Gordon_M

It's impossible to be certain, but it looks like the ten ton M123 tractor unit, normally made by Mack. Slightly lighter built than something like a Dragon Wagon but pretty much the same size. If original it will have the huge LeRoi V8 engine which is something to behold and even better to listen to. Here is one towing a Dragon Wagon trailer, just for scale.

Not K-GASS but KI-GASS, basically starting ether for cold starts

Sorry Tim, but even the chaps on the US Just Old trucks Forum didn't venture an opinion on it. One chap did say he could use the tyres but I assume this chassis will be getting kept. Where would you get new tyres for that anyway, if you had to? There are rubber / plastic extrusion and moulding companies here in Aberdeen that could probably extrude section and then just bond it on.

Good to see you here Brian. I think I can offer thanks on behalf of all the forum members for offering to complete this in Jack's memory. I won't go any further than to commend you for your efforts and to sympathise with you all on your loss.

Looking at the tyre press images, given the height, width, drop down into it and staging in front, I'd suggest it was built onto a railway wagon and then roofed over like a shed. I don't see anything that would rule out a railway wagon , given the distance to the building behind and relative heights.

I've made this comment recently on the Thorny thread - you might be over-solving this particular riddle. :angel: In that particular location, pretty much the only thing those tabs and links can be for is to tie something up,or tie it down. Axle? Engine? something else? If I look at the trailer, and it does look very nice, the other thing that strikes me is that it has a deck fore and aft, but a gap over the axle in the area where those brackets are. They have to be tie-up or tie-down brackets of some kind.

Ta, I suspected a number down there somewhere. Given fuel volatility and octane rating, would you not be tempted to try and up it a little with marginally taller pistons or the like?

You are right - you might be over-solving this one. What's the compression ratio on the engine, then? Nothing too high, I assume.

Back in the days when I had to fit British tyres (ex-101) to my Dodge 3/4 ton they just pushed on, no problem. Managed to get them balanced too.

Hello Kevin, semi unit gone to Mick, then? What are you plans for the Dodge?

1866 to 1966 approx Last one sold for £190 on E-Pay so more than scrap value. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfQ1ai2ukwo&feature=youtu.be Dont think the army would need the foldaway version, but someone will definitely want it Educational or what ? could we get a grant ?

TAYlor & WILson compact mangles and wringing machines according to that nice Mr Google Fancy setting up a WW2 Laundry, do we ? :cool2:

The single ended rope clamps are the modern version of the US Gar Wood ones - I'd be thinking Canadian.

.... to send a copy by e-mail to Sylvia for her Build Card file please. commander@command-car.com

.... I think the DUKW would be the best amphibian ever made, it is by far the most seaworthy. Of course a GPA, Half-Safe, did the most miles in the ocean, but no way the DUKW isn't the most seaworthy vehicle. Gordon

Given the value of that registration plate it may have been transferred. No chance of chassis number or distinguishing features ? It may be on here already with a different registration.

All these worms wear at the centre point, the straight ahead position. You can adjust that screw to reduce this, but then the steering binds when you go towards full lock in either direction. The additional problem is that the steering wheel is often difficult to remove without damage, and it is also difficult to disengage the splined connection for the drop arm ( or is it keyed ? ) Keep working on the screw, by all means, but the cure may be a new or reworked column. I know half ton columns used to be freely available NOS in the States, not sure now, and I have no handle on how available 3/4 ton columns are.

Should be fine Bill, but worth a detailed check - might be 2.5 ton on the front axle - unloaded - sort of thing.

Dealt with this before on other vehicles, when we moved from 12 ply British tyres to 6 ply Gama Goat tyres on DUKWS - they were fine, though of course we didn't load them up. If you are just driving it around 8 ply SHOULD be fine, especially if they are modern, compared to 12 ply originals, but you might want to take on a lot more advice and have a hard think. As a minimum, I'd be checking that the individual load rating of my 8 ply tyres, multiplied by four, was a comfortable margin above the unladen weight of my vehicle, as there would be certain to be legal implications if you loaded them beyond their legal maximum. Might even be worth doing the same check for each axle in case the rear was fine ( truck empty ) but the front overloaded.

Very informative, thank you. So now he needs a Morris to tow it and two sets of ariels and mounts. I think the trailer would be rarer than the Morris.

Thanks Richard. Still no idea, but looks to be inter-war British, maybe still in service when WW2 started.

Not got a clue Richard, steering wheel location wrong for me. While we are waiting for knowledgable guesses, what's the story, since it is obviously a brand new photo and you wouldn't want something that interesting lying around rusting. Has it been discovered, bought, sold, picked up yesterday? You can tell us that without revealing what it is

So, RDF equipment, self-contained, in the trailer, with crew. We know it needs two units to track a source, so why not have a similar RDF unit in the towing vehicle? It tows the trailer to one location, drives to another location, and when the job is finished picks up the trailer and hauls it home. Any evidence of the same RDF gear in a medium sized vehicle suitable to tow this trailer?

Well it is moving forward, a Customs form is a start. If the Customs form has a chassis number on it, and that matches the number on the jeep ( should have plate on the chassis if an MB ) then it is possible. On the other hand, if he is rebuilding TWO jeeps, using copies of the same Customs form, and he finishes his first, it is excrement river with no propulsion system. It is still worthy of consideration, but frankly, I'd only look at it if I was getting BOTH chassis. The other one was for parts and broken up as 'yours' was the better chassis - then let him throw in the other chassis in the deal. If he brought in two, but only one chassis number, potential hazard. I brought in two Carryalls on one C386 form and had no problem with BOTH chassis numbers appearing on the form for that shipment, duty paid, etc, etc

Too true, the snag is that if you force the issue you can always find a way round, but worst case is that HMRC will assess what you have for value, then add something for shipment, then add 20% VAT to the lot. If you have a complete jeep which is (now) valued at £15k, the calculation would run something like; £15k vehicle, plus £2k assumed freight and insurance cost, times 1.1 for 10% import duty, and then the total times 1.2 for the VAT, so regardless of how inaccurate that detail is, there is a bill of about £5500 between that theoretical case and getting a registration number. Pleading that it was imported in bits, valued at £500 total, will get you nowhere with HMRC, and rightly so, even if that was the case.