CMP Ford F60S

RichCam · #1 28-11-11, 16:32

Guys,
This is my first post to the Softskin Forum. Our group of volunteers have been working on restoring a MkII carrier for our local Canadian Legion and along the way, a family donated their 1941 Ford F60S to our cause. With regards to the F60S, we would like to use it in conjunction with the MkII. It is in very good shape and it has a hoist/dump box on it. I have access to a CMP winch. Would it be blasphemous to add the winch to the frame, replace the dump box with a steel flat bed (with ramps) and add an frame mounted tower pulley, essentially turning the F60S into a simplified tilt and load? The carrier weighs 8000lbs and the F60 is a single axle 4x4. I don't want to create a Monster Truck and I do respect the historical value of the F60 just the way it is now. Our other option is to piece together a FAT with a single axle gator style trailer.
I would appreciate your comments.

Keith Webb · #2 28-11-11, 18:02

Is the body currently on the vehicle original?
I'd be inclined to think the load may be a little heavy for the F60S for this particular use. The single tyres tend to limit the capacity which when combined with the extra weight of a suitable flatbed and winching system you may find your self wobbling a bit... I've had a 5 ton load on a F60L and I only tried it once!
In any event, I'm sure we'd all like to see some pictures of your F60S, and a 1941 cab 12 at that!

RichCam · #3 28-11-11, 18:25

Keith,

Thank you for your response. I am inclined to agree, a 4 ton load would be a little too much and I don't need the "free" publicity of being in an accident. I will continue to source out a trailer for the carrier.
With regards to the F60S - it is all original. It was used at a sawmill as a delivery truck and a chip/sawdust truck up until 7 years ago. It is now inside and we will begin working on it this winter. Attached are a couple of pictures.

Regards,

Keith Webb · #4 28-11-11, 19:26

What a beauty!

I think the (braked) trailer is by far the better option now I've seen it.

Ryan · #5 28-11-11, 22:32

Great looking truck. And another 1941 dated cab 13. This is sure to get people talking. Do you have an exact date on the data plate?

Bob Carriere · #6 29-11-11, 00:19

....can you post a readable picture of the data plate mounted on the dash..?

She is far toooooooo good to modify and use as a tilt and load. One it would be taxing its wieght capacity to the limit..... border line unsafe .... and severely underpowered for today's driving.... and as a 1941 cab 13 rather rare !!! is the engine original..... canyou raise the box to take pcitures of the lifting system..... it may be original......

Done up as a general service vehicle it would be a serious addition to the UC....

A good modern trailer..... at least tandem if not 3 axles.... with brakes will make towing the UC a pleasant experience....rather than hair raising !!!!

Was there ever.... vestige of..... a rectangular hatch on the cab's roof...

Get some pictures before the snow starts.....

Curious.

B0B C

Phil Waterman · #7 29-11-11, 01:18

Hi All

I agree with Bob about about trying to haul 4 or 5 tons on a F60s, I have both a long and a short C60. I've towed 3-4 tons with the C60S and the with the short wheelbase it gets squirrelly towing 3 tons and only 10000 lbs on the 134 wb particularly when you hit the brakes above 30 mph. The 134 inch wheelbase tends to be lively at highway speed anyway. Up engining to give the C60S a 160 hp lets you get up to speed and pull hills good even with a gross vehicle weight of 10000 lbs add 6200 lbs in tow and it is back to feeling like an fully loaded truck with the 216 engine. Read that as slow.

The brakes on a C60S with the big drums are good, same as Ford as they are Ford brakes, booster works good and will lock up all 4 wheels at 30 MPH not a good feeling with the Non-directional tires but it will do it.

I've tried carrying 3 tons of wood in the 1941 C60L 158 inch wheel base with the 216 engine and it is stable but slow and with the smaller brake drums it is under braked unless the brakes are adjusted right on.

