David Herbert

Churchills have a specially designed flat 12 petrol engine making 350hp. It is not in any way related to the Bedford 72hp straight 6 of the same period. There was an attempt by Vauxhall to build a copy of a WW2 German half track that did use two 72hp straight sixes side by side. I don't know how they aranged the transmission. That never got beyond prototype. David

Sorry Neil, I think a Clansman 3 way power supply box might melt if you try to run a BV off it. Certainly the old type one in a 432 had its own very substantial socket on the main distribution box and you were told not to use it without the engine running. David

I assume that you have found this thread: http://hmvf.co.uk/forumvb/showthread.php?17075-Crossley-RFC-Tender David

En-jay, I would have read the plate the same way as you - bit hard to see any other way ! David

Is it possible that the dipstick markings take account of leakback from the fluid flywheel and you are trying to run with too high a level, resulting in the oil being stirred to a froth and the valves not being able to work properly ? David

Hi Malcolm, This won't be much help but I have driven a number of M5 light tanks with a very similar power train to an M24. In my experience they change gear almost symultaneously every time, to the point where I looked up to see if the transmissions were interconected hydraulicly. Of course they are not but I think that possibly the lurch from the first transmission changing fools the seccond one into changing too. Obviously both engines must be running properly and the linkages adjusted to the book. I suspect your LH transmission has a stuck valve. If it were an external problem it aught to affect all the changes. RH: I can't remember if the fluid flywheel is self contained or is filled from the transmission but if self contained it could be low on oil. Actually low oil level in the transmission will produce random problems with lack of drive but I am sure that you have checked oil level ! Certainly the front band not doing the same thing consistantly seems odd. I am sorry but I think you are about to get very good at rebuilding hydramatics. Good luck, and please tell us how this develops, preferably with photos. David

Re the radial drill: any idea of its maker? I am sure it's not an Archdale but by 1912 they had done away with the belt drive across the top in favour of a shaft up the centre of the column, a pair of bevel gears and the speed selection box at the top and a splined shaft across to the saddle. In 1914 they moved the speed selection box into the saddle. At that point yours would have looked very old fashioned. David

I think that one of them might react by digging it out himself and then cutting it up just to prove that he won't be pushed around. However he is old and will die eventually. Then you get to start all over again..... David

According to Brian Thackray's book 'The AEC story, part one' page 73; AEC's own engine was in production from 1920, replacing the Tylor. It was known as the 4 type and as the 5 type (no info about the difference) and a 'Y' type built with the AEC 5 type engine was known as a type 501 chassis (or type 505 if longer). Similarly a 'S' type with the AEC 4 type engine became a type 401 chassis. There were aso earlier vehicles taken back by AEC and rebuilt to later standards. The 5 type engine was also refered to as the A109 (introduced in 1921) which ties in nicely with the data plate in the 3rd photo of post 12 above. Also in the same book, page 35, are photos of one of 150 trucks built to a Russian order in late 1916/early 1917, but probably never delivered there. They are basicly to the 1914 B type design but with cast iron round spoked wheels (7 spoke front, 8 spoke rear) and fitted with a "large capacity military radiator and water pump" This radiator is exactly like the radiator with 'AEC Ltd' as its logo but also has 'Anglia' in small Russian (Cyrillic) script in the lower part of the circular depression below the letter 'C' of AEC. I wonder if this same basic casting was reused on the rather later truck that Andrew has posted about when AEC needed a higher cooling capacity for colonial opperation? David

I had never even heard of the Renault NC27 despite tanks being my major interest for 40 years. This is a usefull short write-up about it if anyone else is interested: http://tank-photographs.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/stridsvagn-strv-m28-swedish-tank.html Thanks again Stefan David

Stefan, Thank you for a very clear summary of Swedish production of this type. Be prepared for some very emotional responses though ! David

Also used in most British armoured vehicles. David

When things were at their most desperate the Home Guard often did not even have guns ! They were issued with wooden ones to drill with and expected to ward off the invading Germans with pointy sticks. David

Yes but then there would have to be some artificial deadline after which the whole project is pointless and an annoying media person who knows nothing hyping it up. Just do it for the fun of it ! David

