If (theoretically, as there's nothing concrete as yet) what would be (commercially) the most logical version of the Universal Carrier?

Would (considering the variants) it be more logical to produce a Mark I, II or III rather than a Loyd or Windsor? Personally, i'd root for the Mk II.

Hypothetically, it wouldn't be a huge step to go from the basic Mk. II to the Mortar or HMG Carriers or even the Wasp I or II? Would it?

Would it make commercial sense?

Hi Jim

The Mk II would be spot on, just so long as it does not have individual track links, the old eyes are not what they use to be and the fingers are not as nimble either

cheers
David

Id like to see an mark i AND a mark II, especially something like the australians used in the pacifc and the desert...


and with better tracks than the old tamiya jobbie

A new Mk. I and Mk. II would be excellent, link and length tracks preferred !!!
As a Canadian, a T-16 or Windsor would be favourably accepted.
Cheers

jjumbo

I'd like to see a Loyd or Windsor myself. Surely there's enough Universals around along with their conversion kits?

Theoretically I'd say the Mk II has the greatest subject matter however if however someone "Theoretically" does one of these then I hope they "Theoretically" study how Tamiya did the tracks on the Renualt UE as link and length is the way to go for these in 35th.
Once they have the running gear a whole family could be offerd including the Vickers Lt Mk VI's.
Theoretically speaking of course
Al

Thanks Al - helpful as always! Albeit speaking (as we are) entirely hypothetically..

The tracks issue is a useful point..

A first choice for me would be the Lloyd as it's not available in plastic and especially if a 6pdr came along too!! Plus there are 4 distinct versions that come form it that are significently different but based on the basic vehicle. Much more interesting.

The Versions were

Carrier Personnel
Carrier Tracked Towing (for the 6pdr)
carrier Tracked Towing (4.2 inch Mortar) requires a trailer
Carrier Tracked Starting and Charging

If a new carrier was coming along then I'd go for a Mk I as again as 2 x Mk IIs already exists and the Mk I soldiered on throughout the war in all theaters of operations, so you have a vehicle that can be used in any WW2 time frame.

The current Tamiya Mk II kit even given it's age and it's faults can be fixed up as the main weakness is the tracks, drive wheel and the thickness of the frontal armour. All the basic Mk II versions are the same with diifferent stowage/radios for HQ Carrier, PL carrier, Section Commanders Carrier, and basic Section vehicle.

Mortat Carriers

There weer 4 versions based on the Mk I chassis the only main difference being the engine. One version was Canadian Built.

There were 4 versions based on the Mk II carrier, again different engines and again one based on a Canadian vehicle.

Medium Machine Gun Carrier

There were 4 versions based on the Mk I Carrier.

There were 4 versions based on the Mk II Carrier

There were 3 versions somewhat unique to Australia.

AOP Carrier

1 version based on the Mk 1 and 1 Based on the Mk II, with 4 based on the Mk III

So either the Mk I or Mk II would easily produce the AOP, 3 inch Mortar Carrier and MG Carrier and all could be further divided into PL, Sec Comd, and Basic vehicle, but the Mk I has a wider time frame.

I'd still prefer a Loyd

Al

Edit:

WASP Mk I and Mk II

All designed on the Mk I Chassis.

Originally

Ronson - Canadian design based on the Mk I
WASP Mk I - British design mounted on the Mk I
WASP Mk II - Britrish design mounted on the Mk i
Wasp Mk IIc - British design mounted on the Mk I then modified by the Canadians and tested on the T 16.

Sorry the Mk I has it in my eyes despite what's been said about the Mk II as it fits the bill for every version.

Al

Would theoretical marking be provided for Pacific subjects, as well as North Africa and the MTO? Theoretical figures in warm weather gear would be nice. I'm not up on the various types manufactured but it is an interesting subject.

Since the question is, "What would make commercial sense" and not, "What would you like to see" I agree with Alan that the Mk I would get the most mileage.

