Jump to content

Scammell Constructor Gallery.


Recommended Posts

 

Is that a Gardner under the bonnet?

 

It certainly is. In true Gardner style there's a total eclipse of the sun every time you start it up but once it's warm, hardly any exhaust smoke at all. It's an LXB 150 uprated to 180 on the advice of Steve Guest. 'Tick Over' Ted and Steve installed it and I was told it had only done 100,000 miles when they put it in. Previously it powered a removal van. It's a very sweet engine with a lovely exhaust note.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It certainly is. In true Gardner style there's a total eclipse of the sun every time you start it up but once it's warm, hardly any exhaust smoke at all. It's an LXB 150 uprated to 180 on the advice of Steve Guest. 'Tick Over' Ted and Steve installed it and I was told it had only done 100,000 miles when they put it in. Previously it powered a removal van. It's a very sweet engine with a lovely exhaust note.

 

Slight correction there Tom, the 150 was the LX, 180 was LXB. Sounds like you enjoyed your day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slight correction there Tom, the 150 was the LX, 180 was LXB. Sounds like you enjoyed your day.

 

I certainly did enjoy today's outing. Thanks for putting me right, I'm no Gardner expert and was going on what Ted told me when I bought it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I certainly did enjoy today's outing. Thanks for putting me right, I'm no Gardner expert and was going on what Ted told me when I bought it.

 

I am a bit out of touch, didn't realise it was now yours, how long have you owned it?

 

Hope you didn't mind me using 2 of your photos to answer some technical queries on the CCMV site?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a bit out of touch, didn't realise it was now yours, how long have you owned it?

 

Hope you didn't mind me using 2 of your photos to answer some technical queries on the CCMV site?

 

Please use any of my 'photos as you wish. Your informed and helpful posts are always appreciated.

 

According to the Registration Certificate I acquired this lorry from Ted on 02 05 1999. Getting this Scammell into it's present condition has been an expensive and very time consuming business. The 'photo below shows this same lorry standing outside Ted's house in the state in which I bought it almost 10 years ago.

 

sc000b095f.jpg

 

DSCF0557.jpg

Edited by 6 X 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are two unusual things about this ex forces 20T Constructor -

 

1) The front end restyling

 

2) Believe it or not, it is still in service - currently at J6 of M1 for the widening scheme works. Had to park and run up the slip road to grab this shot yeaterday, sadly I could not find any staff to get any info. The lifting gear is a twin boom Holmes arrangement, same as Diamond T.

 

About 10 years ago I saw possibly the same truck at their Sandy depot, still with cycle front wings, though I thought at the time it was a civilian model. Can anyone shed any light on this / these trucks?

 

Just found this picture on this site http://www.bseps.org.uk/scf2k8/scf2k8.html ! Still being rallied and going strong although I suspect letting the youngsters take most of the work !

dscf9694_scf2k8.jpg

dscf0191_scf2k8.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting this Scammell into it's present condition has been an expensive and very time consuming business.

 

 

And what a fantastic job, not overdone - must see this in the flesh! (Andy, if you can get away with it, stick one of those davits down your trouser leg and sneak it away for me......).

 

Which makes me wonder why you are so determined to get your mitts on PGK888, unless like me you are a total glutton for punishment :cool2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

According to the Registration Certificate I acquired this lorry from Ted on 02 05 1999. Getting this Scammell into it's present condition has been an expensive and very time consuming business. The 'photo below shows this same lorry standing outside Ted's house in the state in which I bought it almost 10 years ago.

 

 

 

Well Done 6 X 6, What a transformation, it looks great. A Proper Job!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tony, is PGK the second MOS Constructor, otherwise known as 'Flipper' due to it's habit of throwing propshafts and rolling tanks:cool2:?

 

It sounds about right, Mike!! PGK888 (the second of this pair) came home to me in 'as demobbed' state with a thrown rear prop, but with all good parts to repair.

 

It sounds like you have some dirt on her which I would love to hear :-D Do please share with the rest of us.

 

You didn't by any chance get to meet Stan Wass did you?

