British Jeep

[sitalkes]

Design of the Land Rover didn’t even begin until 1947. Was a British equivalent of the Jeep/Kubelwagen made during the war? Or was the Universal Carrier and the Daimler Dingo doing the same job? They could have made an unarmoured version of the Dingo, if they had wanted to, surely, or did the existence of the Jeep make it unnecessary?

In The Audit of War, Corelli Barnet says:

North American trucks and gun-tractors were produced by a few large firms like Chevrolet, Ford, Dodge, Chrysler and Mack, with excellent R&D organisations and vast plants. Here were powerfully engined vehicles, ruggedly built, well suspended and comfortable to drive; apt for long distances over bad terrain, and easy to maintain. Although the British ends of American makers, such as Ford, Bedford (General Motors), made a significant contribution to British output, the remainder of United Kingdom production emanated from technically backward native firms like Morris Commercial and a rabble of small and today mostly extinct smaller makers. No one who, after driving in a North American Ford or Chevrolet 15-cwt truck, experienced the Morris Commercial version could forget the Morris engine, quiet as a pneumatic hammer, or the transmission, smooth as if filled with gravel, or the seats and springing, as cushioning as the road surface itself, and the entire vehicle straining fit to explode or disintegrate when pushed beyond 45 miles an hour. The British motor industry developed no equivalent of the indispensable jeep or Kubelwagen during the war.

[Sid Guttridge]

I seem to remember that the first show of the first series of the Chris Evans/Matt LeBlanc version of Topgear featured a competition between the first Landrover and a wartime Jeep. The Jeep won.

Given that the Jeep was half a decade older in design and the Landrover designers had the benefit of slipstreaming in its wake, it implies that Corelli Barnet's proposition that most of the British motor vehicle industry was relatively backward has some substance.

Given that there was no direct British equivalent to the Jeep and that they were cheap, Lend-Leased and plentiful, it is not surprising that the Landrover was not developed until after the war.

Interestingly, Argentina, which was the only Latin American country excluded from Lend-Lease, did develop a Jeep equivalent, but this was swamped in cheap, post-war Jeep imports and never reached production.

I recall somebody commenting decades ago that because the UK had the most developed metalled road system in the world, it had less need to develop off-road or all terrain vehicle technology. By contrast, France was a much bigger country with poorer roads and French cars were built with more robust suspension for their domestic market. One consequence of this was that Peugeot managed to penetrate not only French African colonies but British colonies as well. As a child in Kenya in 1958-61, I can remember Peugeot 403s all over the place, and the Peugeot 404 was very common in Rhodesia in the late 1970s.

Cheers,

Sid

[Knouterer]

Correlli Barnett seems a bit too inclined to sweeping condemnations of everything Britsh (not surprising perhaps from the author of The Collapse of British Power and similar-sounding titles ...). Looking at British military vehicle production during WWII, some designs were less inspired than others, and on the whole British vehicles were more basic and not as comfortable as American vehicles, yet rugged and dependable types were produced that gave good service and in many cases soldiered on until the late 60s. The Bedford QL, AEC Matador and the various Scammell 6x4 tractors and breakdown vehicles come to mind.

Regarding the jeep, in 1939/40 the British army relied on a combination of motorcycles - every subaltern officer had to learn to ride one - and 2-seaters and light utility vehicles in the 8, 10 and 12hp class (Austin, Morris, Hillman, Standard). These were soon found to be unsuitable for frontline service. When the Jeep became available in large numbers, there was no longer any need for the British to develop anything similar.

Page from C. Ellis and D. Bishop, Military Transport of World War II. The motorcycle has the white rhino symbol of the 1st Armoured Division.

[Knouterer]

Regarding the Type 82 VW Kübelwagen, IMHO it would not have been beyond the capabilities of the British motor industry to produce something similar, but I don't see why the British army would have wanted it.

German military vehicle production in WWII was fairly chaotic and inefficient, certainly compared to the USA where early on a coherent system of weight classes and types of vehicles was laid down and the entire automotive industry was put to work producing just that and nothing else.

Where the US Army (and allied armies ) had the jeep and nothing but the jeep, the German army had light, medium and heavy field cars, and in all three categories various German manufacturers produced their own models. Austrian (Steyr) and Czech (Skoda, Tatra) manufacturers went right on producing their own models which were different again. Apart from this multitude of different models, many cars (the heavy models in particular) were overly complicated and expensive, with features such as steerable rear wheels.

