my new mk 1 carrier

[eddy8men]

hi fella's

 

alastair it was nice to come to one of your lincoln carrier club meetings it's always nice to put a face to a name and could you thank martyn for me aswell next time you see him.

everything seems to be coming together now. the engine's with martyn and brian, gearbox is sorted, armour/welding is taken care of, tracks and running gear are ready,hulls ready for blasting and spraying on monday, so that just leaves me to sort out the track warping and brakes (simples). ok there maybe a few other minor details that i've over looked but it pays to be positive.

i drove to ramsgate yesterday to collect 2 flathead v8's in need of reconditioning and paid £2750 for them, which some may feel was a little steep however they did come with a free fordson wot6 . i ended up driving 610 miles and didn't get back til midnight after setting off at 8am but i didn't feel tired at all i was too busy making plans and scheming and thinking back on what a great day it had been for collecting carrier stuff and meeting some good people.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

by the way, does anyone know the significance of this number which is stamped on the angle iron behind the gunners seat bulkhead, could it be a hull number and would it help me identify it

 

 

 

all the best

 

eddy

[steveo578]

Hi Eddy

 

Nice WOT

 

Steve

[eddy8men]

thanks steve, i wasn't really looking to get any wheeled vehicles as tracked armour is my thing but i'm glad i did. the wot came with 2 v8's and a perkins diesel all in the back so the idea is to use the v8's in my carrier and chuck the deisel in the wot and when the carrier's done put it on the wot to get me to shows, although the wot is rated at 3 tons i reckon the carrier will be under that, if not i'll get a trailer behind the wot and chuck some carrier bits in it until it's within the rating. not sure it'll all work out as smooth as that but we'll see.

 

all the best

 

eddy

[Adrian Barrell]

If you use the WOT to carry the carrier, it'll need testing and plating.

[Richard Farrant]

Eddy,

 

With cable and rod brakes, no servo assistance, it would not be very good to drive in a loaded state in present day traffic, even if it were plated and tested.

[eddy8men]

buggar, i didn't think it was gonna be a problem, so ok then how am i gonna get round it, how about towing a trailer behind the wot does that mean i can get away with not testing and plating it, if i can't have a load at all then what do you think my options are, sell it or test and plate it. to be honest i wasn't interested in the wot it was the engines i was really after but now i've seen it up close i quite like the old girl especially as the cab roof lifts off, thought i might paint it up for north africa. let me know what you think.

ideally i should now be saying that the next time i buy a vehicle i will look into it and research it thoroughly but i know i won't that's not my style, i'm more of a rush in and think about it after kind of guy. trouble is it doesn't always work out.

 

eddy

[Adrian Barrell]

Without a test you can only use it unladen and towing an unladen trailer so 'fraid not! I think you may struggle to get it plated.

 

I would get a 7.5 ton beavertail. Make sure it's a light one, universals all weigh over 3 tons empty.

[eddy8men]

thanks adrian

 

oh well i guess the wot's no use as a load carrier then, back to plan "b" .

when i think of a plan "b" i'll let you know what it is.

 

all the best

 

eddy

[ferrettkitt]

thanks adrian

 

oh well i guess the wot's no use as a load carrier then, back to plan "b" .

when i think of a plan "b" i'll let you know what it is.

 

all the best

 

eddy

 

Just got to like that:rotfl:

[Bluebell]

Eddie, There is no doubt that your carrier is Canadian, I can tell by the engine bed rails, and by the markings on your armour plate. On MLU Rob Love stated that all Canadian Mk1 carriers were 85 h.p., This makes your carrier a " Carrier Universal, No2, Mk1* "

 

 

The track links are factory finished at both ends, except for the joining pins which are located by way of a washer, and split pin. The factory track was continuous, service track came in 21 link sections, with joining pins. I'd guess your odd pins have been joining pins, hammered over by a cowboy.