Quite honestly, i am amazed that a proper kit of a Universal carrier hasn't emerged as it was as ubiquitous as a Jeep in the Commonwealth Forces and it served in a multitude of roles. The Tamiya kit is very long in tooth and while I still have a dozen of them, I only ever completed one and that took a year of scratch-building (well before PE and resin). I'd love to build a dozen more but I really don't relish all that correction work that is necessary.

I would welcome either a Mark I or Mark II but I suspect if one was produced, the common parts would encourage a second type. Other variants could follow fairly easily. It's probably the only subject that would get me to salivate after 40 years in this 1/35th hobby. Well, maybe a Diamond t with Rogers trailer.

Cheers,
Ron V

Or even how Dragon did the tracks on the M2/M3. 2 complete sides and place the running gear in the middle!

Hi Matthew,

Glad to see someone else knows their carriers too.

Theoretically, can I broaden the discussion a little in terms of 'interesting builds'.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Mk I Universal Carrier offers the greatest range of possibilities so that would make commercial sense. A range of versions would sell, providing the kit is 'superior' and cost effective to the current offering.

However, theoretically is there any reason why a Loyd could not be developed too?

The reason I'm flying the flag for the Loyd is the uniqueness of each version in terms of interesting builds and becasue it has always been the poor cousin of the Universal, when in fact it to was produced and used in large numbers.

The first prototype came into being in 1939 so this little tractor can be see in service from 39 throught to 45.

There were 7 versions of the Personnel Carrier.
There were 4 versions of the Tracked Starting and Charging
There was 1 version of the Mechanical Cable Laying Carrier
There were 4 version used to tow the 2pdr
There were 8 Versions used to tow the 6pdr and 4.2 inch mortar.

Anyone producing the 6pdr would really need a Loyd to tow it as they were the preferred vehicle and used widely in this role.

The visual diffference between each version of the Loyd is striking which cannot be said about the Universal carrier much as I love that little vehicle.

Anyone not sure of what I'm getting at here check yout the 4 versions currently being offered by Accurate Armour and tell me those don't look like they would sell in plastic and make seriously interesting builds.

http://www.accurate-armour.com/showaaproducts.cfm?category=1&subcategory=1

Yes, I know one can only dream .I'll have to buy and build all 4 of the Accurate Armour kits to give this one a chance of being done in plastic

I'm sure any new quality carrier would be extremely welcome.

Al

Edit: The production of a Loyd would also lead us closer to those missing support weapons like the 6pdr anti tank gun and 4.2 inch mortar!!

Sheer bloody Genius! Thanks for that - since you suggested that, i've been looking thru my references and see the total logic of that idea. The idea of seperate links would be pretty nightmarish. This leaves TWO possibilities, Link 'N Length or one piece.

OK, let me open up a bit, since the components of the Running-Gear are identical, what would the leap be from a Mk 1 to Mk 2. In other words how much would have to be adapted for a FUTURE release?

Again, speaking hypothetically...

would the theoreticals ever explore a long awaited, long overdue Vickers Mk6 ? ...my apologies for the off topic blastphemy.
Cheers Doug.

Hi Jim,

The basic vehichel remained the same as it was 'universal'. What they did was change the layout of the equipment/stowage, so that the vehicle could hold an extra passenger easily. The fixing of the large bin on the rear of the carrier freed up internal space on the rear LHS. Stowage bins were also added in the footwells over the fuel tanks.

Some of the changes were simple for-instance, in the Mk I the front stowage bins in the drivers compartment were open topped, in the Mk II they had closed lids. The mudguards style changed in the Mk II although you can see a mix of both on the vehicle.

The instrument panel in the Mark I was different, and the side and rear panel armour also changed slightly in the Mk II as the radio fixings were in a different place and the Mk I could mount the .30 Cal MG on the RHS, front and rear bulkheads of the vehicle. There were different headlights, depending on whether the vehicle was Canadian or British made.

The rear stowage altered to the familiar Tamiya style of bin and bag, tools were repositioned but this was all mainly small stuff.

There was no difference in hull width, height, wheels, or track as far as I can remember. The rear bulkhead in the drivers compartment in the Mk II is slightly different than the Mk I if I remember correctly as are the seats but I'd have to check back.

