Sid Swallow Ford Prototype? Need help!!

[rob love]

I'm presently working on a Ford prototype that is in the Shilo collection. This truck came from Dr. Gregg, when he donated his collection to Silo back in the 80s. Does anyone know for sure if this is the truck that was shown in Blueprint for Victory, as being rescued by Gary Moonie on page 199?

If so, the book mentions that the truck saw service with the Victoria Rifles. Does anybody have a photo of the truck in service? I would like to find the DND number, as well as any markings that might have been on it.

The truck got a very nice cosmetic restoration at some point, along with a later 8BA engine. I am working on the mechanical restoration of it. The steering box is toast, the suspension is well worn, and I am also giving it a full brake job. Later, depending on time and budget, I should be able to bring some of the other restoration aspects of the truck more up to standard.

Thanks to various dealers like Mac's, the suspension parts will not be a problem. Rock auto.com is the cheapest for the cylinders, so it will get new all around. But the real problem is that steering box. The part numbers on it (what few there are) are not Ford, and the box is different from what I can find in any photos. I suspect that it is from the Ford COE of that period. Most of the parts I can identify are 1940 model parts, so possibly the steering box is too.

I also need to find a set of front spring shackle hangers (the back hangers for the front springs) as these ones were cut for some reason. They have a COE part number on them (W in it) so I guess it will be a challenge to find those as well.

I'll start posting some photos on Monday, if I remember to bring my camera in to work. The wear on many of the parts is quite substantial, but I guess could be expected on a 72 year old truck. I am hoping to get the brakes and suspension as good (or slightly better) than new.

It is kind of an honor to be working on this truck, a chance to work on a prototype does not come along often.

[Rob Fast]

and let me be the first to congradulate you on your new temp. position at the Shilo Museum. You are a wealth of knowledge and you are going to be a huge asset to the Shilo Museum and the Gregg Collection. All the best in this mind bogling collection to sort thru. Cheers Rob Fast

[Bob Phillips]

Hello ! I can tell you where to find a parts truck Ford COE probably about 1940-41 if that is what you need- PM me for details...Bob

[Bob Carriere]

There was one near Arnprior.....

Bob

[rob love]

If anyone is near enough one to take a photo of the steering gear, it would be appreciated. If anyone is actually able to source the spring hangers we need, that would be an incredible help.

The prototype is left hand drive, so that improves the likelihood that the steering box will be available. If one considers the urgency in which the prototype was assembled, it only makes sense that it would use as much off the shelf components as they could get on it.

Seems like the hotrodders these days like to take the COE cabs and stick them on motorhome chassis to make car haulers for their prize vehicles. At the end of the day, they are not using either the steering gear or the front suspension.

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Rob,

Exciting stuff!

check http://bcoy1cpb.pacdat.net/cmp_canad...ry_pattern.htm for pics and background

Hanno

[rob love]

Thanks for that Hanno. I had forgotten about Colin's site. Based on the late part numbers on this truck, I think I would agree with Colin that it is more of a trials or pre-production truck than a prototype.

The project is looking good, and I hope to have it back on it's suspension and wheels by the end of the month if all goes well. It is quite satisfying to see the progress already, when you can devote a solid 8 hour day to the project.

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

I know little about the specifications of the 40 or so '1940 Model' (although arguably they were '39s) Ford 15-cwt trucks...I have yet to find THE file in the National Archives that relates to them specifically. If it exists I should like to find it. What I can say is that so far as I can see the front axle was a Timken front axle quoting Sid Swallow...he also said that they used 'Chevrolet' front axles but Timken supplied Chevy and GMC.., and may be wrong, that there was no Windsor-built 101" wheelbase COE in Canada back in late 1939. I have a photo of a lineup of F15s plus one or two of the '40s...you can compare the 'production' ones with the 'pre-production' '40s.

