Sean N

I love old adverts. The 'Auto Stropper' is presumably to make your car look sharp.

Braided plugs and cables are for the FFW ignition. The vehicle electrical system is 12V but the auxiliary dynamo and control box are 24V. Yours looks as though it has the correct FFW distributor but someone's taken the plugs and leads off and put civvy ones on. Maybe they had ignition problems. Military recon engines (and, I think, a lot of original ones from Austin) are sky blue, mid bronze green is Austin's standard factory engine colour (per Mini, A40, etc. etc.) There's a discussion on engine colours in John's painting topic: http://hmvf.co.uk/forumvb/showthread.php?47743-Painting

Back to sorting yesterday, more stuffs: I have in mind that this came from a Series Landy, can anyone confirm? Does this thermostat look familiar to anyone? It's 180 - 195 deg F and is marked OG4 (or possibly OB4) on the end: I thought this was Bedford MW wireless, but it doesn't look quite the same as the others I've seen: 3/LD and 1970s with an FV part number, so my guess is Chieftain power pack lifting eyes? This shiny thing came out of a loose wrapper marked Thornycroft ENOTS P9001. The underside is stamped A (or delta) L328388 ABROAD: It doesn't at all, it's a patent stamp that says PAT 328399 ABROAD! It also probably is ENOTS as it appears to have an ENOTS trade mark stamped on it, though it's not clear. This is probably a very long shot, but a couple of PTOs for SAE 6 bolt fitting. Likely these are Bedford or AEC fitment given where they came from: This Carter W-1 carb is new (if a bit grubby), but unfortunately the tag's broken off. Anyone know any way of identifying the fitment without it, other than stripping it to check the jets!?

Which engine would that be? B80, or am I thinking of the Sentinel tug? Thanks Terry.

Google Translate made a lousy job of that PDF, but thanks for the link, Pekka. As I read it they're suggesting that because troop numbers had to be built up quickly, they couldn't get transport from Finland quickly enough so borrowed vehicles from the British. The dates of the Finnish peacekeeping mission in Cyprus, 1964 to 1977, might tie in well with the K9 being sold in 1978 - i.e. they brought it back and then disposed of it fairly quickly. If as Wally says it was a radio repair vehicle the body John Morter's got would be correct for it, BUT that body is in very poor condition even just from the photos. Those fuel consumption figures are really poor, I'd expect double that from my K9s and RL! Is it DBG on the bottom (original factory), then matt light stone (desert tan), then white, then matt NATO green on top? That might be consistent with going to the middle east, then UN service. Be interesting to uncover those markings. Wally, thanks for the comments. That does look as though there's MBG on the rocker cover at the back, with maybe DBG over (or discoloured / oily MBG). Interesting about the vehicles on that contract.

So is this where my old map case is going?

Have to say, Pekka, if it was used by the Finnish Army they don't seem to have done much to it. All the fittings, markings, bits and pieces and paint appear still to be British. Wally, reference our discussion about engine paint, does that engine look DBG or MBG to you? I can't quite decide if it's DBG (by comparison with body colour) or just old, tired, oxidised and oily MBG. Camera / screen might be throwing it off as well.

Yes, it's the control box for the auxiliary dynamo. Rifle holders are British.

Pekka, that looks like 86 BG 97 from the photo. Interesting that it's GS not FFW on the plate. Radio bodies do come up reasonably regularly, say once or twice a year. There's a radio repair one for sale at the moment but it's a wreck and he wants lots of money for it. Getting one to Finland wouldn't be cheap, either. Have to say, although the paint's horrible it doesn't look too bad underneath. The red lever is to engage the auxiliary charging set for the radios. There was an auxiliary gearbox on the inside of the chassis rail that was driven by V belts from a pulley on the front of the transfer box. A short shaft ran from the auxiliary gearbox to a large dynamo mounted on the left hand side of the chassis inside the chassis rail, rearward of the transfer box. To run the dynamo you would put the transfer box in neutral, engage the auxiliary gearbox and run the engine. I have got a gearbox and dynamo somewhere, if I find them I'll post some photos. It would be interesting to know the history of their use in Finland.

