Land Rover Military One-Tonne E-Book

James Taylor

• Herausgeber: Crowood
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2015

Seitenzahl: 255

Beschreibung

A fully illustrated history of the Land Rover 101 One-Tonne - the forward-control military vehicle developed as a gun tractor for the British Army, in production from 1975-1978. This essential guide to these small yet powerful 4 x 4 vehicles covers: production histories; design and prototypes; specification guides; the 101 in British military service between 1975 and 1998; the 101 variants - ambulances, Rapier tractors, hard-bodied versions for electronic warfare and special field conversions; sales to overseas military authorities and, finally, advice on buying and owning a 101 today. Of great interest to Land Rover and military vehicle enthusiasts, historians and owners' clubs and illustrated with 207 original colour photographs.

Leseprobe

Land Rover Military One-Tonne

James Taylor

THE CROWOOD PRESS

First published in 2015 by The Crowood Press Ltd Ramsbury, Marlborough Wiltshire SN8 2HR

www.crowood.com

This e-book first published in 2015

© James Taylor 2015

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

ISBN 978 1 84797 892 9

CONTENTS

Acknowledgements

Timeline

CHAPTER 1     ORIGINS

CHAPTER 2     DESIGN AND PROTOTYPES

CHAPTER 3     PRE-PRODUCTION AND TRIALS

CHAPTER 4     THE 101 IN PRODUCTION

CHAPTER 5     THE 101 IN BRITISH MILITARY SERVICE

CHAPTER 6     BRITISH 101 VARIANTS

CHAPTER 7     THE 101 IN OVERSEAS SERVICE

CHAPTER 8     AFTERLIFE

Appendix: Powered-Axle Trailers

Index

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I probably started writing this book some time in the 1990s, although I didn’t realize it at the time because I was simply collecting information about the One-Tonne Forward Control as it came my way. The first indication of some attempt to organize it all came in 2000, when I wrote an article for Land Rover Monthly magazine to celebrate twenty-five years since the 101 had entered service. That article forms the essential backbone of this book – although the story has been hugely amplified by subsequent research.

A lot of people have contributed to that research, particularly by writing to me in response to the Roverphile column that I have been running since the mid-1990s (in Land Rover Owner 1996–99 and 2012 to date, Land Rover Monthly 1999–2000 and 2010–12 and Land Rover Enthusiast 2000–10). Colleagues on all those magazines played their part, too, in particular Bob Morrison and Pat Ware. I couldn’t compile a list of all those who have helped me with little points of detail if I tried, but those who did will know who they are.

A few people have provided special help, and I am pleased to mention them. From Land Rover itself, these have been Mike Broadhead, (the late) Norman Busby, Roger Crathorne and Bob Lees. In Australia, help has come from Glenn Smith and from several members of the Registry of ex-Military Land Rovers, notably Neil Dailey, Rod Genn and Richard Green. In Canada, Robin Craig helped out. In Luxembourg, indirect help has come from Nico Lauryssen and Jean-Claude Thies.

In the UK, members of the 101 Forward Control Club and Register whose input proved invaluable have included Les Adams, Alan Armstrong, Peter Barratt, Darren Parsons and (the late) Chris Savidge. I must also single out for particular thanks Phil Bashall of the Dunsfold Collection of Land Rovers, military vehicle historian Geoff Fletcher, whose enthusiasm for this project matched my own, and several members of the staff at the Heritage Motor Centre over the years: Richard Bacchus, Richard Brotherton, Anders Clausager, Lisa Stevens and Jan Valentino.

To all those I have failed to acknowledge, my thanks are no less sincere. I hope they will forgive a failing memory!

© BMIHT – All publicity material and photographs originally produced for/by the British Leyland Motor Corporation, British Leyland Ltd and Rover Group including all its subsidiary companies is the copyright of the British Motor Industry Heritage Trust and is reproduced in this publication with their permission. Permission to use images does not imply the assignment of copyright, and anyone wishing to re-use this material should contact BMIHT for permission to do so.

