Hi there we are really sorry because the picture is miss-placed, they are actualy in reverse 0:36 ua-cam.com/video/70v9ojzqP4s/v-deo.html ► How the Humvee Compares to the New Oshkosh JLTV
It would be cool to have about 10 of these. & a Maximum Security Prison. Add a bunch of weapons to each of them, then have Prisoners Race them around a track & whoever wins the Race gets a Full Pardon!
Your info on speed is wrong. Used M-ATV on multiple deployments and they were easily capable of driving 70mph and we did it regularly and it’s just as mobile as a J-LTV. The only differences between the two was suspension, weight (armor, levels of protections) and engines. Also the payload capacities are off. Lazy research is what gets you lost subscribers. Smh
@@Fng_1975 glad you said this. I have an M35A2 that can go faster than 30. I couldn't imagine the US buying a wheeled vehicle slower than an old deuce.
The size difference of JLTV vs MATV is not that big. That is the reason. The JLTV is in the same category (light tactical vehicles) as the Humvee, and yet the JLTV looks massive compared to the Humvee. Did you know the JLTV weighs more than twice the Humvee? So it's therefore reasonable to compare the JLTV to MATV.
I can say this from personal experience. In Afghanistan, my cavalry scout platoon supported special operations forces using these vehicles. We traded in our MRAP vehicles for these and these are much more mobile off-road with the same amount of armor as an MRAP RG-31. I saw one of these take a command detonated IED straight underneath it, flipped over on its side, and still protect every single soldier in that vehicle, including my fellow soldier who was a groomsmen at my wedding 7 years later. These vehicles save soldier lives and I thank the engineers who invented these things. They truly had the soldiers well-being and comfort in mind when they designed it.
This isn't quite true. The MATV is nowhere near as safe as the MRAP family of vehicles (RG-31, RG-33, Husky, MAXPRO, and Buffalo) Engineer Route Clarence packages weren't authorized to use the MATV because of insufficient V-hull designs on the bottom. I will agree the MATV is faster and more agile, but to claim they're just as safe isn't true at all. MATV can take smaller IED blasts but anything larger than 75lb would likely cause significant damage to the vehicles hull followed by explosive breaching of the crew compartments.
For the title card you’re getting the images and nomenclature backwards. The MAT-V is the larger one (on the left in your title card) the JLTV is the smaller one on the right. You can confirm this from images in the rest of your video. Other best reference is front windshield shape.
You wanna see a real SUV take a look at the MTV 1.1. Driver sits center so you can have 4 door gunners and 1 turret gunner. Got to ride in an unarmored one last year and I gotta say I was very impressed.
I always thought the MATV was the predecessor to the JLTV, both are awesome trucks. I wouldn't mind ever owning one or if a civilian version came out. Now I know.
@@TheYeetTeam I think you're referring to the GOAT tactical truck which is more of a gimmick. It will protect against gun fire but not against anyone who knows what they're doing while targeting you. It would be good to drop off or pick people up from a small arms gun fight or drive around a bad hood but so would an ex armored money truck and you can get those for a fraction of the price
I love how u do 10 seconds pause between each sentence. Very enjoyable especially considering that the pauses would fit more then one length of the sentence before. 👍
oh thank god, when he said 30 I was wondering how they could use such slow vehicles. They would get outpaced by everything and practically sitting ducks
Don't watch this gut, his videos are garbage and are filled with incorrect facts, MATV is not at all based on an MTVR, the MTVR is a marine logistics truck. he does this crap often and lies alot so take anything he says with a grain of salt.
The JLTV's are everything that the HMMWV's failed to be.The HMMWV's were never meant for combat in the first place,espiecally with the underpowered and outdated drivetrain from General Motors they always came with. They literally use the same engines and transmissions that the Chevrolet CUCV's came with. The MATV's or MRAP's were great replacements but because of being heavy and slow,the JLTV's are great solutions for those aspects alone.
The most important thing you forgot: mean time between failure. During the competition that led to the JLTV the winner went something like 4 times as long between failures as the #2 competitor did. In war, having your equipment actually work and be available to you in the field is far more important than having the “best” vehicle stuck on a lift in the mechanics pool. I’d rather have a 25 year old Toyota pickup with the new VAMPIRE rocket system in the bed than a battalion of Abrams a dozen miles away (and the technical has AC too!). Same reason we prefer artillery fire support over Air Force (anything). You know the artillery will be in range (or they wouldn’t be assigned), while that plane could be hundreds of miles away when you need ordnance on the ground in 90 seconds (howitzers are a good middle ground, they should be in range, but can still move pretty quickly if needed). So unless you’re willing to outspend your opponent by many orders of magnitude you can’t never afford to give the greatest tools to everyone who might make use of them, and the JLTV is an upgrade over even the MRAP under almost all circumstances…. And since they cost less than half what an MRAP does you can buy they two for one and gain redundancy too!
