Chevrolet MCP 3 Ton Lorries G.S. (Australian)

[Lionelgee]

Hello All,

I have a 1940 Australian - Holden manufactured cabin and tray Chevrolet 3 Ton "Lorry" (Truck). Were these trucks imported to Australia in a knock-down version of just the running gear, chassis and firewall? Once they arrived then Holden assembled them and added the cabin and tray.

According to the Australian War Memorial my truck is from the same stable as:
ID number 127795
Collection type Photograph
Object type Black & white
Physical description Black & white
Description AUSTRALIA. LORRIES, 3-TON G.S. (AUSTRALIAN). CHEVROLET. QUARTER FRONT VIEW, RIGHT SIDE. Accessed April 4th 2016 from, https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/127795

When I went to the General Motors Heritage website they have the Technical Specifications Manual (page 8) for the "1940" trucks it only shows that their "Heavy Duty" trucks go up to 1.5 Tons. Accessed April 4th 2016 from https://www.gmheritagecenter.com/doc...olet-Truck.pdf

Is there meant to be another type of truck that the GM Heritage site missed out on? Or are the 3 ton Lorries for the Australian Army a Canadian sourced cousin to the Chevrolet Maple Leaf trucks - if not the GMC trucks?

It just seems strange to me that the GM Heritage place has only one listing for Chevrolet Trucks 1940 and they finish at their "Heavy Duty" being half the capacity of the Australian Army General Service truck?

Looking closely at the photograph and back at my truck I think I might have the remnants of an original tray because the rope tie rails look very much the same. They still have green paint on them too - and that "green paint" must certainly mean that it is military

Kind Regards
Lionel

[Lionelgee]

Hello All,

In a photograph from the Australian War Memorial it shows a 1940 Chevrolet (Australian) 3 Ton Lorry with an Office Tent constructed across it.

Were these "Office" tents just used for clerical type work or were they also used as sleeping quarters?

Would there be any plans available to work off to make new one up of in the future?

Did these Office Tents use the same dimensions as the front headboard of the General Service canopy; or were they a different beast suited for just the Office tent? The General Service photograph in the earlier message is taken from a different angle and seems to have a more triangular apex than the Office tent. I am not sure if I can see a flap in the headboard end of the tarpaulin for the General Service truck either.

The details of the photograph were accessed on April 4th 2016 from, https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/127773


ID number 127773
Collection type Photograph
Object type Black & white
Physical description Black & white
Description AUSTRALIA. LORRIES, 3-TON OFFICE, (AUSTRALIAN). CHEVROLET. THREE-QUARTER FRONT VIEW, LEFT SIDE; SHOWING OFFICE TENT ERECTED ACROSS LORRY.

Kind Regards
Lionel

[cliff]

the rear tilt frames were different between the two trucks. I could not open the GM History site but I would say that there is a couple of types not listed there.

Vehicles were probably imported as components by GMH in those years for truck production.

[motto]

I know little of the pre 1942 Chevrolet trucks and am somewhat surprised that the army classed these vehicles as 3 ton.
The 42 model we know as the lend/lease Chev was basically the same truck with different sheet metal and was rated at 1-1/2 ton by the U.S. military and by Chevrolet themselves though in this country in civilian life at least they were generally considered to be 3 ton trucks.
I have a copy of TM 10-1677 for Chevrolet models 4403, 4408, 4409 and 4412 dated June 1, 1943. Stuck (glued) on the front cover is a strip of paper printed in red with the following information.
SPECIAL NOTICE The 160" Wheelbase CHEVROLET TRUCKS imported by the Commonwealth Government for essential civilian users are equipped with:-
HEAVY 10" x 5/16" FRAME REINFORCEMENTS,AUXILIARY SPRINGS, 7" WHEELS, 7-7.50 X 20 TYRES AND HAVE A GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT OF 14,300 lbs
TARE WEIGHTS ARE- CHASSIS AND CAB 4,368 lbs. TRUCK WITH PLATFORM BODY 5,068 lbs, TRUCK WITH DROPSIDE BODY 5,348 lbs, WITH STAKESIDES BODY 5,488 lbs.
Subtracting the dropside truck tare weight from the allowable gross vehicle weight gives 8952 lbs or just under four tons.
It seems the rating figures were a bit rubbery and depended on who you were dealing with. The different load ratings that have you puzzled Lionel could refer to the same vehicle.