[steveo578]

Bluebell

On MLU Rob Love stated that all Canadian Mk1 carriers were 85 h.p., This makes your carrier a " Carrier Universal, No2, Mk1* "

 

Bluebell

 

Are you implying that Rob love regards Eddys carrier as a "Canadian built No2 Mk1" or that he says that all Canadian Mk1 carriers had an 85bhp motor.

 

This argument needs closure I put my argument in post #103 and #111 supported by Ajmacs post #106 -if you have any new evidence please feel free to post it,

 

I actually don't care if some-one proves me wrong, but what I'm not prepared to get involved in a "flaming exchange" it is not acceptable on this forum.

 

Steve

[Bluebell]

Hi Steve. What I am saying, and accept, is that Rob told me that all the Canadian Mk1 carriers were fitted with the 85 h.p. motor.

The Canadian parts manual is titled "Universal Carrier Mk1x" and the Canadian manual (UC-F1) is titled "Carrier Universal Mark 1*(Canadian)" Funnily enough, there is no sign of a "No_" in the designations at that stage.

Maybe Adrian is the man to listen to?. I find fault after fault in many of the official, and un official publications relating to carriers. You appear to be taking your info directly from Chamberlain and Ellis. Is that the case?

[eddy8men]

hi fella's

thanks for all your advice but let's not fall out about what mark or designation it is because to be honest by the time i've finished restoring it nobody will know what it was

 

eddy

[Stormin]

Have you considered modernising the braking system on the WOT to full air or air over hydraulic from another truck, to make it more usable. Another later model Ford may be favourite for a donor as it'll likely have similar axles.

Not sure you'd get the weight capacity you need out of the WOT or towing a trailer (which could then be air braked) but it would at least be better for general usage.

[eddy8men]

thanks norman

i think the wot's a dead end when it comes to a load carrier so the plan is to get her running and flog it on, shame really as it's a nice truck but too many toys can only distract me from my main task of restoring armour so it'll have to go.

plan b is to buy a bedford mj with crane from withams and use that instead to shift the carrier plus i can also use it for work so it's not totally dead money but i'm probably looking at £5.5k so i better get saving.

 

all the best

 

eddy

[Maurice]

Another thing about these 85hp engines in the Canadian carrier , they are not the same as the British 21Stud 85BHP engine .

The canadian blocks have 24 stud engines like in T16 , and the CMP range vehicles (95 BHP), but the internals are smaller , and so it is a 85 BHP engine with the exterior look of a 95BHP engine.

[steveo578]

Maurice

Another thing about these 85hp engines in the Canadian carrier , they are not the same as the British 21Stud 85BHP engine....

 

Excellent input-probably goes some way in explaining the various confusion with regard to the motors fitted to Canadian carriers.

 

Steve

[Bluebell]

The very eary carriers had either a Ford model SE-51E-6000 or a 79F-6000-CS.

The first of these engines had the water pumps in the heads. By 1940 the engine range used had expanded to include the 79E-6000-CS and the 79E-6000-DS. (are these engines using the engine mount pump assy?)

I have no idea what physical changes these included other than the American electrics option.

Later 225 cu. in.(3 1/16 bore) 21 stud motors (EGAE and EGAEA) used the 18mm spark plugs, whereas the Canadian (CO1UC)and U.S. motors used the 14mm plug.

As you say Maurice, the 24 stud motor came as a 3 1/16" (Ford) or as a 3 3/16" (Mercury)Bore.

While the CMP truck fleet were running 239 cu.in. (3 3/16) engines, I believe that the military 24 stud motors,(85 hp. 225 cu.in.) when fitted to British and Canadian carriers, were the smaller of the two, as originally fitted, although Australia and New Zealand were supplied with Mercury 239 cu.in.engines as original for their carriers.

Nigels(credit to Nigel ) book covers some snippets about both the British, and Canadians trialing the 95h.p. engines in 42 and 43, with reports in, on trials, in July 43.

