Fergie47:
Can’t go through 141 pages to find if this has been posted before, if it has…if it hasn’t…
( sent via a friend from a French forum)
Thanks! Yes, that’s a Martin Phippard photo of a French NGC on Middle-East work (Arabic script on grille) taken in Yugoslavia. Robert
Carryfast:
ERF-NGC-European:
As an aside to my ^^^above reply re 8MW cabs, I would point out that there is almost certainly no danger that one of our known NGCs will turn out to be a re-cabbed non-NGC which used to have a 4MW / 6MW cab. I say this because I know of no 4x2 units with that cab that was sold in UK or Europe (all 6x4s). The only single example of a 4x2 4MW that I can find went to NZ, and as that was a wrecker even that one may have been a cut down 6x4. RobertWouldn’t that premise logically translate as 8 MW being mainly meant as a factory identifier and referring specifically to loose 7MW cabs provided with a factory made mounting kit which made them 8 MW by default ?.Which might answer the question as to the mounting kits all being factory designed if not also fabricated specifically for their respective applications.Which then raises the question of loose 7 MW cabs and mounting kits also being provided for odd number retrospective use in addition to 8 MW.So it’s quite possible that odd number MW’s could also have been retrospectively modified with loose 7 MW cabs just as even number types could.I’d guess that the Cauvas unit might fall into that category ?.IE retrospective fit of a loose 7 MW cab using factory supplied mounting kit ?.
Yes indeed. To sum up, it seems probable that 7MW cabs could be retro-fitted to chassis previously bearing 5MW cabs; and that 8MW cabs could be retro-fitted to chassis previously bearing 4MW / 6MW cabs. I think what you are suggesting is that if that is the case, then some of our so-called NGCs might turn out to be MGCs with later-fitted 7MW cabs. That could put a spanner in the works! However, there is a quick test: the NGC chassis was waisted behind the cab, so the fuel tank appears at a slight angle on the chassis rail and you can see the difference using the rear mudguard as a reference point.
A word of caution though, we know of no rumoured or documented examples of 7MWs replacing 5MW cabs. We also know of only one documented 7/8MW cab replacing a 6MW cab and as that was RHD the issue is clouded. It seems we’re on the right track but in sore need of evidence. Robert
ERF-NGC-European:
Carryfast:
ERF-NGC-European:
As an aside to my ^^^above reply re 8MW cabs, I would point out that there is almost certainly no danger that one of our known NGCs will turn out to be a re-cabbed non-NGC which used to have a 4MW / 6MW cab. I say this because I know of no 4x2 units with that cab that was sold in UK or Europe (all 6x4s). The only single example of a 4x2 4MW that I can find went to NZ, and as that was a wrecker even that one may have been a cut down 6x4. RobertWouldn’t that premise logically translate as 8 MW being mainly meant as a factory identifier and referring specifically to loose 7MW cabs provided with a factory made mounting kit which made them 8 MW by default ?.Which might answer the question as to the mounting kits all being factory designed if not also fabricated specifically for their respective applications.Which then raises the question of loose 7 MW cabs and mounting kits also being provided for odd number retrospective use in addition to 8 MW.So it’s quite possible that odd number MW’s could also have been retrospectively modified with loose 7 MW cabs just as even number types could.I’d guess that the Cauvas unit might fall into that category ?.IE retrospective fit of a loose 7 MW cab using factory supplied mounting kit ?.
Yes indeed. To sum up, it seems probable that 7MW cabs could be retro-fitted to chassis previously bearing 5MW cabs; and that 8MW cabs could be retro-fitted to chassis previously bearing 4MW / 6MW cabs. I think what you are suggesting is that if that is the case, then some of our so-called NGCs might turn out to be MGCs with later-fitted 7MW cabs. That could put a spanner in the works! However, there is a quick test: the NGC chassis was waisted behind the cab, so the fuel tank appears at a slight angle on the chassis rail and you can see the difference using the rear mudguard as a reference point.
A word of caution though, we know of no rumoured or documented examples of 7MWs replacing 5MW cabs. We also know of only one documented 7/8MW cab replacing a 6MW cab and as that was RHD the issue is clouded. It seems we’re on the right track but in sore need of evidence. Robert
Robert,remember the chap i spoke to who put the new cab on Pountains motor at Cossington’s.He said that
they had to put some sort of kit on that one so the cab could tilt.
DEANB:
ERF-NGC-European:
Carryfast:
ERF-NGC-European:
As an aside to my ^^^above reply re 8MW cabs, I would point out that there is almost certainly no danger that one of our known NGCs will turn out to be a re-cabbed non-NGC which used to have a 4MW / 6MW cab. I say this because I know of no 4x2 units with that cab that was sold in UK or Europe (all 6x4s). The only single example of a 4x2 4MW that I can find went to NZ, and as that was a wrecker even that one may have been a cut down 6x4. RobertWouldn’t that premise logically translate as 8 MW being mainly meant as a factory identifier and referring specifically to loose 7MW cabs provided with a factory made mounting kit which made them 8 MW by default ?.Which might answer the question as to the mounting kits all being factory designed if not also fabricated specifically for their respective applications.Which then raises the question of loose 7 MW cabs and mounting kits also being provided for odd number retrospective use in addition to 8 MW.So it’s quite possible that odd number MW’s could also have been retrospectively modified with loose 7 MW cabs just as even number types could.I’d guess that the Cauvas unit might fall into that category ?.IE retrospective fit of a loose 7 MW cab using factory supplied mounting kit ?.