 

I don't buy this Scammell prop throwing mystery stuff - there has to be an engineering explanation for it, and thus an engineering solution.

 

I've allocated the whole of 2011 to unbolting and rebolting propshafts until it is resolved :shake::shake::shake:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tony, is PGK the second MOS Constructor, otherwise known as 'Flipper' due to it's habit of throwing propshafts and rolling tanks:cool2:?

 

It sounds about right, Mike!! PGK888 (the second of this pair) came home to me in 'as demobbed' state with a thrown rear prop, but with all good parts to repair.

 

It sounds like you have some dirt on her which I would love to hear :-D Do please share with the rest of us.

 

You didn't by any chance get to meet Stan Wass did you?

 

I don't buy this Scammell prop throwing mystery stuff - there has to be an engineering explanation for it, and thus an engineering solution.

 

I've allocated the whole of 2011 to unbolting and rebolting propshafts until it is resolved :shake::shake::shake:

 

 

Stan wrote an article for one of the club news letters some years ago in which he mentioned the two Constructors. I don't have the article to hand so I write from memory, but apparently the second one was always a bit of a rogue, starting off on the day it was collected from Watford by breaking down with a prop centre bearing problem. On another occasion while delivering a tank it took a bend at a depot too fast and rolled the FV3601 loaded with a (Centurion?) which had to be returned to the manufacturer for repair. Stan's one had a couple of head gasket problems, but I got the impression that Stan treated his tractor with more mechanical sympathy than the other drivers and hence experienced fewer problems.

 

Stan also mentioned that rear tyre wear was initially a problem but this was cured by lightening the ballast load carried by 2 tons or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hang on Mike, I think we are leading each other astray. :n00b:

 

Stan's motor was NGY593, one of the M.O.S. tank haulers. Not sure how many of these were built :confused:

 

PKK888 was sister to PGK887 (at one time owned and rebuilt with different body and cab by Steve Guest). These two were part of an odd order for 4, the other two of which went with AndyFowler's dad to Xmas Island. Both 887 and 888 may have been in research work, although there is a suggestion somewhere that they were in fact the long-term trial vehicles.

 

Apologies for the confusion!

At least I don't have to call her Flipper!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hang on Mike, I think we are leading each other astray. :n00b:

 

Stan's motor was NGY593, one of the M.O.S. tank haulers. Not sure how many of these were built :confused:

 

PKK888 was sister to PGK887 (at one time owned and rebuilt with different body and cab by Steve Guest). These two were part of an odd order for 4, the other two of which went with AndyFowler's dad to Xmas Island. Both 887 and 888 may have been in research work, although there is a suggestion somewhere that they were in fact the long-term trial vehicles.

 

Apologies for the confusion!

At least I don't have to call her Flipper!!

 

Thanks for clearing that up, I think Stan only referred to two on tank transport, but there may have been more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Done 6 X 6, What a transformation, it looks great. A Proper Job!

 

Thanks ekawrecker, and the others, who left complementary posts. And to think I nearly weighed it in a few months ago when scrap was 200 quid a ton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for clearing that up, I think Stan only referred to two on tank transport, but there may have been more.

 

There is an excellent article in Wheels & Tracks #62 by Stan's mate Ernest Lundy - he went from a Mack to the second Constructor, and does not detail any major incidents like prop throwing or the like, other than yet another Constructor turning its trailer and tank over in the entrance to Luggershall depot, just 200yds away from the offloading point!

 

The article contains a list, reproduced below, of 'some of the prime movers operated by the MoS Tank Transporter Depot, Great North Road, Knottingley':

 

Diamond T 980/981 - HXU7, MLM64/65, NGY539, NGY567

 

Mack NM (petrol) - JGF363, JGF365, KYW37/38/42/43

 

Scammell Constructor - NGY87/88/592/593/635/636

 

So at least 6 Constructors....we can confidently assume that PGK887/888 were not ordered for tank hauling as they were supplied with standard army towing hooks front/rear, not the civilian style pin and muti-hole units of the 6 above.

 

It seems that the 6 Macks were not really up to the job (85 ton GTW), so the 6 Constructors were probably replacements for these?

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...