help with ID please, FGT?

Doug Carrs · #1 17-10-20, 01:30

Hello everyone
first post and not the best friend of computer but Ill try to add some pictures at the end.

Recently found the remains of what I thought may have been a FGT but not sure, hoping someone can help. The frame is junk but the rear axle has been moved back and you can see where it was and it would have been about 101". Still one pigtail underneath but there is no vibration damper on the winch drive shaft. Did all FGT have the damper? There is no room for it. There seems to be extra plates inside the frame rails at the crossmember ahead of the winch. Not a regular CMP cab as it has a 1" square tube frame around the outside of the cab back. There is also a long narrow compartment above the drivers windshield, against the roof. also had a square hatch at one time.

If the winch was added, any ideas on what the vehicle might have been?
Any help is greatly appreciated
Doug

Bruce Parker (RIP) · #2 17-10-20, 01:39

Who knows what axles may have been grafted on but from the pics alone, and the idea it was 101" wheel base at one point, I'd say FAT. The winch installation looks right as do the triangular gussets at the back of the cab behind the door openings.

Grant Bowker · #3 17-10-20, 03:03

Let me start by admitting I know less about Ford CMPs than the Chevrolet versions.
The front axle appears to have the heavier type of steering knuckles (six bolts/studs holding the pivot bearing caps on) and the higher count of bolts holding the steering ends of the axles to the central core. Other than the FATs, most (all?) 101" WB CMPs had the lighter steering knuckles with only four so either someone substituted a heavier axle (hope they did both front and rear so the ratios match) or it was built that way as a FGT.
It is quite possible that if the Layrub coupling from transfer case to winch failed, someone might have fabricated a replacement from a driveshaft. Layrub couplings are still available but not nearly as easy to source as a used driveshaft that could be shortened. Are there signs of field fabrication or engineering by Bozo on the short shaft?
I don't know of any 101" WB CMPs other than FAT that would have had pigtails riveted to the frame. Attachment by rivet is almost certain to be factory, bolts would be simpler to do if you were transplanting in a winch. My impression (to be confirmed or corrected by others) is that although all Chevrolet's had the winch cross-member even without a winch fitted, Fords only got the crossmember if a winch was fitted.
The storage arrangement over the driver's head may be for an artillery plotting board.
I agree with Bruce that the gussets behind the doors were not normal on a standard cab. (The back of the cab prevented twisting/racking but since the FAT didn't have the stiffening of the cab back another form of stiffener was needed.)

Bob Carriere · #4 17-10-20, 05:03

Quick get a trailer and get it home...... you only need to find a couple more for parts.

What part of Ontario Doug???

Lots of people on the forum to help you out......

Hope to see more of you and the truck......

If you decided to get the Ford Artillery Tractor you will need to learn the words to the old song...." Rolly Polly Mama's little FATty.............

Cheers

rob love · #5 17-10-20, 05:11

The common killer of artillery tractors was that winch. Post service, it was in just the right place to make a tow truck. The turtle back was thrown off, and the jib was usually welded directly onto the frame rails, ensuring that the frame would get so twisted and bent up, with the ensuing cracks, fish plating, and more cracks, that the rails would be beyond restoration.

I have an artillery tractor project waiting in the wings now. The 15 cwt frame is identical, so will be the donor to make the artillery tractor whole again. And, thankfully, it is a Ford.

Tony Smith · #6 17-10-20, 05:54

Fuel tank brackets look to be the correct type for 20 Gal tanks, opposed to the regular 12 Gal.