Oil Cooler - Aus Carrier

[Darren Witty]

Can anyone tell me which way this release valve goes on a AUS. carrier. I have had it on and off a hundred times but cant seem to get the lines to lay right. The engine covers wont go on either. I haven't been able to find a picture in the manual.

Thanks

[Darren Witty]

Photo!

[Pedr]

Darren,

Don't really understand your question??

How do you mean "Which way does it go?" ?

It pretty much only goes one way

It is important however that you know which line is oil out and which is the return to sump line. Once you have ascertained this, its all easy sailing.

However, hope this picture helps. The oil pressure pumped from the block must lift the ball when the pressure from the cooler gets too high.

Pedr

[Pedr]

Ok got it.

Try putting on the inside of bracket.

So that it is inside the Engine cover

Pedr

This picture from Graeme in WA

[Pedr]

Or perhaps this picture of a partly disassembled one.

Pedr

[Pedr]

Once you have fitted up the bypass valve, the pipes travel to the cooler under the guard pictured.

Pedr

[Darren Witty]

Thanks! Those pictures are exactly what I needed. Is that guard over the oil lines original. Mine had small brackets holding them in place which seemed original. I don't seem to have holes along the rain to accommodate a guard like the one in the last photo.
Thanks again for your help
Darren

[Rob Dyba]

Darn, every time I take a close look at photos loaded up on this site it just means more stuff i got to fabricate from image only...

Rob

[Pedr]

The carrier pictured is one of the WA 100, in fact its no.2, I am not yet certain of how many carriers this modification was fitted to other than perhaps the WA 100.

Firstly, I am hoping that our Jack M can verify that the WA carrier that he restored also had one fitted.

Secondly, anyone with a more complete and original late series carrier can inform us of this guard existance in their carrier. I would expect that they may be in last built Metgas nos. between 5013 and 5076, or SAR carriers between 5000 and 5013, or Ford carriers from 3870 to 4149.

Please let us know if you can confirm or deny this.

Pedr

PS This will rely a large part on the complete originallity of your carrier if it falls between those numbers. When I tried this once before regarding the special SAR wiring system, most guys didn't even know what I was on about, and those whom did said that they couldn't be bothered attempting to reinstate that system.

PPS On closer investigation I now know that Col Anderson's old carrier has the same guard. WA carrier 5108. ( as seen in the picture )

[JackM]

Pedr,

The Carrier we restored for the Army Museum of WA, had one of these guards on the oil cooler pipes. Hull # was 5174 and interestingly on the outside gusset behind the driver (from memory), there was a stamping of 'WA 98'. This was repeated on the front glacis plate lifting hook - RHS I think.

I always thought it indicated the number of these carriers made in WA. So 5174 was the 98th made. However if you deduct 98 from 5174, you end up with an unusual number from which to start a batch of 100 !

Has your WA carrier got any stampings in the places I mentioned ?

I think I remember getting a letter from Col Anderson in which he said his WA carrier had a similar stamping of WA 32.


Jack

[Pedr]

What I know about WA carriers.

Thanks for your reply Jack.

That carrier is not mine. It belongs to a guy in NSW, but its a very nice example of a WA carrier.

You are right about a dumb number to start the build on but for some reason the WA carriers start at 5077. My carrier is 5071, so not a WA model

There seems no rhyme or reason for the allocation of numbers. My records and official correspondance of the day show that SAR was allocated 5000 - 5013 on contract no. CCS.32. Then Metgas was tasked to build 63 carriers from 5014 - 5076. With SEW finally receiving approval for 100 from 5077 - 5176. The whole numbering system seems to me to have been a complete shambles, with some numbers being double allocated, and correspondance quickly sent to repair this. Infact I am not at this stage even sure if all numbers between 1 and 5176 were used. Hence the continuation in research.

It would make sense to me if Col Anderson's old carrier was stamped WA 32, as that then fits very nicely into the numbering scheme that I have - making the one you restored 98.

Pedr

[JackM]

Pedr,

Your pic of #5078 is interesting to me because although I assume this is the second WA carrier off the production line, it doesn't have the all metal front idler wheel nor the metal return roller. I found these to be fitted to Carrier 5174 (WA # 98) and assumed that all the carriers made under the WA contract had these as standard.

Maybe the ones on #2 were changed for the older style at some stage in its history ?

Pics attached show the wheels I mentioned, before restoration started.

[JackM]

Return roller pic