David

[Mike Kelly]

Lionel

I have the 1940 GMH NASCO parts book . The front cover of the book states "SPECIALLY COMPILED FOR THE AUSTRALIAN COMMONWEALTH MILITARY FORCES" . The book is for sedans and trucks

The 1940 Chevrolet truck was series 13, 14, 15.

1940 Maple Leaf was series 16 - diff ratio was 7.16 to 1

1940 CHEVROLET

Basically, the model 14 had a 133" wheelbase

The model 15 was 158 1/2" wheelbase ( yours ? )

15-40 ES Chassis and cab with special 12 X 7 GS Wagon with canopy top - Standard truck chassis fitted single rear wheels 5.20 X 6 pierced disc wheels . rear axle ratio 6.166 to 1

15-40 E2 Chassis and cab with special 10ft. 6ins x 7ft GS Wagon with canopy top- Standard truck chassis Dual wheel with 7.20 X 6 pierced disc wheels rear axle ratio 6.166 to 1

Effective with overseas 18 x 8 wheels , the wheel equipment for these units will be changed to 5.18 X 8 3/4 offset

1940 MAPLE LEAF

The Maple leaf model 16-40/E12 Chassis cab 157 3/4" wheelbase with special Office Lorry body

..............................16-40/E8 ...............................................wit h special stores lorry body

..............................16-40 /E6 ................................................wi th special breakdown vehicle body

The AWM have that pic incorrectly captioned, its actually a Maple Leaf office lorry , not Chevrolet .

[Lionelgee]

Originally Posted by Mike Kelly

Lionel

I have the 1940 GMH NASCO parts book . The front cover of the book states "SPECIALLY COMPILED FOR THE AUSTRALIAN COMMONWEALTH MILITARY FORCES" . The book is for sedans and trucks

The 1940 Chevrolet truck was series 13, 14, 15.

1940 Maple Leaf was series 16 - diff ratio was 7.16 to 1

1940 CHEVROLET

Basically, the model 14 had a 133" wheelbase

The model 15 was 158 1/2" wheelbase ( yours ? )

15-40 ES Chassis and cab with special 12 X 7 GS Wagon with canopy top - Standard truck chassis fitted single rear wheels 5.20 X 6 pierced disc wheels . rear axle ratio 6.166 to 1

15-40 E2 Chassis and cab with special 10ft. 6ins x 7ft GS Wagon with canopy top- Standard truck chassis Dual wheel with 7.20 X 6 pierced disc wheels rear axle ratio 6.166 to 1

Effective with overseas 18 x 8 wheels , the wheel equipment for these units will be changed to 5.18 X 8 3/4 offset

1940 MAPLE LEAF

The Maple leaf model 16-40/E12 Chassis cab 157 3/4" wheelbase with special Office Lorry body

..............................16-40/E8 ...............................................wit h special stores lorry body

..............................16-40 /E6 ................................................wi th special breakdown vehicle body

The AWM have that pic incorrectly captioned, its actually a Maple Leaf office lorry , not Chevrolet .

Hello Mike,

Thank you for the reply - going off the information that you sent ....

The model 15 was 158 1/2" wheelbase ( yours ? ) I would say "yes" and

15-40 E2 Chassis and cab with special 10ft. 6ins x 7ft GS Wagon with canopy top- Standard truck chassis Dual wheel with 7.20 X 6 pierced disc wheels rear axle ratio 6.166 to 1.

I was just directed towards another forum where a restorer suggests that "The military trucks had many heavier components, as compared to the civilian trucks. They had bigger axles, heavier wheel bearings, heavier brakes, heavier chassis with frame reinforcements, and heavier springing." Accessed April 4th 2016 from, http://www.hcvc.com.au/forum/restore...rucks?start=10 Posted on 12 Nov 2011.