JAMES TAYLOROxfordshire, May 2014

TIMELINE

——

1966

First FVRDE forward-control mock-ups

——

1967

First discussions between FVRDE and Rover Company about the new vehicle

——

1968

6-cylinder prototypes built

——

1968(late)

Switch to V8 engine

——

1970

Comparative military trials

——

1971

Contract issued to Rover Company

——

1972

First pre-production models built

——

1974

First four production vehicles; Trans-Sahara expedition

——

1975

Start of volume production

——

1978

End of production

——

2000

Last 101 One-Tonne in UK military service

CHAPTER ONE

ORIGINS

The story of the Land Rover 101 began in 1965, three years before the first prototype was completed and nine years before volume production formally began, with a War Office study into its future vehicle requirements. Among other things, this study highlighted the need for a GS (general service) 4×4 vehicle with a one-ton payload that would fill the gap between the existing Land Rovers with their ¼-ton and ¾-ton ratings and the four-ton Bedford MJ and MK trucks. ‘There are many roles,’ the report on that study read, ‘for which the smaller vehicles are inadequate and the larger one expensive or tactically unacceptable.’

In fact, the War Office already had three types of one-ton vehicle in service, but the Austins and Morrises that were rated with that capacity were elderly designs that were near the end of their service life, and the remaining Humbers had all been converted to armoured ‘Pigs’. So another study was set up to develop a specification for a one-ton vehicle that would meet all the requirements that the War Office could then foresee.

One of these was that the vehicle should be capable of towing a one-ton trailer to give a total train capacity of two tons. Another was that it should be capable of towing the forthcoming 105mm light gun, which, it was already clear, would be too heavy to be towed by existing Land Rovers. At this stage, the War Office was also taking an interest in powered-axle trailers – trailers with an axle driven by the towing vehicle through its tow hitch – and the plan was to have a powered axle on the carriage of the 105mm gun. Behind a 4×4 towing vehicle, the resulting 6×6 combination was expected to give formidable cross-country ability in rough going.

At this time, there was very close liaison between the Rover Company, who built Land Rovers at their factory in Solihull, south-east of Birmingham, and FVRDE, the Fighting Vehicles Research and Development Establishment at Chobham in Surrey. The key figures involved were Cyril Belfitt, who was a civilian in a senior position at FVRDE, and Tom Barton, who ran Land Rover engineering. Rover was only too well aware of the importance of British military contracts to its Land Rover sales, and had established this liaison so that it could react quickly to any new military requirement that came along. It was already experimenting with powered-axle trailers, working in tandem with Scottorn Trailers Ltd, and by 1964 the Scottorn system had become commercially available as a Land Rover approved accessory.

The British armed forces had been using short-wheelbase Land Rovers since the start of the 1950s, but there was a limit to what they could cram into one, as this picture of a 1960s Series IIA 88in model shows.LAND ROVER

There was more room in a 109in long-wheelbase Land Rover, which was also better suited to towing duties. One is seen here on the FVRDE test course at Long Valley, towing a field gun. There was a limit to what the 109 could tow, however, and it was not going to be capable of handling the army’s new 105mm light gun.KEN TWIST, AUTHOR

Also under development in the mid-1960s was a lightweight version of the 88in model, designed to be carried under a Wessex helicopter. Some of the thinking behind this model, usually known simply as the Lightweight, would eventually carry over to the 101 One-Tonne as well.LAND ROVER

THE 110IN GUN TRACTOR

As soon as Rover learned that their existing Land Rovers were not going to be powerful enough to handle the new light gun, they got started on the design of a bigger and more powerful model that would do the job. They were clearly also aware that the new 105mm light gun was expected to have a powered carriage, and so they made sure that the new vehicle incorporated the technology needed to drive it.

As the military had not yet issued a formal requirement for a new vehicle, Rover developed their new Land Rover as a private venture. It ended up being a lot larger and heavier than existing long-wheelbase models, although it was still recognizable as a Land Rover. It was powered by a 3-litre 6-cylinder petrol engine – detuned from its Rover saloon car application – that developed 110bhp, as compared to the 77bhp of the standard 2.25-litre 4-cylinder in existing production Land Rovers. It was rather wider than the standard 109in wheelbase Land Rover and had a slightly longer wheelbase of 110in. Although Rover described it as the ‘proposed British Army ¾-ton Land Rover’, engineering documents show that its payload was actually a full ton.

Land Rover developed this Gun Tractor on a 110in wheelbase specially to meet the anticipated military requirement. It was designed to tow a powered-axle trailer, but it was not what the military wanted. Just two prototypes were built in 1965–66.LAND ROVER, AUTHOR

Nevertheless, the new 110in gun tractor did not incorporate the Scottorn trailer-drive system that Land Rover had been working on. Instead, it incorporated a different system that had been drawn up by the UK military in conjunction with Rubery Owen. The full story of the Scottorn and Rubery Owen trailer-drive systems is explained in the Appendix, but it is clear that Rover had no choice at this stage but to go with the system that the military favoured if they were to win a contract.