Again from memory I can say that when the '38 GS trucks were requested to be supplied by the DND, the order was to be split more or less down the middle between Fords and Chevrolets [Contract Demand Stores 689 was issued in early November 1937 to Ford and G.M. of Canada]. In the end Ford of Canada declined to proceed with the order and so GM of Canada stepped in and supplied a second batch of Chevrolet trucks [26 Chevy; 25 Ford though originally 70 total were wanted; despite the assumption that Ford would tender for the supply of the 25 required 15-cwt. Trucks, they evidently officially declined the invitation to treat as they were not able to produce them to the price required. Another reason was that the pilot truck had been assembled in a small area, and there was probably no area to assemble them: March 1938]. In due course a further batch of GS trucks was ordered and I assume that a contract was placed in 1939 with Ford. Being lazy I have lleft the quotation from my notes in full and not edited it:

Dewar then wrote to Carr on 22 September 1938 and requested that he see the approval in principle of the recommendations in connection with the provision of machine-gun carriers and Ford G.S. Trucks. It was presumes that it would now be possible for Carr to go ahead with the Ford Company, but with regards to Canadian Vickers, it was thought that the proposed contract should be carefully reviewed in order to ascertain whether or not it would be economical to purchase separately those article for which Canadian Vickers had not got the exclusive licence for and to arrange for assembly.[1]This was then sent on by Carr for the approval of the Minister. Note that Canadian Vickers Limited had an exclusive licence to produce Vickers’ products in Canada, and that extended to the “Bren Gun Carriers”. Vickers-Armstrongs Limited were based in London, but manufactured a succession of Carden-Loyd tracked and armoured vehicles in a northern English factory, and had done so since The Great War. The company seems to have been keen to promote their armaments to the War Office, and had in the past emphasised the concerns over foreign competition in the British market and stressed the importance of foreign sales.[2] It is clear that it was perceived by the D.N.D. that series production would not be practicable by the Canadian arm, and that production elsewhere, without infringing the solus licence, would be required. It is not revealed whether Ford were being considered at this early stage, but a clue is that on 24 September 1938, Deputy Minister LaFleche wrote on both the Ford truck file H.Q. 38-72-335 and also the Carriers file, 543-V-48, to the Ford Motor Company of Canada. The Minister commented that the D.N.D. was now [at last?] considering the placing of an order with Fords for “a number” of General Service 15-cwt. Trucks. The complete specification for this vehicle was attached for their information. Minor alterations to the body were under consideration and would be forwarded. However, such alterations would not materially affect the production. The number of vehicles to be purchased was to depend largely on the cost thereof. It was therefore requested that Fords quote for 20, 40 and 60 units. Payment would be effected on a cost plus basis, but for the purpose of budgeting the funds then available, an upset price should also be given. On the assumption that progress payments would be effected during the course of the contract, it was desired to know the sum which would be encumbered month by month from the date of placing the order up to the and including 31 March 1939. As Fords were aware, a number of these trucks had been recently purchased from G.M. and for that order the Dominion Rubber Company and Fires-tone Tire & Rubber Company supplied the tyres. In order to increase the sources of supply for this sized tyre, could Fords arrange to bring into production at least one other company and possibly two, depending upon the number of vehicles finally ordered. At that time, deliveries of any of the trucks would not be required until the spring of 1939, but should an order be placed for any quantity up to 60, delivery would be required to be completed not later than 1 June 1939.[3]

Ellis requested on 12 October that Carr send copies of drawings of W.D. wheels, code HA 645 also HA 739, presumably for use in the proposed 1939 trucks.[4]This adherence to War Office specifications was to ensure interchangeability between Empire vehicles in the forthcoming conflict.

No response had been received for quotations for the trucks by 6 February 1939, even though after the 24 September letter, Ellis and Carr had had conversations in respect of the requested production of the 15-cwt. G.S. Trucks. The D.N.D. were anxious to place orders and were concerned at the lack of a response![5] The explanation for the delay was that it was in the course of preparation and Ellis even offered to visit Ottawa on 20 February in order for the D.N.D. to peruse the written rejoinder.[6]Note that Charles Burns, former Director of Contracts, was now Assistant Deputy Minister! This appointment was then postponed, however, and it is not known if there was a subsequent one or whether the requisite letter was merely mailed to Ottawa.

[1] 22 September 1938: Memorandum: Dewar to Carr, File H.Q. 38-72-335/543-V-48, ibid.

[2] April 1927-November 1931: Letters from Charles Bridge, Vickers-Armstrongs Limited, London, to Liddell Hart: Liddell Hart papers, 15/3/66, King’s College, London.

[3] 24 September 1938: Letter: LaFleche to Ford, File H.Q. 38-72-335/543-V-48, ibid.

[4] 12 October 1938: Telegram: Ellis to Carr, File H.Q. 38-72-335, ibid.

