Jump to content

matador restoration.


doug fleet

Recommended Posts

DOUG

The AEC records show that your chassis number left the factory as a DEACON no were can l find anywhere mention

of a conversion which is why l suggested looking at the records held at the TANK MUSEUM THE only reason l have referred

to DORCHESTER is that you raised it does the information lan 43 mention confirm that it was converted

 

REGARDS WALLY

Surely the cab structure for a Deacon is very different from that of a Dorchester as it had a one-seat armoured box for the driver. This one has the engine cover of a Dorchester/Matador cab

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SIMON it left the factory as DEACON with a F PREFIX census number if it was DORCHESTER it would have had a L prefix

also the DORCHESTER chassis numbers ran 1419 to 1555 /1556 to 1623 also the contract dates are 13/4/40 and 1/8/40

 

REGARDS WALLY

 

Hi Wally,

 

Both "F" and "L" prefixes were used on different batches of Dorchesters - for instance

 

 

AEC 4x4 Armoured Command Car L 4144685 to 4144707 No = 23

AEC 4x4 Armoured Command Post F 89104 to 89313 No = 210

AEC 4x4 Armoured Command Vehicle L 4426417 to 4426516 No = 100

AEC 4x4 Armoured Command Vehicle L 4427073 to 4427109 No = 37

AEC 6x6 Armoured Command Post F 280396to 280545 No = 150

 

Deacons (and the associated Ammunition carriers) had the "S" prefix for self propelled arttillery

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is getting a way from the point the fact is that chassis number is identified as been built as a DEACON

no one has come up with any further information as to when or if it was converted to a DORCHESTER mention has been made that the information held by THE TANK MUSEUM has been seen what does that information state if it was converted one would expect it to be recorded on that key card l have spent time checking all the details on matadors chassis numbers against census and post war numbers and come to the same result if was converted were is the proof from my point

if it was l can add that fact to what was already complied by members of AEC l know that they had access to all documents

held at Beverley and the TANK MUSEUM and others as well of the ones

Finally in the past seventy odd years many things will have happened to this vehicle that none of us are aware of part of having these vehicles is uncover there history both in military and civilian life and hopefully get to the truth l look at this with a open mind and l am never surprised I will request a copy of the key card to see what it contains

 

REGARDS WALLY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello All,

Please don't shoot the messenger!!

I was the one that gave the chassis details to Doug. All the information came from the Contract cards and Key cards held in the Tank Museum archives. I have attached a copy of the contract card & the vehicle's entry on the Key card for reference (copyright The Tank Museum) There is no evidence of this vehicle being converted from a Deacon, although there is evidence of Deacons being converted to ammunition carriers. I have looked at other reference material and it all suggests that this vehicle was an ACV and not a Deacon. Wally's source is the only one that contradicts this, which is unusual when you consider where the information has come from. The main difference contained in that source is that the WD numbers carry an 'S' prefix denoting Deacons and not an 'F' prefix but all the other details are correct. (Chassis contract numbers ,quantity, etc). Simon is right that both 'F' and 'L' prefixes were used on different batches of Dorchesters, from what I can see at a glance the earlier batch quoted by Wally had the 'L' prefix with the latter having the 'F'.

Hopefully we can put a lid on this large can of worms that I opened!

Ian.

T12700jpeg.jpg

Scan0009jpeg.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have attached a copy of the contract details showing the run of chassis numbers with the S prefix allocated census numbers it shows chassis numbers 4362 to 4571 were DEACONS the lower part is from a list of chassis numbers and

the F prefix plus the post war number 98 ZR 11 why there is this difference l do not know

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hi all the plot thickens on its army history. i know the showman i got it from siad his dad was the one who cut the back off . they got it and another one from a sale (he didnt know where he wasnt born). they sold one on almost straight away and cut this one down. it was converted in 1957_ 58 and used to pull there gallopers to fairs around the country.it was layed up about 1971 or 72 .and sat in there yard for about 38 years . it was offerd to me as spares for my matador timber tractor .i have owned it for about 6 years . thanks for all the imformation and help sorting its army history out.what ever it turns out to be it still wont be sold to anyone . i did find 1942 stamped on the front of the front near side spring today.there is a number writen on the inside of the near side chassie rail which i have taken down and left at the yard . kind regards doug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have today spent some time researching Deacons and ACVs. There are quite a few period photos of both types on the web and I have to agree with Ian and Doug that Doug's vehicle was an ACV before it was showmanized. I had not realised that all the rear bodywork that remains is actually the original armour, and the angle iron framing behind the cab is original too, as is most of the back of the present cab. The front wheel arches are correct for ACVs but not for Deacons and the fuel tank is on the left side (as ACVs) but Deacons and standard Matadors have it on the right (driver's) side. Similarly the air tank etc for the brakes are on the opposite side to a standard Matador or Deacon. These changes would make conversion to a ACV much less likely so I am at a loss to explain the chassis number.

 

If it were a very late Deacon number one might think in terms of using up un-used Deacon chassis but it is quite an early number. Is it possible that Deacon body/gun mount production lagged behind chassis production enough that some finnished, early Deacon chassis were converted by AEC to ACV standard and fitted with ACV bodies ? Can anyone confirm if AEC stamped the chassis number on the chassis rail when the chassis was fully built up and driveable or when it was just a bare chassis frame and much easier to change its build standard.

 

Personally I would love to see it returned to its ACV identity but there would be no point unless it was done 100% and that would be a massive job with little glory at the end. I think that Doug's plan to restore what he has is probably the best plan - though the idea of a running Deacon (the only one I think) is nice.

 

Best wishes for what is still going to be a lot of work.

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wally we havent ruled out one day putting back as an acv in many years to come . when i brought it i was told if i didnt want it , it was going for scrap.i have done alot of work getting one of there old scammells back on the road a few years ago and the rest of the family would be very happy to see it back on the road as there late dad ran it .when it was converted they painted the inside of the cab and the out side . but the underneath was left in olive drab. so iam going to put it back like that complete with all the white patches on the diffs and all the numbers painted back in the same size and place.i will keep updating this blog if everone wants me too. doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame it isn't a Deacon - as that is infinitely rarer than the Dorchester - and Doug's truck would be a unique survivor - unless somebody finds one gently rusting in a Turkish scrapyard as many were sold to Turkey at the end of the desert campaign when they were declared obsolete.

 

I suspect the original order was for Deacons but in use it had been found out pretty quickly that the design was flawed and the Army didn't want any more so the contract was converted during/before production into ACVs All the visual evidence points to Doug's AEC coming out of the factory as an ACV.

 

Contract information is not always right - I've been trying to determine serial numbers for MkI and Mk II Horsas - Some Horsas which serial number lists (derived from contract records) specify as Mk II Horsas have been shown by photographic evidence to be Mk Is - presumably as a result of design or manufacturing delays - so the change from Deacon to Dorchester is not without precedent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[ATTACH=CONFIG]111463[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]111464[/ATTACH]

a bit more progress this week . had to take the back of the cab out as it bolts in to get to the back of the engine and the channel section that holds the body up.started to clean up the frame . found some badly rusted parts that need cutting out and renewing .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the first job of the day was to get the back of the cab primed . that done moved onto scrapping the years of mud and dried grease on the drivers side chassie rail up to the back of the cab. the dirt was almost 1/4 inch thick . now we have the army reg number is there anywhere I can go and find out where it served ??.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...