1940 CMP developments

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

I believe that at long last I have traced the likely development of the 4-wheel drive pilot DND-pattern trucks. This is because of a careful re-reading of the DND papers from 1939-40 and also a lucky break thanks to W & T that I just happened to find by coincidence very late last night in a copy sitting next to me on the floor! Yes, after all these years! Thanks are due yet again to the late Mr Vanderveen.

May I appeal please for any advice on what engineering was required to adapt the F60H chassis, with its rear bogie, from the C60L? The photo of a F60H wrecker in W & T on CMP WRECKERS shows that they used initially at least Chevrolet front axles, and therefore Chevrolet rear axles. By the way, that's not the photo referred to in the previous paragraph!

Further, I need some photos of early GM/McKinnon transfer cases and those fitted to early F15A and say either FGT, F30, or F60 chassis? Likewise 1940 Marmon-Herrington cases? Alternatively proof either way that early Ford 4 x 4 and 6 x 4 chassis other than the F15A used GM cases, and the same viz-a-vie F15A. I lack an early Chevrolet Service Book and so although I have cut-away drawings of the two Ford cases, one for F15A [single-speed] and one for the others, I have nothing to compare with the GM version[s].

[cliff]

David are you sure about the Chev axles under that F60H wrecker. I assume you mean the 11 cab double page one?

I have looked but cannot tell for sure.

Cheers
Cliff

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

I suspect that the photo on the centre-pages is an Imperial War Museum one. Not only does the truck have banjo-type front axle, Bart mentions 'Chevrolet axles'. Regrettably although I have a BRITISH photo [IWM] of what may well have been the Pilot Model (sic.) F60H with British gantry body, I cannot see the front axle type. Yes, this was probably THE pilot F60H, sent to England summer 1940, Engine # 1C3685F. This dates to November 1939! However, a '1C' engine would be a Ford 01T truck unit and not not a C09T Mercury-engined truck, prefix '1G'. If there was a typo, then 1G3685F dates to earlyish May 1940. I f the number is correct then for the pilot models Windsor used the standard Ford 85 bhp engines and then realised that there was insufficient power. Would be interesting to find what the engine type was as fitted to the 15-cwt. G/S trucks, as per Garry Moonie's and Dr Gregg's.

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

I have been sent some information that cements the Marmon-Herrington connection with CMPs. However in order to ensure accuracy may I once again appeal?

I need some photos of early GM/McKinnon transfer cases and those fitted to early F15A and say either FGT, F30, or F60 chassis? Likewise 1940 Marmon-Herrington cases? Alternatively proof either way that early Ford 4 x 4 and 6 x 4 chassis other than the F15A used GM cases, and the same viz-a-vie F15A. I lack an early Chevrolet Service Book and so although I have cut-away drawings of the two Ford cases, one for F15A [single-speed] and one for the others, I have nothing to compare with the GM version[s].

Was the M-H transfer case a single-speed or dual-speed?

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally posted by David_Hayward
information that cements the Marmon-Herrington connection with CMPs

You do have this bit of information, don´t you? Marmon-Herrington's expertise on all-wheel drive vehicles was also called upon when the Canadian automotive industry geared up for war production:

"Immediately after the war was declared, the Ford Motor Company of Canada were charged with the responsibility of developing a 4x4 truck for army use. Obviously, they had very little experience in this field [...] Consequently they went to the Marmon-Herrington Company, Indianapolis, who in peace time supplied conversion material to convert Standard Ford 4x2 trucks into 4x4 models for various commercial peace time usage. [...] these joints were unsuitable [...] [the weight of the more or less cab over engine design and heavy army wheels/tires put too much load on the front axle joints.] To solve this problem, "Bendix-Weiss and Rzeppa joints were chosen by General Motors and Ford respectively [...] [They later realized that the "Tracta" type was better but they were already tooled up with the above types, so left it as it was.] (The Design Record, Vol. 4, p. 27).

Source: http://www.geocities.com/marmonherrington/truck.html

Originally posted by David_Hayward
Was the M-H transfer case a single-speed or dual-speed?

