MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > MILITARY VEHICLES > The Armour Forum

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 13-10-05, 04:14
Roger Condron Roger Condron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: SLC Utah USA
Posts: 5
Default fox info needed

We just recieved a Fox and an Otter for our ww2 collection, apx 160 pieces mostly US. I am going to restore it but I don't know much about them. The car is fairly complete but needs the outside storage boxs and some misc. interior parts. There is a triangle about 2 inches wide welded on the front plate, any ideas? What I realy need is a paint color and code for it.
ser #2844609293 built in April 23, 1942, Hamilton Bridge model#ac contract # 7427, serial#3A, paint OA76
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 13-10-05, 04:20
Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP)'s Avatar
Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP) Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP) is offline
former OC MLU, AKA 'Jif' - sadly no longer with us
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 5,400
Default

Roger, where the hell did they come from??!! Hell, we have hardly any up here, and they were MADE here! Info please sir....
__________________
SUNRAY SENDS AND ENDS
:remember :support
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 13-10-05, 13:22
Alex Blair (RIP) Alex Blair (RIP) is offline
"Mr. Manual", sadly no longer with us
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa ,Canada
Posts: 2,916
Default Re: fox info needed

Quote:
Originally posted by Roger Condron
We just recieved a Fox and an Otter for our ww2 collection, apx 160 pieces mostly US. I am going to restore it but I don't know much about them. The car is fairly complete but needs the outside storage boxs and some misc. interior parts. There is a triangle about 2 inches wide welded on the front plate, any ideas? What I realy need is a paint color and code for it.
ser #2844609293 built in April 23, 1942, Hamilton Bridge model#ac contract # 7427, serial#3A, paint OA76
Hi Roger..
Welcome abord..
Wow!!!
Sounds like you have some great iron..Starting with the Fox and the OTTer..
I have manuals available for lots of Military vehic;les,some very rare ones..
Let me know off line if you need manuals..


#14: 200 pages GENERAL MOTORS CANADA, ILLUST. PARTS LIST. ARMOURED CAR, CANADIAN, GM Mark 1 (Fox 1) MOD. A.C. Chassis 8446 (Feb.'43)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#15: 290 pages NEW CAR, ARMOURED, CANADIAN GM Mark 1. (Fox) Operation, Maintenance and Repair. (Feb.'43)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#16: 168 pages CRAC-02 GM CANADA, ILLUST. PARTS LIST, CAR, LIGHT RECONNAISSANCE, CANADIAN, Mark 1 (Otter 1), Mod. RAC Chassis 8447 (Jan.'43)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#17: 320 pages. NEW RAC-C1, LIGHT RECON CANADIAN CMP GM Mark I, II (R.A.C.) Operation, Maintenance and Repair.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.dana-nield.com/d3/blair/H...8/Default.aspx

Just click on the "Manuals" header for list of manuals.

Post some pix on MLU forum..
We all want to see what you have..
__________________
Alex Blair
:remember :support :drunk:
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 13-10-05, 13:33
Bruce Parker (RIP) Bruce Parker (RIP) is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,606
Default Contact me if you like

I, and a few other gentlemen I know, have a little information on these.

The triangle on the front plate appears on all 4 of the known Fox that remained in Canada (the 5th was repatriated recently). One even had the words "THIN ROOF HULL" welded into the side of the turret. I think these marks relate to hulls which failed a pentration or other test. These were marked so nobody would mistake them and send them into combat. It is not an A Squardron mark despite what is painted on front of the Shilo Fox (below).

I have the fenders and some of the bins that came off my Fox. They are poor but would provide a good pattern. They're available if you want them.

Bruce
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 13-10-05, 13:35
Bruce Parker (RIP) Bruce Parker (RIP) is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,606
Default Our national treasure:

The Canadian War Museum Fox. Same triangle on the front.
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 13-10-05, 13:36
Bruce Parker (RIP) Bruce Parker (RIP) is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,606
Default What the heck

Canadian War Museum Otter:
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 13-10-05, 22:56
charlie fitton's Avatar
charlie fitton charlie fitton is offline
HLIofC - Normandy Pl
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Maryhill Ontario
Posts: 942
Default FOX

I'm with Bruce on the triangle - I heard that it's not BP steel at all - they were made for training.
__________________
Charles Fitton
Maryhill On.,
Canada

too many carriers
too many rovers
not enough time.
(and now a BSA...)
(and now a Triumph TRW...)
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 14-10-05, 00:59
Bruce Parker (RIP) Bruce Parker (RIP) is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,606
Default It's armoured!!