One of the realities of hitting things is that if you use a small hammer you will make dents in the surface but not bend the piece much but if you use a big hammer with the same amount of effort, you will do less surface damage but bend the piece much more. I have a small sledge hammer (about 5lb I think) with a short handle which is ideal for this kind of job. You can protect the surface with a piece of wood which will probably protect the paint too if you don't need to correct the shape too much. I also have a couple of pieces of aluminium angle that I use to protect things from damage from the vice jaws but anything tough enough but softer than the steel bracket will do. If you would like to use an anvil but don't have one, a big hardwood log can often do the job of being a heavy thing to hit against. The main thing is to think exactly where you need to bend or straighten the piece and so where it needs to be supported and exactly where you will need to hit it. It just takes practice, it's not magic ! Hope this helps, good luck David

Ahh but did they have MWR or MWD chassis numbers ? David

I don't see it either, can someone enlighten us please? David

You might want to consider that a carrier is capable of 30 mph which might not sound much compared to a car but is quite enough on steel faced tracks on a surfaced road. They are legal on the roads in the uk and there is a huge pressure to keep up with the traffic. If a track breaks at speed (which they did when new) you have no directional control and negligable braking power. At this point you might wish that they were made of the best steel available. As you suggest, wear is not so critical but it is critical that they do not crack or fatigue. David

Wax is an ideal material to 3D print with, and if using the resulting thing for lost wax steel casting, the problems with 3D printing of low density and poor surface finish, do not matter. I doubt though that it would be economic to 3D print the sort of number of patterns that would be needed for carrier track, much better to CNC machine an aluminium mould and cast the wax patterns from that. There were various steels used for carrier track, manganese probably being the best in terms of life, but I have not seriously looked at the relative properties and anyway there are much more sophisticated steels available now at reasionable costs. This would certainly be an area where you would need advice from someone with up to date specialised knowledge rather than someone like me. David

Actually new British dry pin track isn't machined except for grinding / cutting off flash and the runner where the metal was poured in. The holes are cored and not even cleaned up with a drill. There is a very tight tolerence on the diameter and distance apart of the holes but the initial wear is quite high. I have seen Chieftain track being manufactured and that was just the same. I would have thought that carrier track was a candidate for lost wax casting. I think that the problem is that we are so used to buying military vehicle parts for a tiny fraction of their cost that when confronted with real modern prices for what are very low volume production runs (compared to modern motor industry spares) we get rather put off. David

What a great find and better than many WW2 barn find trucks. Quite unusual for an American FWD to have the spoked cast steel wheels too. Are those rails in the floor of your shed ? Not that I'm nosy or anything ! David

I am not sure that my wife agrees with that ! David

In the good old days a long time ago, when a vehicle was first registered it received the next available number. Then someone thought it would be good to add a letter to the number that related to the year of registration. Then it was realised that people were registering vehicles that were not new (eg. ex MOD trucks) and passing them off as newer than they were so 'Q' plates were invented for any vehicle that was not new when registered. This went on for a while untill we were given the option to ask for an age related plate which of course required some evidence of the true age to be provided. At about the same time it became possible to recover an original registration if suitable evidence could be found to justify the application. Most construction and use regulations relate to "date of first registration" rather than date of manufacture but this is not usualy too much of a problem to MV enthusiasts as most of us think that things like working brakes, tail lights and indicators are a good idea even if not fitted originaly to our vehicles. The question of Agricultural registration is not a problem for tractors unless they are being used for non agricultural haulage commercialy (eg pulling a digger on a trailer between non agricultural jobs). If you want to drive a combine harvester or agricultural tractor on the road for fun it is agricultural because of what it is. The problem comes with things like Unimogs that are registered as agricultural purely because of their use. There are very clear regulations about what is agricultural use and it does not include historic vehicles that are constructed as trucks or even tanks attending rallies. Good luck, David

Including the neighbours I expect ! Very nice job though :bow: David

I have recently had a set of modern van wheels blasted and powder coated. The guy who did them tried his best but the seam between the rim and the disk on the outside is already showing rust because the powder coating is attracted to the metal each side of the crevice and very little penetrates to fill the seam. The wheels look much better than they did and I am selling the van but I would not see powder coating as a long term rust preventer on anything with narrow crevices, particularly if, like my van wheels, they have been exposed to salt. Possibly I should have painted on a phosphoric acid treatment like Jenolite to neutralise the rust before they were coated but that still would have left a negligable coverage in the bottom of the seam. If you want to gauge the interest in this thread, check out the number of times people read it ! Blow by blow restoration blogs are always popular and often there are not many comments because the guy doing the work seems to be forging ahead successfully and there is not much to say. Like Degsy I try not to chip in with "Cor, that's realy good" etc. Not everyone can take on full restorations so being able to feel a part of someone else's - restoration by proxy! - is quite rewarding. Thank you for taking the time to share with us. David