US Navy CJ3A

[Roger]

First off... no one is going to hurt my feelings one bit if someone tells me that something ain't right... because I already feel that way 

Here are the tags... they are held on by screws and who knows what is reality.  The brass Navy plate matches the body tag... so that helps.  The Jeeps original color was Cadet Gray.  Another nod to Navy.  The serial number on the engine was removed some time ago during a previous rebuild when the block was decked... no check in that box.  The engine castings put it at around a 48 and by some sources align with the military applications???  The radiator is a bottom mount which was something changed out in the early 3A series and even though weird things happened between years I am suspicious that it would have made it into a 53?  Have others seen that?  The frame was painted black by the factory... the front cross member under the radiator was also painted body color... and this was not just a splash through the grill but pretty much the whole tube.  Now we get to the next part of the archeology experiment... the side rails on the frame had gray over the black paint. Hmmm... the front and rear diffs have gray on them as well as the front tie rods.  The hubs were first black, then red then gray.  I have seen Civy Cadet Grays with red wheels... potentially painted red at the factory and dressed up with gray for the Navy?  The tub, fenders and grill were all the original metal... all had the same gray base with a whole lot of ugly colors on top.  The engine has the larger military oil filter.  Added a picture of the engine just after bringing it home.

Is there any information on what the Navy did when they bought the civilian CJ3As for domestic use?  Did they dress it up with more gray?  Could a 53 have a bottom mount radiator (could not find the Harris date on the radiator).  Thoughts?

Does it really matter one way or the other... nope.  But if I would like to duplicate as many of these details to get it looking like what the Navy would have done.  The Harris heater I will be installing was not original.   Thank you.

[1955CJ-5]

Well you have a mystery there....the 453 would lead you to believe its a 53 but the low s/n and bottom mount radiator fits it in the '49 model year...how about some dash pics and maybe a couple of the body?

Looks like a vacuum advance on the distributor..is it a key start or a floor kick-start? And the oil filter looks oversized for a civilian jeep...

Is there a date anywhere on the Navy plate?

Randy

[Bob W]

Willys did install bottom mounted radiators at the factory in later years when heavy duty cooling radiators were specified in a contract, like this Navy Jeep.

Can you post a better photo of the Navy plate? It should have the Date Of Delivery which will probably be 12/52.

[Roger]

The distributor is definitely a later addition... a Prestolite IAY... still trying to determine if it stays or goes.  Thoughts?

Dash pic included... it is a key start.  The body is in pieces... which features were you wanting to see Randy?  I will include a picture just in case that helps.  The spare tire is mounted on the passenger side rear quarter.

Filter pic and it does fit the larger filter found on the M38s.

Bob (need to buy your book!)  The delivery date is 12/52 and I have provided a few pictures to try and get all of the important details. Interesting to hear as that was always a nagging concern about the frame mounted radiator.  The engine is a gear driven cam.  The pics provide the casting info... and the one shot is just in primer... final color is black.

Also included a bit of the original gray.

Other areas needing pictures?  Thoughts?

Thank you,
Roger

[1955CJ-5]

Thanks for the pictures...I was just curious if it had the M-38 style  instrument cluster and the location of the ignition key....

As I think a little more about this the 453 and the s/n go together fine, so with Bob's input about the radiator it must be a 53..

Get Bob's book for sure....and post pictures of your progress..!

[athawk11]

This is a pretty interesting 3A.� Base on his knowledge of the probable delivery date, it's likely that Bob has some actual data on Navy 3As.� I know nothing about them.

What I found fascinating...� Year of Manufacture: "1953"�  Date Shipped:� "12/52"� Seems a bit backwards.

This should be a fun project to watch.� Thanks for sharing it with us.

Hawk� �

[RICKG]

Good eye on the dates Hawk. Interesting indeed..
The 18896 SN is evident on both the patent and data plate. Bonus..

[Bob W]

Willys was doing the same thing back then as all car manufacturers do today. 1953 is the Model Year of the Jeep. The 1953 Model Year began in 1952.

