1963 Morris 6cwt O-Type Van Post Office Telephones
![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
Comments about this vehicle
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2022-12-15 22:29 |
FUU reversed is a London Series allocated in its entirety to the Post Office in 1963. The vehicle in question meets the dates used elsewhere on this site, therefore, for what is described as a Morris 6cwt O-type van. -- Last edit: 2022-12-15 22:35:34 |
|
◊ 2022-12-15 23:03 |
Hint of PO Telephones livery |
|
◊ 2022-12-15 23:48 |
^^ More than that, it’s kitted out as per the engineer’s van exterior, with a ladder rack. -- Last edit: 2022-12-15 23:50:43 |
|
◊ 2022-12-16 09:02 |
![[Image: 2022-12-16.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/3808/2022-12-16.jpg) Yes your right External Maintenance vans . 1 TO 297FUU supplied in 1963 Interestingly 2FUU pictured here number survives on a SORNed 1988 Mercedes. ( Looking AT 1-20FUU 10FUU is also current on a BMW.) https://www.britishtelephones.com/vehicles/minorvans/126.htm -- Last edit: 2022-12-16 09:06:29 |
|
◊ 2022-12-16 09:13 |
Thanks for this, JCB. Interesting database, also, interesting nomenclature in the page shown, presumably PO rather than anybody else’s. (Minor Series III?). Also, still fitted with the “ears” type of indicators, in ‘63, had the generally available vans got those by then? PO speak, 1963 style:- “This van supersedes and is interchangeable with Minor Vans Types 1 and 2. The cab has two seats to accommodate one passenger and the driver and.-is separated from the vehicle body by a wire-mesh partition. A roof ladder rack is provided for the transport of a Ladder, Extension, No. 4A or 5. Steps, Folding, 5-tread may also be carried within the body immediately under the roof of the vehicle, using the securing straps. The standard vehicle is fitted with two internal racks (unit A), one either side of the body, for the accommodation of tools and stores. Additional racks (units B and C) are available and may be mounted above the unit A racks. The vehicle is intended for use on duties that normally require one man only and where the weight of tools and stores to be carried does not exceed 5 cwt. If however a passenger is carried, the vehicle load must not exceed 4 cwt.” Wonderful! Don’t take Fat Freddie, he’ll overload it! I wonder what the penalty was if you took Ladder, Extension, No. 4B? -- Last edit: 2022-12-16 09:21:14 |
|
◊ 2022-12-16 09:20 |
I have just read the very same, no passengers over 8 stone !! Sadly as I weigh well in excess of 1 cwt (50kg in metric) I could be a danger in this van .gif ":)") -- Last edit: 2022-12-16 09:29:35 |
|
◊ 2022-12-16 09:27 |
[quote=johnfromstaffs]Thanks for this, JCB. Interesting database, also, interesting nomenclature in the page shown, presumably PO rather than anybody else’s. (Minor Series III?). Yes probably like the British military, they gave Land Rovers different Mark Numbers for each change from inception with last military S11A models being Mark 11. Interesting that GPO specified smaller engines for their Minors . -- Last edit: 2022-12-16 09:30:32 |
|
◊ 2022-12-16 09:37 |
They also continued this when they changed to the Vauxhall HA van. iirc, there was a variant with a minute carburettor (HA110?) that restricted the output to about 25bhp. One of my mates was a PO engineer, he reckoned these vans were dangerous because they were so gutless. |
|
◊ 2022-12-16 11:41 |
My first boss had a 1100 Escort Mk2 in some kind of poverty/economy spec. (no chrome at all). It was a company car and he said same about that , so underpowered it was dangerous. -- Last edit: 2022-12-16 17:42:37 |
