1948 Hudson brochure

[rmcgrice]

For those interested, I have uploaded a 1948 Hudson brochure to one of my
web sites.

The older people will find it interesting, particularly if you compare this
car to the 48 Holden/Chevy/Ford :-)

http://member.newsguy.com/~mcgrice/ABPA/hudson_01.htm

Ron

[Jason James]

"rmcgrice" <mcgrice@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969555368BEF1nofuse@129.250.170.89...
> For those interested, I have uploaded a 1948 Hudson brochure to one of my
> web sites.
>
> The older people will find it interesting, particularly if you compare
this
> car to the 48 Holden/Chevy/Ford :-)
>
> http://member.newsguy.com/~mcgrice/ABPA/hudson_01.htm
>
> Ron

Very interesting. I love looking at old specs. The staright 8 is only
marginally larger in capacity and hp to the 6. Something I didnt know. My
Uncle had one in 8cyl,..I remember the front seat was wide-enough to seat 5
across.

I've often tried looking for specs on WW2 tank engines which were
petrol,..especially the panzers which used BMW engines I think.

Jason

[John_H]

Jason James wrote:
>
>I've often tried looking for specs on WW2 tank engines which were
>petrol,..especially the panzers which used BMW engines I think.

British and American were petrol (some used aircraft engines). German
tanks were diesel.

--
John H

[athol]

John_H <john4271@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Jason James wrote:

>>I've often tried looking for specs on WW2 tank engines which were
>>petrol,..especially the panzers which used BMW engines I think.

> British and American were petrol (some used aircraft engines). German
> tanks were diesel.

From "The History of Holden Since 1917" by Norm Darwin
(E L Ford Publications Pty Ltd, ISBN 0.959.2287.05), page 146:

"Australia's Cruiser tank, built in the NSW Government annex was fitted
with GMH supplied Cadillac engines. Fitted in a 'clover-leaf' pattern
of three engines the package was dry sumped, used a common crankcase
and meshed to a single output shaft. Special three stage oil pumps
were fitted. The Cruiser was capable of 35 mph and weighed in at 26
tons."

There is a photo of the tank and a photo of the engine assembly
production line. The engines were Cadillac V8s.

--
Athol
<http://cust.idl.com.au/athol> Linux Registered User # 254000
The state of infrastructure in New South Wales is a disgrace.
I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss.

[John_H]

athol wrote:
>
>"Australia's Cruiser tank, built in the NSW Government annex was fitted
>with GMH supplied Cadillac engines. Fitted in a 'clover-leaf' pattern
>of three engines the package was dry sumped, used a common crankcase
>and meshed to a single output shaft. Special three stage oil pumps
>were fitted. The Cruiser was capable of 35 mph and weighed in at 26
>tons."

Reminds me.... IIRC Chrysler built a "W" design as a WW2 tank engine,
which is in their museum. Pretty sure it's on their website.

--
John H

[Jason James]

"John_H" <john4271@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nvtgd11gogct7nqnhn60utf0ta98iqfodc@4ax.com...
> Jason James wrote:
> >
> >I've often tried looking for specs on WW2 tank engines which were
> >petrol,..especially the panzers which used BMW engines I think.
>
> British and American were petrol (some used aircraft engines). German
> tanks were diesel.

There you go. During the 'Battle of the Bulge', the last ditch attempt by
Hitler to stop the Normandy invasion, failed, when the panzers ran out of
fuel. Apparently, the German tank-commanders were trying to reach an
American fuel dump. So I guess the allies had both petrol and diesel fuels.

Jason

[John_H]

Jason James wrote:

>
>"John_H" <john4271@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:nvtgd11gogct7nqnhn60utf0ta98iqfodc@4ax.com...
>> Jason James wrote:
>> >
>> >I've often tried looking for specs on WW2 tank engines which were
>> >petrol,..especially the panzers which used BMW engines I think.
>>
>> British and American were petrol (some used aircraft engines). German
>> tanks were diesel.
>
>There you go. During the 'Battle of the Bulge', the last ditch attempt by
>Hitler to stop the Normandy invasion, failed, when the panzers ran out of
>fuel. Apparently, the German tank-commanders were trying to reach an
>American fuel dump. So I guess the allies had both petrol and diesel fuels.

It's possible that the Americans had diesel earthmoving equipment...
the Seabees certainly used D7's in the Pacific region (of which
there's still quite a few rusting in peace around Oz). I can recall
reading that captured German fuel dumps in North Africa were destroyed
because our side couldn't use it but the Americans weren't involved in
that one.

As a bit of trivia. The German military's decision to go diesel is
supposed to be one of things that was upsetting poor old Rudolph when
he went overboard just prior to WW1.

--
John H