Jump to content
Great War truck

WW1 finds and discoveries

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, mammoth said:

850mm dia rims. So is English and not American (who used imperial sizes). The axle is obviously home made so not a reference point..

England has only used metric since about 1970 so not sure what made you say this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

British solid tyres were specified in metric dimensions from the very early years and the Government Subvention scheme required that those on the front would be 720x120mm and on the rear 880x120mm twins. Both our Dennis and Thornycroft have these. The AEC Y-type was not approved for the scheme but, very sensibly, had the same sized tyres all round but 850x120mm. The American trucks coming over had imperial sizes so our FWD has 36x5" tyres all round. The Peerless also has imperial tyres but I can't remember the sizes offhand.

This seems to be another little quirk of history. Do you think it might have been the French influence which led to metric tyre sizes being adopted?

Although these are 850mm tyres, I don't think they are AEC as the hub cap is too square. I shall have to look at some more photos and see what other suggestions I can make. An interesting find, nonetheless.

Steve   :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leyland "modernised" their range of RAF types around 1925 by having equal diameter back and front, with 850mm for the 4, 5, & 6 tonners and 770mm for the 2 & 3 tonners.

The advert from 1928 demonstrates that you could drive in and get new tyre bands pressed on while you waited.

tye advert.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Leylands... the earliest Leyland parts and drawings registers show that vehicles were built specifically to customer request, said vehicles were all different: chassis length, width... some joggled some not; diffs and axles; motor; and wheels!  Every new and redesigned part was logged.  Gradually, beginning with the war office subsidy scheme, vehicles began to look similar, but even then modifications occurred along the way.  In recent times the leyland Society has attempted to sort the pre-subsidy scheme Leylands into groups.  No easy task!

One reason I find ID'ing vehicles/parts so interesting...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 27/04/2018 at 10:36 PM, mammoth said:

10,000 mile guarantee? That would be nice. 

Perhaps we should pop round to the Hammersmith address with the Fire Engine :-)

[edit] Queen Street has disappeared, but 7 Caledonian Road looks like just the sort of place that might have new-old-stock solid tyres:

https://goo.gl/maps/kzJAGLBT39C2

Edited by andypugh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to previous correspondence , the following  1915 BS  hopefully will explain some of the sizes and reasons. The main difference of principal with the American sizes is that irrespective of width the o.d. when new is the same, e.g. the 30" rim all widths are 36" o.d. ( 1/2" steel plus 2  1/2" rubber) ,  with British tyres the o.d. varies according to width within the rim diameter . Another  curious  listing  by Dunlop  was the 881mm X 14" , Thornycroft  'J' rears. Most listings  have 3 dimensions - 36" x 6" for 30" for example.

Richard Peskett.

 

 

Tyres.thumb.jpg.7bad7d8c83bf5b6c4b28c901fce9cba4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting they spell tyres with an "i".

 

When did it change to Tyres from the Tires in the article?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Oxford dictionary tells me that  'tire' is the US spelling, Commercial Motor magazine  seem to consistently spell the word with an 'i'  despite their advertisers using a 'y' at  that time . Motor Traction seem to always have spelt it with a 'y', Another earlier anomaly was that the 'Automotor Journal' up to at least 1907 spelt lorry 'lurry' as did some manufactures.

Richard Peskett.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Richard Peskett said:

Another earlier anomaly was that the 'Automotor Journal' up to at least 1907 spelt lorry 'lurry' as did some manufactures.

The "Lurry" spelling is mentioned in the Wikipedia page on the horse-drawn lorry:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorry_(horse-drawn)

(Though I half expect that it was you who put that there :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎27‎/‎04‎/‎2018 at 8:24 PM, Old Bill said:

British solid tyres were specified in metric dimensions from the very early years and the Government Subvention scheme required that those on the front would be 720x120mm and on the rear 880x120mm twins. Both our Dennis and Thornycroft have these. The AEC Y-type was not approved for the scheme but, very sensibly, had the same sized tyres all round but 850x120mm. The American trucks coming over had imperial sizes so our FWD has 36x5" tyres all round. The Peerless also has imperial tyres but I can't remember the sizes offhand.

This seems to be another little quirk of history. Do you think it might have been the French influence which led to metric tyre sizes being adopted?

Although these are 850mm tyres, I don't think they are AEC as the hub cap is too square. I shall have to look at some more photos and see what other suggestions I can make. An interesting find, nonetheless.

Steve   :)

Steve

Just seen this, every day a school day, many thanks for this

Richard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Surveyor said:

Steve

Just seen this, every day a school day, many thanks for this

Richard

It is just that I have a head full of useless information. I still don't know why British tyres were metric!

Steve    :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve  - I to have wondered  for many years why this BS is  metric and the origins, probably the first metric BS , only took another 50 odd years to catch up !. A possible origin is that pioneer Michelin were making vehicle tyres  from 1891 and these would have been metric, document herewith . Probably the first large user of solid tyres 1905/8 would have been the London bus operators,  with almost 900 vehicles on the road at the end of 1907, 90% plus of these would have been of continental origin ( Milnes Daimler, De Dion, Bussing/Straker ), maybe this is a pointer. Another interesting reference is that this map  published 1947 is using the spelling 'tire'.

Richard.

 

translit867.thumb.jpg.c4c81d0b1dda0c20a40be99ab9b7af9f.jpg

 

translit866.thumb.jpg.97643bf7d8c40617fa13c74daf29257d.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Redherring comments on early Leyland vehicles, early Thornycrofts were also under continual change.

 The early model J had 670 mm wheels on the front and some of these would have been obtained by the War Department at the out break of war. My J has 670 mm on the front, being exported well before the war.

 Doug W 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good friends of mine has found this hay press which has been mounted on a WW1 Daimler Gaggenau chassis. It is a very neat piece of machinery, if all goes well we will be baling this weekend.

Regards

Marcel

IMG_20180510_164314.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure? Gaggenau was Benz if i am correct the fusion with Daimler was later?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daimler and Benz amalgamated in 1926 to trade as Daimler-Benz., the word 'Mercedes' is a registered trade mark.

Richard Peskett.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My mistake - Benz of course

IMG_20180512_145551.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Great War truck said:

Similar, but not quite the same.

The vehicle photo shows shackles front and back of the rear springs, whereas the chassis photo only seems to have them at the back. But I don't think that necessarily precludes them being the same, as Dennis made vehicles with both arrangements, some with 2 shackles and a torque arm, and some with 4 shackles and sliding blocks. (I think that Ben has one of each)

Edited by andypugh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×