Perhaps these upgraded specifications brought them up to 3 Ton Lorries?

Kind Regards
Lionel

[Mike Kelly]

Originally Posted by Lionelgee

"The military trucks had many heavier components, as compared to the civilian trucks. They had bigger axles, heavier wheel bearings, heavier brakes, heavier chassis with frame reinforcements, and heavier springing."

Perhaps these upgraded specifications brought them up to 3 Ton Lorries?

Kind Regards
Lionel

No that's not correct . The 1940 models issued to the army were mechanically no different to the civilian specifications. Bigger axles , heavier brakes - makes no sense at all . We are talking about 1940, who was making special heavy axles or brakes ?

The standard series 14 models were 30 cwt and the series 15 was 3 Ton , there was no special " heavy duty " model in the Chevrolet range in 1940 . The Indian pattern Ambulances were built on the 30 cwt or series 14 chassis.

20 cwt = 1 long Ton

[Lionelgee]

Originally Posted by motto

I know little of the pre 1942 Chevrolet trucks and am somewhat surprised that the army classed these vehicles as 3 ton.
The 42 model we know as the lend/lease Chev was basically the same truck with different sheet metal and was rated at 1-1/2 ton by the U.S. military and by Chevrolet themselves though in this country in civilian life at least they were generally considered to be 3 ton trucks.
I have a copy of TM 10-1677 for Chevrolet models 4403, 4408, 4409 and 4412 dated June 1, 1943. Stuck (glued) on the front cover is a strip of paper printed in red with the following information.
SPECIAL NOTICE The 160" Wheelbase CHEVROLET TRUCKS imported by the Commonwealth Government for essential civilian users are equipped with:-
HEAVY 10" x 5/16" FRAME REINFORCEMENTS,AUXILIARY SPRINGS, 7" WHEELS, 7-7.50 X 20 TYRES AND HAVE A GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT OF 14,300 lbs
TARE WEIGHTS ARE- CHASSIS AND CAB 4,368 lbs. TRUCK WITH PLATFORM BODY 5,068 lbs, TRUCK WITH DROPSIDE BODY 5,348 lbs, WITH STAKESIDES BODY 5,488 lbs.
Subtracting the dropside truck tare weight from the allowable gross vehicle weight gives 8952 lbs or just under four tons.
It seems the rating figures were a bit rubbery and depended on who you were dealing with. The different load ratings that have you puzzled Lionel could refer to the same vehicle.

It also raises another point - the Chevrolet truck in the photograph has a Commonwealth "C" plate. Did this number plate represent the ARN because a number of the Australian War Memorial photographs of the 1940 trucks do not show a ARN on the bonnet?

David

Hello David,

Thank you for the reply and for the information. Some of the details about the reinforced - extra strength parts were mentioned on another forum without providing a source.

The plate on my firewall says ... CHASSIS: 5200
MAXIMUM WEIGHT IN POUNDS: 3400 ??
GROSS WEIGHT: see note 11500
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE GROSS WEIGHT INCLUDES CHASSIS BODY AND ALL LOADS AND IS SUBJECT TO THE UNIT BEING EQUIPPED WITH WHEEL AND TYRE EQUIPMENT OF ADEQUATE CARRYING CAPACITY
GENERAL MOTORS – HOLDENS LTD.

The ID plate was loose in the truck's glove box and only an outline appeared on the firewall. I am presuming the ID plate was taken off and put in the glover box and not taken off one of the 100 plus trucks that were in the yard at Dalby in Queensland.

I never learnt Imperial measurements so I am not sure what they refer to weight wise.

If you click on this link to an article written by Laurie Wright and scroll down there is a reference to the trucks being a 30-cwt GS
Accessed April 4th 2016 from, http://anzacsteel.hobbyvista.com/oth...siecamlw_1.htm. So how does 30 cwt get to be 3 tons?

Now apparently cwt stands for "Hundredweights" (?) and they can be long as; in from the United Kingdom, or Short - from the US of A. It being a Holden built Chevrolet would it be a long or a short Hundredweight - no wonder they turned to Metric!!!