FVRDE agreed to take a look at a prototype of this new Land Rover, of which probably only two were ever built in 1965–66. On the Rover side, there were doubts about how well the standard four-speed Land Rover gearbox would hold up behind the 3-litre engine. Earlier experiments with this engine in Land Rovers had shown the gearbox to be a weak link, and in fact the two gun tractor prototypes were later fitted with heavy duty five-speed gearboxes made by ENV.

Sadly, the stronger gearboxes did not make FVRDE any more enthusiastic about the new 110in gun tractor. One key reason was that military thinking had by this time begun to focus on a forward-control design.

THE PRELIMINARIES

This interest in a forward-control design had probably come about because the military wanted maximum carrying space in the vehicle. They had already worked out that the overall length should be around 168in (427cm), and those dimensions had reached Rover in time to guide the design of the 110in gun tractor. That length had been established so that a defined number of vehicles plus trailers could be fitted into the RAF transport aircraft of the time. The next challenge was to arrange the vehicle so that an infantry section of ten men could be fitted into it.

By the end of 1966, FVRDE had produced the first of several full-size wooden mock-ups of the vehicle it wanted. There were at least three of these and one of them was used to test whether the forward-control vehicle could indeed accommodate ten infantrymen with their full complement of equipment. Photographs show that it was a tight squeeze, but they also show mock-ups that bear a striking resemblance in general outline to the eventual production Land Rover 101. FVRDE also made a number of scale models to demonstrate the potential roles of their new forward-control vehicle, and these included personnel carrier, WOMBAT portee, four-stretcher ambulance, missile launcher and mortar carrier.

Airportability was an important part of British military thinking in the 1960s. This is a stripped-out Lightweight being carried under a Wessex helicopter of the RAF.TANK MUSEUM

It is not clear how closely FVRDE and Rover were working together at this stage. If nothing else, Rover were clearly very quick off the mark. In May 1967 they lent the army a production 110in Series IIB Forward Control model for trials; this vehicle was registered as 22 BT 25. At the same time, Rover returned for further assessment an experimental 112in 30cwt forward-control Land Rover that the army had recently rejected because it did not meet their latest payload requirements. Both were used during Operation Wagon Train, an exercise at Leeon-Solent, which included amphibious landings. The main aim of these loans was clearly to find out how much of the existing designs could be re-used and where they fell short of the ideal.

This was what the British Army wanted, and this mock-up was created at FVRDE early in 1967. It bears a striking resemblance to the eventual production 101. That is a mechanical digger in the background, not a jib mounted to the vehicle!TANK MUSEUM

FVRDE followed its first mock-up with another one during 1967. Here it is being used for trials: the idea was to see if a section of ten men could fit on board with all their kit. It appears to have been a tight squeeze – and some of the kit is still on the ground behind the vehicle.TANK MUSEUM

This was another version of the FVRDE full-size mock-up. The spare-wheel stowage arrangement was interesting, if rather wasteful of space.TANK MUSEUM

The FVRDE thinking was very well-developed by the time Rover were formally asked to become involved with the project. This was a scale model of the ambulance variant they wanted.TANK MUSEUM

The British Army borrowed a Series IIB 110 Forward Control at an early stage, but trials confirmed that it was not the vehicle they wanted. Here, the trials vehicle 22 BT 25 is seen during Operation Wagon Train, at Lee-on-Solent, on 19 May 1967.LAND ROVER

Meanwhile, things were formalized in May and June 1967 when Rover and FVRDE got together to draw up a specification for the new one-ton forward-control gun tractor. From the beginning, it was seen very much as a joint project: even though the new vehicle was to be developed and manufactured by Land Rover, there was never any doubt that the basic design came from FVRDE, and there would be a substantial amount of military input all the way through to production. The military input was so significant, in fact, that when the Rover Company later came to offer the new Land Rover for sale to other users, the Ministry of Defence took a royalty on every vehicle sold.

