Two more wrecks in my yard

[Phill]

Brought 2 wrecks home today. I will use the armor off one to help complete my MK2. It appears to have hull # 777 and has some features I'm not sure about, a folding piece of armor, a screen on the engine cover, an idler latch of some sort, rubber pads on the side armor, and a piece of tin fastened to the right rear fender. Anyone know what version of carrier this was?

Will post some pictures of the second wreck hull #8293c later. Phil

[Phill]

More pics...

[rob love]

It is an early standard mk1. You likely won't find the serial numbers in the usual place on the front armor because it would have been on a large data plate bolted over the front right fender. It also would have had the older style air cleaner mounted under the engine cover instead of on the rear armor.
The tin piece on the rear right is to hold the ration box. The ratchet type idler adjusters were a feature of the early carrier. Also notable are the rubber firing rests, which were later replaced by wood when rubber became more dear.

[RichardT10829]

at risk of jumping the gun again on this topic but.... if i understand your post correctly please dont cut the armour off if you are thinking of doing that, i have just sent full armour schematics over to Canada to Doug Lavoie you could use them to make some more infact i would be interested in that tub if you were to sell it

Rich

[pzrwest]

Phil are you the guy that bought the carrier from Ross in Bancroft? Ross bought it from my friend Jack from Gilmor. Jack thought his carrier was a Windsor but haveing tiller bars makes it a T16 I was told

[RichardT10829]

Serial number "777" on the list i have corresponds to a carrier used by the 8th Recce Battalion "CT 42895" Early Mk1 made by Ford Canada contract CDLV73 quantity 783 units. this carrier fitted with F.M 41 F.D. Track type ? if i read the lists correctly
shame there is no track left on it to see if it is the same carrier.

cheers

Richie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8th_Rec...ian_Hussars%29

[Phill]

I got these two units from Dan McCaw of Coe Hill, not far from Bancroft. Now I'm not sure what to do. I thought my carrier would be worth more with some original armor on it and it would be a simple transfer, once I got the knack of working with rivets. I was hoping to sell the hull once I got the armor off and recover something for it. Everything is there but the left side armor.

Doug may get those cut by Lasertech.

Interesting about the early air breather, maybe not as hard to find as the later one. Phil

[rob love]

I personally prefer the earlier mk1 over the refined mk2. The kit stowage on a mk1 is great; there is a bracket and a place for everything.

The mk1 armor will not be exactly the same as the mk2 carrier. Why not re-rivit a replica armor plate to the one side of the mk1 hull, sandblast and paint the bare hull, then start transferring the running gear etc from the mk2 to the mk1? There will be some minor differences like the oil filter, but nothing insurmountable.

The early aircleaners are far more difficult to find than the later style. The early one was only used on the first few thousand, and as they failed were retrofitted with the later style. I have only seen remnants of these, never a complete one.

[RichardT10829]

deffo save the Mk1 hull in my opinion if it is a carrier from the above mentioned unit just look where they went !!!! this thing potentially has been around the globe no point making more chopped up hulls the complete mk1 would be worth more upon sale too IMHO making Mk2 armour is something Martyn can explain in and out as he has done a fantastic job of it himself..... like i say i would buy the mk1 tub off you if it meant saving it being dissmantled. i would litterally kill to get my hands on a mk1 tub like that ! it kills me working on mine the frustration of it being butchered in the first place. the schematics i have given Doug have the Mk1 type gunners side armour (with drop down triangle) but i can get my hands on the solid Mk2 of this plate if needed. the plates are not hard to do and i have figured out how to replicate the marks associated with the hardening process of the plate.

i would love to be in your position this is a cause for celebration THREE CARRIERS !!!!!

[kevin powles]

Hi, Nice find, In your third photo, those two round clips on the rear compartment deck, left hand side, one clip bigger than the other, does anyone know what they are for?.

[Lynn Eades]

They are for the jacking bar. I too would be keen to buy the folding armour, hinges, locking handle etc.

[kevin powles]

hi, thanks, has anyone got a picture of the jack bar, is this for the track jack or the main lifting jack?.

kevin.

[greg anderson (RIP)]

I had seen your hull 777 at Dans and if I did not have a carrier already I would have seriously considered restoring it -I believe the main problem was the missing left armor which I think could be replaced rather easily using laser cut steel plate and you would have a fairly complete original hull-in my opinion this is the way to go ---Greg at Bancroft

[RichardT10829]

i have CAD DXF's for the side armour i can email them to you if need be, its one of the easiest bits to do

[Phill]

I think I should reconsider my plans..... she's going to need a new floor too..... It's a little thin in places. You chaps are talking me into it. I will get some close-up pictures of a couple of unusual features I found today.

Here are some pictures of the the other hull. It has a lot of conduit in it. We are quite sure the hull # is 8193c. The small c is quite clear and the #1 has definitely been stamped over a 2. I can get a better picture with another camera if needed, in case I got this wrong.

I also bought her engine, from Dan and a few bogies wheels, also a radiator. I also got a remote oil filter but he was not sure what it should look like and neither was I. It looks like the oil filter on a CMP I looked at yesterday. Phil

[Phill]

More pictures.