I wonder how these rigs are gunna do in the sloppy mud of eastern Europe? The humvees only weigh in the 5-9000 lbs. These things are 11-18 tons. There so freakin big. There sweet, but sloppy muddy may eat there lunch
@@Buck123four I know what your saying. It's different when you in an environment everyday as it changes from freezing to thaw to freeze to thaw and greesy fields and ditches 3' deep mud. I think we will get to see some vids of them performing over there. There awesome, but everything has weeknesses
@@user-bd5md5cm2j Sir - what does change is the physics of the soil; the ability of a vehicle to traverse that soil changes dependent on the settings of the Central Tire Inflation System The metrics are Rated Cone Index AND Vehicle Cone Index. CTIS + torque + Tak-4 suspension is a game changer...
J-LTV is taking humvee and beefing it up to survive ied and ambush while having mobility of humvee while MAT-V is miniaturizing MRAP vehicles to make it more stable and have mobility more than MRAP vehicles. Just as MAT-V is a better version of the commercial of the shelf MRAP vehicles, J-LTV is the improved version of MAT-V.
JLTV are the Lieutenants/ Captain's ride and general grocery getter that can haul a gun arrouind and help with base defense. The MATV is a security/ convoy/ patrol vehicle and low internsity battle taxi.
So, it sounds like the MATV is the new battle wagon for combat ops or maybe preferred depending on needs? I wonder which is rated to take more damage or if both can add extra armor if needed? I have seen them with cages and they look even more hardcore but I hope they can develop a light weight hard kill system as that seems like the greatest danger to them.
@@Snipeyou1 Asking a question is never dumb. They rode really good. We used them specifically for QRF because of their speed off road. They have independent suspension where as the bigger MRAP's don't, which I think is probably what makes the biggest difference. Hope that helps.
You make a mistake in the first scene that appeared in the two vehicles, the one of the left is the M-ATV and the one on the right is the JLTV. Thanks for do this type of videos ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Your info on speed is wrong. Used M-ATV on multiple deployments and they were easily capable of driving 70mph and we did it regularly and it’s just as mobile as a J-LTV. The only differences between the two was suspension, weight (armor, levels of protections) and engines. Also the payload capacities are off. Lazy research is what gets you lost subscribers. Smh
@@Buck123four What is the purpose of your comment? My comment had to do with the video creator getting facts wrong, not with J-LTV vs MRAP. I didn’t even mention MRAPs, and if you think that the M-ATV is in the same league or category as MRAPs then you are highly mistaken. Smh
@@Buck123four J-LTV is also considered an MRAP, but personally, I don’t consider either it or the M-ATV an MRAP. I saw real MRAPs in action and the M-ATV nor the J-LTVs come even close to the protection provided by the Caimans, RG-31s, 33s, MaxPros, or Cougars. I saw those vehicles take IEDs that ranged from 300lbs to 1000lbs and the occupants still survived. Saw a Buffalo take a 1500lbs IED, everyone inside survived, but the gunner died from the over pressure, and saw an RG-31 get ripped in half by a 1800lbs IED. Only 2 Soldiers survived that, but there wasn’t much of them left, and we pumped them with morphine to ease their pain until they passed. But I saw M-ATVs getting penetrated by 40lbs IEDs when they first got in country and Army commanders pulled them off the roads until they developed an upgraded armor kit for it, which we used for our next deployment to Afghanistan. They couldn’t handle anything more than 300lbs and even that was suspect, because we got reports of them still getting penetrated by lesser IEDs. IMO, the best MRAP was the 4x4 Cougar with the independent suspensions. You could go anywhere off road and still take large IEDs. Regardless, your comment still had nothing to do with my original comment concerning the Video’s creator being factually incorrect.
