deadline

The main reason spark plug torque has become an issue is due to aluminum heads. In an old cast iron GMC 270 ripping the thread out is really not an issue (ok, but you really, really have to want to do it). But in an aluminum head its a very real issue. Since the plugs are grounded by the treads you really only need to make sure they are clean for a good electrical path. Make sure you use the crush washer and 1/4 - 1/2 turn past seated in good enough. If you must use a torque wrench 20ft lbs is a good target number.

That's the conclusion I have reached.... its an assembly remnant. But the more important discovery is that no M-series (post war) bow that I have has one. Thus is can be used to discriminate between 'proper' and post war parts. If you read the link I posted it has my full discussion... there are to many photos to repost here.

I can only assume that the two halves were stamped, then spot welded. There is little need for stress relief in an part stamped by a multi-ton press. The metal will flow under pressure. If the part were rolled, OK, that would indeed generate stress.. but the notch is not at what I would consider the point of highest stress. The most convex part has a very significant cutout. None of the current prodcution (M-series) bows have that notch. Also the notch varies. I've got pictures of a simple slot, to a triangle, oval, ellipse and half circle. The only thing in common is the location. This image shows 2 CCKW bows (left w/red circle) and 2 M series (right w/blue circle) Note that about 1 inch (2.5cm) below the portion that is set back.. this has nothing to do with stress either, it that section were straight, the flange would protrude over the bottom, inset part. So they cut it back. Also, why is there no stress relief for the bottom radius? Its actually a smaller radius than the upper one... so a tighter radius would mean more metal to 'move' and therefore more 'stress'. But, as I said since I believe that these parts were formed in a press of suitable tonnage the metal would simply flow (actually the reason you need to much tonnage is to get the metal to deform past is elastic limit resulting in the desired permanent shape... aka no need for any stress relief. I will look on the side part for a notch. Like I said, I have more images and explanation (including TM references) at http://www.tm9-801.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=627

The long held idea is that the WWII era bows are the same as current production (well, 1990s) cargo bows. I found that all of the bows that I have collected off CCKWs have a tell tale notch. None of the M35 bows have this notch. I have all the images, manuals and discussion at: http://www.tm9-801.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=627&p=1277#p1277 Not sure what the rules are, but I don't think I can put those images on this server.. but I would like everyone to look it over and if there is anything that blows my theory out of the water please post here.

Whats kinda funny is that it has a lot of errors. GP != General Purpose, nor 'jeep'. The first jeep was the Bantam BRC (they did show a few). Lots of CCKWs.... thats always good.

Some pictures of the CCKW open cab doors would be great. Anything to document the parts is always welcome. As for wood doors, here is a quick scan from 'A Universal Truck'

I have been told that as few as 10 years ago open cab doors were still plentiful. But recently all you can find are rusted steel frames with rags covering them. I have a set which I do plan to repro. But the biggest drawback is that covering them is so expensive. $350+USD per pair. Which means each set would be over $500. I've looked at the doors and can't see $350 worth of materials. As for your great effort, there are PLENTY of pics of just about everything used to seal up an open cab. Wood, steel, blankets. You may want to run some 1x1 stiffeners across the top and the sides.

'Factory' typically means off the assembly line with no mods. I don't extend that to say 'all new condition'. A worn out jeep could be factory correct, but add in a bustle rack, or MG mount/radio and its not factory correct in my opinion. 'Motor Pool' class is slightly less formal. Parts still need to be correct, but an MB motor in a GPW is not a deal breaker. An F head motor would be. Modifications (either from the manufacturer or field mods made by GI's) are acceptable, but must still be period correct. Judges are volunteers at events. I give a 'Factory Class winner' the same consideration as an ebay jeep. Until *I* go over it its just an MV. 'Buy the vehicle, not the story'.

A new wiring harness to replace the painted over one is approx $750-1200 USD Plus the work to install it, replace the wiring clips etc. For *just* getting the harness right in the engine bay you are looking at $2k+ (plus untold hours of labor). Then you still have to correct the engine bits. There are way to many holes in the firewall and the dash itself has some extra holes. Lots of little things that are going to quickly add $5k+ to the cost of this truck if you want it corrected. If you just want to hop in and drive, then $10k is a good number for the truck, its condition, accessories, etc. But a 'Factory Correct' or even 'Restored' truck? No way.

Well I have to put in my two cents (it's what I do) "Nice looking restored to original truck,drives perfect" FAIL That motor is all kinds of wrong. The painted over everything.. wire harnesses, hoses, ground straps etc. Figure about $1k to take out, strip and paint. There was NEVER a dataplate on the rocker cover. Wrong horn, hose clamps are wrong, wire and terminal ends are wrong. Way to many holes on the firewall. Looks like no winch cable. Winch cables were shortened from 300ft to 150ft late war, but this model should have the 300ft if factory correct. The cargo bow corners are missing the leather straps, there are way to many hardware store gate locks (theft must be rampant). There are also way to many stencils on the truck. The battery box on the truck is a piece of wood.... but there looks to be a proper cover in the last picture, but it look kinda beat. Also the markings on wrong. SO you are looking at redoing the bumper, hood, tailgate (only very early trucks used the W prefix, and registration numbers started with '4'. '2' and '8' were used for other types of vehicles. I would agree that this could be a $10,000 truck. But not much more... still has work to be done. And nothing on it is exceptionally rare. I would take off most of the 'accessories' as they just add clutter. Most people would never know what's wrong with it.

I believe the TM you are looking for is: TM 11-2715 Installation of Radio Equipment in 1944 Jeeps · 1/4 Ton 4x4 Willys MB and Ford GPW Jeep Available at: http://www.armyradio.com/arsc/customer/pages.php?pageurl=/publish/TM_11-2715/TM_11-2715.htm Do you also have the FT-250 mount? I think you also need them. The 1306 also needs a vibrator, and those are fairly rare in working condition (IIRC its takes 6/12V and makes the different plate voltages for the tubes).