Yes indeed. To sum up, it seems probable that 7MW cabs could be retro-fitted to chassis previously bearing 5MW cabs; and that 8MW cabs could be retro-fitted to chassis previously bearing 4MW / 6MW cabs. I think what you are suggesting is that if that is the case, then some of our so-called NGCs might turn out to be MGCs with later-fitted 7MW cabs. That could put a spanner in the works! However, there is a quick test: the NGC chassis was waisted behind the cab, so the fuel tank appears at a slight angle on the chassis rail and you can see the difference using the rear mudguard as a reference point.
A word of caution though, we know of no rumoured or documented examples of 7MWs replacing 5MW cabs. We also know of only one documented 7/8MW cab replacing a 6MW cab and as that was RHD the issue is clouded. It seems we’re on the right track but in sore need of evidence. Robert
Robert,remember the chap i spoke to who put the new cab on Pountains motor at Cossington’s.He said that
they had to put some sort of kit on that one so the cab could tilt.
To be honest, I’ve always regarded that as a bit of a one-off job as they had either to convert the cab to RHD first, or perhaps use only the outer shell. Robert
ERF-NGC-European:
Carryfast:
ERF-NGC-European:
As an aside to my ^^^above reply re 8MW cabs, I would point out that there is almost certainly no danger that one of our known NGCs will turn out to be a re-cabbed non-NGC which used to have a 4MW / 6MW cab. I say this because I know of no 4x2 units with that cab that was sold in UK or Europe (all 6x4s). The only single example of a 4x2 4MW that I can find went to NZ, and as that was a wrecker even that one may have been a cut down 6x4. RobertWouldn’t that premise logically translate as 8 MW being mainly meant as a factory identifier and referring specifically to loose 7MW cabs provided with a factory made mounting kit which made them 8 MW by default ?.Which might answer the question as to the mounting kits all being factory designed if not also fabricated specifically for their respective applications.Which then raises the question of loose 7 MW cabs and mounting kits also being provided for odd number retrospective use in addition to 8 MW.So it’s quite possible that odd number MW’s could also have been retrospectively modified with loose 7 MW cabs just as even number types could.I’d guess that the Cauvas unit might fall into that category ?.IE retrospective fit of a loose 7 MW cab using factory supplied mounting kit ?.
Yes indeed. To sum up, it seems probable that 7MW cabs could be retro-fitted to chassis previously bearing 5MW cabs; and that 8MW cabs could be retro-fitted to chassis previously bearing 4MW / 6MW cabs. I think what you are suggesting is that if that is the case, then some of our so-called NGCs might turn out to be MGCs with later-fitted 7MW cabs. That could put a spanner in the works! However, there is a quick test: the NGC chassis was waisted behind the cab, so the fuel tank appears at a slight angle on the chassis rail and you can see the difference using the rear mudguard as a reference point.
A word of caution though, we know of no rumoured or documented examples of 7MWs replacing 5MW cabs. We also know of only one documented 7/8MW cab replacing a 6MW cab and as that was RHD the issue is clouded. It seems we’re on the right track but in sore need of evidence. Robert
I’d guess that it’s mainly a question related to the 6 x 4 examples like Cauvas etc ?.Based on the clear division between the choice of either going for a stretched chassis conversion of 4 x 2 NGC as opposed to a 7 MW cab conversion of other 6 x 4 types. 
Carryfast:
ERF-NGC-European:
Carryfast:
ERF-NGC-European:
As an aside to my ^^^above reply re 8MW cabs, I would point out that there is almost certainly no danger that one of our known NGCs will turn out to be a re-cabbed non-NGC which used to have a 4MW / 6MW cab. I say this because I know of no 4x2 units with that cab that was sold in UK or Europe (all 6x4s). The only single example of a 4x2 4MW that I can find went to NZ, and as that was a wrecker even that one may have been a cut down 6x4. RobertWouldn’t that premise logically translate as 8 MW being mainly meant as a factory identifier and referring specifically to loose 7MW cabs provided with a factory made mounting kit which made them 8 MW by default ?.Which might answer the question as to the mounting kits all being factory designed if not also fabricated specifically for their respective applications.Which then raises the question of loose 7 MW cabs and mounting kits also being provided for odd number retrospective use in addition to 8 MW.So it’s quite possible that odd number MW’s could also have been retrospectively modified with loose 7 MW cabs just as even number types could.I’d guess that the Cauvas unit might fall into that category ?.IE retrospective fit of a loose 7 MW cab using factory supplied mounting kit ?.
