[PRCo] Re: 1630

[Jim Holland]

> Kenneth Josephson wrote:

> I wonder if PAT would have rejected 1630 if a roof cowl from a scrapped 1200 or
> 1400 had been installed (when the factory cowl was removed) instead of the
> 1000/1100 style it received?  Ken J.

	The 1200--series retained the 1000--1100--series cowl but added another
portion in front of it with a curved transition between the two.  Don't
want to give  ({[pat]})  credit for noticing something like that, but
they might have.
	And at the time that 1630 was overhauled  --  electrically,
mechanically, and aesthetically  --  it might have been too early to get
any 1400s or later.  And not many 12s would be gone.
	Wonder how the roof of 1648 fared in the fire?
	Interesting to note that, on the original 1400--1699--series cars
(minus 1565--1569) that the roof cowling was used to draw in air for
ventilation.  Mustn't have been necessary since 1630 couldn't do that
after modified.  Maybe the holes in the bondo allowed enough for
ventilation!!<GGGGGG>

James B. Holland