Thread: Help I am trying to trace a Series 3A landy

Originally Posted by Beckford

Where in the Blue Mountains?

We are based at Oberon, so could take it I guess even to Penrith
Not sure yet of what state it's in but do know that the engine is in bits.
Thanks

Originally Posted by JDNSW

I don't believe this can be correct. From quite early Series 1 production, PMC was assembling CKD Landrovers. But early on parts that could be made locally were. This included electrical equipment and tyres. But at least by Series 2a some panels were being produced by PMC, and the 2a military chassis was apparently developed by PMC and only later produced for the One Ton in the UK.

However, the Series 3 introduced pressed chassis rails on the lwb, and this may have been the innovation referred to. Or it may have simply been that these represented the change of chassis/panels from the 2a, with full CKD kits being used to produce Series 3s until tooling was completed (and tested with these two vehicles).

John

I would personally doubt that the series 2a LWB military chassis was developed at PMC and later used on UK 1 tonners. British Army 3/4 ton 2a lwb's apparently also had the deeper spring hangers too, so that the optional 9.00x16'' tyres could be fitted without modifying the guards and rear wheel boxes. AFAIK The OZ military never used 9,00's on any LandRover variants except for 101FC's.
The Aus Military swb 2a chassis was unique however, as it's British counterpart didn't have the deeper spring hangers and longer shackles.
I would also question that the ''Pressed'' series 3 LWB chassis would have been worth developing here. Press tooling in those pre CNC machinary days would have been very expensive to produce for the low sales volume of LandRovers in OZ back then. .According to I think it was Jeff Slavins book '' LandRover the Unbeatable 4X4'', chassis assembly to export markets was mainly restricted to assembly of or final welding of outriggers and crossmembers.
Having said all that, When I was working for a Military surplus Landrover dealer back in the day, I did come across a few mysterious 'one off' prototype? components that would have required some investment in special tooling, patterns etc, so anything's possible.
Bill.

Originally Posted by Selsi

We are based at Oberon, so could take it I guess even to Penrith
Not sure yet of what state it's in but do know that the engine is in bits.
Thanks

PM Sent.

Originally Posted by JDNSW

I don't believe this can be correct. From quite early Series 1 production, PMC was assembling CKD Landrovers. But early on parts that could be made locally were. This included electrical equipment and tyres. But at least by Series 2a some panels were being produced by PMC,
John

I agree. I have a 1964 Rover Australia price list with Au parts marked as such & even then large no.s of parts were made in Au. I think in their ads at one stage (I may be wrong) "65% Au content"

I think the Series 3 bulkhead is unique to some Au assembled, after the initial batch of imported. One difference is the mirror bracket.

There were considerable tax/import duty issues that did make it economical to spend money on tooling. Even if imported bits were used, later parts were made in Au. A good example is 80 guard outers in steel.

Originally Posted by fc110

I agree. I have a 1964 Rover Australia price list with Au parts marked as such & even then large no.s of parts were made in Au. I think in their ads at one stage (I may be wrong) "65% Au content"

I think the Series 3 bulkhead is unique to some Au assembled, after the initial batch of imported. One difference is the mirror bracket.

There were considerable tax/import duty issues that did make it economical to spend money on tooling. Even if imported bits were used, later parts were made in Au. A good example is 80 guard outers in steel.

Content figures quoted can be misleading, as the percentages refer to the value of the vehicle, not the number of bits - and assembly costs, largely labour, probably represent close to 50%. Without building engines, gearboxes, and axles locally (and as far as I know these were never done here for Landrovers) it would be hard to get above something like 65%. Apart from assembly this probably included tyres, glass, rubber, some electrical, paint, perhaps standard fasteners (maybe not, as these were not a big part of cost). As you say, there were strong tax incentives to increase local content, and tooling up for and pressing panels would be the easy way to do this. Remember that the Series Landrover was specifically designed from the start to need minimum tooling for body panels, which means that producing these locally would also have required minimum tooling.

John

To all those people who helped to trace the lost Series III, thanks....

It has been transported to Melbourne and is currently being rebuilt and restored.

Hopefully it will be driven under it's own power to it's new home near Oberon, NSW where it will be reregistered as an historicic vehicle.

A picture is attached of it starting it's journey to Melbourne.

Originally Posted by Selsi

To all those people who helped to trace the lost Series III, thanks....

It has been transported to Melbourne and is currently being rebuilt and restored.

Hopefully it will be driven under it's own power to it's new home near Oberon, NSW where it will be reregistered as an historicic vehicle.

A picture is attached of it starting it's journey to Melbourne.

I'm glad it's all worked out ok

Originally Posted by JDNSW

there were strong tax incentives to increase local content

pity this doesn't happen now