Yes indeed. To sum up, it seems probable that 7MW cabs could be retro-fitted to chassis previously bearing 5MW cabs; and that 8MW cabs could be retro-fitted to chassis previously bearing 4MW / 6MW cabs. I think what you are suggesting is that if that is the case, then some of our so-called NGCs might turn out to be MGCs with later-fitted 7MW cabs. That could put a spanner in the works! However, there is a quick test: the NGC chassis was waisted behind the cab, so the fuel tank appears at a slight angle on the chassis rail and you can see the difference using the rear mudguard as a reference point.
A word of caution though, we know of no rumoured or documented examples of 7MWs replacing 5MW cabs. We also know of only one documented 7/8MW cab replacing a 6MW cab and as that was RHD the issue is clouded. It seems we’re on the right track but in sore need of evidence. Robert
I’d guess that it’s mainly a question related to the 6 x 4 examples like Cauvas etc ?.Based on the clear division between the choice of either going for a stretched chassis conversion of 4 x 2 NGC as opposed to a 7 MW cab conversion of other 6 x 4 types.
Precisely, except that the Cauvas might have had a graft-on, which category you didn’t mention! Robert
DEANB:
May have been a false one but without doubt in my opinion,one of the best looking ones.0
Absolutely! And this is a new picture too 
. I think we have another pic of UGE with that steam loco on the trailer somewhere. Robert
A bit more progress on the model front, as depicted below. Ash says, *'Not the best pics, but heres a couple of interior “first fix”. Curtains, upper bunk, a/c vents. *
*Curtains made from 2 ply tissue. Spilt, then sprayed with “photomount” glue, stuck back together then “scrunched up” to form creases. Un-scrunched then painted olive green. *
Glueing together makes the tissue harder but still pliable to fold/scrunch and paint without disintegrating when paint is wet. Next will be door handle/window winder then its ready for floor pan to slide up.’
Magic! Robert
Those curtains are very impressive ! Ash is doing a cracking job chap ! 
ERF-NGC-European:
With any luck this may stimulate more info or material! Robert0
Wheres my ticket you tight git !!! 
DEANB:
ERF-NGC-European:
With any luck this may stimulate more info or material! Robert0
Wheres my ticket you tight git !!!
I don’t issue them! And mine’s gratis!
Well the talk at Crewe seems to have been well-received! A few points arose from the talk because, as I hoped would happen, people found me afterwards to add details. I also made one or two new contacts. Here as some points to ponder.
Apparently, between Eric Vick and Trans Arabia, KFH 248P and KFH 249P were sold to Goldings Heavy Haulage of Wooten-Under-Edge. Whether they actually ran them or simply acted as dealers is not yet known.
Before Beeches garage sold JDF 132N to Beresford Transport, it was leased to Grocott – we know that because Graham Beech provided a picture which I put on here a while back. What I didn’t know was that Grocott did Middle East with it. We already knew that Grocott did Middle East BTW. Graham is hunting me out any more details.
There were five ex- NGC drivers there. I was able to have confirmed that the top speed was around 60 mph which fits in with my findings about the final drive ratio being used as a ‘limiter’ with a sensible margin for European running.
Meanwhile, others are keeping their eyes peeled for any more material.
Cheers, Robert
ERF-NGC-European:
Well the talk at Crewe seems to have been well-received! A few points arose from the talk because, as I hoped would happen, people found me afterwards to add details. I also made one or two new contacts. Here as some points to ponder.
Apparently, between Eric Vick and Trans Arabia, KFH 248P and KFH 249P were sold to Goldings Heavy Haulage of Wooten-Under-Edge. Whether they actually ran them or simply acted as dealers is not yet known.
Before Beeches garage sold JDH 132N to Beresford Transport, it was leased to Grocott – we know that because Graham Beech provided a picture which I put on here a while back. What I didn’t know was that Grocott did Middle East with it. Graham is hunting me out any more details.
There were four or five ex- NGC drivers there. I was able to have confirmed that the top speed was around 60 mph which fits in with my findings about the final drive ratio being used as a ‘limiter’ with a sensible margin for European running.
Meanwhile, others are keeping their eyes peeled for any more material.
Cheers, Robert
Some intresting bits and bobs there chap ! Golding heavy haulage is a turn up for the books ■■ I know someone who
has thousand of heavy haulage pics i will have a word with him.
Be intresting to see what Graham comes up with, and thats also another big surprise that Grocott did ME with it ■■
Some good stuff there chap !
DEANB:
Just realised that will be John Golding heavy haulage who had all the American trucks.0
Yes that’s the one! Apparently, they ran several LHD trucks incl Whites.
DEANB:
Willemstein new pic.Week ended in Venice.0
Excellent! That’s a new pic too. Weekended in Venice: toss up between a cook-up between the tilts and pizza in Piazza St Mark, I imagine . Robert
Clearly John Golding wasn’t ERF-averse, if this pic is anything to go by! Robert
