[mhennessy]

Hi Nick,

I think the woodwork changed substantially with the new grille, so it's unlikely to have been a retro-fit job.

However, your set is very close to the change, so it's perhaps conceivable it left the factory that way. Here's my theory:

On the chassis production line, some would display faults that needed specialist attention. So these would have been taken away, and returned into the "pool" at a later date.

Of course, the serial numbers are stamped onto the chassis - presumably before components are fitted to the chassis, or at least at an early part of that process. I believe that a set of matching serial number stickers were attached somehow to the chassis at this point, and at the end of assembly, these stickers would be attached to the bottom of the cabinet, the user instructions, the box, and perhaps other paperwork too.

Most of the time, no-one would be aware of these faulty chassis being delayed in the factory - no-one outside of Hacker would be monitoring the serial numbers. And for a set that hardly changed over its lifetime, no-one could ever discover this practice. However, with the Hunter - a set that did enjoy a lot of changes - we are starting to see evidence of this.

So, the chassis of your set, I suspect, was produced before the change of cabinet, but after the grille change (no green print), and would ordinarily have been fitted to a chassis with a mesh grille. But its passage through the usual production line was interrupted - probably because of a fault - and by the time it rejoined the line, the cabinets had been changed.

As a theory, that seems to fit. I need to look more closely at the other "unusual" sets I have on record, as while some of those are fairly obviously the product of a "bitsa" restoration, others are less clear-cut. I bet some of them could fit this same theory.

The more data we gather, the more interesting this project becomes! Thanks to all that have taken part so far, and new information is always welcomed.

All the best,

Mark