Dual-speed.

H.

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

Hanno, do the M-H and Ford CMP transfer cases other than the F15A one have anything in common? I have conjected that M-H used Timken cases, and that GM McKinnon adapted Timken designs as well, using the US GMC multi-drive components. The F15A design, being a single-speed unit seems to differ substantially from M-H cases but may just have something to do with GM McKinnons.

[Keith Webb]

Originally posted by David_Hayward
May I appeal please for any advice on what engineering was required to adapt the F60H chassis, with its rear bogie, from the C60L? The photo of a F60H wrecker in W & T on CMP WRECKERS shows that they used initially at least Chevrolet front axles, and therefore Chevrolet rear axles. By the way, that's not the photo referred to in the previous paragraph!

David, from my reading on the subject, the GM front axles were used for a short time due to supply problems with the first Ford ones, and the rear axles including the non-driven one were Ford product.

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

Thanks Keith, except that the service books I have both say that the front and rear axles were always the same. It was that batch of 47 Fords that had Chevrolet fronts and Ford rears that stand out.

Has anyone got an early Chevrolet Handbook please showing the transfer case drawings please?

[Keith Webb]

Originally posted by David_Hayward
Thanks Keith, except that the service books I have both say that the front and rear axles were always the same. It was that batch of 47 Fords that had Chevrolet fronts and Ford rears that stand out.

Has anyone got an early Chevrolet Handbook please showing the transfer case drawings please?

Ahh I see.
I have a July 41 (third edition) maintenance manual which is the small size but it only has cross sectional drawings of the tranny case.

[Pete Ashby]

David

A quick flick through some of my books has netted the following:

Chevrolet D, M & R July 1941 (this is marked second )
Chevrolet D, M & R July 1941 (this is marked third edition)
Ford 'built for British war office' D, M & R Third edition (no dates on Ford early books but as this shows 3rd type cabs as well this would be early 1942 I guess).


By just quickly flicking through the relevant sections I can't see any differences in the schematics.

I have found that the D, M & R books can be misleading as the same picture seems to be reused particularly before the MB F or C series manuals.

I would suggest the best way to track down the information you are looking for is to go to the parts lists although these too should be treated with some caution.

In the Chevrolet parts list No 197 August 1942
Covering 1940 to 1942 CMP vehicles covering 8,15,15A,30,3 ton and FA gun tractors

There are two part numbers listed for transfer cases in the section covering 30, 3 ton and FA gun tractors these are as follows: 180#### and 181####

With the not unusual addition to the text which reads when stock is depleted use 5266###.

The only variation to this is the CGT which reads 1810065 when stock is depleted use 1810340.

Alex is the man to have this information at his finger tips.......... but it may suggest the above indicates the 180 and 181 numbers are not GM part codes

Pete

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

Thanks guys! This is the info gleaned from WHEELS & TRACKS with some of my own additions gleaned from MLU, which requires editing:

'Chevrolet C.8A trucks used a 4-speed gearbox, Model (GM) McKinnon 1810610 with a (GM) McKinnon 1810813 single-speed Transfer Case with front axle declutch. The front axle was a banjo, full floating, spiral-bevel drive with 5-inch Bendix-Weiss C.V. joints. They were (GM) McKinnon model 1810617, 1810847. The rear axle was a banjo, full floating, spiral-bevel drive (GM) McKinnon 5807406, 1810882. The steering gear was a GM-Saginaw unit 5266920. The C.8 4 x 2 presumably used an I-beam McKinnon front axle and Saginaw steering gear, with the same rear axle as the C.8A.

Chevrolet C.-G.T. and 8440 A/Tk. Portee [and C.30 units?] used a 4-speed gearbox, Model (GM) McKinnon 1804948 with a (GM) McKinnon 1810340 2-speed Transfer Case with front axle declutch. The front axle was a banjo, full floating, spiral-bevel drive with 6-inch Bendix-Weiss C.V. joints, (GM) McKinnon model 1810445. The rear axle was a banjo, full floating, spiral-bevel drive (GM) McKinnon 1810069. The steering gear was a GM-Saginaw unit 5269442.