@@Fng_1975 Sir - Glad you survived those blasts. Way back when...in 1996 I helped develop a requirement document that would have armored ALL Army wheeled vehicles, but DA G3 refused to put a penny against it for funding. It was based largely on Bosnia & Mog, where I rode around in totally unarmored HMMWVs. Anywhooo JLTV is advertised as having "MRAP-like protection..." Which it has, but one can't easily make a 24,000 +/_ pound vehicle as survivable as one 2 or 3 times as large. The MATV ORIGINALLY had to weigh less than 25,000 pounds - that didn't last long. //// All MRAPS have LIMITED soft soil mobility. Hard packed desert w/ substrata of rocks / petrified wood, a VW Jetta could drive on that. SOFT soil - mud, sand dunes, etc. is where JLTV excels. That is what is was tested against, and it passed. Maneuver warfare requires maneuvering - and thats why JLTV is important. It ran CIRCLES around any HMMWV in those soil types. /// IRT any comment on a previous subject - I musta been brain dead OR the cat ran across the keyboard. Take care. GC
@@TacticalTirpitzle central tire inflation, and the adjustable suspension alone are big failure points. Plus the huge amount of electronics with all sorts of cameras and screens including a thermal imaging camera and pull down screen. I can't imagine trying to problem solve electrical gremlins in that thing
@@christopherrowley7506 none of those affect vehicle operational capabilities though, it can still preform the capabilities of the humvee even with all its fancy tech not working. Fyi the humvee has been preforming a role it was never designed for so its really no arguement that this replacement is a good thing
I hated my MATV. I loved my Dash. As a taller Soilder, It was much uncomfortable ride for me, and it made me think of being cramped up in A Humvee, Are they still operating on the thought of 5ft 10 inches average height?
Big isn't "better"......less endurance, nimbleness, maneuverability etc etc. The "toughest" guys are usually 6' or under. Go play basketball if you want a award and leave USSOCOM out of it.
Why even bring up the SHERP? That makes no sense.. the SHERP is a recreational vehicle... NOT an armored military vehicle... You're comparing Oranges to Apples there.
Well, the most interesting part of the comparison would be survivability - that is what they are designed for in the first place, so it makes sense to compare that in the first place.
My question is ..... is the military going to have BOTH Vehicles on the field, I understand that one seems better than other, but other seems better in certain circumstances. USN Veteran Curious.
One: The M-ATV may be heavier the than the JLTV but doesn't mean it wold be less capable of water crossing or navigating through deep mud, inertia and torque can play a big role. Two: Oshkosh should make a civilian version of these two vehicles. I would have one of these over a Gwagon or X5 any day. Three: If Oshkosh want to send me one for testing here in Australia we have some of the gnarliest trails, mud and water crossings, hill climbs and rough terrain in the world.
JLTV/M-ATV are massive and expensive compared to typical civilian cars. JLTV costs over $300,000. Humvee obviously got a civilian version, which was a big car for its time, but a Hummer is tiny compared to a JLTV.
@@quinndenver4075 it has electronically controlled lift kit for traction, stability and storage/shipment. It has numerous cameras and numerous screens, heck it has a camera on the front hood so the driver can see the road as he crests a hill to avoid any mines or debris. The systems that work, and can be adapted to the civilian market, will eventually make it there. I expect the hood camera to be require for new large civilian vehicles by like 2040.
jltv is cool and all, its got the duramax, im just curious, how does one service the glow plugs on one of those? i can tell you removing all 4 glowplugs on 1165a1 on the passenger side is literally almost impossible. Were as the c7 on the matv, its just only have a grid heater which is real simple and you can tell if it works by putting your hand on it.
Honestly, both tactical vehicles are built for fairly different purposes, with the M-ATV being better protected and the JLTV offering better portability.
M-ATV has virtually the same speed as JLTV, has the same wading depth as JLTV but is much heavily armoured for survivability being MRAP spec. Can carry more troops and ordinance. I know which one I'd rather be in in a firefight or if an IED went off underneath!
i think the best way to judge them is by their price. in the military price does matter. if the generals son drives one than that is the better one. if someone else drives the other one than that is the difference.
Is the MATV planned to be supported as long as the JLTV? To my limited understanding the US military was disgoring themselves of previous Gen MRAPS as they are really backfilled to fill a limitation of loadaout in Iraq and Afghanistan. With the military reconfiguring to Eastern Europe and Asian theater combat planning, the MRAPS don't fit it with the fast assault plans. MRAPS are better suited to occupational roles against insurgents, not open direct near peer conflict. They're too slow for the light armor they posses. However, I don't know how MRAP and MATV fit together.
M-ATV weighs 18 tons and BMP-3 weighs 18 tons, what a coinsedence) Nice video except one moment about mobility. Any MRAP mobility is pretty bad compared to any other vehicle, it can go only road and hard dry surfaces.
It would be cool to have about 10 of these. & a Maximum Security Prison. Add a bunch of weapons to each of them, then have Prisoners Race them around a track & whoever wins the Race gets a Full Pardon!
10 and 14 tons to transport a grand total of 4 people + gunner. So many variants, yet nobody seems to have thought to themselves in development to put some armour on the backend and add two, or gasp, maybe even four more seats to the vehicle so it can carry a whole fireteam on it's own, plus the driver, gunner and VC.