Could someone from the AWM confuse 3 Tones with 30 cwt of either the long or short variety?

To me it still remains a wee bit confusing about what their capacity was.

Kind Regards
Lionel

[Lionelgee]

Hello All,

If the truck is a 30 CWT or a 3 ton does this mean that it could be driven in Australia with just a car licence? Or would I have to go up to a MR licence?

Yes the restoration is some way off before my truck once more motors stately down the road. However, it would be nice to know the licence requirements in advance.

Kind Regards
Lionel

[Lionelgee]

Hello All,

I have dual tyres 7.20 X 6 pierced disc wheels . These wheel rims have suicide rings on them. Is there a modern version available that is more safe than the split rim? Some local tyre places will not handle the suicide rings. In the early 1980s I worked at Killarney Abattoirs with a bearded bloke whose previous job used to be as a truck tyre fitter. The beard covered most of the scars that occurred to him after a suicide ringed rim let go out in the field. The beard grew while he was recovering after an extended stay in hospital.

Mike's message has the tyres down as 7.20 X 6 tyres

The current outside rear dual tyre on my Chevrolet has the following written on it "Olympic Trojan Made in Australia SN 6026 7.00 - 20 with Ply rating 8".

Are these the same tyres as in Mike's earlier message except they just have two more layers of "ply" on the Olympic Trojans?

All my tyres are completly unserviceable and as they have cracked, disintegrated and they are rather square. Way beyond the idea of just whacking a new tube into them. Yes all 7 of them - well if I had a spare wheel that is I am also missing the suicide rings off the two inside dual rims.

Kind Regards
Lionel

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by motto

The 42 model we know as the lend/lease Chev was basically the same truck with different sheet metal and was rated at 1-1/2 ton by the U.S. military and by Chevrolet themselves though in this country in civilian life at least they were generally considered to be 3 ton trucks.

David, I'm pretty sure 3-ton military spec in Australia included 2-speed diff and brake booster, which explains why trucks of similar appearance were rated differently:

127780 AUSTRALIA. LORRIES, 30 CWT. BLOOD STORAGE (AUSTRALIAN)..JPG

AUSTRALIA. LORRIES, 30 CWT. BLOOD STORAGE (AUSTRALIAN).


127798 AUSTRALIA. LORRIES, 3-TON STORES (AUSTRALIAN) NO.1. CHEVROLET. LEFT SIDE VIEW..JPG

AUSTRALIA. LORRIES, 3-TON STORES (AUSTRALIAN) NO.1.

[motto]

If only it were that simple Tony but unfortunately it isn't.
TM 10-1677, the maintenance manual I mentioned earlier, was published by General Motors Overseas Operations and is identified as being applicable to :-
CHEVROLET 1-1/2 TON (Right Drive) 4x2 TRUCK
This is the same manual that has the strip of paper on the cover that gives the payload as being over three ton. (GVM minus Tare) And also lists why, frame reinforcement, aux springs and tyre size. The frame reinforcement can be readily seen in both the photos you posted and tyres appear to be similar on both trucks.
You usually can't tell whether a vehicle has a two speed axle from a photograph and a brake booster could be inside the chassis but usually found on the outside. What can often be seen is whether the front axle is the light duty with bicycle type cup and cone wheel bearings (most of them) or the heavy duty type with barrel rollers. One of the things that has puzzled me over the years is that, by direct observation, the installation of light or heavy front axle appears to be completely indiscriminate and unrelated to differential or booster installation. There was a class of truck produced that was identical to the '42 vehicles being discussed but it was shorter with a nine foot instead of a twelve foot tray. These trucks were classed as being 30 CWT but all seem to have come with the heavy front axle. This was confirmed by a fellow that used to work for Regent Motors, a GM dealership. It just doesn't make sense.
Brake booster wise, I've only ever seen the diaphragm type PBR boosters on these trucks which I have always taken to be a post war or post service modification. The North Americans seem to have used piston type boosters on their trucks which is what I would expect to see if original equipment.
In summary, these are interesting vehicles produced at a time of duress and shortages using pretty much whatever was available with a lot of what went on not being very well documented. We all know parts of the story but are often left guessing.

