Read the web site page - Vic Roads can't provide you with the record because they have given them to AOMC. This seem s to have happened only a year or two ago - some desk jockys need longer than that to find their way home.
Either that or they are full of SH.. and make it up as they go along!
Trouble is with these types of govt bodies, you get some ill-informed, just out of school graduate, who instead of asking somebody more in the know, just wing it.
But, like I said above, a week can't hurt to see if the girl in the sub-branch finds out anything, if no answer, then I'll approach that AOMC.
Truck was last registered in 1985 going by the old sticker, probably been lying in that cockies paddock for at least 15 years slowly rotting away.
Just a bit of an update on sussing out details of that Karrier.
Received an email overnight from the Commercial Vehicle register in the U.K.
Quote "Hello Dave
We can confIrm that this vehicle is a post 1957 Bantam, and that 74A is the model and 8283 is the chassis number. The all metal CAB WAS FIRST INTRODUCED IN 1948, AND YOUR CAB IS A POST 1957 MODEL WITH A SINGLE GLASS WINDSCREEN."
Just after lunch this arvo, the delightful young lady from the Vicroads sub branch rang me with the good news that she had found out the following:-
Rego expired in 1991,
Details archived in December 1993
Was originally registered as a 1956 Karrier tray
She even found the original engine No. it was rego'd with.
As the engine numbers are later than the Karrier registered in S.A. (Commer Karrier photos post), either one of a couple of things may have happened, it COULD have been recabbed or there may have been an error of details entered into the records. Until I can find the engine number of the one here (and it's damn well hidden!) and hope that it matches the one Vicroads found, for the purpose of the exercise I'm declaring it a 1958 model.
The girl at Vicroads also told me that they would accept that, as long as the engine numbers match with their records and I can prove proof of ownership. (I can, have an approved bill of sale).
Just want to take this opportunity to thank everyone who has helped me out with this. At one stage I didn't seem to be getting anywhere and gradually it starts to fall into place, like a jigsaw.
One thing I do know, I'll be replacing as many of those battleship nuts and bolts ( those old obsolete Whitworth) as I can get away with.
So, anyone out there contemplating a rebuild of something you may have a few doubts about, this forum and it's members input has been invaluable.
Thanks again Guys. And Gals who toil for Vicroads !
Well done Dave, does show perseverance pays, and Vic Roads proved more helpful than us doubters thought might be the case.
Is it possible some rogue in the past has just transferred the plate to a completely different truck? I guess engine no will shed some light.
Just went out and checked the I.D. plates, THINK they are genuine to the cab (I'm no expert on fasteners but they are NOT pop riveted on, more like the rivets they would use in the factory, NO centre hole) Of course it is always possible that it has had another shed put on the chassis, but I doubt it. Everything so far is pointing to the very first model KB Karrier after the cessation of the split screen model, badges, placement of lights, indicators, recessed headlights, position of lower marking lights etc. Changeover from split to one piece screen is indicating 1957, engine no (if original) should bring more to light. We reckon we are going to declare it a 1958 KB model.
Just as an aside, run into a bloke in Ballarat whilst trying to identify these rotten wheelstuds and he worked for the local Commer/Karrier dealer in Geelong back in the fifties. When asked what he thought about them, he said "O.K. but they seemed to use up every available nut and bolt in the Rootes factory, so don't be surprised if nothing fits the norm". Rootes must have been doing it hard in that era.
I showed him the wheel stud I had, after having it I.D'd by the bolt specialist, it is DEFINITELY 18mm X 2mm (TPI of 12.5?) and what bamboozled me was that on one end of the stud, exterior wise, took a 5/8 BSW socket (28mm just that fraction loose), but on the internal thread where the stud comes through the housing, takes a 1/2 BSW socket. One and five sixteenths SAE or AF just that little bit loose (maybe 33mm closer?). Said to totally disregard bolt head sizes, said he worked on a Sunbeam sedan and just about EVERY nut and bolt used BSW spanner sizes, BUT the entire car was almost ALL metric thread. Go figure? Just as to why this was ever done looks like remaining a mystery to me anyway. Possibly something to comply with world standards bandied about in 1947, one way of getting around it. Yanks disregarded it anyway. Don't know if this is true or not, but Canada accepted the ISO standards of metrification, across the border in mainland states they set up their own version.
Just to throw another spanner in the works, when it comes to bolt sizes in 18mm, seems the universal standards are 2.5mm pitch for coarse, 1.5mm for fine. That's what most bolt places carry. There are listings for other pitches in 18mm thread, 1mm (called superfine and this mongrel half bred thing I have called god-knows what, at 2mm pitch.) My bolt man told me it is very rare and COULD have been used primarily for aircraft.automotive or extremely unusual machinery which needs high loads.
So, I'm really not much better off than when I started, I'd like to swap out as many of these damn things as I can, but would entail having all new wheelstuds made up from scratch to suit the non-standard rims, can get away with it on the front, different story on the rear where the rims are dual tapered, on the stud as well as the wheelnut. Could at least look at the studs that the wheel rims came from and see if they are anything like I have, although inclined to think they may even be BSF threads (Leyland Terrier 6 stud--HELP! Eddy, got a workshop manual?).
No wonder I have very little hair left! But, we'll keep chipping away. Cheers,
Once again I have to eat humble pie! Either I am going completely blind or I have lost the plot in it's entirety!
I used an old Whitworth thread gauge which is probably as old as me. No excuse!
The bolt man used a metric thread gauge and what I thought at first, measuring across the peaks to be 12.5 TPI DOES come out exactly as you point out, 12.7.
Glad I am not a micro-surgeon, I'd be facing some hefty malpractice suits!
Does throw a completely new slant on things. Only thing I have to be thankful for is I didn't rip into anything major and am not too proud to admit it when I make a stuff-up.
I find it a little strange that the 18mm X 2mm is listed in a lot of bolt charts, yet from what I have searched so far, seems very hard to get. May have to suss out a really good speciality bolt man or maybe even an engineers supply. Only need three nuts to suit the thread where the wheelstud goes through the hub adapter. Rest I won't tamper with!
Where the hub adapter bolts onto the actual brake drum is held on by 6 X 7/16 BSF thread bolts, roughly 35mm long (possibly just under 1 & 1/2"), but I will take it down to the bolt man and throw it on the counter. Made a D/H of myself a few times over bolt threads.
Thanks for the heads up. Dave
Don't beat yourself up Dave, by asking lotsa questions we have all learnt something about Commers and you will have saved the next bloke going down the same path. Sounds like Rootes were making everything themselves so it didn't matter (to them) if it was non standard.
Next time you are at one of them cheap tool stalls at a swap meet grab a thread gauge pack - they have an imperial set one side and a metric set on the other. When using the gauge it is best to hold it up to the light to check that it is a neat match.