tm9-801.com

As I am beginning to research for my wood bed restoration I have become aware of a few important facts. First, not everything is in the TMs and some very notable CCKW owners don't have all the answers.

Recently a question was asked on the mounting of a CCKW bed. All the 'know it alls' (as we will see, don't) said that the bed sill was drilled so the rivet heads of the crossmember would fit into them and allow the sill to lay flush on the frame. BULLOCKS! I said. I have in my possession 2 beds and one was drilled, the other had a section cut out, tapered on both ends... so I dutifully posted a picture of it.

Well, here's further proof that the know it all's, well, don't.



Note the TWO cut outs for rivet heads. I know this is a pretty banged up chassis. But the bed appears to be a composite one and they were used from 44 on. Add that to my wood bed and it seems a pattern is forming.

Which one is 'right'? Well, since the wood beds were not Yellow Coach/GMC Truck produced one could assume that each wood bed supplier had their own method. The beds are not in the SNL-G-508 other than as a reference PN and no specific TM for them was produced.

I'll be looking for more examples. But right now both were used, on at least two separate bed type.s

JACKPOT!!!!

Lookie here. A late production CCKW 353 with the cut out for the rivets on the bed sill.



Lets blow that sucker up and look closer shall we???



Well well well... looks like a taper in the sill to allow for the cross member rivets above the rear bogey. MY MY MY.

Let me sum this up with a 'SUCK IT' to all the people who say that the beds are counter sunk to allow for the rivets only.

All you gotta do is LOOK and not blindly follow.

And here's a close up of a wooden bed off a 4/43 CCKW



So who believes that all CCKW sills were bored for rivet heads? I got 3 perfect examples that clearly show there were other methods.

Just another pic of the 'notch' or 'cutout' type bed sill mounting.



More pics are available at http://www.northwestmilitaryvehicles.com/CCKW.html

Another interesting pic of the same bed sill. First, the sill is laminated (you can make out the individual lamination's AND you can clearly see the front 'notch' or 'cutout' for frame cross member rivets.

Latest Army Motors #130 has a nice article on post war French Army CCKW rebuilding program there are phoyos of wood cargo bodies being rebuilt, note the relief holes in the wood subframes for the chassis rivets.

There is no doubt that the rivet holes were drilled out. That is without question.

The question remains of all the wood bed manufacturers who used the 'notch' style vs the drilled?

Also, as the above pics illustrate, the sills were either solid wood beams or laminated, either vertically or horizontally. Any idea on which manufacturer used what 'style'?

The pictures above come from trucks made in 1943 and 1944.

Another picture of the 'notch' type sill mount.


http://www.armyfiretrucks.com/restoration_cckw.htm

Also, it would seem that we have a data plate for a composite bed with notch type cutouts:


http://www.northwestmilitaryvehicles.com/CCKW.html

Case closed?

Just another example of the different sill construction used on CCKWs.



This is from http://www.armyfiretrucks.com/ Note this is an Airborne modified trucks (it can be split in two at the gusset just aft of the cab).

Note the laminated sill construction and of course, the milled out gap.

The cargo bodies with the bearers cut away to clear the rivet heads on the chassis would be the standardised units. The Studebaker US6 had a different rivet layout to the CCKW and the standardised body was made to fit either truck.
Another feature that had to be taken into account was that the bearer needed to finish way short of the front end of the body to allow for the spare wheel to come in over the top of the chassis. The US6 has the spare wheel (and so also the fuel tank) on the opposite side to the CCKW so needed the right hand bearer to be short whereas the CCKW required the left side bearer to be short. To fit either truck both bearers needed to be short and that's what was done.
I have a composite body with original stencilling on the forward panel that states that it is 'For GMC,Studebaker and Reo, 6x6 and 6x4.'
David

VERY Interesting.

I also have a composite bed with the stencil.

But the US6 was shipped to the USSR:

Overall production:
105917 of 6x6 and 87742 of 6x4 + 22204 REO 6x6
(reportedly some 152000 of US6 shipped to USSR).

Roughly 100,000 trucks were cargo versions. Would the Army modify the bed to fit such a small number of trucks? It seems like they would just add a paragraph in the assembly instructions to cut the sill if it is to be installed on a Stude/REO. I say this becuase the 8 September 1943 "Manual of Operations for assembling wood cargo bodies packed for export" specifically shows long wheel base wooden bodies modified for ONE specific Ford truck (you have to move a cross sill and reroute some wires).

I will post the paragraph when I get time to.

Many hundreds of US6s were used by the Australian Army and they are more readily found here than CCKWs. The GMCs were sold off long before the Studebakers which were not put into general service until the 1960s having been kept in storage since delivery in 40s. Virtually all the Stude's and Reos that I have seen have a 1945 DoD. They were all 6x6 and all hard cabs. The cargo bodies were predominantly of composite construction with quite a number of wooden ones among them. All the trucks that I have had anything to do with had the sills milled away to clear the rivet heads, I have never seen one that was drilled. The machining was clearly done by the manufacturer.
The sills varied in construction with some being made from solid timber and some laminated horizontally, I even seem to remember one body having sills that were laminated vertically, each being made from three planks.
The maintenance manual for the Chevrolet 1-1/2 ton 4x2 truck model 4403 June 1941 shows one of these trucks with what is clearly a CCKW style cargo body on it. The mudguards are still spaced to suit a tandem rear end and look strange so far away from the single axle.
Standardisation was the name of the game and U.S. military/industry did it far better than anybody else.
David

Here is one of the pages of the 'Manual of Instructions for Assembling Wood Cargo Bodies for Export'. Its dated 8/43 (the composite bodies were right around the corner) and it shows SOME of the work required to get a standardized wood body to fit a Ford



Now the most interesting photo is next. It clearly shows the sills and that they are NOTCHED and both sills are the same length.



The sills extend all the way to the second crossmember (the only other crossmember is the front headboard or sill #1).

But even though the layout of all the parts for the 80x144 bed shows the notch, all subsequent pictures show the drilled holes:




So as far as I can conclusively tell, yes, there were two types of sills. And you explination of the different rivethead pattern is as good as any. Maybe if someone had pics of the rear wheel mounts and the rivet heads? The manual does not say anything about the sills.
The manual clearly states that they are also for Studebaker trucks and that sills are the same length.