Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It was a 6-wheel chassis but no inter-axle diff, which I don't think was the main reason, other than it had to run for fairly high mileages to locations on public roads. On one film it went to Holland, and got chucked off the motorways for being too slow! It was a petrol engined thing but we transplanted a Bedford 466 diesel into it, with gearbox, which improved both its speed and reliability somewhat.

 

It was back in the mid 1970's, Queen were in the hit parade and so on.

 

There were two cranes, one had a Matador-axled Ford petrol truck chassis, with a big electric motor drive by batteries and carbon pile regulator. That one also had a home-brew gearbox that allowed the motor to drive the axles etc etc., but this box was a nightmare to look after. We eventually threw the home-brew box away and did a much simpler 1:1 drop-down box with a cogged belt drive from the motor that was engaged on location by putting in a 5/8" locking pin into a coupling. That was drawn up on an A4 pad and the machine shop machined it up for me out of 1" thick dural plate, with sealed bearings and just oil for the gears.

 

I remember going to Aldenham, probably either an AEC agent or even London Transport, for the oil seals for the Matador axles. They weren't too bad, but as the chassis had four wheel drive, it had one axle at each end, and the homebrew box was in place of the transfer box, introducing the motor drive into the drivetrain.

 

The home-brew box had oil pump lubrication and a lot of complexity, but it was just too much overkill for what was needed, and it just wasn't user-friendly.

 

The first (prop-shaft) I can visualise well, I am sure we made the device, but I'll need to go back in the boxes of junk (family archives) and see what I can find.

 

The last project was to buy a few Bedford RL Green Goddess chassis from L W Vass, had them trucked down to us in Cricklewood, hired a crane in to lift over the buildings as we couldn't drive them. We were going to build our own crane chassis, even got new axle tubes out of Vauxhall so we could shorten them and reduce the chassis width. Vass's place was huge then, the big field out the back was full of rare stuff, and they were turning over huge volumes of ex-MOD vehicles.

 

That ended when business went down and I ended up being made redundant in 1981. The chassis were around for some years before the whole thing folded in the mid to late 1990's.

 

Interesting times!

 

Peter

Edited by listerdiesel
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 888
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Thanks for posting those Andy, I was going to call in myself but got dragged into work. How are you getting on with Daisy, about time we had an update?

Dave had some lovely vehicles on show.

Posted Images

There was a lot of kit in the Film & TV industry that was cobbled together, to put it mildly!

 

The bigger 6-wheel crane had an hydraulic column that was a landing gear strut off a Boeing of some description, but that whole crane was built in California and shipped over before I joined the company.

 

Fascinating times!

 

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites
Heres the Constructors military and civilian from this years GDSF :D

The Ex Cyprus RAF (PSA) Constructor sold at the show for £4500, new owner is in East Grinstead, Sussex....

 

THe ex Cammell Laird, ex Vickers machine is not Constructor, but is a Super Constructor, The Ex Pickfords unit is likewise not a Constructor, but a Junior Constructor. (nit picking again...)

Edited by antarmike
Link to post
Share on other sites
The Ex Cyprus RAF (PSA) Constructor sold at the show for £4500, new owner is in East Grinstead, Sussex....

 

THe ex Cammell Laird, ex Vickers machine is not Constructor, but is a Super Constructor, The Ex Pickfords unit is likewise not a Constructor, but a Junior Constructor. (nit picking again...)

 

For those of us who don't know, it is a useful guide to what we should be looking for.

 

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites
Or even "Here are the Constructors....." being propper picky......:whistle:

 

You lot keep on and the next thread will be I saw some nice Scammell's the other day , I took some nice photographs but you aint gonna see em !!!!!!!! So Nuh Nuh Nuh ! :-D Off up the shed now sulking like a big kid ! :pfrt::pfrt::pfrt::pfrt:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think there is any need for us to explore the limits of Andy's sense of humour any further. We already know he can take a joke so let's get back to what started this. Question, is it reasonable to describe the Junior, and Super, variants of the Scammell Constructor as Constructors ?

Edited by 6 X 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
About coming back, do you mean? I guess they finally slung you off the saxophone forum then?

 

Well, you lot may not think so but this forum is relatively civil compared to most sax forums. Disagreements on here haven't got as far as death threats. Yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
But to answer your question, why yes - they are all members of the genus CONSTRUCTOR

 

Well, that's what I thought. Just to elaborate just a little further so that everyone knows where I coming from, in Mike's post he describes a Super Constructor as "is not Constructor" and also, the Junior Constructor as "not a Constructor". Well, surely, they both are Constructors. One being a Junior and the other a Super.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6X6

 

you are 100% CORRECT in saying that the super & junior are both Construtors Just different plated weights and the junior being 6X4.