A FORMAL PROJECT

So it must have been at about this time that Rover allocated the work within its engineering department. There was already a Forward Control Team in existence, and at this stage its day-to-day work was looking after development of the existing Series IIB 110in models. Leader of the team – project engineer, in Rover language – was Norman Busby. As there were no other major forward-control developments in the pipeline at this stage, it made perfect sense to give the job of developing the new Military Forward Control model to the team that had the most experience of such vehicles. Rarely appreciated, however, is that the new 101 Forward Control was simply an addition to the Forward Control Team’s workload; they would continue to be responsible for updates and modifications of the Series IIB models right through until their production ended in 1972.

More than thirty years later, Norman Busby remembered how he did some initial calculations for the new model, based on a maximum length of 168.5in (428cm) set by FVRDE: ‘I sat down and put four British soldiers, 22in wide, in. That was stipulated! A 10in wide spare wheel…and it left a cab a bit small for the gunners but…that’s why it’s a little cab!…. We want a good departure and approach angle. Draw this back down to the ground, draw the wheels in, and you get a 101in wheelbase. So we finished up with a very impressive approach and departure angle, which was helped by this short-body requirement.’

Norman Busby was appointed to run the new Forward control project for Rover.BMIHT

The normal project team at Rover consisted of a project engineer, an assistant project engineer and one or more technical assistants, who were usually young engineers recently out of their apprenticeship. For the new Military Forward Control, the team consisted of Norman Busby himself, his existing deputy Bob Lees as the APE and no fewer than four technical assistants: John Shaw, Scott Seymour, Kevin Hunt and Hugo Vernon. This team would be supplemented by others later on, and from time to time it would call on expert assistance from other departments, such as transmissions and electrics. The actual construction of prototypes would be overseen by Ken Twist, the foreman of the experimental shop, and would be carried out by fitters from his team.

It was standard practice in the Rover engineering department for a project engineer to issue job cards – formal requests to other engineers to carry out specific tasks – and the earliest job card for the new Military Forward Control was issued on 5 September 1967. It asked John Shaw and Ken Twist to build a cab mock-up and to assess it for ease of entry and driving position. This mock-up would have been built to the scheme drawings that must by this stage have existed, and those scheme drawings were also to be used as work started on the construction of the first prototype. A second job card, also issued on 5 September, formally requested Shaw and Twist to get started on that – although it would be some months before work started in earnest.

In the meantime, Norman Busby had wasted no time in carrying out some preliminary assessment work. The most powerful engine in the existing Series IIB Forward Control models was a 2.6-litre version of the 6-cylinder, but it was already clear that this would not be powerful enough for the new vehicle; that would have to have the 3-litre engine which had been tried in the earlier 110in gun tractor prototypes. So in July 1967, Busby had one of these engines put into a Series IIB Forward Control (335-00011A, number 110/FC/17 on the engineering development fleet). This went to FVRDE, where it acquired the registration number 00 SP 47. It is not clear whether FVRDE put it through any serious trials process, but in October or November that year it was given big 11.00 × 16 tyres and shipped out to Sharja in the Persian Gulf for trials with the Trucial Oman Scouts.

One of the things that became clear from these tests was that even the 3-litre engine would struggle to deliver the performance that the military wanted, but it was the most powerful one available to Rover at the time and the project would have to go ahead with it in the hope that a better option might become available. Norman Busby had already anticipated that better option: the Rover photographic records show that a forward-control chassis was trial-fitted in June 1967 with one of the new V8 engines, which at that time were just entering production for Rover’s flagship car models, the P5B 3.5-litre Saloon and Coupé.

By the time of the GSR document in June 1968, the Land Rover design was coming along nicely. It was reflected in this artist’s impression that was included with the document.TANK MUSEUM

THE 105MM LIGHT GUN

One of the primary roles for which the 101 was intended was that of tractor for the new British 105mm light gun. Known as the L118, this was under development from 1965 by RARDE at Fort Halstead, near Sevenoaks in Kent, and was intended as a replacement for the Italian-designed 105mm Pack Howitzer that served with the British forces from 1961. Airportability was among the key requirements.

The first prototypes were tested in 1968 but production was not authorized until late 1975 and actually began at the Royal Ordnance Factory, Nottingham, in 1976. An early intention was to mount the gun on a powered carriage so that its axle would be driven from the gun tractor. However, this idea seems to have proved too complicated and by about 1973 the trailer-drive requirement had been changed so that the gun tractor would power the axle of an ammunition limber towed between tractor and gun. Within the next couple of years, this requirement was also dropped.