Only you can decide how far how often and over what roads you would be towing or carrying a full load. No question at all that F60 and C60 routinely carry loads of 3-4-5 tons on the road in their cargo roll. But that was 60+ years ago at road speeds lower than today and with other drivers who understood that you didn't cutoff a fully loaded truck and expect it not to run them over.

But having said all that it would make a classy looking haul a CMP with a Carrier in the bed or in tow.

Get the F60s as a support vehicle it looks like a good one.

Cheers Phil

RichCam · #8 29-11-11, 03:48

Guys,

Thanks for all of your positive comments and questions. I currently drive a 2009 F550 dually and I hear you all about the necessity of good (serious) brakes and a big enough engine to haul you out of a tight spot when you need it. I will look at a trailer AFTER we get the F60S running.
I checked the data plate before I left work today. It was manufactured Jan. 5th, 1941, Serial # 25938, Motor 3G-7408-F. I crawled underneath it, being in my warehouse, it wasn't an issue. It looked to have a winch plate mounted part way down the frame, just past the split differential. Hoist equipment looks original. Does it use the power take off to power the hydraulic pump? As well, the box bottom, sides and rear gate are all wood. Roof panels are solid and flat, no hatches. It did come with an engine crank handle and rifle bracket in the cab. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask. We will be bringing inside the workshop sometime in the next two weeks. Warehouse is ok for storage but its getting cold out there.
Regards, Richard.

Bob Carriere · #9 29-11-11, 03:58

Hi Richard

Don't be mislead by the winch crossmember mounting plates........all CMPs have them. The winch mounting crossmember was a factory stock issue rivetted in place when the frame was done. Those destined to have a winch were then ready for installation.

If you rtruck was an original tipper..... the hydraulic pump was probably driven by the PTO at the back of the transfer case. The same location that would have powered the winch .........tippers would not have winch and lifting device for the dump box....

That truck looks very straight and worth every effort to restore it to its former glory.

Don't forget the pictures as most of us are illeterate and love/need to see nice pictures.

Bob C

Keith Webb · #10 29-11-11, 04:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Carriere

Hi Richard

Don't be mislead by the winch crossmember mounting plates........all CMPs have them. The winch mounting crossmember was a factory stock issue rivetted in place when the frame was done. Those destined to have a winch were then ready for installation.

Bob C

Only Chev chassis came with the winch cross member. Fords did not unless factory equipped with a winch.

and from Richard:

Quote:

It was manufactured Jan. 5th, 1941, Serial # 25938, Motor 3G-7408-F.

I'm inclined to think the year date may be a mis-strike. The engine number indicates a 1942 build. I don't think even the cab 13 prototype had been built by January 1941.

Bob Carriere · #11 29-11-11, 04:17

..... to the Ford X-Purt ...........

My experience is limited due to my sheltered life as a devout Chebby Lover !!!!!!

....on the ID plate....could the 41 be actually a 44...?

Will need to crawl under the 42 F15a to see the difference.... once the ground is dry !!!!!

Very early pilots cab 13.....and HUP were around late 41(Dec) or January 42..... but I stand to be corrected again....

Bob

Ryan · #12 29-11-11, 04:56

Hi Bob, have a look here at this thread:

http://www.mapleleafup.net/forums/sh...ad.php?t=12724

Grant Bowker · #13 29-11-11, 14:30

As far as I know, all CMP dump bodies were hydraulically powered from the PTO (the transfer case PTO, not the transmission). This means that it is unlikely that there were any dump trucks equipped with a winch. (for the same reason - transfer case PTO already used for the 2nd rear axle - I haven't seen any listings for C60-X with a winch) This makes sense on another level - the electrical system on all trucks of the era, not just CMPs, didn't have the capacity of modern trucks to support loads like winches or snow plows and electric motors also were larger, heavier and I think less efficient due to advances in magnet technology. I think they would have preferred hydraulic over electric for applications that might get wet.

RichCam · #14 29-11-11, 16:29

Guys,

Thanks for all of the commentary. The pictures were taken when it was parked outside last fall, it is now inside - safe and dry. For those of you that prefer not to read, I will try and video a quick walk around, crawl underneath and include shots of the cab with a close up of the ID plate. I will then post this video to YouTube with the title "F-60S Tipper".