So new side panels, and rear panel, bulkhead and instrument panel, Closed bins in the footwell and drivers compartment and on the rear plate and the rest is down to re-positioning of the existing equipment or added additional stuff like the tow hook and fitings and lights on the front armour.

Hence my recommendation on Nigels Watson's Universal Carrier Volume 1 & 2.

Much easier to change the Mk I to the Mk II than the Mk II to the Mk I I believe.

Hope that helps a bit.

Al

So logically (and hypothetically ) it would be logical to begin with the Mark I and move onto the Mk II later?

The Loyd, would be MY personal preference also I take you point and agree with the comments about the 6-pounder.

I'm not even sure that the Loyd wouldn't be easier to tool-up either. Alsom the running-gear components would have the added advantage that they could be used for a Universal later...

Hi Jim,

I believe so, the Mk I would be the logical starting point, give a completely new vehicle and form the basis for all future developments of either Mk I varients, (which run theroughout the war), or morfing into the Mk II at some point.

It's a clean slate and therefore can't be compared against the old Tamiya kit, many of the parts once manufactures will be generic to future versions and personally I think it is a more interesting vehicle.

Perhaps someone will pick up on the Loyd, it's such a neat vehicle in it's 5 main formats with lots of room for 'experimental' builds for the scratch builder.

Al

Jim, as you know I'm almost a total Axis builder, but I guarantee I would buy at least one UC IF I didn't need to rekit the damn thing the way I would have to with the Tamiya kit. I asked Alan off-list once what it would take to do a nice vehicle, and the cost in time & $$$ just put me off it. But a nice OOB Universal Carrier would be a splendid item to have in one's stash, even for an Axis builder like me.

May I add, off subject as this is a what I would like to see, an Aussue or NZ Local pattern LP2 would be nice. This would save me a lot of work in converting the Tamiya kit!
Mind you any version would be a good start, especially if the manufacturer was to do others, as so many seem to have realised is a good way of using moulds and increasing sales.

I'm sure everyone could come up with a list of what they'd like to see. Unfortunately, this is moving into the area of AM manufacturers - for a mainstream (injection-moulded) manufacturer, this would be commercial suicide. I'm not raining on anyone's parade here, but how many would actually buy one of the Australian or NZ variants? Thought not...

I've strongly recommended (following the feedback here, on ML and looking at my own material) that a Mark I would be the logical starting point. Particular thanks to Al (for his always succint suggestions ) and also to everyone else for their constructive suggestions

I've also suggested that the Loyd is ALSO considered.

I'll keep you posted on how things develop...

Hi Jim,

Sounds promising, will look forward to developments.

Al

This sounds interesting, I would like any carrier that comes out be it a Mk.I, II, Loyd or Windsor.

Let me just throw this out, for whatever it's worth. It seems to me that any manufacturer couldn't do very wrong by just copying Tamiya, but updated. How long has the Tamiya Carrier been out? How many kits have been purchased over that length of time? One person here mentions having six of them, even though they aren't all that happy with them. I've had three in the stash at one time, and I rarely buy more than one copy of any particular kit.

Look what Tamiya did with their updated Matilda. If they, or any other "hypothetical" manufacturer were to update a version of the Tamiya kit, not copying it of course but giving it decent tracks, good suspension, scale, or at least close to scale armor panels, along with some P.E. extras and a good set of figures they'd sell a ton. They could then come out with the same exact vehicle but with a different set of figures and sell some more. Then a third set of figures, along with different makings of course, and sell some more. If they then made some simple changes to the basic kit and change it to a different version, even more. In sort they wouldn't have to re-invent the wheel each time. One more critical item, don't make the kit too expensive. Price it more than the current Tamiya kit is going for, but much less than what a medium sized tank goes for.

No "hypothetical" manufacturer is ever going to please everybody. There are going to be those who only make Axis, those who want only a vehicle from their own region or country, those who turn their nose up at anything that isn't resin, and those who want to kit bash any kit, no matter how perfect it might be. Just make a good, state of the art kit, that you can do a few minor changes, especially as to figures and markings, and it should be a commercial success.