The square flap could have torn off. Certainly looks as though it could be original - the ones on mine were padded with horsehair or similar as well (just to help them rot out when they got wet). Pekka, I think we need to see photos of this K9.

John, underseal the cab only (and body underside when you do it), don't do the chassis. If you go to your local bodyshop you can buy a substance called Schutz which is similar to factory underbody sealant. It comes in cans which screw onto a gun that you can buy very cheaply - it's like a very basic spraygun or waxoyl gun that runs off the compressor. http://www.toolsave.co.uk/images/products/detail/sg14.v3.jpg http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/3M-08861-Body-Schutz-Coating-Black-muti-textured-under-body-coating-1x1Litre-/330931775466 Sorry, just to clarify, just paint the chassis zinc phosphate primer + chassis black / red / whatever you fancy.

I seem to have a few of these Wilmot Breeden fuel caps: I can find almost everything out about these Perkins / Rolls Royce OF1609 filters except what they fit. Suspect possibly B series again. No part numbers, but Stalwart, I believe, by comparison:

No, I understood that, thanks Richard. I'm inclined to think it might be Champ as I have other Champ items here from the same lot of stuff, and that the Rolls Royce valves and gaskets I have may be B range engines as well.

Thankyou Lauren. I've had little to do with CMP. Maybe a difference between Ford and GM, or perhaps a different GM truck?

The pics, new and old, have been on before, but the exact matching and the slider are nice. Have to click and slide right the way across to get the full fade.

Train, not gross, presumably?

Mind you, we'll have to keep it quiet if it might fit a tank. Rick will be wanting to restore a MkV round it.

Could do, Adrian, I'd like to know what they're for though!

I seem to remember AEC supplied oily bits for tanks in WW1, but that could just be my memory playing tricks. As Mike says, my money's on it being from a B-type or similar rather than a tank, but you never know - and worth saving in possible, in any case. The history of WW1 tanks supplied to Russia is quite interesting - again, I seem to remember there's a photo of one in Berlin in 1945, if my memory serves me correctly.

IF it (i.e. the Estonian gearbox) really was from a tank, and that's not just local legend, could it be from a WW1 British tank - I seem to remember some MkVs went to Russia and were used in WW2. ...and after a quick Google, supposedly four of the MkVs were used by Estonian forces between the wars and used to cover the Soviet retreat from Tallin in WW2, which might tie in with the story on the Wehrmacht Awards site.

Is it too obvious to say is it AEC, and if so would it be from a Y-type (or a B-type bus)?

Well, that's a couple eliminated at least! Some instruments: This is AC 7228093. I thought this would be simple (i.e. Bedford) but I can't find it in any of my Bedford books: Sure I should know this one: This is similar to a lot of Austin ones, but different background colour: These grubby horrible things, believe it or not, are NOS. They have 'Distometer', some patent numbers, and GC on the back:

J5229 may also be Austin 1K-4063, not that it helps as I can't find a cross-reference for that either. I have some small boxes marked Z.1 ZA 14464 Straps, Securing, No. 4, Trucks, 15-cwt, 4 wheels Wireless (Mod Kit). Would these be MW? Also a dipstick LV10 FV143013, so it's from some A or B vehicle. I'll see if I can get a photo of it. .

I've got a pair of decent s/h Bedford tractas and short shafts that came from an MK, if they're any use.

From the way the consultation's worded I suspect they'll try to do it by type approval. That would exempt your Iron fairy, but I don't know if it would do the same for a modern equivalent. The crucial point for many of the classes of vehicle they discuss is defining what is a specialist chassis and what is HGV based. I don't know enough about type approval to know whether they could make a distinction that way.