CCW Carrier transporter

[motto]

I have a Kiwi friend who assures me that the CCW had a heavier chassis than the CCKW to upgrade the carrying capacity to five ton. I don't believe this to be the case but have no way of checking it out myself so can someone give a definite answer on this point?
Part of the reason for asking, apart from stumbling across this thread, is that there has been a bit of argument going on on another forum about load ratings for the CCKW as to whether they were rated for five ton on-road and two and a half ton off-road or just two and a half ton regardless.
I have the TM 10-1565 for the Studebaker US6 and 6x4 and it clearly states 6x6=2 1/2 Ton, 6x4=5 Ton but fails to give exact differences between the two trucks so still doesn't help define the philosophy.
David

[jeff davis]

I have had a look at several and do not find a diffrence between the CCW and the CCKW I believe it is only the difffrence between on road and off road(cross country)
The latter M135 and M211 also uses the same refrencee on road or off
Jeff

[Ken Smith]

Good day fellas,
I own GMC 6x4 chassis No CCW 4355 and there is no difference between it and a normal 6x6 chassis.I also own the remains of a later truck and the cab on it has the sliding roof hatch that seems to be a New Zealand modification.In Australia the 6x4 type seem to be mostly for the RAAF,including for use as the prime mover on the huge airfield cranes seen elsewhere on the forum.
Cheers Ken

[cliff]

Originally Posted by motto

I have a Kiwi friend who assures me that the CCW had a heavier chassis than the CCKW to upgrade the carrying capacity to five ton. I don't believe this to be the case but have no way of checking it out myself so can someone give a definite answer on this point?
David

The only difference between the CCW 6X4 and CCKW 6X6 was a driven front axle on the 6X6. Other then the missing transfer case, front drive shaft and an 'I' beam front axle instead of a front driven axle all other features between them were the same. The CCKW 6X6 were rated as 2.5 ton only because of their off road capacity but on road could carry a 5 ton load the same as the 6X4 CCW.

[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.