We will restore the Tipper to its original specs. You have convinced me that I need to chase down a FAT to haul the UC on a trailer or to winch it out of the mud.

I will post the link as soon as the video is up.

Regards, Richard

RichCam · #15 15-12-21, 20:09

I am updating an old thread but the good news is that I am making rapid progress on the F60-S tipper. A local family has purchased this vehicle and they would like to use it on their large, rural property. Currently, it is not functional with the large wood box on the rear so I have decided to convert it into a LSVW. Since this CMP looks like it was originally fabricated for civilian purposes, I have elected to keep it civilian but add some military accessories. Let's called it a Hybrid which is much better than a gate guard or a parked truck in the back 40 that is slowly rotting away. The plan is to put the 2B1 metal box on the rear and pull the hydraulic lift back on the frame. In the space between the cab and the lift, I will add a spare tire carrier and a tool locker. Inside the cab, I need to add a passenger seat and I am going to add a roof hatch. If the box clears the rear of the frame, I will add a trailer hitch and the tow rings for the front bumper. The revised F-60S will be as authentic as possible in a "could have been" configuration. At the very least, it will be in operation and enjoyed as a working piece of history. As always, comments and opinions are welcome!

RichCam · #16 15-12-21, 20:21

With the wood box removed and the 2B1 box removed, I have been able to bring the F60-S inside and get it up on jacks. The old fuel has been drained from the tank and I will work my way around the truck, draining and replacing differential, transfer case, transmission, motor oil and anti-freeze fluids. This is a very early Cab13 according to the identification tags - they are mounted on the dog house, not on the window rail.

RichCam · #17 15-12-21, 20:27

Theoretically, if I can find the ID on the motor and it matches the ID number on the tag, then the serial number should be correct? Where would the ID be located on the motor? (Now that I can look for it with a crawler on a concrete floor)

Jacques Reed · #18 15-12-21, 21:16

Hi Rich,

The engine number is actually on the transmission bell housing stamped just above the inspection cover as in example in photo.
I believe the thinking at the time was an engine would likely be replaced but the transmission would more likely stay in a vehicle. This was to keep track of the vehicles identity more so than the motor.

Cheers,

Hanno Spoelstra · #19 15-12-21, 21:29

Hi Rich,

Always good to see a CMP being brought back to life. Two remarks:
1) CMPs were never fabricated for civilian purposes. But they were sold as surplus after the war and used in large numbers by civilian operators both in Canada as well as in many countries in Europe.
2) The data plate dated Jan.1941 most likely came from an earlier F60S as the Cab 13 wasn’t in production then, IIRC.

If I lived near you I would come over and swap that 2B1 body for a civilian one. Keep us posted on your progress.

RichCam · #20 16-12-21, 01:31

Jacques, thanks for reply, I will check the bell housing on Thursday morning when I get to the shop and I will post the result. Cheers

RichCam · #21 16-12-21, 01:46

Thanks Hanno, this truck has a couple of peculiarities that I don't have answers to.......yet. (the ID plate and the English made lift) Yes, if we lived closer together I could probably swing you a deal on two FGTs as well as drive over the 2B1 body..........I will keep everyone posted. I'm trying to get this project done in the January - February time frame as this is a quiet time of the year for my business. I'm not sure if I can catch up to Mr. Bergeron but I will try.

RichCam · #22 16-12-21, 17:05

Good morning, I cleaned off the transmission bell housing and at top centre, the numbers 30 7408 F are visible. So, the Ford V8 engine that is in the F-60S matches the name tag on the dog house. Does this mean that whoever converted this Cab 11 or Cab 12 original F-60S was careful enough, when upgrading to the Cab 13 format, that they matched the engine to the tags that were installed on the dog house? Is this possible that the original Cab 11 or 12 dog house stayed with the chassis and motor and a new Cab 13 fit over it? I don't have another Ford here with a dog house here to compare to. Thoughts?

m606paz · #23 16-12-21, 17:30

Normally behind first number is a letter G you can read on blocks engines...

