MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > MILITARY VEHICLES > The Carrier Forum

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-01-20, 11:45
Tom Millward Tom Millward is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 126
Default LP2 wheels

Happy New Year to you all!

A question to any LP2 gurus...A friend of mine has an LP2 carrier, the wheel rubbers are pretty shot, but he has some NOS UK/Canadian carrier wheels which he is planning to fit to it. Apart from the fact that they are not the correct looking wheels (a shame as I was hoping to trade them with him for my Mk1*), will they fit? Are the axles the same size, bearings etc? Is the LP2 track the same as UK/Canadian track?

Also his steering needs major adjustment, does the axle cross shaft have the same concentric rollers as the Canadian Carrier for adjusting the cam plate mechanism?

Cheers,

Tom
__________________
1942 Mk1* Universal Carrier T53664
1944 Willys MB (OP VARSITY veteran) M5535401
10 cwt trailer
1942 Royal Enfield WD/CO/B
1943 James ML
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-01-20, 19:32
Lynn Eades's Avatar
Lynn Eades Lynn Eades is offline
Bluebell
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tauranga, New Zealand
Posts: 4,858
Default

Tom, No. The Lp2 wheels are wider at the rubber / rim. The hubs are the same and use the same axles and bearings. They could be used but the tracks wont be stable. The track links are the same except that the horns that guide the track are wider on the Australian carrier. The LP2 and LP2A used track that was similar to the Vickers Light Tank Mk6B (The Aust. track has a short pin located with a lead plug and had a small hole on the opposite side only to enable removal of the pin. The VLT had the same pin arrangement as your Canadian carrier)
On the side rollers. The Australian casting that mounts to the hull sides, make no allowance for the angle iron at the floor in you carrier, and the holes are positioned differently.
The pin through the roller has a BS thread while the LP2 has a UN thread. The Aust. LP2 also is drilled with a grease nipple while the Brit / Canadian carrier has a vague "dribble" arrangement that relies on "hope" (actually I think the bushes (2 each side) are maybe "oilite", or sintered bronze that were pre soaked before assembly and relied on a bit of residual oil from the grease that drops on the roller and cross shaft. The roller its self may fit.
The cross tubes are different lengths.
__________________
Bluebell

Carrier Armoured O.P. No1 Mk3 W. T84991
Carrier Bren No2.Mk.II. NewZealand Railways. NZR.6.
Dodge WC55. 37mm Gun Motor Carriage M6
Jeep Mb #135668
So many questions....
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-01-20, 00:21
Tom Millward Tom Millward is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 126
Default

Thanks Lynn, I will pass the info onto my colleague. Useful to know that the rubber And track are a different profile than the UK/Canadian wheels. Iíll suggest he gets his wheels re-rubbered to the correct profile.

Cheers,

Tom
__________________
1942 Mk1* Universal Carrier T53664
1944 Willys MB (OP VARSITY veteran) M5535401
10 cwt trailer
1942 Royal Enfield WD/CO/B
1943 James ML
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-01-20, 03:05
David Herbert David Herbert is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Ayrshire, Scotland - previously Suffolk
Posts: 358
Default

I would add that Windsor Carriers also have the wider rims and tires and track horns wider spaced to suit. I am not certain that they are precisely the same dimensions as the LP2s but they look the same. However the Windsor wheels and track are the same style as other Canadian / UK carriers, and look exactly the same unless you know to check the width of the wheel and spacing of the horns.
T16 carriers use the narrow format wheels but in straight spoke (similar to UK / Can), curly spoke or pressed disk designs.

David
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-01-20, 10:49
Lynn Eades's Avatar
Lynn Eades Lynn Eades is offline
Bluebell
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tauranga, New Zealand
Posts: 4,858
Default

Hi David, I have never seen Windsor bits, but believe the track would be dimensionally interchangeable with the Australian carriers. It is my opinion that the Australians that came up with their design made great improvements in many areas, (except that I love the classic style of riveted carriers) The adoption of the wider rubber and track horns from the later VLTMk6B along with the higher track guards made for a quieter and much more stable track that leaves me wondering why it was not universally adopted.
I can only imagine national pride being the barrier.
__________________
Bluebell

Carrier Armoured O.P. No1 Mk3 W. T84991
Carrier Bren No2.Mk.II. NewZealand Railways. NZR.6.
Dodge WC55. 37mm Gun Motor Carriage M6
Jeep Mb #135668
So many questions....
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-01-20, 13:53
David Herbert David Herbert is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Ayrshire, Scotland - previously Suffolk
Posts: 358
Default