[5] 6 February 1939: Letter: LaFleche to Ford, File H.Q. 38-72-335, ibid.

[6] 13 February 1939: Ellis to Burns, File H.Q. 38-72-335, ibid.

[rob love]

David
Great information, thank you. So the term "prototype" really does not apply to these trucks, but rather trials or limited production. Re the 1940 vs 1939 dates, the commercial vehicles were always released a little early before their actual model year.....I suspect that is why the parts may have the 1940 code to them. I'll keep my eyes for a more definite date on anything. Unfortunately, the radiator, which often have very precise dates on them, does not have the usual little plate attached to it. I have my doubts if it is even the correct radiator.

Front axle is indeed a Timken, the name is cast into it. Any parts I have removed from the front axle, like bearings etc, that have part numbers, have all have the Timken name but Ford part numbers. I'll find out soon enough if the standard Ford kingpins will fit this truck.

I'll bring the camera to "work" today and get some photos. I'll quote the term "work" because it is not really work when you enjoy it this much.

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

I cannot dare hope that the original engine is still there....the engine # was the serial # as you know. I might just have the sheet for '39 as well as '40 detailing which month the engine was built in. Also, was it a truck unit or a Mercury unit, as per production CMPs.

These trucks were not 'prototypes' since there really was just the two: the 1937 15-cwt 4x2 one-offs. These wer5e officially referred to as 'Pilot Models' in the papers. The Ford was built in the Pilot Bay at Windsor. This is what we know:

On 25 July, Swallow sent the complete registration form for the truck, and mentioned that the truck was in the paint shop at that time. Delivery would be as soon as possible.[1] The Ford truck was registered as a “FORD”, 1937 manufactured [registered with a 1937 Ontario dealer plate, 856-M] Serial Number C-4800, Engine Number C-4800, with a “box” body, single rear wheels, 4300 lb. empty weight and 7,800 lb. Gross Load. The Manufacturer’s Model Number was “79”. The Series 78 was the 30 h.p. 221 cu. in. capacity L-head V-8, and it assumed that the engine was the 1937 Model truck engine: 1937 30 h.p. car engines/serials started at No. A-1, and the 22 h.p. series D-1. The Chevrolet truck incidentally had serial number 7151107427 Engine number T88,396 and was a Model 16-40S “CHASSIS WITH COWL”, with the “S” suffix denoting “Special” chassis.[2] The “7”indicated 1937 Model Year, and Model Number 1511, the “7427” indicating that it was the 7,426th truck built in Oshawa Plant in 1937 Model Year. This requires explanation: The whole truck was a Model 1640, which was a 1½-ton chassis, 131½-in. wheelbase, and the “1151”indicates a combination of the chassis model 1511, and the model 1540 Cowl, without a cab. This standard chassis was then shortened to suit, but although rated at 15-cwt., or ¾-ton, was based on a chassis suitable for double the weight![3] A note from a Lieutenant R. Henderson confirms my assessment: the chassis and engine were “standard 1½ to 2-ton Chevrolet” with a special War Office pattern G.S. body. The tyres were balloon type all round and were of the War Office type.[4] The Chassis Weight with water, fuel and oil including cab was: Front End: 2,475 lb.; Rear End 1535 lb.; Total 4010 lb. The Chassis Weight as before but with body was 2,500 lb.; 2,260 lb., and 4,760 lb., respectively. Left hand turning circle was 44 feet and the Right hand was 45 feet.[5]Both Ford and Chevrolet trucks were registered in Ontario, by the D.N.D. Mechanical Transport department, 268 Sparks Street, Ottawa. However, as of 5 August, the Ford truck was still in the paint shop and it was expected that it would be complete and available for delivery on 11 August.[6]

[1] 23 July 1937: Swallow to LaFleche, LaFleche to Ford, File H.Q. 38-72-335, ibid.

[2] Per File H.Q. 38-72-334, ibid.

[3] 27 July 1937: Letter: Kirkhope to Colonel E.W. MacDonald, D.N.D., File H.Q. 38-72-334 and –335, ibid.

[4] 3 August 1937: Memorandum: Henderson, for D. of S.&.T. to C.M.T.S., File H.Q. 38-72-334 and –335, ibid.

[5] 18 August 1974: Letter: Armstrong to LaFleche, File H.Q. 38-72-334 and –335, ibid.

