
Armstrong Siddeley Typhoon Drophead Coupe information
#1
Posted 25 October 2011 - 00:18
My father just told me that he used to own an Armstrong Siddeley Typhoon Drophead Coupe. I looked on the net but I couldnt find any good pictures of one. He recalls that the headlight nacelles were separwte from the fenders (ie not integrated). Any pictures and info would be appreciated.
Mark
Advertisement
#2
Posted 25 October 2011 - 05:51
#3
Posted 25 October 2011 - 07:04

and this Hurricane.

#4
Posted 25 October 2011 - 07:07
A-S also built a pick up truck on the Hurricane chassis. A super vehicle, way ahead of the, then, current thinking.I'm no A-S expert, but always thought the Typhoon was the fixed-head version of the Hurricane. Pictures of the latter can easily be found using 'google images', and I would think a bit more searching would find the fh version. But first you need to establish whether your father's car was a drop-head (Hurricane) of fixed-head (Typhoon)
#5
Posted 25 October 2011 - 07:49
A-S also built a pick up truck on the Hurricane chassis. A super vehicle, way ahead of the, then, current thinking.
Supposedly for the Australian market, don't know what the Aussies thought of it?
#6
Posted 25 October 2011 - 08:25

#7
Posted 25 October 2011 - 09:33

#8
Posted 25 October 2011 - 09:39
We have one of these "utilities" in Northern Ireland, english registered, cream and maroon coloured, just a super looking vehicle.Supposedly for the Australian market, don't know what the Aussies thought of it?
Simon Thomas
#9
Posted 25 October 2011 - 10:25
Roger Lund
#10
Posted 25 October 2011 - 14:42
Looking at the shape of the screen and roof, I suspect that the ute was based on the Lancaster and Whitley models, which, with both being 4 door models, would have the advantage of shorter front doors, making them eminently suitable for the ute version.
Roger Lund
What differences were there in the underpinnings Roger?
#11
Posted 25 October 2011 - 16:54


#12
Posted 25 October 2011 - 18:46
Looking at the shape of the screen and roof, I suspect that the ute was based on the Lancaster and Whitley models, which, with both being 4 door models, would have the advantage of shorter front doors, making them eminently suitable for the ute version.
Roger Lund
Comparing the photos the "Ute" appears to have the same size doors as the Hurricane. I used to pass one practically every day on my way to school and I always reckoned it would not be much use as a pick-up because the load bed was so short.
#13
Posted 25 October 2011 - 19:02
http://www.armstrong...ilitycoupe.html
#14
Posted 25 October 2011 - 22:27
http://en.wikipedia....eley_Whitley_18
see also 3rd post from John of Staffs. Whitley derived.
http://www.imcdb.org...ports-1950.html
see also ASOC site under models
http://www.siddeley....fo_16_18hp.html
RL
Edited by bradbury west, 25 October 2011 - 22:36.
#15
Posted 26 October 2011 - 07:15
If a farmer bought an Armstrong Siddeley Whitley it would have cost him a heck of a lot more to run than a ute. You can claim the running costs of a ute against the farm at tax time. You can't do that with a saloon. That was the main reason they sold well at the time.
When you are sitting in the front seat looking out the windscreen would there be much difference?

#16
Posted 26 October 2011 - 08:41
Didn't need to as it wasn't in any way unitary construction. Low volume cars of that time had a proper chassis which was the same, no matter what the coachbuilder put on it.A few American based utes used the convertible chassis because if the extra bracing in the chassis. I wonder if Armstrong Siddeley did the same thing?
#18
Posted 04 August 2014 - 12:20
How can that be a 5-6 seater - unless you have some on the back, outside, which wouldn't be legal in UK.
#19
Posted 04 August 2014 - 13:13
Allan Lupton, on 04 Aug 2014 - 14:20, said:How can that be a 5-6 seater - unless you have some on the back, outside, which wouldn't be legal in UK.
Bench front seat and 3 across the back