Charlie, I can attest to the fact my Fox (with a triangle) is armoured. It will shred a drill bit or any other device you set to work on it.

Just below the triangle is a small dimple that looks like the beginning of a torch cut. I think this was part of a test to determine if the armour was acceptable. They would heat a section for a period of time, and if it melted or softened too much, it was rejected. I can't say if this was done to the plate before it was assembled into a hull (smart) or after (bumb). Mine looks like it stated to cut, so think it failed and got the triangle.

A similar test was done on cariers. In several places you'll find an oval about the size of a quarter. In the middle is a 1/8" depression. This was where they heated and then stuck a rod in. If it didn't go through, the armour passed.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 14-10-05, 12:08
Bob Moseley (RIP)'s Avatar
Bob Moseley (RIP) Bob Moseley (RIP) is offline
RIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,620
Default Dimples In Armour

Hi all
My understanding is that here in Australia a standard armour test was to fire a .303 into it and if it failed to penetrate it was deemed OK. I have seen many Carriers with these dimples. It would be interesting to know if this was fact or another urban legend.
Bob
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 14-10-05, 14:06
Bruce Parker (RIP) Bruce Parker (RIP) is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,606
Default Carrier urban legends?

It can't be. I heard this story from a friend who knew somebody who's father worked in the plant where they did this testing.

Actually, I did speak with an old guy who worked in the place where they straightened the armour for carriers creating all those 1" dash marks.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 14-10-05, 23:07
rob love rob love is offline
carrier mech
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
Posts: 7,517
Default

That 303 rumour was always floating around here, but I believe it is not likely. The dimples on my side armour are so evenly spaced that I thought it was part of the punching or straightening process. I guess I should try a .303 on a scrap piece of armour and see what it would really do.

I took a carrier front armour to a machine gun shoot a few years back. The only gun that would penetrate the front armour was the .55 boyes, and there was one small arms bullet (likely an AK round) which passes through near an edge. I suspect that the plates were torch cut and this may have weakened the first 1/2" of the armour.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 14-10-05, 23:29
David_Hayward (RIP)'s Avatar
David_Hayward (RIP) David_Hayward (RIP) is offline
former Resident Historian
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The New Forest, England
Posts: 3,841
Default DATA PLATES

Thanks for the Otter serial # data which I have added to my Canadian Chevrolet database. Is there a photo available of the GM of Canada plate with serial/engine number on it please as I have never seen one myself.

The Canadian contract I think is [C.D.]L.V. 7421. Of course the British Ministry of Supply acquired a large number.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 15-10-05, 02:53
Roger Condron Roger Condron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: SLC Utah USA
Posts: 5
Default fox, otter info

thanks for the responce
the otter ser # is 2844714611. I pulled the fox in the shop today and removed the turret (it was not fastened down). I only have a parts book to look at so I think I need the upper bearing race,the brass segments and the retaining clips for it. also a few parts for the hand crank system. I am also in need of a couple of door key/handles for the fox and the otter.any one with extra parts please contact me if you would please.
I would like to know how many of each were made and how many are known to exist today
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 15-10-05, 03:56
Bruce Parker (RIP) Bruce Parker (RIP) is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,606
Default Otters and Fox

(can't have one without the other, right James-the-Lucky?)

Roger, there were 1761 Otters and 1506 Fox built. For both, the hulls were built by Hamilton Bridge (Hamilton, Ontario) and the chassis by General Motors of Canada in Oshawa, Ontario.

To the best of my knowledge, there are (after your acquisition) 4 Fox and 3 Otters remaining in Canada. Your new vehicles are the only ones in the United States I believe (please correct me?).

David, the infomation on this Fox is:

AC-Mk 1
Hull 003A
2844600923
Engine 27082253
LV. 1557
July 12/43
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 15-10-05, 08:52
David_Hayward (RIP)'s Avatar
David_Hayward (RIP) David_Hayward (RIP) is offline
former Resident Historian
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The New Forest, England
Posts: 3,841
Default Thanks!

Quote:
The Canadian contract I think is [C.D.]L.V. 7421. Of course the British Ministry of Supply acquired a large number.
I ralised this morning that the contract related to the Hamilton Bridge hull, and I also referred to 'Oter' and not 'Fox'...too many man-weeks spent on a new commercial vehicle book that has dented my brain. Apologies!