@@Buck123four it would lose nothing in its capability as a multipurpose 4x4 vehicle by being able to carry more people. If anything, it would be more useful.
@@Buck123four how? How much more weight do you think it would add? The MaxxPRO MRAP is at most 14.5 tons. The Russiams have a 4x4 MRAP that has 2+8 seats and is 13.7 tons heavy. How much weight do you think would be added to the JLTV by extending the roof and sides by less than 2 meters to add two more seats? i'm willing to bet it's far less than some of the bullshit "modules" weigh that are envisioned for it to carry in that segment.
@@MatoVuc How much more? Mebbe about 1,500 pounds + / -. But a CRITICAL requirement for JLTV is external air transport by CH47 to X distance. Every pound counts. Ask Oshkosh Truck Co. if ya don't believe me. Ciao.
Hi there we are really sorry because the picture is miss-placed, they are actualy in reverse 0:36
ua-cam.com/video/70v9ojzqP4s/v-deo.html ► How the Humvee Compares to the New Oshkosh JLTV
It would be cool to have about 10 of these. & a Maximum Security Prison.
Add a bunch of weapons to each of them, then have Prisoners Race them around a track & whoever wins the Race gets a Full Pardon!
Your info on speed is wrong. Used M-ATV on multiple deployments and they were easily capable of driving 70mph and we did it regularly and it’s just as mobile as a J-LTV. The only differences between the two was suspension, weight (armor, levels of protections) and engines. Also the payload capacities are off. Lazy research is what gets you lost subscribers. Smh
@@Fng_1975 glad you said this. I have an M35A2 that can go faster than 30. I couldn't imagine the US buying a wheeled vehicle slower than an old deuce.
@@Fng_1975 MATV in TRUE soft soil / sand stunk...it can NOT compete w/ JLTV in that - and many other - capabilities.
Have you seen the size difference? I don't think people realize how big matv actually is. A humvee looks like a toy car next to it.
Facts lol
I remember my first time walking past one and being surprised at how it towered over me even at 6’ tall
The size difference of JLTV vs MATV is not that big. That is the reason. The JLTV is in the same category (light tactical vehicles) as the Humvee, and yet the JLTV looks massive compared to the Humvee. Did you know the JLTV weighs more than twice the Humvee? So it's therefore reasonable to compare the JLTV to MATV.
its more like a truck: up to 18 tons...
V hill always means a big vehicle
I can say this from personal experience. In Afghanistan, my cavalry scout platoon supported special operations forces using these vehicles. We traded in our MRAP vehicles for these and these are much more mobile off-road with the same amount of armor as an MRAP RG-31. I saw one of these take a command detonated IED straight underneath it, flipped over on its side, and still protect every single soldier in that vehicle, including my fellow soldier who was a groomsmen at my wedding 7 years later. These vehicles save soldier lives and I thank the engineers who invented these things. They truly had the soldiers well-being and comfort in mind when they designed it.
This isn't quite true. The MATV is nowhere near as safe as the MRAP family of vehicles (RG-31, RG-33, Husky, MAXPRO, and Buffalo) Engineer Route Clarence packages weren't authorized to use the MATV because of insufficient V-hull designs on the bottom. I will agree the MATV is faster and more agile, but to claim they're just as safe isn't true at all. MATV can take smaller IED blasts but anything larger than 75lb would likely cause significant damage to the vehicles hull followed by explosive breaching of the crew compartments.
They should test this at Ukraine conflicts to see the new war doctrine. Drone suicide & FVP from the sky.
For the title card you’re getting the images and nomenclature backwards. The MAT-V is the larger one (on the left in your title card) the JLTV is the smaller one on the right. You can confirm this from images in the rest of your video. Other best reference is front windshield shape.
I knew I wasn’t going crazy. Glad you caught that too
thats why I clicked on the video haha, I thought I was crazy
...and still not fixed 10 months after your comment.
Knew I wasn't the only one!
Faxxx
Now that's a real SUV.
Those ain't no Sports Utility Vehicles 😂
But I'd sure love to have a civilian version if and when. 😁
You wanna see a real SUV take a look at the MTV 1.1. Driver sits center so you can have 4 door gunners and 1 turret gunner. Got to ride in an unarmored one last year and I gotta say I was very impressed.
Waiting for the day they will be replaced by something newer and we're going to see JLTVs on the roads like we see Humvees
I always thought the MATV was the predecessor to the JLTV, both are awesome trucks. I wouldn't mind ever owning one or if a civilian version came out. Now I know.
you might be able to get one in a couple years at a police auction lol
I'm pretty sure there is a civilian version that goes for around $200k
Мне больше нравится International MaxxPro MRAP .