It soon became clear that in this way the industry would never be able to meet the rapidly increasing needs of the armed forces. Here the VW Kübelwagen offered an attractive solution. It was cheap (the heavy BMW and Zündapp motorcycles with sidecars, for example, cost twice as much), light (barely more than half the weight of a jeep, so it could easily be pulled or lifted free from the Russian mud or North African sand), easy to maintain and repair, and very economical, which was important in view of the perennial fuel shortage. The air-cooled engine also stood up well to extreme conditions.

With all those qualities, it was a "disposable" vehicle; as a German author (Werner Oswald, Kraftfahrzeuge und Panzer der Reichswehr, Wehrmacht und Bundeswehr) has pointed out, under wartime conditions most did not last for 5,000 km, only very few if any ever reached 10,000 km. If they had been required to serve in peacetime after the war and do say 100,000 km in 15 years, their reputation would have suffered.

The British and US armies preferred vehicles that were built to last, and could afford them.

[Tomg44]

The British army had other priorities prior to WW2.
When offered lots of free Jeeps, they took them.
Would they would have wanted as many if required to pay for them?

There is interesting information on the evolution of the Jeep here.
http://www.allpar.com/history/bantam-jeep.html

The Austins mentioned in the articles would have been Austin 7's, which had amazing off-road capability.
These ones are 80+ years old! I have better off-road tires on my bike!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58A8u7_cRsE

If they had been seriously "militarised", They would probably have looked like the Bantam Pilot.
The Pilot morphed into the Willys Jeep.

[Sheldrake]

Here are two nominations for the "British Jeep"

#1 The Universal carrier



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Carrier
The AFV produiced in the largest numbers in history 113,000 built (compared to C.50k Kubelwagens)

#2 the LandRover
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Rover

Prototype built from jeep parts

[Petrus]

A British own 'true' jeep was built in 1943 by Standard Motor Co. It was smaller a bit than the US jeep, also it lacked 4WD, being 4x2 only. Obviously, when US jeeps became available in large quantities, a further development of the vehicle and its series production were quite rightly deemed pointless.

Specs in metric system:
Wheelbase: 1905 mm
Length: 3150 mm
Width: 1600 mm
Height: 1626 mm
Engine: 4 cyl. 44 BHP
Weight: 864 kg or 965 kg (elsewhere on the Internet I found info that it weighted 19 cwt)
Tyres: 6.00-16
Gearbox: 4F1R

Standard 4x2 1943.jpg (42.57 KiB) Viewed 999 times

Standard 4x2 1943 02.jpg (49.2 KiB) Viewed 999 times

[EwenS]

On the outbreak of war Britain needed vehicles for the war effort. And it needed them now. This was particularly true after June 1940 when only a fraction of the vehicles sent to support the BEF came back to Britain. It couldn’t wait to design purpose built vehicles like the Jeep. That would have meant loss of production and a less mobile army in the immediate short term. So instead it used motorcycles and the latest models of cars in production by various companies like Austin, Morris, Hellman, Standard etc. Later these were developed with utility bodies with pick-up style bodies and canvas tilts.

It is worthwhile remembering that the origins of the Jeep go back to the efforts of the Bantam Car Co from 1938 but it took until 1940 before the US Army showed any interest, and late 1941 before the Willys Jeep was decided on as the standard. Much easier to do that when the USA was at peace without bombs dropping on its factories.

The original Land Rover series 1 was produced with an eye on the agricultural market being a cross between a tractor (it was given a power take off to power farm machinery) and a utility vehicle. It was designed to be produced cheaply. Aluminium body due to the surplus from scrapping all those WW2 aircraft already in the country instead of expensive steel.

[LineDoggie]

It is worthwhile remembering that the origins of the Jeep go back to the efforts of the Bantam Car Co from 1938 but it took until 1940 before the US Army showed any interest, and late 1941 before the Willys Jeep was decided on as the standard. Much easier to do that when the USA was at peace without bombs dropping on its factories.

Well we weren't obligated by any mutual defence treaty to your king, we weren't subjects of the crown. The UK basically declared war on Germany so if your werent ready it was Chamberlains fault

As to why it took so long well when you are at peace you can afford to take your time to let a design mature, and it may not have priority over Warships and Aircraft, etc.




[/quote]