These are my known Fox contracts:

C.D.L.V. 125
C.D.L.V. 227
C.D.L.V. 539
C.D.L.V. 640
C.D.L.V. 1557
C.D.L.V. 472
UK: S/M 1077
Aust.:
278 CA 652 including Rhinos

and Otter contracts:

C.D.L.V. 127
C.D.L.V. 225
C.D.L.V. 556
C.D.L.V. 1594
C.D.L.V. 7421/
U.K.: S/M – 2424 including CAPLADs



BRITISH CONTRACTS:

CENSUS NUMBER F ? >? SM 1077 FOX 1 ARMOURED CAR 1942-3

CENSUS NUMBER F 210280 > E.g. F 210158 SM 2424 OTTER 1 RECONNAISANCE CAR 1942

Last edited by David_Hayward (RIP); 15-10-05 at 18:52.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 15-10-05, 14:57
Bruce Parker (RIP) Bruce Parker (RIP) is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,606
Default Serial numbers

David:

Here is the data plate information on my toy:

Chassis Model AC-1 (note Roger Condron's says "AC.MK 1")

HULL 2A (Roger's is a "HULL 003A". Why? Fire suppression? Turret ring differences?, Desert equipment? Bin replaced by spare tire on the right side? No provision for the Lakeman mount? And the most recently discovered difference, brass vs. cast iron gun mounts?)

Chassis Serial 2844601635

Engine Serial 27051136

Order No. LV. 1557

Date of Mfg. OCT. 8/43

Census number C.F. 160464

The Hamilton Bridge Company Ltd. plate says its a Model AC, Contract 7472, Serial 2A (which matches the "HULL 2A" on the General Motor's plate), and Paint OA76 which must refer to Khaki No.3 on the outside and/or white on the inside.

My Fox has the later bolted turret ring, no fire suppression, is desert equipped, and has brass MG mounts...oh, and that pesky triangle.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 15-10-05, 18:50
David_Hayward (RIP)'s Avatar
David_Hayward (RIP) David_Hayward (RIP) is offline
former Resident Historian
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The New Forest, England
Posts: 3,841
Default Thanks again!

Thank you...it seems that the Fox was 'AC-1' or 'AC Mk1', etc. and the Otter 'RAC-1' etc. although query if there were also plates or whatever with 'RAC Mk 1'?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 15-10-05, 18:57
David_Hayward (RIP)'s Avatar
David_Hayward (RIP) David_Hayward (RIP) is offline
former Resident Historian
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The New Forest, England
Posts: 3,841
Default How many were built?

I have been asked how many were built. This is my data so far:

FOX: 1,506 BUILT 1942/3
RHINO:
Quote:
Mike Cecil's excellent book suggests that 251 Model 8446 chassis were delivered to Australia. Not included were 131 chassis shipped aboard the SS Port Montreal which was sunk by enemy action enroute to Australia.
OTTER: 1,761
CAPLADS: 2

STAGHOUND TE17 SERIES: 3,801?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 15-10-05, 19:45
James Gosling James Gosling is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Kent, England
Posts: 255
Default

David
Here is some more data for the records.
My Otter has census number CM 4647062, the Chassis is a donor from another Otter serial 2844709330. Sorry all the rest of the data plates are long gone.

Now for the Fox
Chassis serial 3844617385

Engine serial 270323353

Order LV.1557

Date Dec 2/43

Contract 7427

Paint AO76

Hull 1112

I hope this helps.
James
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 18-10-05, 02:13
Bruce Parker (RIP) Bruce Parker (RIP) is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,606
Default Way back then...

Otter, Fox, MB's and a C8 11 cab in the Elliot Bros. yard, 1978. Not for sale, but the price on the armour was $3000 each.
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 18-10-05, 02:16
Bruce Parker (RIP) Bruce Parker (RIP) is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,606
Default

My return visit (with $3000 in hand) in 1980 found them in much the same shape, but up to $5000 each. Otter 56-203 (28444714637)
Attached Thumbnails
56-203 in 1980.jpg  
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 18-10-05, 02:20
Bruce Parker (RIP) Bruce Parker (RIP) is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,606
Default and Fox

Fox 68-971 (28446609293) with the welded "THIN ROOF HULL" on the turret. Still in the yard were Fox 69-579 (2844601635), Fox 53-595 (2844616009) and Otter 56-204 (2844714611). Ask me how I know?
Attached Thumbnails
1980 picture thin roof hull.jpg  
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 18-10-05, 02:30
Bruce Parker (RIP) Bruce Parker (RIP) is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,606
Default Why?