@@TheYeetTeam I think you're referring to the GOAT tactical truck which is more of a gimmick. It will protect against gun fire but not against anyone who knows what they're doing while targeting you. It would be good to drop off or pick people up from a small arms gun fight or drive around a bad hood but so would an ex armored money truck and you can get those for a fraction of the price
I love how u do 10 seconds pause between each sentence. Very enjoyable especially considering that the pauses would fit more then one length of the sentence before. 👍
Pretty sure yall labelled the JLTV as the MATV and the MATV as the JLTV in 0:36
Yeah your right
Hi there we are really sorry because the picture is miss-placed, they are actualy in reverse
@@Military-TV It's all good
MATV has top speed of 65 mph electronically limited. Not 30.
oh thank god, when he said 30 I was wondering how they could use such slow vehicles. They would get outpaced by everything and practically sitting ducks
@@ameritoast5174 our 10 wheel pls and 8 wheel LHS can hit 76-80 mph when we take off governor on the highway. Military vehicles are not that slow
Good call, I was about to say that, and also, pretty much every vehicle in the military will max out their speedo.
Don't watch this gut, his videos are garbage and are filled with incorrect facts, MATV is not at all based on an MTVR, the MTVR is a marine logistics truck. he does this crap often and lies alot so take anything he says with a grain of salt.
I miss Hummvees but these Oshkosh are quite awesome!
The only thing i dislike about the humvees are their lack of ACs other than that im also gonna miss them
@@harbour2118 and they didn't have cup holders
@@harbour2118 HUMVEE's a deathtrap. It's as safe as a Toyota pickup.
The JLTV's are everything that the HMMWV's failed to be.The HMMWV's were never meant for combat in the first place,espiecally with the underpowered and outdated drivetrain from General Motors they always came with.
They literally use the same engines and transmissions that the Chevrolet CUCV's came with.
The MATV's or MRAP's were great replacements but because of being heavy and slow,the JLTV's are great solutions for those aspects alone.
“On the other hand” This dude must have like 12 hands
The most important thing you forgot: mean time between failure.
During the competition that led to the JLTV the winner went something like 4 times as long between failures as the #2 competitor did. In war, having your equipment actually work and be available to you in the field is far more important than having the “best” vehicle stuck on a lift in the mechanics pool. I’d rather have a 25 year old Toyota pickup with the new VAMPIRE rocket system in the bed than a battalion of Abrams a dozen miles away (and the technical has AC too!).
Same reason we prefer artillery fire support over Air Force (anything). You know the artillery will be in range (or they wouldn’t be assigned), while that plane could be hundreds of miles away when you need ordnance on the ground in 90 seconds (howitzers are a good middle ground, they should be in range, but can still move pretty quickly if needed).
So unless you’re willing to outspend your opponent by many orders of magnitude you can’t never afford to give the greatest tools to everyone who might make use of them, and the JLTV is an upgrade over even the MRAP under almost all circumstances…. And since they cost less than half what an MRAP does you can buy they two for one and gain redundancy too!
I wonder how these rigs are gunna do in the sloppy mud of eastern Europe? The humvees only weigh in the 5-9000 lbs. These things are 11-18 tons. There so freakin big. There sweet, but sloppy muddy may eat there lunch
@@user-bd5md5cm2j Nope. JLTV was tested in HUGE mud pits...and sand dunes. It met the requirements the experts established.
@@Buck123four I know what your saying. It's different when you in an environment everyday as it changes from freezing to thaw to freeze to thaw and greesy fields and ditches 3' deep mud. I think we will get to see some vids of them performing over there. There awesome, but everything has weeknesses
@@user-bd5md5cm2j Sir - what does change is the physics of the soil; the ability of a vehicle to traverse that soil changes dependent on the settings of the Central Tire Inflation System The metrics are Rated Cone Index AND Vehicle Cone Index. CTIS + torque + Tak-4 suspension is a game changer...
@@Buck123four it's 11 tons . Mud is soft. Do the math
J-LTV is taking humvee and beefing it up to survive ied and ambush while having mobility of humvee while MAT-V is miniaturizing MRAP vehicles to make it more stable and have mobility more than MRAP vehicles. Just as MAT-V is a better version of the commercial of the shelf MRAP vehicles, J-LTV is the improved version of MAT-V.
JLTV are the Lieutenants/ Captain's ride and general grocery getter that can haul a gun arrouind and help with base defense. The MATV is a security/ convoy/ patrol vehicle and low internsity battle taxi.