I'd say the engine block probably came from a 1950 Jeep.

This Navy Jeep was most likely painted Gray at the factory and so it would have most of the paint characteristics of a regular CJ. The Navy probably painted it a couple more times while in service. The military paint jobs would not follow the same characteristics as the factory paint. Then when it was surplussed it got a few more random coats of paint.

[Roger]

There was another gray on top of the original... lighter in color, and directly under the yellow so I assumed it was primer.� I have found multiple colors and not all of them across all panels.� Factory gray all panels... then a lighter gray assumed primer, a red, a funky 60s/70s metallic aqua, and then the construction yellow that was in the interior of the tub... then the light pale yellow on the exterior.� The PO said that this was a Navy Jeep used for flightline use... and hence the construction yellow.� That does not hold any water based on the construction yellow not to be found on the exterior surfaces and the myriad of other colors underneath.

Good to get a little more of the story and appreciate the feedback... all good to know as I definitely don't want to be telling a tall tale when telling stories about its history.� I guess I just need to get Bob's book� but are there sources available that discuss the story of these Navy Jeeps?

FYI... spent tonight finishing sand blasting the frame... kind of like pulling the string of the sweater... leads to more work... like crack repair�

[Roger]

BTW... is the registration the number on the plaque the same number that is typically painted on the hood?  Seen some with them on the tail gate? 

[Bob W]

The registration number on the tag is the hood number. Those tags are cool, they have all the original numbers in one place!

[Roger]

Okay... another riddle for the masters.  When stripping the frame down I pulled the tie rods off and noticed one of the tubes was bent and looked like it had some repairs done in a previous life.  I looked for a replacement and wondered what they were talking about with the driver side and passenger side because that did not fit what I was seeing.  So... found a good used set of tubes figuring I would take one and replace the bent... yesterday was not my day. 

Now I understand the d/s and p/s tags as it appears that mine was converted at some time during its life and being ignorant in most things Jeep wondering if the original config is better or are there benefits to the current set up.  As you can see in the picture below, instead of the two tie rods coming together at the bell crank the two wheels are joined by a cross link with a single connection to the bell crank.  Seems like it would help maintain alignment while traversing uneven surfaces but are there problems with that setup?   Interference with the springs?  I know the PO was running larger tires... and the bell crank was actually bent... and the bell crank bracket top weld was broken clean through.  That was repaired and beefed up and new improved bell crank with bearings. The funny thing is that there is gray on the tie rod tubes so it has been that way for a long time... based on the paint layering  Thoughts?

[Bob W]

I really don't think there is any advantage to that modified tie rod arrangement. It will keep the toe setting constant when the suspension flexes but will also give more bump steer than the original setup.

[Roger]

Two questions on bumpers... front and back.� Bob W has mentioned that as a Navy CJ3A that the back should have the bumperettes.� Looking at Ebay or any of the shops (like Walck's or G503, etc) there are a couple flavors available.� I would assume that due to vintage that the M38 bumperettes are correct?� Ebay has multiple different looking ones some with the narrow gap between the mounting points or wide.� Which is the correct one? :-?

Front bumper right now is a twisted noodle of a chrome winch bumper.� Dad is desperately wanting to keep the coolness of the Koenig winch but I would like to go with a stock bumper and modify/beef up for the fairlead rollers.� Should this rig have the CJ3A civilian front bumper or the M38 front bumper?� Any input would be greatly appreciated.� Thank you!

Some clues for what the front bumper may have been... the holes at the end of the frame appear as though someone used a torch to blow out rivets... is one version bolted and the other riveted?

[athawk11]

Hi Roger,
The bumperette style is the same version found on the MB/GPW, but is flipped over.� The narrow style is a modern version and would not be appropriate for your Navy Jeep.�

I believe the 3A and M38 front bumpers are the same.� The M38 was bolted on. The 3A was riveted on.� There is some lifting brackets bolted to the M38, but I don't know if these should be on your Willys.  Also, I think there may have been a wood filler piece on the M38.

Hawk