Because somewhere in the office of the Elliot Bros. was this shipping slip from the Crown Assets Disposal Corporation. In mid January 1958, 5 Canadian armoured cars made their way from Haggersville in South Western Ontario to a wrecking yard near Port Hope. Two (Otter 2844714611 and Fox 28444609293) were selected by Don and George Elliot for fixing up. Soon thereafter, the remaining Otter was traded to a private owner in Quebec for a DUKW. Fox 2844601635 was bought by Les Fisher (and later me for a little more that $5000). Just recently, Dirk Leegwater bought Fox 28444616009 which he recently sold.


(Edited by moderator: click on image for a large size scan)
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 18-10-05, 02:37
Bruce Parker (RIP) Bruce Parker (RIP) is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,606
Default Present

Which brings me to the present. With the kind permission of Roger Condron, who is now in posession of the last Elliot Fox and Otter, here is a picture of Fox 284469293 (the same one in the black and white 1978 picture) in it's new home in Utah.
Attached Thumbnails
misc1 052.jpg  
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 18-10-05, 08:58
David_Hayward (RIP)'s Avatar
David_Hayward (RIP) David_Hayward (RIP) is offline
former Resident Historian
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The New Forest, England
Posts: 3,841
Default 1943?

James. thanks for the data..is that '1943 Model' prefix correct please as I have yet to find any with the '3' prefix?
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 18-10-05, 15:33
centurion centurion is offline
Historian
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Welsh Marches
Posts: 136
Default Re: Dimples In Armour

Quote:
Originally posted by Bob Moseley
Hi all
My understanding is that here in Australia a standard armour test was to fire a .303 into it and if it failed to penetrate it was deemed OK. I have seen many Carriers with these dimples. It would be interesting to know if this was fact or another urban legend.
Bob
Many urban myths have a little bit of real grit around which they accreted. Proofing armoured vehicles by firing a 303 at them was certainly used during WW1 in the UK. There is a good photograph in 'War Cars' by David Fletcher (HMSO) of a pair of Peerless AA armoured lorries being subjected to just such a test on a firing range. If and when this approach was replaced by more scientific methods it would be interesting to find out. I could imagine it being appled to some of the improvised AFCs of WW2 but would have thought something more calibratable would have been applied to factory built vehicles.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 18-10-05, 21:48
Richard Farrant's Avatar
Richard Farrant Richard Farrant is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Kent, England
Posts: 3,634
Default Re: Re: Dimples In Armour

Quote:
Originally posted by centurion
Proofing armoured vehicles by firing a 303 at them was certainly used during WW1 in the UK.

If and when this approach was replaced by more scientific methods it would be interesting to find out. I could imagine it being appled to some of the improvised AFCs of WW2 but would have thought something more calibratable would have been applied to factory built vehicles.
I would say the firing of a rifle at a hull in WW2 to test it is probably a myth. At present I am working on a 1941 Daimler Scout Car hull, and along with all the others that I have restored before, there is evidence on most of the panels that make up the hull, of hardness tests carried out. This would be the Brinell test. A small area, about half inch square, is ground flat and using a special jig, a small spherical indentation is made, the force of which is known. Measuring the depth of indent, this is why the surface is ground first, to get an accurate measurement, a calculation can be made and the armour plate can be checked for its hardness on the Brinell scale. As can be seen, firing a rifle at the hull, only tests that particular area and even then can not accurately measure the hardness. I am certain these tests are done before welding the hull panels together. It is a bit late after you have built the hull, to find a "soft" panel in it!

Richard
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 18-10-05, 23:20
Hanno Spoelstra's Avatar
Hanno Spoelstra Hanno Spoelstra is offline
MLU Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 14,400
Default Re: fox, otter info

Quote:
Originally posted by Roger Condron
how many are known to exist today
Roger, see Car, Armoured, Mark I, Fox I and follow the link to the Fox Armoured Car thread on the old MLU forum.

Hope this helps,
Hanno
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 19-10-05, 19:38
James Gosling James Gosling is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Kent, England
Posts: 255
Default

Hi David

Yes it definately is the 1943 prefix.

James
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 19-10-05, 20:44
David_Hayward (RIP)'s Avatar
David_Hayward (RIP) David_Hayward (RIP) is offline
former Resident Historian
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The New Forest, England
Posts: 3,841
Default Thanks!

Wonder if there were any Otters with 38447XXX serials?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 03:24.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016