[6] 5 August 1937: Ford Service Dept. to D.N.D., File H.Q. 38-72-335, ibid.

There then followed the Ford-Scammell and Chevrolet-Scammell FATs with 6x4 drive, then the 51 Chevroelt 1938 GS trucks, and finally the 40 [?] Ford GS trucks.

[rob love]

Unfortunately, the original engine was replaced by a late 40s/early 50s 8BA flathead with the top side distributer. We hope to change this out in the future, but for now I'll be happy to get the running gear back in shape.

I will get down to the dustbowl and look around. Who knows, maybe when the engine was changed out the old one was dropped into the compound.

[Stew Robertson]

If memory still serves me I think Gary found that truck in Drumheller Sask.
and the details from Sid, that was a proto type and was either 37 or 38 and had alum intake on it and I can't recall but I think it also had aluminum heads
If I can get these damned tapes from the seminar finished the real answers should be there!
I hope all that collection is still not sitting in the rain depot
(Just a little dig)
I am glad that someone finally got their act together and is going to do
somthing with it
Congrats on the best job in the world Rob
Stew

[rob love]

There are still a few unrestored vehicles out in the dustbowl, but anything that is complete is indoors. There are some vehicles on display in the main museum building (some on a rotational basis) and the bulk of the vehicles along with some guns and limbers, and even a light aircraft and the remnants of a glider, are all stored in another building where they are completely out of the elements.

If anyone is passing by on the trans-Canada highway near Brandon, and does not take the 10 minute drive south to view the collection, they are truly missing something. The vehicle collection is now much more accessible even on a drop in basis, but it is still best to call ahead.

BTW, the term rain depot does not apply to Shilo. Sure, we might get some rain in May and June, but by July the grass normally turns brown. Some years we see rain again in October, but no guarantees.

Today we worked on the shifting mechanism on a Lynx armoured car for a bit. There is a bit of wear and damage in the shifter, but I think the problem is solved. The biggest challenge was getting those cotter pins off the linkages in that very tight space.

[Stew Robertson]

By rain depot all I meant was the condensation off the steel roof and the dirt floor No insult intended at least most of the collection ended up inside

[rob love]

Ahhh, I get you. You are talking about the old sheds on the G lines. All the vehicles have been moved to N118, which is the old RCHA maintenance building. Cement floor, insulated walls, and plenty of heat. But as with all vehicle buildings, they are never big enough. As it presently sits, some of the newer armoured artifacts like the M113 and the M577 sit outside tarped.

[rob love]

Here are a couple shots of what I am working with. The truck did have the body work done on it to make it a nice looking cab and chassis. Last year it got torn down as a result of the steering problem, and that was when the worn steering and suspension started to surface, and of course the brakes were shot.

The second photo is the steering box, which I hope will be a normal COE box. Although the box looks similar to the CMP boxes, this one is left hand drive and a lot lighter. The sector shaft is considerably shorter than the ones available from Mac's and other restoration places.

[Lynn Eades]

My un qualified guess is the steering box is a Gemmer engineering manufacture. They did a a lot of steering boxes for Ford and Dodge back then.

[rob love]

Looks like you are right. Googled it and that does seem to fit their design.

[rob love]

Well, here is a bit of an update on the project. I had to remove one of the spring hangers, repair the missing portion of metal, and then re-rivet it to the frame. Tough job when you are working by yourself, but after having riveted upper armor on two different bren carriers, four rivets wasn't going to break me.

Anyway, the vehicle is now back on it's wheels, although I still have a problem with one of the links for the shock absorbers.

While working on it, I came across the serial number on the frame. The number is located between the steering box and the horn, on top of the left frame rail. This one is 1C5987*. Hopefully someone can later add the numbers from the similar trucks at the War museum and at Reynolds in Wetaskiwan. I believe there is also another on Vancouver Island or Victoria.

Anyway, here is a shot of the serial number and a shot of the truck as it sits. I still have to repair that steering box, and when it warms up the body will get a repaint to a more suitable color than the parade square green that it is currently in.

[Walde Libera]

Rob

FYI

Don Gordon owns the Vancouver Island one, he purchased it a few years ago from Gary Moonie. I took pics of this unit when Gary still owned it about 6 years ago; it was in pieces but in very good condition. Don is also a member of Western Command Club, we see him occassionally at events.