The 105mm light gun was originally intended to weigh no more than 1,600kg (3,520lb), but reinforcements to the gun carriage were found necessary during development and production versions weighed 1,858kg (4,88lb). The gun was 8.8m (29ft) long, and for transporting, the barrel was swung round over the trail. It had a six-person crew and could fire six rounds a minute, each shell weighing typically around 15.1kg (33¼lb) in HE (high explosive) form. The gun’s maximum range was 17.2km (10½ miles) and it had an anti-tank range of 800m (2,624ft).

The British Army had fewer than 150 of these guns but they were a very great export success, being purchased by armed forces in Australia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Ireland, Kenya, Malawi, Malaysia, Morocco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Oman, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, Thailand, the UAE, the USA and Zimbabwe. The British Army deployed five batteries of six guns each to good effect during the Falklands War, when these guns were firing up to 400 rounds a day each.

CHAPTER TWO

DESIGN AND PROTOTYPES

The design and prototype stage of the 101 One-Tonne project lasted five years, from 1967 through to 1972. It was complicated by what was really a false start, when Rover built the first group of prototypes with the old 6-cylinder engine. Once it became clear that the new V8 engine would be available for the project, a major redesign ensued and the final prototypes incorporated this engine and its associated new transmission.

A further complication was that the One-Tonne was a joint development between Rover and FVRDE. Each side had its own engineering development prototypes, although all were built by Rover. Some of these prototypes shuttled back and forth between FVRDE in Chertsey and Rover at Solihull. In addition, as Rover had hopes of selling the 101 to overseas military agencies once the MoD production specification had been signed off, there was a demand for demonstrator vehicles from quite an early stage. On more than one occasion, the Rover development team found itself short of vehicles.

INVITING TENDERS – 1968

The specification that Rover and FVRDE had worked up between them was turned into a formal requirement document, GSR 3463, in June 1968. (Those initials stood for General Staff Requirement, and it was standard procedure for the War Office to issue such a document when it was looking for a new item of equipment.) This document described a forward-control 4×4 vehicle, and the accompanying illustration looked astonishingly like the eventual production Land Rover 101, even though the contract for production vehicles had not yet been awarded to Rover.

The vehicle that the War Office wanted had a payload of one tonne, metric measurements by this stage being the norm in the British military. As the metric tonne is lighter than the Imperial ton (2,204.5lb as against 2,240lb), this actually reduced demand on the vehicle. Its overall length was the 168.5in (428cm), which would allow it to fit into Andover transport aircraft, and the military wanted an overall weight of 7,700lb (3,493kg), achieved if necessary by removing non-essential elements of the vehicle. This weight limit would allow it to be airlifted by the latest Wessex heavy lift helicopters. It had to have the powered-axle trailer capability, with a detachable propshaft driven via the rear tow hitch; and the trailer capacity had now increased to 1.5 tonnes, no doubt in order to cope with weight of the 105mm gun.

That GSR document, now known by its military code of LV82, was issued to the motor industry at large in August 1968 – by which time Rover had been working on the vehicle it described for the best part of a year! The document recognized there were no fewer than sixteen vehicles in the frame for the eventual military contract, but when bids were submitted in September 1968, only two manufacturers confirmed their readiness to tender for the contract. The two were Land Rover, with the 101, and Volvo, with a version of the 4140-series Forward-Control that they were already supplying to the Swedish Army in quantity. Proud of their bid for the contract, Land Rover displayed a 101 prototype at the Commercial Motor Show at London’s Earls Court during the autumn.

THE 6-CYLINDER PROTOTYPES – 1968

The chassis design of the existing forward-control models was something of a compromise because it was a modification of the chassis drawn up for the 109in normal-control models. Essentially, a forward extension had been added to support the cab, and a sub-frame had been added at the rear to support the body. With the new 101in Forward Control, the chassis was designed from first principles, and it ended up as a simpler, straight-frame design.

The first six 101 prototypes were built with the 3-litre 6-cylinder engine, plus the four-speed primary gearbox and special low-ratio two-speed transfer gearbox used in the 110in Series IIB Forward Control. This combination gave selectable two-wheel drive, and to cope with the transmission loadings the 101 prototypes also had heavy duty ENV axles from the Series IIB Forward Control.

