Driver Magazine - 2025 - issue 1 of 3 - Magazine - Page 36
WHAT MAKES THIS 1905 RILEY 9HP SPECIAL?
The chassis itself is similar to what you would see in the 1907 production model but with a few interesting differences.
Extension pieces of tube, about 10″ long have been fitted at the front of the car. This seems to have been added to support
a flimsy scuttle panel. The result is a stretched-out-looking front end that gives the car an almost awkward appearance.
Another notable difference is the off-proportion nearside door. It looks to be too narrow, with an oversized panel beside it.
This design choice results in a lot of wasted space in front of the foot pedals. The once missing radiator is positioned
forward over the front axle, likely to accommodate the stretched front section. The combination of these points gives the
car a somewhat boxy, enclosed look. Obviously, quite different to the more polished 1907 model that followed.
The seating arrangement is another indication that this was an experimental model. Unlike later versions, which had
separate double seats, this car features a one-piece, double-width bench seat. Period photographs show that early
production models still used this seating layout, but by the time Riley9s 1907 sales catalogue was issued, they had moved to
a split-seat design for better comfort and flexibility.
Even though some aspects of the original bodywork hinted at the final production version, there were some parts that
looked unfinished or improvised. For example, the rear body frame appears to have been made close to the final design,
but the wood used is noticeably thinner than what would be used in the production cars.
All of these points further support the story that this 1905 Riley 9hp was an experimental design. A mock-up of what would
eventually be the production 9hp. The evidence strongly suggests that this car is one that very likely played an important
role in the development of Riley9s first four-wheeled chassis. There is also a very real chance that it may even predate what
would traditionally be considered the first prototype.
33