By September 43 the Canadians had decided not to re-equip 85hp carriers. and to "accumulate 95hp carriers to issue all to one formation, at the same time withdrawing all their 85hp carriers, from that formation (presumably to re issue else where).

I welcome any info to help me understand this.

Is anyone able to supply details or specifcations for the 4 early engines I listed?

I'd like to know what fan was used, in the early Bren, and Scout carrier, Did they use the fan extention, or were they mounted directly to the generator? (pre universal)

Edited August 14, 2010 by Bluebell

[montie]

Your married- totty is verbotten- although many wives consider looking at old MVs nearly as bad:D

See if you can find some nice and Scouts Cars.

 

Steve

 

Here are some, they (Marmon Herringtons) are South African afterall!! :cool2:

Here is another thread.

http://hmvf.co.uk/forumvb/showthread.php?18874-Armoured-Vehicle-identification

 

 

 

 

 

 

[montie]

I have a copy of a war office drawing (dated March 1944) in front of me and it says:

No1 Mk1/2 = 85HP V8 British Production

No2 Mk1/2 = 85HP V8 USA Production

No3 Mk1/2 = 85HP V8 Canadian Production

 

The 95HP was the USA produced Mercury engine, I understand that when Mercury redesigned the V8 in 1941(?) that Ford upgraded too although they kept the smaller bore diameter, thus the Mercury mods resulted in a 95HP Mercury Flathead and an 85HP Ford Flathead, up from the original 65HP. How the Dagenham production shadowed this change I don't know.

There is also a variation within Engine type nomenclature, as the No1 could have either US sourced electricals or Lucas sourced parts!

 

That is a shame to keep it to yourself, could you pleeeeze post a scanned copy,......PLEEEEEZE?? (was looking for a begging smilie)

[Stormin]

thanks norman

i think the wot's a dead end when it comes to a load carrier so the plan is to get her running and flog it on, shame really as it's a nice truck but too many toys can only distract me from my main task of restoring armour so it'll have to go.

plan b is to buy a bedford mj with crane from withams and use that instead to shift the carrier plus i can also use it for work so it's not totally dead money but i'm probably looking at £5.5k so i better get saving.

 

all the best

 

eddy

You should be able to get an MJ with crane for a good bit less than £5.5K from tender sales at Witham's just make sure you go and view first.

[ferrettkitt]

Withams 'new' tender form is online to view no pics yet

 

http://www.mod-sales.com/tender/listing.htm

[eddy8men]

hi fella's

thanks for all your input, the different engine specs is really interesting

 

eddy

[steveo578]

montie

Steve

 

 

 

Here are some, they (Marmon Herringtons) are South African afterall!! :cool2:

Yes they are probably MH Mk3 the final version of the forward engined armoured car and well worth preserving, many of the earlier types (Mk1-3) were deturreted in service and fitted with various weapons as more flexible scout/armoured card. But the nature of the South African Armoured Cars of this era -virtually no castings -all flat plates would make restoration feasable, for example stowage boxes on Mk4s have domestic 4inch door hinges welded into place- functionality or what:D

 

Most were out of service after the end of the desert war although some may have remained in service with south African and Indian troops serving in Italy and in patrol-police work in Cyprus, Greece and Palestine- so lots of historical possiblities.

 

The Mk1-3 are quite rare without doing a search the only complete one I'm aware of is at SAMOMH - apart from the ford drive train components -no connection to the carrier though

Edited August 14, 2010 by steveo578

[steveo578]

Bluebell

By September 43 the Canadians had decided not to re-equip 85hp carriers. and to "accumulate 95hp carriers to issue all to one formation,

Possibly to get a commonallity of supply with the expected deployment the Windsor which could restrict this action to NWE.

 

Perhaps the perpetuation of the smaller capacity 85hp motor may have something to do with a transmission weakness as U/Cs were governed to 60bhp at one stage.

 

Considering the tendancy for most Canadian Ford wheeled vehicles to have the 95bhp motors it seems odd to use what is in effect a none standard type.