David

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by motto

If only it were that simple Tony but unfortunately it isn't.

David, I don't profess to understand the load rating system completely, but I do find the load rating parameters perfectly simple and logical. They are FUNCTIONAL FEATURES relating DIRECTLY to load carrying capability. That includes gradeability and braking ability. Hence 30cwt truck uprated to 3-ton by fitting 2-speed diff and brake booster.

The real confusion arises when we attempt to correlate load ratings with parts and components, because these are ever changing. As I've tried to point out before, components do not determine load rating. They merely determine vehicle reliability. Components found wanting in service can be upgraded, both in production and in the field. This does not change the nominal load rating. Classic example is 3-ton Ford CMP steering box, upgraded TWICE before they got it right!

Originally Posted by motto

The North Americans seem to have used piston type boosters on their trucks which is what I would expect to see if original equipment.

Yes I believe you're right David. Here's the Dodge 3-ton set up:

img035.jpg

[Lionelgee]

Originally Posted by Tony Wheeler

David, I'm pretty sure 3-ton military spec in Australia included 2-speed diff and brake booster, which explains why trucks of similar appearance were rated differently:

Attachment 80891

AUSTRALIA. LORRIES, 30 CWT. BLOOD STORAGE (AUSTRALIAN).


Attachment 80892

AUSTRALIA. LORRIES, 3-TON STORES (AUSTRALIAN) NO.1.

G'day Tony,

Thank you for the photographs and for the detailed information. Another difference between these trucks and mine is they are both from 1941. This is the year after mine and they changed the style of the headlights - mounted on the mudguard, and front grille - elongated at the bottom with vertical bars.

Another difference between my truck (1940) and the two 1941 trucks is that I mine only has a single speed diff.

Not sure what else they changed in 1941 apart from the increase in pretty bits.

Kind Regards
Lionel

[Lionelgee]

G'day David and Tony,

Thank you for providing the information about the MCP Chevrolet trucks of the era.

Would the trucks of the day have a pull-push switch mounted on the gear stick to select which speed the differential operated at? I just have a plain gear stick with no sign of any brackets or mounting marks anywhere on it.

Apart from the handbrake cables there are no strands of wire leading into the differential to operate a two speed system. Presuming they were cable operated?

Kind Regards
Lionel

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by motto

I know little of the pre 1942 Chevrolet trucks and am somewhat surprised that the army classed these vehicles as 3 ton.
The 42 model we know as the lend/lease Chev was basically the same truck with different sheet metal and was rated at 1-1/2 ton by the U.S. military and by Chevrolet themselves though in this country in civilian life at least they were generally considered to be 3 ton trucks.
I have a copy of TM 10-1677 for Chevrolet models 4403, 4408, 4409 and 4412 dated June 1, 1943. Stuck (glued) on the front cover is a strip of paper printed in red with the following information.
SPECIAL NOTICE The 160" Wheelbase CHEVROLET TRUCKS imported by the Commonwealth Government for essential civilian users are equipped with:-
HEAVY 10" x 5/16" FRAME REINFORCEMENTS,AUXILIARY SPRINGS, 7" WHEELS, 7-7.50 X 20 TYRES AND HAVE A GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT OF 14,300 lbs
TARE WEIGHTS ARE- CHASSIS AND CAB 4,368 lbs. TRUCK WITH PLATFORM BODY 5,068 lbs, TRUCK WITH DROPSIDE BODY 5,348 lbs, WITH STAKESIDES BODY 5,488 lbs.

Came across this manual on Ebay, thought the notice on the front cover was interesting. But of course this was discussed on here already years ago.

CHEVROLET 4403 4408 4409 4412 RHD 4X2 1.5 TON WORKSHOP MANUAL PRINTED 1943.jpg CHEVROLET 4403 4408 4409 4412 RHD 4X2 1.5 TON WORKSHOP MANUAL PRINTED 1943 2.jpg CHEVROLET 4403 4408 4409 4412 RHD 4X2 1.5 TON WORKSHOP MANUAL PRINTED 1943 3.jpg