RichCam · #24 16-12-21, 18:33

You are correct Mariano, It is a G and not a zero. (my typo) So as far as I can tell, it is a match.

Quote:

Originally Posted by m606paz

Normally behind first number is a letter G you can read on blocks engines...

Colin Alford · #25 16-12-21, 21:17

My hunch regarding the correct production date of this truck is that it was produced on 5 Jan 1942. I suspect that the 1941 date was an error by the operator of the stamping machine who had been stamping 1941 for so long that it became habit.

In 1942, 5 Jan was the first Monday of the new year. In my life there have been a number of times that I wrote or typed the wrong year during the first few days back at school/work in January.

Keith Webb · #26 16-12-21, 22:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colin Alford

My hunch regarding the correct production date of this truck is that it was produced on 5 Jan 1942. I suspect that the 1941 date was an error by the operator of the stamping machine who had been stamping 1941 for so long that it became habit.

In 1942, 5 Jan was the first Monday of the new year. In my life there have been a number of times that I wrote or typed the wrong year during the first few days back at school/work in January.

I'm sure you are correct there Colin.

RichCam · #27 17-12-21, 14:52

Thank you Colin, that makes very good sense. Hanno, does that work out better for Cab 13 production dates as well? If so, I guess this vehicle has an 80th Birthday coming up on January 5th! Cheers, Richard

Mike Cecil · #28 17-12-21, 16:48

Hi Jacques,

You wrote "The engine number is actually on the transmission bell housing stamped just above the inspection cover as in example in photo.
I believe the thinking at the time was an engine would likely be replaced but the transmission would more likely stay in a vehicle. This was to keep track of the vehicles identity more so than the motor"

The 'G' in the Ford 'engine' number actually stands for the combination of a 3-3/16/95hp/239 cubic inch engine coupled with a 4-speed heavy-duty truck gearbox, so the number actually indicates more than just the engine, but the complete engine-gearbox assembly. So perhaps the thinking was it didn't matter where the ID number was stamped? As you know, in Aust, the 'engine' number was stamped on the front top flat of the engine block and not on the gearbox. (It was also stamped on the front right top face of the chassis in Aust assembled Fords).

Mike

rob love · #29 17-12-21, 17:30

It should be easy enough to compare the serial number and compare it to Oct, Nov, Dec 41 known serials, and Feb/Mar 42 serial numbers to see if this serial falls in between those. A list like Peter Ford's infoex would have solved this quickly.
I also think on the first Monday of the year, the guy making the plates buggered it. After all, he had been changing the day on the embosser daily, the month monthly, and never had to really think about the year.

Jacques Reed · #30 17-12-21, 21:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Cecil

Hi Jacques,

The 'G' in the Ford 'engine' number actually stands for the combination of a 3-3/16/95hp/239 cubic inch engine coupled with a 4-speed heavy-duty truck gearbox, so the number actually indicates more than just the engine, but the complete engine-gearbox assembly. So perhaps the thinking was it didn't matter where the ID number was stamped? As you know, in Aust, the 'engine' number was stamped on the front top flat of the engine block and not on the gearbox. (It was also stamped on the front right top face of the chassis in Aust assembled Fords).

Mike

Hi Mike,

The photo I posted of the number stamped on the gearbox is on my F-15A. It corresponds with ARN 55166 and had an Australian cab and diamond plate floor so I assume it was Australian assembled. I've had three chassis and none were stamped. All had Australian cabs. Another collector believes not all chassis were stamped.
Both my engines are 1946 blocks but have no Ford s/n's. They do have later state issued numbers that are located at the top left rear of the block. Will have to look at a wartime built engine to see the serial numbers you mention. Being 1946 engines perhaps they were replacement engines and therefore not stamped by Ford?

Cheers,