That's just untrue
Every word of what you said is wrong and we're all dumber for reading it
Belgium has ordered 322 JLTVs which will be delivered from September 2023
So, it sounds like the MATV is the new battle wagon for combat ops or maybe preferred depending on needs? I wonder which is rated to take more damage or if both can add extra armor if needed? I have seen them with cages and they look even more hardcore but I hope they can develop a light weight hard kill system as that seems like the greatest danger to them.
It all comes down to what the military needs for their current operation.
Your source for the speed of the M-ATV is wrong. My team easily had our M-ATV up to 55 mph on crappy Afghan asphalt.
Maybe a dumb question (sorry) how did they ride bro?
@@Snipeyou1 Asking a question is never dumb. They rode really good. We used them specifically for QRF because of their speed off road. They have independent suspension where as the bigger MRAP's don't, which I think is probably what makes the biggest difference. Hope that helps.
@@KeyboardWarrior101st great description, thanks hoss.
@@Snipeyou1 No problem.
if you dont mind me asking how do they compare to the JLTV in comfort and useability. Which would you rather ride in?
They look badass
True, I especially like the J-LTV
Looks like the dog van in dumb and dumber.
What about it Armoured does both has the same defence capability in full gear???...
You make a mistake in the first scene that appeared in the two vehicles, the one of the left is the M-ATV and the one on the right is the JLTV.
Thanks for do this type of videos ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Your info on speed is wrong. Used M-ATV on multiple deployments and they were easily capable of driving 70mph and we did it regularly and it’s just as mobile as a J-LTV. The only differences between the two was suspension, weight (armor, levels of protections) and engines. Also the payload capacities are off. Lazy research is what gets you lost subscribers. Smh
JLTV off road in soft soil is much better than ANY MRAP.
@@Buck123four What is the purpose of your comment? My comment had to do with the video creator getting facts wrong, not with J-LTV vs MRAP. I didn’t even mention MRAPs, and if you think that the M-ATV is in the same league or category as MRAPs then you are highly mistaken. Smh
@@Fng_1975 MATV off-road mobility sukketh compared to JLTV. MATV IS a MRAP...just the tiniest. M = MRAP. Fact.
@@Buck123four J-LTV is also considered an MRAP, but personally, I don’t consider either it or the M-ATV an MRAP. I saw real MRAPs in action and the M-ATV nor the J-LTVs come even close to the protection provided by the Caimans, RG-31s, 33s, MaxPros, or Cougars. I saw those vehicles take IEDs that ranged from 300lbs to 1000lbs and the occupants still survived. Saw a Buffalo take a 1500lbs IED, everyone inside survived, but the gunner died from the over pressure, and saw an RG-31 get ripped in half by a 1800lbs IED. Only 2 Soldiers survived that, but there wasn’t much of them left, and we pumped them with morphine to ease their pain until they passed. But I saw M-ATVs getting penetrated by 40lbs IEDs when they first got in country and Army commanders pulled them off the roads until they developed an upgraded armor kit for it, which we used for our next deployment to Afghanistan. They couldn’t handle anything more than 300lbs and even that was suspect, because we got reports of them still getting penetrated by lesser IEDs. IMO, the best MRAP was the 4x4 Cougar with the independent suspensions. You could go anywhere off road and still take large IEDs. Regardless, your comment still had nothing to do with my original comment concerning the Video’s creator being factually incorrect.
@@Fng_1975 Sir - Glad you survived those blasts. Way back when...in 1996 I helped develop a requirement document that would have armored ALL Army wheeled vehicles, but DA G3 refused to put a penny against it for funding. It was based largely on Bosnia & Mog, where I rode around in totally unarmored HMMWVs. Anywhooo JLTV is advertised as having "MRAP-like protection..." Which it has, but one can't easily make a 24,000 +/_ pound vehicle as survivable as one 2 or 3 times as large. The MATV ORIGINALLY had to weigh less than 25,000 pounds - that didn't last long. //// All MRAPS have LIMITED soft soil mobility. Hard packed desert w/ substrata of rocks / petrified wood, a VW Jetta could drive on that. SOFT soil - mud, sand dunes, etc. is where JLTV excels. That is what is was tested against, and it passed. Maneuver warfare requires maneuvering - and thats why JLTV is important. It ran CIRCLES around any HMMWV in those soil types. /// IRT any comment on a previous subject - I musta been brain dead OR the cat ran across the keyboard. Take care. GC
what are the advantages over Humvees?
fuel
protection
engine
Thera are different variants.
everything
disadvantages are that they are way overly feature rich. 20 years from now they are going to be a nightmare to keep up an running.