I'll take a guess that feritan (sp?) is a typical metal prep solution like phosphoric acid (in the USA there is a product called 'Metal Prep' that is phosphoric acid). But those are for clean metal preservation (most vehicles now a days use an epoxy primer). I never have had any 'luck' with naval jelly or rust converter products. POR-15 is simply an epoxy coating to seal the rust (rust needs water, iron and air. Take away one and there is no chemically viable oxidation). There are a few drawbacks to chemicals... the biggest being that the rarely penetrate the metal to metal joints because of paint, rust or dirt meaning that rust is still there. I guess the easiest (but not cheapest) would be to see about getting the entire bed (or if its a composite bed, take it apart and just do the sides) chemically dipped and coated. That will remove the rust and preserve it. Its a common thing in the USA, but not knowing UK environmental it may not be allowed. Finding a welder that can give you warp free panels after a patch is kinda hard to do... thats more of an art than a science in modern times. TiG would be the best, but a very good mig welder should get you close.

Making new stake pockets is easy. But once you remove the old stake pocket you'll see that there are quite a few bends that make up the side/bottom sill of the bed. There are no 'repair kits'. Your only hope is to find a reputable welder/body shop and see if the can do the work or provide the repair sections. You could find a product like POR-15 and simply seal in the rust.

Most of those pics seem to be copies from a Time-Life magazine color spreads I've seen. I should dedicate some time to finding all the CCKW color images.... maybe get a paint guide compiled. One thing to watch for are recolored B&W images. The original kodachrome process is very sharp. The colorizing process blurs them up a bit... Some are easy to catch, but others are quite good.

Why even hook up the CTIS? Its more of a PITA (your tire are almost guaranteed to deflate) and unless you air down the tire frequently its not doing anything useful. Do you plan on PMing your truck frequently to keep the system working?

Without knowing the unit it was assigned to its hard to tell. The USMC was really the only service that used cammo in large scale. The Army in Europe tried it only once IIRC on D-Day and quickly abandoned it because they suffered from friendly fire (it was assumed anything not OD was German and shot). Also I don't see any National Symbols (the big white stars). It could be that its not a US unit.

Its definitely been cropped... the M2HB is missing about 2 feet (.75m) of the barrel.

Whats interesting is that just over the top of the hill you can see the top of another CCKW. None of that cammo does any good when you are silhouetted like that.

My guess would be an improvised rack to hold some of that cammo netting/tentage. There are lots of pics of CCKWs with cammo netting on the fenders (wings?)... either that or *some* sort of stowage rack.

I did find a few of the 'solid' box corners in my stash. Only thing I noticed was that they appear *slightly* thinner. I didn't measure it, but even you side by side pic looks like the solid corner is thinner. The TMs show precious little of the cargo bodies or corners. The solid corners could be 'early', and as a measure to save steel they were stamped (and the punched metal recycled) but I have nothing to back that up. 'Early' war (mid to late 42) really didn't have wartime materials restrictions in place. The jeeps got hit in late 42 (no more brass data plates, most rubber was purged for felt etc). CCKWs also got hit in mid/late 42 (wood cargo body, open cab etc) so it makes sense... but its pure conjecture. I also thought that the solid corners could be for some trailer.. but not the 1 ton or 1/4 ton.. they would have been the most numerous.. the Ben Hur had an all wood bow, and the 1/4 ton didn't have any bows.

You can read about the hub-bub in the January and February 1943 issues of Army Motors. Both are available here: http://www.tm9-801.com/ArmyMotors/index.php

I have a meager collection, but I will get them online. At least they are easy to scan. Mr. Rimmer, if you don't mind may I post the images of the plates at tm9-801.com for reference? Would be cool to get a timeline going of the plates and what trucks they would go with.

Is there any contact info or web sites for the people listed with data plates? I have started collecting plates and have a few. I just picked up 3 registration plates this weekend... even a rare GMC 6x4 5 ton plate. I kinda stopped once I got the correct plates for my mid-43 open cab. But will buy them when I see one that I don't have. The 'Becker book' has a lot of data plates, but they are hand drawn... they do not have the different fonts that I have seen on the different plates I have in my possession. I will dig up what I have and post what I find.

I checked the cargo bed assembly instruction TM dated 1943 and they show the corners with the holes. It may be that the bows never changed from the 1940's. Like the Budd nuts on the wheels.. still in use today unaltered, also the steel 5 gallon gas can (made by blitz, a wartime supplier). The only differences I can see for the corners is that the roll up strap should be leather, not canvas. Other than that it seems that the M series corners are perfectly acceptable for WWII once the strap is changed. About the only 'drop in' upgrades I can think of for the 270 would be a new cam and/or raise the compression. Both are pretty simply to do.. the cam would be the easiest... no machining would be required. You take out a piston, measure the bore and find out you are out of round, worn etc and may need sleeves to get back to 'standard' piston size. Using a 302 head would not do much. The issue isn't intake or exhaust performance... but the 270 is a 6.5:1 compression engine. Bump that to 7:1 or better and you have made massive performance gains. This site http://www.patricksantiquecars.com/ seems to be a much referenced site for 270 upgrades.

I am not 100% sure, but my experience is that the corners with the stamped holes are later M series. The 'solid' parts are the WWII ones. Here's an NOS M35a2 cargo corner sold by a big M series parts dealer: I don't have any pics at hand.. but I think that the all solid corners are 'proper'. As for 270 performance parts any online parts place (Summit Racing, Jeggs, NAPA) should have the parts. The 270 was in production till the 60's and still popular for hot rods.