MK-I* (Canada) production numbers change over to MK-II*

[Michael R.]

Milestone images from Ford Canada showing the production of the Universal Carrier, MK-I* from 12 January, 1943 through 28 January, 1944.
I believe the last serial number for a MK-I* series is about 24,005. The 24,000 milestone image shows the MK-II* was in production on 3rd March, 1944.


Milestone 12,000 image update (11 Dec 13) to show rail cars transporting assembled MK-I* hulls from Dominion Bridge Company, then at Sandwich, Ontario, a few miles from Ford Plant 4 (also known as "Ensite") where the Universal Carriers were assembled.

Does anyone know where the production numbers are taken from? Do they relate to the lower hull, upper hull or serial number?


References: Bill Gregg, Profile No. 4, Carrier, Universal MKI* (Canadian)
Michael Gladstone White, Faces of Ford, The Windsor Years.

[Jordan Baker]

Check out the middle east water can rack on the back of the carrier in the first picture. I wonder if this carrier would look similar on the inside to that one from South Africa that was featured earlier this year

[RichardT10829]

1943, loads of carriers would have been sent out to North Africa, they had taken Tunisia back, and were preparing for operation Husky with a view to using Sicily as a stepping stone for the planned landings at Salerno (Op Avalanche) So it would make sense to have the ME stowage installed at factory level. I love the line of carrier hulls in that shot on what I assume is a conveyor belt.

[Bruce Parker (RIP)]

Originally Posted by RichardT10829

1943, loads of carriers would have been sent out to North Africa, they had taken Tunisia back, and were preparing for operation Husky with a view to using Sicily as a stepping stone for the planned landings at Salerno (Op Avalanche) So it would make sense to have the ME stowage installed at factory level. I love the line of carrier hulls in that shot on what I assume is a conveyor belt.

The conveyor belt looks like a train to me. What is also interesting is that those hulls look complete and shipped right from the factory that made them. All Ford had to do is put in the engine, rad, axle and wheels, yet they have the nerve to say they built them!!

[Jordan Baker]

Bruce, interesting point about getting a complete hull minus drive systems. I guess it would be no different then your Fox. The bodies were all built by Hamilton Bridge in Hamilton then shipped by rail to the GM plant in Oshawa.

Sorry completely missed your original question for this post. I'm thinking the production #'s were based on the serial numbers. I have no proof, just my opinion.

[rob love]

The complete hulls also through away the old theory that the powertrain was added to lower hulls, then the upper armour was added, resulting in the difference between the serial, hull and division plate numbers. One could almost wonder why the three different numbers.

[Roddy de Normann]

Michael -

Did Ford (Canada) keep details the contracts issued to them ? I would be v interested to know to whom their vehicles went...

Roddy

[Michael R.]

Nigel Watson, in his publication: Universal Carriers, Volume One may be the best source for that information.