There are few makers jostling for position in the niche which Thomson have carved out for themselves. The Scottish firm could so easily spend the difference between cheap construction and their moderate price levels on eye-catching gimmickry and flash deco­ration; instead, they choose to work for steady improvement in specifi­cation details which add to real, rather than apparent, value. Above all, they have the knack of providing good workability-a kitchen which never irritates the cook, with ample and well divided storage space, good table arrangements, planned floor area, and better clothes and general storage accommodation than in many vans of the same size at prices even higher than Thomsons.
These remarks, although general, apply particularly to the 13ft. Glenelg : the body is, in fact, a little longer but the extra length is taken up by the projecting razor-edge bay front and rear which typifies the T-line style introduced throughout the range last year. A four-berth in this size suggests an element of restriction on space, of making-do by the user, under cramped conditions for the sake of a van small enough for the car. But thanks partly to public and trade acceptance of bunk beds and partly to good design, one has the feeling of enjoying a van a foot or eighteen inches longer. In short, the team enjoyed using the Glenelg.
Having built their 1964 prototype in June, Thomson were able to meet us halfway by delivering it for test to Yorkshire Caravans of Bawtry Ltd., where we were able to study 1964 im­provements achieved with only a £10 increase to £350. Anodised alumin­ium window frames, a feature associated usually with much more expensive makes, were introduced at the last Show. Now we find B & B Beta damper-controlled overrun braking, independ­ent suspension, an extra nearside window, greatly improved bedding locker lids, foamed plastic mattresses with (a pleasant surprise) the cotton tapestry top and bottom, better mountings for the upper bunk, a valuable extra cupboard and, finally, an alternative rear mounting for the hook-on table. One or two other improvements are being made follow­ing our test comments to Thomson.
The present T-line body style is smart and appeals whether on tow or on site. The huge front window is all in one piece and neatly fills the area between the projecting eaves of the vee roof and the sharp edge of the bay projection. The anodised window frames are fitted with the Ellbee twist-to-lock tubular stay on side and rear windows but the big front unit has conventional sliding stays. All windows open high. The sills are swaged with anti-condensation lips. Among other body features which deserve emphasis are roof and wall insulation by glass- fibre , bitumen treatment of the floor and joists, a stable door and no fewer than four roof vents. Regrettably the roof vents have only two friction stays each and, on the test van, they tilted easily out of position when open.

The new window on the nearside gives welcome light and extra ventila­tion to the kitchen. It is only l2in. deep but the photograph shows that any more would be wasted when the hotplate top is open. The window opposite has been reduced to a similar depth, thus reducing the risk of the occupant of the top bunk getting wet from condensation on the glass or breaking it in a nightmare. The three-light rear window opens only in the centre and if the obscured portion in the toilet room opened too it would improve the ventilation; this compartment relies on a low wall vent and one of the roof vents.
As we have implied already, the impression inside is one of surprising spaciousness considering the size of the Glenelg and what is inside it. It looks light and airy too. If there is anything wrong it is the overall anaemia of the decor. Even the plain cotton curtains in a reddy orange (and even these seem a little timid and gutless) are nullified by the overall biscuit tones of the furniture, cream wall and ceiling paint, beige-based tapestry and the fawn and brown carpet. The traditional tapestry pattern makes it difficult for the owner to enliven the decor with bold splashes of colour but that is what is needed. To be fair, one must wonder how much this might reduce the light and spacious look.

Because of the wheelarch , there is no room for a gas locker within the kitchen as there is on the Glenalmond and the cylinder must be carried in the boot and connected at the drawbar; there is no gas cradle. The wheel arch also interfered with the waste water hose but suspension changes in production offer the hope of something better. On test we were unable to get a bucket under the waste outlet pipe. A roof locker spanning the width of the kitchen is fitted with a china rack occupying about a third of the total space or less. The rack has a 16-piece china set included ; there are no tea plates. Illumination is good from the two lights which are the Morco type with spring-loaded mantle and globe carriers. There is no fire point.
Floor area in the toilet is adequate. It gives a slightly misleading impres­sion because the shaping of the end walls provides extra space. Thomson have agreed with our suggestion that a glazed panel be fitted in the compart­ment door for borrowed light at night (see photograph).
Our test, for internal reasons, had to be fitted in with other arrangements which compelled us to use an MG 1100, kindly provided from their test fleet by Nuffield before our own was available, as the towing vehicle. The ex works weight of the Glenelg , fractionally over l4cwt., is in itself within the limits of the 1100 but the as-tested l6¼cwt. is excessive. We cannot emphasise this too strongly, because, for regular towing, this is too much and a heavier car is recom­mended. But since circumstances forced us into it, it is gratifying to be able to record that the combination towed extremely well with no indica­tion of the unfavourable weight ratio. The MG 1100 managed a 1 in 7 restart without troubling the clutch.
Maximum speed reached on the speed test was 58 mph and even from this deceleration was, if not the peak of perfection, quite straightforward. The Beta braking was, as usual, reassur­ingly powerful. However, it must be recorded that the undergear , and particularly the brake assembly, needed lubrication badly when we collected the test van and, here, the service department of Yorkshire Caravans were able to provide thorough and efficient service.
The only criticism of the road behaviour is probably no longer valid. The prototype on test was fitted with Boden independent suspension of the type employing long trailing arms with relatively soft coil springs some way behind the stub axles, and simple rubber bump and rebound damping. The suspension was a little noisy on bumpy surfaces but, more important, tended to hop and tramp on medium fast bends. Production models, as the data panel shows, have the Rubery Owen torsion bar independent system used for the past two years on the Glen and now also being fitted to the Glendale. Whatever the suspension, obviously the Glenelg has its weight distribution and balance correct for towing.
Even if taken only on the basis of materials and workmanship, this newest of the Thomsons in its 1964 version is good value. This value is enhanced by qualities discovered on tow and on site so that it will un­doubtedly give satisfying pleasure to many owners.