[barriefield-brian]

WoW!! Would love to have that one as my grandfather was in the 8th recce. Cheers Brian

[RichardT10829]

the floor is only made from 3 - 5mm plate beleive it or not so would not be an expensive job... and no one would be the wiser if it was replaced if you look on some of the castings you will get dates ie the gear lever casting that mounts to the floor, this item would rarely be changed during the carriers life the code may start with FMco then a two digit number ie on mine it is FMco42 (made by ford motor co 1942) it may assist with a rough date for the hull. looking at the front idler setup you have something a bit more special as they were changed out to the type i have (and most other people) the idlers you have on that hull were used on the Bren carriers and were only ever used on a small number of universal carriers (to use up the stocks) infact you may find a lot of the components within have different part numbers, or numbers which relate to being used in Brens rather than Univesal.......... have i sold you yet ?

the side armour will be a sinch to do in the scheme of things then you will have a majority genuine hull rather than a Mk2 with incorrect armour from a mk1 on Bogeys and wheels etc i have found are fairly available still so you could either borrow them from the remains of the Mk2 or preserve the mk2 (for later restoration wink wink) then collect bits for this rare Mk1

[Lynn Eades]

There is no doubt that this is an early U.C. I would like to hear a bit from the history guys. According to Nigel Watsons book, there was a batch of 300 U.C's built by Nuffield, Hull numbers T8120 to T8419. May be this was sent to Canada for trials etc. Maybe this is the reason why it has a "C" suffix.
Richard. dating by part number has its draw backs. 1942 was the height of manufacturing for many military vehicles. the most Jeeps, the most Dodges, and who knows what in carriers. I would put this carrier as 1940 or 1941. When did production start in Canada? It was already up and running in early 41. Was this carrier built in Canada or the U.K?

[RichardT10829]

if i read the lists correctly by tying up serial 777 to its ct number (CT 42895) it was made by Ford Canada, now with that in mind did Canada ever produce the earlier Bren ? According to the Book Canada were asked to produce Carriers from June 1939 however thanks to British Beurocracy (sorry guys) the first carriers were not made until circa 19th June 1940 and these initial ones were made with British componentry fitted with the lucas lamps etc etc. So potentially this carrier could have been from the first batches of Mk1* made by canada ? on page 110 there is a photo of a carrier CT43054 (from same batch as CT42895) used by 7th Recce Bat and the hull has all the same features as serial 777, photo is taken on tour in france

on Page 114 and 115 of Carrier book Vol 1 there are some production pictures of early Canadian Mk1s I am still reading through for references to the rubber gun rests rather than the wooden ones.

i totally agree with regards to the numbering on casts my thoughts being that unless the gear lever housing was changed the date could potentially point out that the hull was made no earlier than that on the housing, but like everything with these beasts that I have learnt, nothing is final or foolproof

[RichCam]

Good Morning, I'm new to the forum. My name is Richard and I represent a team of volunteers that is restoring a Mk II carrier for the Huntsville Legion. We have obtained a 2nd carrier for parts and I have attached some pictures of it. I need to know where I can find the hull identification numbers for both vehicles. We would like to sell or trade components from the 2nd carrier for our Legion carrier. Those that are interested in parts, please feel free to contact me through MLU or at compal@vianet.ca
Regards, Richard Hatkoski

[RichardT10829]

phill the running gear from this would do your mk1 tub number is located on the rearmost gunners side angle bar the one that holds the rear armour in place normally between the first two rivets that hold the angle bar onto the track guard.

[Lynn Eades]

The jacking bar goes into the cross tube, for lifting the side of the carrier on a jack. To make it less boring, here are pictures.Note this may be for an Australian carrier. Much the same but different diameters. My cross tube is a shortened LP2 tube, in my English A.O.P.

[Phill]

Thanks everyone for the all the information. I checked yesterday and the shifter housing is missing. I did get 2 more pictures inside #777. Phil

[RichardT10829]

is that the smoke discharger handle mount on the first pic Lynn ? if so this carrier has everything ha ha ha

[Lynn Eades]

Richard H.???????? Post no. 23 is the jacking bar.
Phill, you early production carrier is of Canadian manufacture. I revisited your photos.
Can someone identify the brackets for me in the last photo Phill has posted.

[Jordan Baker]

Lynn

They are left to right, the smoke launcher cable holder. That bike style cable would fit in the slot in the tube then its out of the way for the radio and less chance of getting snagged on other stuff. The next one is what the smoke launcher handle attaches too. Its flat steel in the shape of a "T" with a tube welded on the end. The next one is the bracket for the flare gun holster and grease gun hose. On the back of the flare holster there is a wide strap and it slides over the bracket. There is also a spot for a grease nipple to thread on. Obviously there is nothing to grease there except the back of your blouse, but the hose from the grease gun hooks onto it and then goes down the rear wall under the seat to the grease gun in its bracket.

[Jordan Baker]

Here are some more pictures of the carrier from a couple of years ago.

[Lynn Eades]

Thanks for the detailed info. I'm always learning.
Jordan, thats an English clutch pedal(with welded on strips of non skid) in your 2nd photo. Have you a picture showing the bed rails of this carrier? This would confirm its origin. (what about you Phill?)
I make the assumption that the clutch pedal is English, because they are the type usually seen in the hulls with the sharp edged (channel) bed rails, as opposed to the chequer plate type pedals seen in the Canadian hulls with the rounded (roll formed?) bed rails. Another difference between the two, is the lock out lever for reverse on the gear stick. one is a short rounded alloy casting, and the other is a longer skinny steel lever.
another question I often have often wondered about, is the manufacturing differences, between the various British manufacturers.
Phill. Please ignore my statement that your early production carrier is of Canadian manufacture. I was looking at the photos of your later(missing front armour) one.

[Lynn Eades]

In Nigel Watsons book (vol.1) there is a listing for a serial no.777, which is down as registration number CT42895 (the number painted on it)This is about the 26th, from a batch of 783 Universal Mark I*'s built in Canada.
The only previous batch being of 300. So IF! I am reading this correctly, then this might well be the 326th Carrier built in Canada. Maybe if Nigel is following this, he might like to varify (or not) my conclusion