Walde

[45jim]

Normal vehicle development follows established engineering principles. Normally, this is: "design" (a small word for a lot of work), a "mock up and/or prototype", "pilot", "initial" production and finally "serial" production.

This vehicle is certainly not a "mock up" or "prototype" (which are usually one-off's) we have all seen photos of the earliest iterations of CMP's which were quickly made up from available parts to develop the actual requirements for the final design. This is not one of those trucks.

In my opinion, this vehicle is a pilot, one of a small test batch of vehicles built to the developed specification. 25 Ford and 25 Chevrolet vehicles is not a sufficient quantity to be considered initial production.

The cab 11 4x2 was the first CMP to reach "initial production" and then changes were made to result in the cab 12 which went into "serial production".

[servicepub (RIP)]

Rob,
What is the status of this truck now?
Clive

[rob love]

No progress from the photo above. Still have not positively ID'd a source for the steering box, but I think I may be able to repair it. The next step is going to be to take all the body portions and repaint them in a more fitting WW2 colour rather than the parade square gloss green it is currently sporting.

Unfortunately, I took on a job at a different portion of the base which has consumed all my time. Fortunately, cutbacks have resulted in that job ending Nov 1st, so I will be able to get some more time at the museum. However, by November, paint season is usually over in this god forsaken province.

[David Dunlop]

Don't they have a nice vintage Herman Nelson heater on base somewhere you could toasty up the paint shop with this Fall, Rob? Not that I want to see you overworked or anything…


David

[servicepub (RIP)]

Originally Posted by 45jim

Normal vehicle development follows established engineering principles. Normally, this is: "design" (a small word for a lot of work), a "mock up and/or prototype", "pilot", "initial" production and finally "serial" production.

This vehicle is certainly not a "mock up" or "prototype" (which are usually one-off's) we have all seen photos of the earliest iterations of CMP's which were quickly made up from available parts to develop the actual requirements for the final design. This is not one of those trucks.

In my opinion, this vehicle is a pilot, one of a small test batch of vehicles built to the developed specification. 25 Ford and 25 Chevrolet vehicles is not a sufficient quantity to be considered initial production.

The cab 11 4x2 was the first CMP to reach "initial production" and then changes were made to result in the cab 12 which went into "serial production".

From examining a fair number of DND documents ranging from 1930 to 1948, dealing with vehcile development, I think that I can state the following;

Design - purely a paper exercise that started with an identified need. Concepts were bandied about and specifications were agreed to.

Pilot - a one-off vehicle, assembled with all the bits and pieces to ensure fit and function. At times the pilot (machinery and signals 3-tonners) was disassembled and re-used as the basis for another project. At other times the pilot was accepted by DND and put into service. The pilot would have all aspects of the vehicle, and its equipment, tested. Pilots are prepared for the client (DND, ec..). If the client is satisfied with the pilot as-is, or will be satisfied following certain changes, then the specs are formally accepted.

Production - To DND, Depatrment of Munitions and Supply, and the auto-makers, anything produced to the approved specs is considered a 'production' vehicle - regardless of quantity.

There was no use of the terms 'prototype' or 'limited production' or 'serial production' in any of the thousands of documents I examined. In the case of the six Signals Lorries developped in late May 1945, the same chassis/body was used for each variant, although the interiors differed. Each variant was the pilot for that specific specification.

A review of the combined inventories taken in December 1939 and February 1940 show a number of pilots in service. However, no one type of vehicle had more than one pilot.

To use the 1938 Chev 15cwt GS or the 1940 Ford 15cwt GS as examples of 'pre-production', and then say that the "cab 11 4x2 was the first CMP to reach "initial production" and then changes were made to result in the cab 12 which went into "serial production" implies that the final CMP design was the goal all along. In fact, the 1938 Chev design was the then-current goal and DND identified a need for 51 vehicles - which they bought. The same applies to the Ford 1940 15cwt. As there was no intent (or money) to exceed these quantities at the time, it was immaterial to either DND or the manufacturers to concern themselves with the terms 'initial production' or 'serial production'.

Clive

[45jim]

Clive you are looking at these definitions from the wrong end. DND did not engineer or develop these vehicles and those definitions are engineering ones, looking for engineering terminology in non-engineering documentation is pointless; just like today, DND couldn't engineer a cam-stick. DND wrote a "Statement of Requirements" for the manufacturers to work from and then issued a "Request for Proposal". The manufacturers would take this away and develop and submit their proposal on how to meet that statement. From that, DND would issue a contract, within that contract there may be a deliverable such as a prototype vehicle. This vehicle is tested and rarely accepted "as is" and may be the first of several developmental vehicles built until a standardized vehicle is accepted for production. This continues today.