Chevrolet C.15 and Ford F.15 chassis used, presumably their own proprietary front axles, which were in either case a Reverse Elliott I-Beam [possibly standard Chevrolet or Ford design], with a fully floating hypoid rear axle and fully floating spiral rear axle respectively. The C.15A and F.15A chassis had 5-inch Bendix-Weiss C.V. joints and 4 7/8-inch Rzeppa C.V. joints respectively. The Transfer Case in either chassis was a single-speed unit, and rear axles were fully floating spiral bevel drive type: the GM of Canada transfer case must have been a McKinnon Industries Limited production; was the Ford a Marmon-Herrington unit? Gearboxes were either (GM) McKinnon or Ford as appropriate. All chassis were 101-inch wheelbase. The Ford C011QRF rear-engined and thus reversed version of the FAT used GM banjo-type axles front and rear and thus so must have the FAT, with Rzeppa C.V. joints but at some stage they went over to Ford split, spiral-bevel drive axles with Bendix-Weiss C.V. joints instead. They also had two-speed transfer cases.

The C.15-TA armoured trucks with their GMC 270 engine used 3-ton axles with 15-cwt. ratio differentials. The (GM) McKinnon gearbox was unique to that chassis. From the GM Catalogue of Major Assemblies, the C15TA transmission is Part # 5819283; the C60X transmission is part # 5814102. The I.D. Chart shows the major external difference to be a power take-off adapter spacer on the C15TA while there is none on the C60X. In looking at the detail on the Conversion Chart the C60X transmission has more in common with those in the Otter and Fox. The C15TA transmission is a bit of an orphan.

The Ford Transfer case was part number 0007199D-C01Q, the F.30Ford being the Model C01QF.

Chevrolet C.60S/L used a 4-speed gearbox, Model (GM) McKinnon 1810610 with a (GM) McKinnon 526623 2-speed Transfer Case with front axle declutch, with P.T.O. for chassis winch. The front axle was a (GM) McKinnon 1810839, which was a banjo, full floating, spiral bevel type with 6-in. Bendix-Weiss C.V. joints. Rear axle was a banjo, full floating spiral bevel, (GM) McKinnon 1810878. Steering was by a GM-Saginaw unit # 5266918. C.60S had a 134-inch wheelbase and C.60L a 158-inch wheelbase.

The General Motors [Chevrolet] C.60X had a 160½-inch wheelbase, and used 10.50 x 20 tyres. The front axle was a full floating spiral bevel type with 6-in. Bendix-Weiss C.V. joints. The gearbox, 2-speed transfer case and front and both rear axles were all (GM) McKinnon units although there was no P.T.O. as there was a rear all-drive bogie and both rear output shafts were required on the transfer case'.

I have to discount the possibility that Fords used GM (McKinnon) transfer cases. As Pete says:

By just quickly flicking through the relevant sections I can't see any differences in the schematics.

I have a glorious official shot of a transfer case off a C15A and readily viewable is the part number [I suggest] # 1809697 as well as 'GM'. Is that a part number for the whole component or is it just a casing part #? I decided that I ought to check my collection and see whether I had some Ford transfer case photos and any more Chevrolet ones. Well, the answer was to both that I did, and the Ford one is of the underside of a F60H. The Chevrolet one is a # 13 Cab chassis. What I can say is that although there are apparent differences between the Ford and Chevrolet cases, the overall design is very similar indeed with similar cast-in ribbing and the overall shape is the same. My imediate reaction was that either McKinnons produced Ford's cases or that they had a similar origin. I am certain that McKinnons adapted a Timken design, and as M-H allegedly used Timken components this could be another explanation. The final thought was that McKinnons reproduced the basic Timken design, and Ford's axle plant did the same albeit based on the M-H casing under agreeement with Canadian Traction Limited.

To resolve the matter I would like to ask anyone with an early 4 x 4 Ford if, under layers of rust and dirt, there is a 'GM' or 'Timken' or 'Ford' cast in? Or does anyone have an official shot of the Ford casing similar to the Chevrolet ones?