All of the 6-cylinder prototypes were built with more or less the same configuration, although the specification developed in detail as Rover’s own test work proceeded. They were all boxy looking machines with flat panels and a rather crude-looking snub nose, and some had separate canvas tilts for the cab and the back body, while others had a one-piece tilt. The upper bodywork was made demountable to reduce the height so that the stripped-down vehicle could be fitted into an Andover transport aircraft. This was something proposed by FVRDE that had been demonstrated on one of their early scale models. The principle was similar to that being employed for the 88in Lightweight Land Rover that was under development at the same time, although for that vehicle the upper bodywork was made demountable to reduce weight for helicopter lifting operations.

The first six prototypes all had the Rover 3-litre 6-cylinder engine. Here it is in the first prototype, 101/FC/1, as that was being built at the start of 1968.BMIHT

Not only was the length influenced by the space inside an RAF Andover transport aircraft. This picture, from early February 1968, shows 101/FC/1 stripped down for airporting operations, with most of its upper superstructure removed. The wooden arch represented the Andover’s hull.LAND ROVER

Prototype 101/FC/4 was visually typical of the 6-cylinders. It was pictured here in summer 1972, complete with powered-axle trailer, while still undergoing assessment with the army.LAND ROVER

The joint nature of the 101 project became very clear when these prototypes were built. Rover retained just one of the six for engineering development, and constructed one specifically as an FVRDE prototype on which the military could carry out their own development. This and the remaining four fulfilled FVRDE contract WV7791 for five prototypes (‘engineering models’ was the term used) that was issued to Rover on 16 January 1968.

The first vehicle completed became the Rover engineering prototype and was numbered 101/ FC/1; it was built between February and mid-May 1968. The last vehicle, 101/FC/6, became the FVRDE engineering prototype and was built between August and December that year. Certain items of its specification, perhaps including a lightweight chassis, were special. The other four prototypes, 101/FC/2 to 101/FC/5, were destined for FVRDE trials, and were built between March and October. They were registered with military numbers 01 SP 13 to 01 SP 17, in the SP series used for experimental vehicles.

This was 101/FC/1 as built. Although the essential structure was there, the 101 would undergo a huge number of changes before production began.TANK MUSEUM

Three of these first six vehicles (numbers 1, 5 and 6) had a 24V electrical system, and three had a 12V system (numbers 2, 3 and 4). All except numbers 2 and 3 were fitted with Mayflower winches, mounted at the front of the vehicle between the chassis rails and in front of the radiator. All except number 6 had twin fuel tanks, one on either side of the chassis. Three of the FVRDE group were sent on to the Royal School of Artillery (numbers 3, 4 and 5), mainly for trials associated with the forthcoming 105mm gun, and two (numbers 2 and 6) remained at FVRDE for other trials.

Four of the 6-cylinder prototypes had a front-mounted Mayflower drum winch. The date of this photograph – early February 1968 – makes clear that this must be the first prototype under construction.LAND ROVER

THE 3-LITRE 6-CYLINDER ENGINE

The 3-litre 6-cylinder engine used in the first 101 prototypes was a detuned version of the Rover car engine that had entered production in 1958. With a swept volume of 2995cc (77.8mm bore by 105mm stroke), an 8:1 compression ratio and a single SU carburettor, it developed 110bhp at 4,500rpm and 150lb ft of torque at 2,000rpm. The engine was a direct descendant of the 2.1-litre Rover car engine introduced in 1948, itself a 6-cylinder version of the legendary 1.6-litre engine that had powered the first Land Rovers.

From 1959, the 3-litre engine began to appear in experimental Land Rovers that were going to be big and heavy or were expected to have a high payload. However, all these vehicles confirmed that the existing Land Rover gearbox was not strong enough to take the engine’s torque, and this was the main reason why the short-stroke 2.6-litre derivative was chosen to power the forward controls from 1963 and the normal-control models from 1966.

Nevertheless, the 3-litre was considered for various other applications where a special gearbox could be fitted to cope with its high torque output, and heavy duty ENV gearboxes were tried in the 110in gun tractor, in the 112in and 120in forward controls, and in the specially modified 110in forward control that was trialled by the Trucial Oman Scouts. Perhaps the 101 team anticipated switching to such a gearbox at a later stage, although it is rather surprising that they did not try one out in any of their 6-cylinder prototypes.

AUSTRALIAN INTEREST

Meanwhile, Land Rover had been busily making clear to some of their military customers that the 101 was under development and would be ready for sale in due course. Among those who took the bait were the Australians, who had a requirement for a new one-ton GS vehicle. They really wanted a larger vehicle than the 101 because they used a huge stores