The first CMP (37 Ford) was built as an engineering exercise totally funded by Ford, and termed "Ford 15 cwt. 4x2 Prototype", followed by the "General Motors 15. cwt 4x2 Prototype". Neither of these were termed "pilot".

Flipping through Blueprint for Victory this is all covered by Syd Swallow as he talks about the prototypes that were built and tested. There is also a nice photo (on page 20) with a caption "This Ford 15 cwt. 4x2 is either a pilot model or a very early production model. It represents the earliest true Canadian Military Pattern design. The type 2A1 G.S. body is almost identical to that shown on the 1939 Prototype III Ford 15 cwt." Also on page 18, a caption describes the Ford 1939 Prototype III "The CMP design actually evolved over a three year period."

From this statement we can see that there were several prototypes built (at least three Ford variants), then a pilot conceivably with all the changes desired by DND was provided to be accepted before initial production began. This also shows that the 1937 and 1938 prototypes were part of a continuous development program that led to the cab 13 CMP produced later in the war. To suggest that these early vehicles were developed and procured in some sort of vacuum totally separate from later developments is unsupported by any factual data. In fact, the goal WAS the final CMP design.

The engineering designation of "prototype", "pilot", "initial production" (or very early production) and "serial production" are very important to understand how such vehicles are brought from the drawing board to reality. Even in wartime these engineering principles are followed. If you were a WWII Jeep guy you would be all over this.

[servicepub (RIP)]

My comments were made after plowing through six volumes of documents, dated betwen 1933 and 1940, dealing with the mechanization of the Canadian Army.

Syd Swallow was certainly involved but not at a senior level. His boss, Ellis, penned a number of letters and these, along with all of the DND correspondence are there.

When this started in 1937 there was a fear of war on the horizon (one of the reasons why industrial cooperation between Ford and GM was sought) but there was no preconception of ultimately developing the CMP. DND at the time was struggling to get 50-70 15cwt vehicles per year and only desired that WO specs be attained - as much as possible within the confines of DND's own instructions to use as many commercially used parts as possible. In hindsight, one could say that these early vehicles were part of a three year evolution - but in 1937 and 1938 that was not DND's concern.

Your statement "DND wrote a "Statement of Requirements" for the manufacturers to work from and then issued a "Request for Proposal". The manufacturers would take this away and develop and submit their proposal on how to meet that statement. From that, DND would issue a contract, within that contract there may be a deliverable such as a prototype vehicle. This vehicle is tested and rarely accepted "as is" and may be the first of several developmental vehicles built until a standardized vehicle is accepted for production." accurately describes what has happened since the 1950s but is not represenetative of the pre-war and wartime situation.

DND set specifications and then worked closely with both manufacturers concurrently in order to come up with a single design accepteable to DND. Indeed, the documents show that GM and Ford communicated with each other. While the pilots were being built DND modified the specs to adress the individual needs of the manufacturers, including slightly different body sizes.

A single pilot from each firm was tested at Petawawa and the contract was let on the basis of the pilots PLUS any suggested changes put forward by DND. In the case of the Ford it was sloppy steering and for the GM it was the leaf-springs. However, no additional vehicles were built to 'prove' these changes.

DND intended to split the contract for the 1938 purchase of 52 15cwt GS trucks into two equal purchases of 26 per vendor - even though the prices differed. In fact the price paid was the cost of parts and labour plus 10% as a fixed profit. Only Ford's surprising decision to not tender caused the entire contract to go to GM. To encourage Ford to get involved (read 'experienced') they directed the follow-on contract solely to Ford.

Insofar as the body is concerned, although the 1938 body is similar to the 2A1 it is only because they both come from the same British drawings. At the time the term 2A1 was unknown as the system of body identification was only developed with the establishment of the Steel Body Manufacturer's Assocation, a group established by DND to find efficiencies in body production and to relieve the auto manufacturers from this.