@@christopherrowley7506 not really
@@TacticalTirpitzle central tire inflation, and the adjustable suspension alone are big failure points. Plus the huge amount of electronics with all sorts of cameras and screens including a thermal imaging camera and pull down screen. I can't imagine trying to problem solve electrical gremlins in that thing
@@christopherrowley7506 none of those affect vehicle operational capabilities though, it can still preform the capabilities of the humvee even with all its fancy tech not working. Fyi the humvee has been preforming a role it was never designed for so its really no arguement that this replacement is a good thing
I hated my MATV.
I loved my Dash.
As a taller Soilder,
It was much uncomfortable ride for me, and it made me think of being cramped up in A Humvee,
Are they still operating on the thought of 5ft 10 inches average height?
Big isn't "better"......less endurance, nimbleness, maneuverability etc etc. The "toughest" guys are usually 6' or under.
Go play basketball if you want a award and leave USSOCOM out of it.
Why even bring up the SHERP? That makes no sense.. the SHERP is a recreational vehicle... NOT an armored military vehicle... You're comparing Oranges to Apples there.
I miss my MATVs man. things were rugged af out in the stan
Well, the most interesting part of the comparison would be survivability - that is what they are designed for in the first place, so it makes sense to compare that in the first place.
My question is ..... is the military going to have BOTH Vehicles on the field, I understand that one seems better than other, but other seems better in certain circumstances.
USN Veteran Curious.
Well put together video. Some very cool vehicles. Just wished you would’ve put metric measurements as well
MATV can reach 75 MPH but its frowned upon...65 MPH is the norm pave road...30 MPH gravel road.
Is it me or has anyone else noticed the laughable amount of grammatical errors?
Yeah, it's almost like this was translated from another language.
JLTVs are a lot of fun to drive
One: The M-ATV may be heavier the than the JLTV but doesn't mean it wold be less capable of water crossing or navigating through deep mud, inertia and torque can play a big role.
Two: Oshkosh should make a civilian version of these two vehicles. I would have one of these over a Gwagon or X5 any day.
Three: If Oshkosh want to send me one for testing here in Australia we have some of the gnarliest trails, mud and water crossings, hill climbs and rough terrain in the world.
I’m in the Marine Corps and I’m a mechanic and this vehicle is so complicated it’s always in its natural habitat the shop
JLTV/M-ATV are massive and expensive compared to typical civilian cars. JLTV costs over $300,000.
Humvee obviously got a civilian version, which was a big car for its time, but a Hummer is tiny compared to a JLTV.
@@NFLYoungBoy223 so complicated? it uses a duramax engine
@@quinndenver4075 Im 14 out of 87 in my class and The JLTV is complex in all its electronic components
@@quinndenver4075 it has electronically controlled lift kit for traction, stability and storage/shipment. It has numerous cameras and numerous screens, heck it has a camera on the front hood so the driver can see the road as he crests a hill to avoid any mines or debris.
The systems that work, and can be adapted to the civilian market, will eventually make it there. I expect the hood camera to be require for new large civilian vehicles by like 2040.
how about bullet proof? can it protect from 12.7mm?
If you can please make a comparison video of US JLTV vs Aussie Hawkei.
Oshkosh looks fantastic😍🤘
jltv is cool and all, its got the duramax, im just curious, how does one service the glow plugs on one of those? i can tell you removing all 4 glowplugs on 1165a1 on the passenger side is literally almost impossible. Were as the c7 on the matv, its just only have a grid heater which is real simple and you can tell if it works by putting your hand on it.
Greatvid thanks a munch y son just got thru the USMC and drove a LJTV a missile man
what about making the "same" vehicle but with a halftrack design? I want to see it. lol
Thank you for this informative video but the M-ATV speed is 65 miles per hour
Honestly, both tactical vehicles are built for fairly different purposes, with the M-ATV being better protected and the JLTV offering better portability.
Is AUSTRALIAN Hawkeye based on the similar platform too??
Any opinion, coz by luks they are similar in few aspects.
Would be interesting to see a 200 cannon could be mounted on the MTV
M-ATV has virtually the same speed as JLTV, has the same wading depth as JLTV but is much heavily armoured for survivability being MRAP spec. Can carry more troops and ordinance. I know which one I'd rather be in in a firefight or if an IED went off underneath!
i think the best way to judge them is by their price. in the military price does matter. if the generals son drives one than that is the better one. if someone else drives the other one than that is the difference.
JLTV was the result of YEARS of testing. Your "generals son" remark is obtuse. That means STUPID.