 

 

Clive

 

Well, it's very unusual for me to be right about anything never mind being 100% right ! This must mean that Lord Field Marshal Fowler is also right......and.....err....... that ExAntarMike is 100% wrong. What a day it's been. I expect Mike will apologise to Andy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, it's very unusual for me to be right about anything never mind being 100% right ! This must mean that Lord Field Marshal Fowler is also right......and.....err....... that ExAntarMike is 100% wrong. What a day it's been. I expect Mike will apologise to Andy.

 

Hi Tom , while you are in this 100% right mood could you clarify something thats been on my mind for some time ! Is an African elephant still an elephant or a species that just use the name for social reasons ? :nut:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, that's what I thought. Just to elaborate just a little further so that everyone knows where I coming from, in Mike's post he describes a Super Constructor as "is not Constructor" and also, the Junior Constructor as "not a Constructor". Well, surely, they both are Constructors. One being a Junior and the other a Super.

 

Scammell built Constructors, Junior Constructors and Super Constructors. Each was a seperate model. The Scammell Constructor is a model with 6x6 transmission and the Scammmell 6 speed gearbox.

 

The junior Constructor is a model with 6x4 transmission and 6 speed Scammell gearbox.

 

The Super Constructor is a 6x6 with Self Changing gears gearbox. It did not share engines with the other two having either Albion or Rolls C6SFL.

 

Constructor is specifically the 6x6 with Scammell gearbox.

 

The AEC matador was built as a pre war 4x2, the wartime 4x4, a post war Civilian 4x2 Artic tractor and later as a five speed AV powered 4x4. Each is a seperate model.

 

The Contractor based Explorer is not of the genus Explorer, which is a 1950's vehicle based on the pioneer.

 

The Contractor based Explorer is of the genus Contractor, so name is no guarantee of which genus a vehicle shouild be placed in.

 

(The AEC matador was built as a pre war 4x2, the wartime 4x4, a post war Civilian 4x2 Artic tractor and later as a five speed AV powered 4x4. Each is a seperate model.)

 

The 50's Explorer has more in common with the Pioneer, than the Super has with the Junior. If you feel, which I don't that these are the same genus then maybe Pioneer and Explorer should be seen as both members of the genus "Coffee pot", rather than sepewrate types.

Edited by antarmike
Link to post
Share on other sites
is the Current Mini the same genus as the sixties mini that bore the same name???

 

Surprisingly, yes. Both have enough general characteristics in common to place them in a group, or class, of vehicle. The three types of Constructor you describe also have more similarities than differences between them and that places them firmly within the Constructor genus. They are all Constructors. A bit like with African elephants and Indian elephants. They're both elephants but distinctly different models within the elephant genus. I hope this has cleared things up.

 

GENUS.

a class; kind; sort

BIOL. a major category in the classification of animals, plants, etc., ranking above a species and below a family: it can include one species or many similar species: the Latinized genus name is capitalized and italicized, and precedes the species name, which is italicized but not capitalized (Ex.: Homo sapiens, modern man)

LOGIC a class of things made up of subordinate classes or species

 

http://www.yourdictionary.com/genus

Link to post
Share on other sites
Surprisingly, yes. Both have enough general characteristics in common to place them in a group, or class, of vehicle. The three types of Constructor you describe also have more similarities than differences between them and that places them firmly within the Constructor genus. They are all Constructors. A bit like with African elephants and Indian elephants. They're both elephants but distinctly different models within the elephant genus. I hope this has cleared things up.

 

GENUS.

a class; kind; sort

BIOL. a major category in the classification of animals, plants, etc., ranking above a species and below a family: it can include one species or many similar species: the Latinized genus name is capitalized and italicized, and precedes the species name, which is italicized but not capitalized (Ex.: Homo sapiens, modern man)

LOGIC a class of things made up of subordinate classes or species

 

http://www.yourdictionary.com/genus

 

Yes but in terms of vehicles there are only makes and models. The make for all types mentioned is Scammell so I suggest the genus is Scammell.

 

The models are Junior Constructor, Constructor, Super Constructor. These are all species within the genus Scammell, as are Handyman, Routeman, etc. A junior Constructor is no more closely related to a Super constructor than a handyman is to a routeman.

 

A Constructor is more closely related to a Mountaineer, than it is to a Super Constructor......

Edited by antarmike
Link to post
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...