From David Hayward's research Sidney [S.E.] Swallow of Ford’s Service Department wrote to LaFleche in early April suggesting that the body for the pilot models from both sources should have a body made by the same source in view of the desired standardisation of bodies. Ford had been asked to withhold from ordering their body until they received the drawings from Ottawa and further instructions . This is a further example of the unique and unprecedented situation whereby two rival companies some distance apart, were requested to, and did, work in tandem. The standard G.S. [General Service] body design was approved on 9 April 1937, and Specification No. 352-C was allocated, whilst the Drawings were given the code D.D. (V) 352-C. Woodwork was to be of thoroughly seasoned ash and white oak, free from knots, saps, shakes, wavy edges and defects. Metal parts were to be of high quality forged steel, free from defects. All bolts and nuts were to be of steel. The body was to have side and tailboards, duly hinged. Carriage bolts were to be used when assembling wooden components, though screws could be used when it was wood-to-wood. Side and tailboards were to be of 1-in. planed white ash,-tongued and grooved where applicable and finished with a “V” joint outside. The floor was to be of 1¼ in. planed white oak with plain butt joints. The spacing of the longitudinal runners on the body was not specified but was to be in accordance with the width of the chassis frame for which the body was intended. The assembled body was to be painted throughout in Service Green No.22 “Dulux” including interior, under-surfaces and hardware. A plate with the name of the manufacturer, date of completion and reference number was to be engraved or stamped on it, and attached to the left lower corner of the body. After completion and inspection, the detailed drawings and specifications were to be sent to the D.N.D. in connection with any future production.

In fact, DND allowed a variation in that quality ash was unobtainable in Canada and they suggested that oak should be an acceptable substitute. DND agreed.

In any event, after studying thousands of pages, there is not one single hint that these contracts were part of an intentional "continuous development program".

Clive

[servicepub (RIP)]

As a follow on to my above post, and one that may get me shot. Bill Gregg did some ground-breaking work but some of his conclusions may have been limited by the information available to him.

In his ground-breaking book "Blueprint for Victory" he shows (images 3-10) a Ford 15cwt which he calls "Prototype I". This is actually the pilot model submitted to DND in 1937 for the 1938 purchase of 52 vehicles. I find it difficult to accept "Prototype I" as it implies that there were other prototypes prior to the purchase, when there weren't. This 'pilot' was paid for, and kept, by DND and the truck was given DND number 37-1-1. The GM pilot was 37-1-2.

Bill also shows (image 25) a truck which he calls a prototype of 1939 when this is one of the 52 15cwt GS trucks contracted for by DND in 1938. This example is shown approx 1940 at the Cdn Armoured Fighting Vehicle School.

Clive

[David Dunlop]

No need to dig out your body armour. Bill Gregg did some great work that is a benefit to us all, and he did it at a time when all of Canada's production efforts prior to and during World War Two, had largely been forgotten and were rapidly slipping away from us. He got us thinking and asking questions in the ongoing quest for answers about this amazing time in Canadian history.

It is hard sometimes for us to shake ourselves free from the world we know today and are comfortable with, and try to understand that the world of the 30's, or 40's or 50's was a different place, functioning in a different way that worked very well.

Bill Gregg's real legacy is the framework of information he was able to assemble. He would have been the first to admit it was not a complete, fully fleshed out product and he would be thrilled to see how much more information we have discovered and been able to add to his baseline. Who knows where it will lead in the future and what gems of discovery are yet to be found, not just here in Canada, but Australia, New Zealand, and anywhere else on the globe where CMP's have left there tracks.

David

[DK Simpson]

Hey Rob - Are you still working on the above vehicle? Don and I have the one that we bought pieces of from Gary Moonie virtually up and running. #IC-5984. Don did an amazing job of repairing and putting all the hand cut body parts back together, mostly with the original wing nuts rather than bolts, engine is fully rebuilt, (seems to run well with 100 yards on it - ha ha ), most body parts refurbished, all new brake lines, 6 volt wiring harness, switches and gauges rejuvenated by Sid Moorehouse here in Victoria, new rear wooden box made with all the original hardware. Don made a heavy duty jig and then used an anchor chain link (for the curve) to straighten out and then hand hammer both of the folded over and ruined rear fenders. Front bumper all redone to the correct curve by Pat Houle and his wonder press.
We are having problems with the clutch linkage and wondered if you had a picture of yours. The clutch will not dis-engage and the linkage bent!!!!! Cannot find another one.
Let us know how you are doing
Cheers Katrinka and Don

Picture of "Papa Bud"