could always be a simple one, but the degree of effort that (I imagine) was needed, and taken, to so carefully apply the (style and format of the) numbers leads me to think there was a specific objective in mind for the process. It’s one reason why I find myself so intrigued… and still retaining a ‘whodunit’ (and why) frame of mind
Larry, anything is possible, and it’s certain that at least one person knows all about it (the reason for putting that particular number on the pipe), it’s even possible that some know which bike the number actually refers to.
With regard to “OC” and “DC”… do you mean Obsessive Compulsive and Data Collection… in which case, I have to admit that I can tend towards ‘sufferance’ of OCDC.
Regards,
Roger.
That’s certainly a fair (valid) point, but if the purpose of the number was simply to segregate one exhaust system from another, within a limited group, I’d have thought keeping it simple and easy, e.g., just a ‘unique mark’, would have sufficed - and if on one component of an individual system then the same mark on all of the components.
@Larry:
The reason could always be a simple one, but the degree of effort that (I imagine) was needed, and taken, to so carefully apply the (style and format of the) numbers leads me to think there was a specific objective in mind for the process. It’s one reason why I find myself so intrigued… and still retaining a ‘whodunit’ (and why) frame of mind
Larry, anything is possible, and it’s certain that at least one person knows all about it (the reason for putting that particular number on the pipe), it’s even possible that some know which bike the number actually refers to.
With regard to “OC” and “DC”… do you mean Obsessive Compulsive and Data Collection… in which case, I have to admit that I can tend towards ‘sufferance’ of OCDC.
Regards,
Roger.
-
Busy Little Shop
- Advanced Member
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 7:07 am
- Location: California USA
Re: who and why
Simply put OC is Owner's Choice and DC is Designer's Choice...roger wrote: With regard to “OC” and “DC”… do you mean Obsessive Compulsive and
Data Collection… in which case, I have to admit that I can tend towards ‘sufferance’ of OCDC.
Regards,
Roger.
who and why
Yes, Larry, the last 3 digits of the chassis numbers do apparently repeat, so it seems that when talking chassis numbers the entire number, as a whole, needs to be considered.
Thanks for clearing-up the #009 USA vs Germany number, as that corrects me on my earlier (Japan to USA to Germany export route) misconception.
But back to the central issue of the discussion, i.e., the number 2000065 on markRC45’s exhaust pipe.
Given that the number appears, to all intents and purposes, to be a chassis number, maybe there are people who have knowledge of the bike to which the number belongs.
Now as the pipe is (presumably) a race pipe (for who would mark a standard pipe?!), I think it fair to suppose that it may be from a race bike.
As the pipe is in the UK then it’s possible it may always have been. Putting the two suppositions together raises the prospect that 2000065 is the number of a UK race bike.
Clearly, the owner of any bike at all may not be prepared to divulge a chassis number (for obvious reasons). So all we need now is for someone with knowledge/records of UK race bikes, and their chassis numbers, to divulge any information they may have on 2000065.
Some time ago, I was contacted (by telephone) by someone named Dennis Willeys who, apparently, was ex-Honda Louth. During the conversation I was informed by Mr. Willeys that he held records on the ex-Castrol Honda & Honda Britain race RC45's… maybe, just maybe, Mr. Willey’s can throw some light on the number. Does anyone know him, or has anyone ever been in contact with him?
Regards,
Roger.
Thanks for clearing-up the #009 USA vs Germany number, as that corrects me on my earlier (Japan to USA to Germany export route) misconception.
But back to the central issue of the discussion, i.e., the number 2000065 on markRC45’s exhaust pipe.
Given that the number appears, to all intents and purposes, to be a chassis number, maybe there are people who have knowledge of the bike to which the number belongs.
Now as the pipe is (presumably) a race pipe (for who would mark a standard pipe?!), I think it fair to suppose that it may be from a race bike.
As the pipe is in the UK then it’s possible it may always have been. Putting the two suppositions together raises the prospect that 2000065 is the number of a UK race bike.
Clearly, the owner of any bike at all may not be prepared to divulge a chassis number (for obvious reasons). So all we need now is for someone with knowledge/records of UK race bikes, and their chassis numbers, to divulge any information they may have on 2000065.
Some time ago, I was contacted (by telephone) by someone named Dennis Willeys who, apparently, was ex-Honda Louth. During the conversation I was informed by Mr. Willeys that he held records on the ex-Castrol Honda & Honda Britain race RC45's… maybe, just maybe, Mr. Willey’s can throw some light on the number. Does anyone know him, or has anyone ever been in contact with him?
Regards,
Roger.
-
Busy Little Shop
- Advanced Member
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 7:07 am
- Location: California USA
Re: who and why
You're welcome Roger... has it also cleared up the PM???roger wrote:
Thanks for clearing-up the #009 USA vs Germany number, as that corrects me on my earlier (Japan to USA to Germany export route) misconception.
Regards,
Roger.
who and why
@Larry.
Yes Larry it has, and thanks once again.
Regards,
Roger.
Yes Larry it has, and thanks once again.
Regards,
Roger.
chassis number
@Larry
Larry, I dont know how many times over the years I have told you but you seem to refuse to listen. My chassis number DOES NOT start with a 2, it is 000055, I sent you a pm explaining the 0, 1 or 2 at the beginning of the frame number. But I'll repeat here.
Frame numbers starting with 0 are pre order bikes, ie, ordered in 1993, frames starting with a "1" are JDM (JAPANES DOMESTIC) and frames with a "2" are export models. So it is quite likely someone will have a 94 model starting with a "0" as the main Honda importer for that country pre ordered for 1994.
But for the last time Larry my bike frame number does not start with a "2", even though I am from down under we can fucking read!
Larry, I dont know how many times over the years I have told you but you seem to refuse to listen. My chassis number DOES NOT start with a 2, it is 000055, I sent you a pm explaining the 0, 1 or 2 at the beginning of the frame number. But I'll repeat here.
Frame numbers starting with 0 are pre order bikes, ie, ordered in 1993, frames starting with a "1" are JDM (JAPANES DOMESTIC) and frames with a "2" are export models. So it is quite likely someone will have a 94 model starting with a "0" as the main Honda importer for that country pre ordered for 1994.
But for the last time Larry my bike frame number does not start with a "2", even though I am from down under we can fucking read!