Is the MATV planned to be supported as long as the JLTV? To my limited understanding the US military was disgoring themselves of previous Gen MRAPS as they are really backfilled to fill a limitation of loadaout in Iraq and Afghanistan. With the military reconfiguring to Eastern Europe and Asian theater combat planning, the MRAPS don't fit it with the fast assault plans. MRAPS are better suited to occupational roles against insurgents, not open direct near peer conflict. They're too slow for the light armor they posses. However, I don't know how MRAP and MATV fit together.
M-ATV weighs 18 tons and BMP-3 weighs 18 tons, what a coinsedence)
Nice video except one moment about mobility. Any MRAP mobility is pretty bad compared to any other vehicle, it can go only road and hard dry surfaces.
It's good and all but they need more Technicals on their arsenal.
Looking for used JLTV Oshkosh 11 Ton Truck in Good Condition.
You put the wrong name on the wrong photo at the start, it’s the other way around, I can tell because of the front bumpers.
A word or two about the engine/transmission/driveline components? A syllable? A stick drawing? Just askin'.
What? I thought the M-ATV did 65mph!
Sherp wasn't designed for combat it was a civilian expedition vehicle 🤔
Why would I have to pick the better one... they have different roles.
0:38 the JLTV is on the right and the MATV is on the left
It would be cool to have about 10 of these. & a Maximum Security Prison.
Add a bunch of weapons to each of them, then have Prisoners Race them around a track & whoever wins the Race gets a Full Pardon!
Covered vehicles use turret on top ir remote controlled mini gun on sides for reconiecnce and tank reinforcement
I have personally driven matv’s in excess of 60mph they definitely get up to speed
Got blown up in a MATV. Gunner cussed a lot, but everyone was fine.
MATV can only go 30mph? Idk about that chief. Did a good 60mph on the freeway overseas in one.
Ok but why do exposed gunner seats still exist?!?
The MATV is ridiculously massive compared to the hummve.
I thought the JLTV is now L-ATV called.
Dynamicity?? That's not a word
The main difference is that they are different vehicles.
@3:50 I think that's my motor pool
A MATV will do more than 30mph and they are quite nimble for their size
Up to 60mph
@@shooth100 I know I have driven one ;)
Song... huma huma- hydra
The Price?
I want a JLTV so bad lol
When they are making a civilian model of this beast ?!
If you wanted an SUV to drive around Chicago this is it.
The thumbnail picture has them switched up
0:39 used the wrong pictures
Thanks
I want delivery JLTV
Lockman Rapid
The JLTV is much better than the M-ATV in my book.
Well your thumbnail is backwards
That fiber glass hood makes your engine vulnerable to even rifle fire tho.
Speed.., in neary every situation.
Wilkinson Forks
10 and 14 tons to transport a grand total of 4 people + gunner.
So many variants, yet nobody seems to have thought to themselves in development to put some armour on the backend and add two, or gasp, maybe even four more seats to the vehicle so it can carry a whole fireteam on it's own, plus the driver, gunner and VC.
Tis NOT intended to be an IFV...thats what Strykers & Bradleys are for.
@@Buck123four it would lose nothing in its capability as a multipurpose 4x4 vehicle by being able to carry more people.
If anything, it would be more useful.
@@MatoVuc It would FAIL in Transportability and be MARGINAL in Soft-soil mobility if that was done.
@@Buck123four how? How much more weight do you think it would add?
The MaxxPRO MRAP is at most 14.5 tons.
The Russiams have a 4x4 MRAP that has 2+8 seats and is 13.7 tons heavy.
How much weight do you think would be added to the JLTV by extending the roof and sides by less than 2 meters to add two more seats? i'm willing to bet it's far less than some of the bullshit "modules" weigh that are envisioned for it to carry in that segment.
@@MatoVuc How much more? Mebbe about 1,500 pounds + / -. But a CRITICAL requirement for JLTV is external air transport by CH47 to X distance. Every pound counts. Ask Oshkosh Truck Co. if ya don't believe me. Ciao.
Armstrong Mills
Garret Plains
Against traditional mines only
I love to buy that for the Farm hahaha. Both of them
Cruickshank Villages
Can I order 1000+JLTV?
Yep, I want one.
You realize you got them wrong in your video thumbnail?
In the beginning you need to switch them
biggest similarity is the face o ly a mother could love
Valentina Shores
Broo its moving forward backwar 2:25
The size
Grant Oval
Truck's use machine gun or grenade machine guns and tow missiles on top to run in retreat operation
Lewis Jason Martinez Elizabeth Harris Amy
My son is certified for both