Universal Carrier No32

[John Clarke]

It's arrived! All present and correct.
Shushhhhh, actually I got three extra track links. Either that or I can't count.

It's always a pleasure of finding all the parts in the box of white wonderment, although one of the tray units eluded me for ages.

Some bureaucrat took that sort of pleasure away back in the 70's, when they stopped putting plastic toys in corn flakes boxes.
(If you eat a plastic bag with a plastic airplane in it, your parents have done a woeful job.)

Here's the obligatory box photo

SAM_3289.JPG (217.02 KiB) Viewed 6367 times

Totally worth it!

[John Clarke]

So the search begins.

Was the Armortek type of carrier with the BEF 1939-40? I'd like to do two tone camo such as this.

bren-carrier_mk1_web.jpg (45.78 KiB) Viewed 6342 times

But the problem is this, I have not found any clear pictures of this type of carrier. the only carrier type seen with the BEF to be sure is the "Scout".
I found one picture that could be the Armortek type at Southampton docks before embarkation, but the picture is hazy to say the least, the left side square armor plate seems present. Maybe, maybe not?

13.JPG (25.97 KiB) Viewed 6342 times

Any help would be appreciated.

[John Clarke]

Well it seems the Universal Carrier Mk2 debuted around 1942 so the BEF idea has to be rethought.
In the mean time I've started doing a few little bits and plan ahead. The Armortek universal carrier is a super model as we're seeing from the ongoing builds.
To tighten up things I thought I'd get the box joints welded up. Some of the steel is very thin, mud guards etc, so I'm going to have to find someone with a good steady hand and needs a fast food meal, which will be sometime next year now.

I did get these bits done, a bit rough but nothing a good session with the hand sander won't sort.

SAM_3292.JPG (192.29 KiB) Viewed 6071 times

[John Clarke]

I managed to get the last of the welding done on the UC, If I'd done it we'd have had an accurate model of a vehicle left behind by Micheal Whittman on Cean Road with the rest of Brigadier William "Loony" Hinde, the 22nd Armoured Brigade group

Even a good friend who is a great welder turned the job down because metal is so thin.

But another coded welder I know, well it's like watching magic being performed.

The welds will need a bit of fettling and painting for storage.

[Vince Cutajar]

Excellent welds. Was it MIG or TIG?

Vince

[Phil Woollard]

They are pretty good, I would say tungsten inert gas?

[John Clarke]

Tig it was, with stainless rods, I did ask why not use ordinary steel rods and the chap said the stainless steel rods are usually a much higher quality.
Who am I to argue.
I hold my breath while welding so I have about a minutes worth of welding in me, if it's thin metal, its all over in seconds

Although, I do have the skills Of T34 production line fettlier

[John Clarke]

My motion pack arrived a day early "DING DONG!"
Checked it out, Looks nice, very compact easy to setup.

Looking at the builds so far, I've been most surprised by how much space there seems to be.

The supplied Electronic Speed controller (ESC) is very similar to some spares I keep on stock for other models.
If I'm right, the Speed controller supplied should have a Battery Eliminator Circuit (BEC) of 5.5 volts limited to 3 amps.

With this in mind I don't think I'll be temped to add anything to the BEC circuit than what has been designed.

I'll to need add my own separately supplied and controlled lighting circuits and maybe a small smoker (Sorry Greta )

[John Clarke]

Absolutely loving the builds on the UC, I do like what Armortek has come up with and though some would go their own way on a quest of excellence. I have had my own thoughts on the direction I'd like to travel.
Armortek provide a good setup that can deliver what it says on the box. I like the Differential braking system and the warping track ability.
I think it adds a scale aspect to the model.

I think I'd like to see a better match of gearbox and motor, where the motor is suited to the battery voltage and the gearbox generates the necessary torque for a full motor range output. A Graupner 7.2 volt 600 speed mated to a 1:25 ratio gearbox available on line should provide a similar speed range to the supplied system but with much higher torque, so slow speeds and greater control should be achieved throughout the speed range.
I'm not going to quote figures, I don't know them and field trials can be quite different to the drawing board. The upside is that the alternative motor gearbox is a virtual straight swop, so no extra cutting or machining required and if it doesn't work it can always be flipped into the spares bin.

The braking system seems to have been cracked by some earlier on, without the need for the round head set screws. A couple of months back I saw a chap on Youtube form his own disc pads from angle grinder slitting disc's. An interesting concept that could be translated into something as a brake disc for the UC. Maybe...

The UC track links are wonderful, I did think of tightening them up with some stainless steel 1.5mm pins that fit quite well. but as the track was built up it began to warp to one side. I'll be sticking to the original supplied stainless steel split pins (nice) with nipped up loops, a dollop of grease in the split and neat bit of trimming. That way I'm sure at low speeds (see above), I'll be able to achieve track steering.

I love this Model and the many variations being made. Any modifications made are purely for the owners pleasure and warranties always go sailing down the Swanee.

SAM_3500.JPG (210.5 KiB) Viewed 5440 times

[John Clarke]

Ooops, I put the wrong ratio on the last post. actually meant 25:1, oh well, found 26:1 gearbox and a good Graupner 600 motor, put them together to see what sort of performance they could deliver.

I borrowed a Tachometer to do some comparisons.

As it turns out it's not too bad, Both motor and gearboxes were tested with freshly charged 7.2 volt battery packs.

The 12:1 ratio Armotek motor & gearbox output is around 950 RPM on the output shaft and the 26:1 with the Graupner 600 motor & gearbox provided a reasonable 730 RPM on the output shaft.

I'm guessing the torque will be some what more with the 26:1 gearbox with a loss of around 20% top end speed. Originally I thought top end speed would be a important factor but having control over the speed has to me become a more apparent.

Torque will be handy for slow running and gradients. The 26:1 gearbox is noisier than the 12:1 gearbox, the down side of the higher revving 7.2 volt 600 motor.

The other problem I found was that run times are short, even with the lower wattage 600 motor. So I'll have to invest invest in a pretty high capacity battery pack/packs. But they should be easy to recharge and replace in the hamper box on the rear.

It'll be interesting to see if/how the substitute motor and gearbox performs, fortunately it's a straight swop. It's nice to have options and No chainsaw required.

Still loving the Twin drive builds, Surprised to see no ones bunged in a Enya 19 or a Veco 19 IC motor in the UC yet!
That'll wake the neighbors!

Even just battery powered, Armortek meets might resemble race days, hoards of em, each UC tuned to perfection. Battery chargers humming in the background. Dodging the big boys like a steering competition