Hi Lynn,
I agree with all of the above but bare in mind just how desperate the situation was in the UK at that time. There was a huge pressure to not mess with anything that worked and as a result we were behind where we should have been in many fields. Canada and Australia and NZ were tooling up from scratch and so only inherited what we forced on them.
In my view the T16 was by far the best of the WW2 carrier family in terms of its driving and mobility qualities. There were teething troubles but once they got them right they worked well and continued in use post war until that class of vehicle became too small and under protected.
The Windsor in contrast I find under powered and extremely hard work to drive as the track warping phase of the steering just makes it crab as the two bogies move out of line with each other rather than creating a curved track path as in a UC. I am sure the Windsor owners club will disagree but everyone to their own !

David
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-01-20, 21:47
Tom Millward Tom Millward is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 126
Default

Iím sure that British designers were investing their time in the development of future armoured vehicle design, to combat the ever increasing capabilities of German armour, rather than perfecting what was already considered to be a working design. If itís not broke, donít fix it.
__________________
1942 Mk1* Universal Carrier T53664
1944 Willys MB (OP VARSITY veteran) M5535401
10 cwt trailer
1942 Royal Enfield WD/CO/B
1943 James ML
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-01-20, 22:14
Lynn Eades's Avatar
Lynn Eades Lynn Eades is offline
Bluebell
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tauranga, New Zealand
Posts: 4,858
Default

David, I have no doubt about the desperation of the time, but there was a big difference in the desperation of 1939 versus 1944. As you know, there was also a world of difference (production pressure wise) between an English 1941 U.C. and a T16 (that never made the battle field until the end of the war)
At the wars start much of the population (U.K. and colonies) were pretty much still horse and cart orientated. By the time of the T16 things had changed.
An example from this end, is that N.Z. had new vehicle number plates made in the U.K.(yearly)
In 1940 we were kindly told to F.O. Because of the war effort.
The result was that the 1939 plates were used for the next 4 or 5 years. We were totally reliant on mother England.
Australia was obviously further ahead than little N.Z. however it would have been relative.
My point was really to praise the Australians.
While in their infancy in the area of design and mass production they came up with a very practical carrier . I assume the biggest reason why it never saw more active service was also in the interests of standardization.
As an aside: The Eastern War Council ordered LP2a's from N.Z. but during production cancelled them in favour of Canada filling the order. (same reason?)
When you compare details of the LP2 with a British or Canadian carrier, you realize how much they improved on the faults of the riveted carrier while simplifying the construction.
BTW: this was their second effort. The Australian Govt. had bought a Machine gun carrier from England prior to the war from which they'd built the LP1. (Qty. 161) They had done away with the warp steering, which lead to brake issues. However I believe some of the T16 details were "acquired" from the LP1. No evidence, just my opinion.
__________________
Bluebell

Carrier Armoured O.P. No1 Mk3 W. T84991
Carrier Bren No2.Mk.II. NewZealand Railways. NZR.6.
Dodge WC55. 37mm Gun Motor Carriage M6
Jeep Mb #135668
So many questions....
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-01-20, 07:13
Tony Smith's Avatar
Tony Smith Tony Smith is offline
No1, Mk 2** (I'm back!)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lithgow, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Herbert View Post
Hi Lynn,
I agree with all of the above but bare in mind just how desperate the situation was in the UK at that time. There was a huge pressure to not mess with anything that worked .....

David
And imagine how much time and production savings could have been made (even before the war) by standardizing Carrier track with Vickers Light Tank track, but no, they had to create yet another unique part system.
__________________
You can help Keep Mapleleafup Up! See Here how you can help, and why you should!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-01-20, 07:15
Tony Smith's Avatar
Tony Smith Tony Smith is offline
No1, Mk 2** (I'm back!)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lithgow, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Eades View Post
My point was really to praise the Australians.
Point taken. *places in pocket for future use*
__________________
You can help Keep Mapleleafup Up! See Here how you can help, and why you should!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wheels Id please Douglas Greville The Carrier Forum 6 01-10-17 21:00
For Sale: CMP Wheels Mrs Vampire For Sale Or Wanted 5 23-01-17 06:05
Different Wheels The Bedford Boys The Carrier Forum 5 20-06-12 07:46
UC Wheels? Richard Coutts-Smith The Carrier Forum 3 10-05-12 15:05
Can anyone id these wheels. kevin powles The Carrier Forum 11 03-06-11 20:53


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:15.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016