[Tony Smith]

David, below is an excerpt from the SE39-42 Ford manual. This is just the first page of transfer cases and seems to be the F30, F60 and FGT cases. Note that two Chev numbers are listed first (with Ford equivalent no.s) and then several variations on Ford numbers. The exploded diagram of the F15A and F30/60/FGT case shows both Ford and Chev numbers for most parts. The part numbers for many of the gears, shafts, bearings and gaskets for the F15A and F30/60/FGT cases are the same. Just the main case castings and the complete assemblies are different.
The Marmon-Herrington transfer cases are very different from CMP cases- no ability to disengage the front axle (constant 4wd), and the CMP case has the front driveshaft output on the right side of the engine/gearbox, M-H case has the driveshaft output on the left side of the engine/gearbox

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

Tony, it does indeed seem that Fords used Chevrolet cases, and I can imagine that this was the case [pun intended!] when Chevrolet axles were used. Incidentally my Ford photos show that both a F60H and FGT featured had Chevrolet axles.

Please shoot me down on this one but I think the evidence suggests that in 1939 Windsor's team compared both GMC and M-H 4 x 4 chassis, and the Ford men naturally though that the M-H setup should be used. Probably with the Chevrolet rear axle located in front....Dr Gregg's photo of the F15A pilot truck had Chev axles and most likely a M-H transfer case. There is evidence that GM of Canada had used M-H components since at least 1935. However, the basic M-H design had its shortcomings as Tony has highlighted, and although we know the DND did indeed use M-H-converted MCPs, with Thornton and M-H/Timken components, it was GM McKinnons that produced the original 4 x 4 components under licence from Timken, and Fords subsequently dual-sourced by producing their own designs based thereon in their axle plant. The new design had the options of dual-speeds [if required] and disengement of front axle. As well as right-side output.

However, when reference is made to the use of M-H layouts when the first 4 x 4 CMP trucks were conceived, I believe that I can now prove this was in fact totally correct! It is just that the part that GM played has been overlooked and forgotten...not least because the design failed in WD Trials!!

[Pete Ashby]

David

This is all very good stuff,
Most interesting watching this thread grow from all corners of the globe, for me this is what makes MLU such a special place.

One practical note the Chev transfer cases (about 5) I have taken apart were all fitted with Timken bearings, the earliest was a non vented C30 so that would be June/July 1940 the latest was a mid range 13 cab C60 .

Pete

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

Thanks Pete! We are getting there! I bet that they had 'GM' stamped thereon.

[Tony Smith]

Originally posted by David_Hayward
Please shoot me down on this one but I think the evidence suggests that in 1939 Windsor's team compared both GMC and M-H 4 x 4 chassis, and the Ford men naturally though that the M-H setup should be used. Probably with the Chevrolet rear axle located in front....Dr Gregg's photo of the F15A pilot truck had Chev axles and most likely a M-H transfer case. There is evidence that GM of Canada had used M-H components since at least 1935. However, the basic M-H design had its shortcomings as Tony has highlighted, and although we know the DND did indeed use M-H-converted MCPs, with Thornton and M-H/Timken components, it was GM McKinnons that produced the original 4 x 4 components under licence from Timken, and Fords subsequently dual-sourced by producing their own designs based thereon in their axle plant. The new design had the options of dual-speeds [if required] and disengement of front axle. As well as right-side output.

However, when reference is made to the use of M-H layouts when the first 4 x 4 CMP trucks were conceived, I believe that I can now prove this was in fact totally correct!

David, I didn't suggest that there was any shortcomings in the M-H system, quite the opposite! It was very well designed and the concept is still being produced today. The system was designed to be used on 1 or 1 1/2 ton trucks with 85hp engines. The issue with M-H components in the prototype CMP's was their marginal weight ratings for that application. They could have gotten away with it if the CMP was only ever going to be a 15cwt, but for the sake of standardisation, a heavier case was required for the FAT and 60cwt's. I don't believe the Ford produced cases are a new design, as I mentioned many of the parts share Ford and Chev numbers and are interchangeable. It was just a case of two (at least!) manufacturers of the components. Who originally conceived or licenced the design, I'll leave for you to discover.

