CCW Carrier transporter

[motto]

Thanks fellas, this is exactly as I understood the situation to be but when I tried to find some documentation that actually states the 'on road' capacity of the CCKW as being 5 ton I can find nothing.
There is no doubt about the CCKW being able to do it without stress as the DUKW proves. It's 2 ton heavier than the CCKW to start with and still has the same placarded payload and towed load rating and I have literature that proves the Australian Army rated them up to 4 ton or 40 men, the DUKW that is. Curiously, the same document that rates them as 40 Australian men rates them at 25 American men. Plenty of room for jokes there but if you think about it, if an Australian operated duck sank with more than 25 Americans on board when they rated them at 25 it would be an international incident. If one sank with forty Australians, ho hum, get another lot.
David

[coachbuilder]

I am Daves kiwi mate who told him about the chassis thickness differences
I know this from personal experience.
In the late 1980s I bought an ex nz ccw that had been a drilling rig in civvy life
the rear 18 inches of the chassis had been removed so I decided to repair it using the rear section from a cckw 352 I was wrecking. To my surprise the rear section from the 352 was approx 2 gauges thinner.I welded it in regardless but the difference was definetely noticeable.
I sold this truck in the early to mid 1990s to a guy in Palmerston North who's name I think was Bevan Udy and I believe he still has it and is restoring it as a ccw. Maybe someone knows this guy and could possibly check the measurements. Even though it was a long time ago I still remember this clearly.Why would the NZ army go to the trouble of modifying CCWs when there were literally hundreds of CCKWs availble at the time.

[cliff]

Originally Posted by coachbuilder

I am Daves kiwi mate who told him about the chassis thickness differences
I know this from personal experience.
In the late 1980s I bought an ex nz ccw that had been a drilling rig in civvy life.

More likely to have been modified post army when the civy drilling rig was added and the rear 18inches of chassis was removed.

There is NO difference between the two chassis except for the front axle and lack of transfer case But I'll ask on another forum just to check.

[motto]

Just in case someone watching this is a little confused, the 6x4 does have a transfer case , it's required to send power to both rear diffs but it contains no front axle drive components and does not have low range. The high/low range sliding gear is secured in high with a circlip and there is no shifter fork.
David

[coachbuilder]

The Chassis was totally orginal with no strengthing added to it.

[cliff]

I have had a reply from a gentleman on the other forum who has years of experience working on these vehicles with the US military and in retirement restoring them and there is NO difference at all in chassis measurements or metal thickness between the CCKW 6X6 and the CCW 6X4 they were the same chassis.

While I am not doughting your finding Coachbuilder but from all the data there should be no difference.

Your first name added to your posts would be nice as well as we are all friends here