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

Tony, you will see that the Canadian Ford men saw the GM system in trials, and it failed. The call was for M-H 4 x 4 drivetrains and on 30-cwt and above. That said, and this is where the development history becomes interesting, M-H components were to be fitted to MCP chassis. Your comment

They could have gotten away with it if the CMP was only ever going to be a 15cwt, but for the sake of standardisation, a heavier case was required for the FAT and 60cwt's.

is absolutely correct I feel from the hard evidence save that to take it one step further, a 4 x 4 MCP was not going to be tough enough in the 3-tonner category and ...well, the FAT was a 3-tonner..so! And yet we have M-H-converted Ford MCP chassis for the Canadian DND, for New Zealand, Australia, South Africa [?], and so the concept was not dismissed totally. Using modified Ford chassis with components derived from all the 4 x 2 MCPs that were being built in Windsor must have been expedient all round, and they may have been less expensive as well!

Thanks for your valuable input.

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

After careful reading of a history of the CCKW-352/3 and predecessors, I am convinced now that Pontiac, Michigan plant bought-in Timken axles and transfer cases for the pre-war GMC and Chevrolet multi-drive chassis, although in the case of the latter the Flint, Michigan plant may have been responsible. Thus when McKinnon Industries Limited of St. Catherines, Ontario were asked by the DND to produce multi-drive equipment in 1940, they used Timken designs as a template.

It was only when Timken and Wisconsin, apparently the only two major producers of cases in the US, could not cope and supply GMC and Chevrolet plants that instructions were given to what we now know was the Chevrolet axle plant [FLINT, MICHIGAN] , to produce banjo-type axles and transfer cases. There is no question now that McKinnons based their designs on anything built in-house, although whether Chevrolet in the US used McKinnon designs is an open question..anybody compared a US 4 x 4 Chev with a CMP? I am conjecting now that Ford of Canada used McKinnon cases initially and then perhaps set up indigenous production in Windsor. I have no proof yet that Ford's had an axle and gearbox plant in Canada and it is something I shall endeavour to ascertain in due course.

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

Does anyone know what the front axle is from please? Ford or Timken?

[David_Hayward (RIP)]

On clearing out some old papers I came across today a Telegram dated May 10 1941 from National Defence HQ to Canadian Military HQ. It states that a GMC truck with 6 x 6 drive was being developed that developed 216 ft lbs torque. The 'new cab and sheet metal' which I assume was the # 12 Cab at that time, was designed to take this engine ..this must have been the GMC 270 although the 248 was mooted I believe at one stage as it was being produced in Windsor at the time. It seems that the 270 as installed had 222 lbs ft in practice. The [C60X] engine was the largest that could be used with the 'present axles' and the design would not enter production until January 1942 at which time the 6 x 4 [F60H] was to be discontinued. Backtracking, Ford of Canada had sent on October 19th 1940 to the DND copies of composite chassis drawings showing the installation of the Lincoln Zephyr V-12 [1940-41 120 b.h.p.] engine to the F.60H, and also sent power curves of the Zephyr engine. The Zephyr engine was available in quantity and Ford proposed converting for test purposes one of the D.N.D. vehicles then at their plant The advantage that the 290 cu. in. U.S. V-12 had was that it was produced in right-hand drive form of course.

As you know the F60H production for the DND ceased [August 14 1941 in fact] in due course in favour of the C60X however export orders for say India and Australia continued and were fitted with the # 13 Cab. There may have just been the pilot C60X that had a # 12 Cab fitted.

I find this 'Gram interesting because this seems to suggest that the 270 GMC engine was fitted because it was the largest that could be used with the then axle design. Development continued and as is well known the ultimate CMP was the Chrysler 323.5 6-cylinder powered C60X airportable prototype. Did they upgrade the axles? Quaerae: if a stronger axle had been available, and presumably transfer cases, etc., would GM of Canada swallowed and then suggested buying-in the Chrysler unit or would they have opted for the Zephyr?