Cool - I actually have both a M35A2 with a whistler turbo and the MAN L2000 4x4, which is the european civilian version of the LMTV. Both have similar Steyr-based cabs. The MAN (LMTV) is build as an expedition RV. The M35A2, I try to keep in original shape. And I agree with this video. The LMTV or in my case MAN L2000 is a much smoother ride. The visibility is great. But the whislter turbo makes the M35A2 a piece of art.
DEEMI Search and Rescue just got in three of these vehicles. They came out of the Red River Army Depot in Texas through the DOD Excess Program. So in addition to two M998, one M996, we also have one M1078, one M1079 and one M1083.
A horse is when you look at failure modes and required support. A horse requires constant attention to keep it in working shape. A truck can sit in a shed, never gets sick, doesn't need rest. As for 'mogs... seeing as they cost 5-20 times what an M35A2 does, cost might be a concern. 'Mogs are also smaller, have a lower top speed (45) and a higher loading height that can cause issues. Unimogs are a better match for a Pinzgaur than a M35A2. But we have used 'mogs here. Check GL.
A: if it's one of the tandems, you chain it up. Same thing if you break a dog-bone. B: steer axle you're pretty much SOL if it is a major issue, but you can still grind metal as long as the wheels are intact, even if the driveshaft/diff/etc is coming apart. Honestly, they could have upgraded the M35 to this standard and above rather easily. (tires, engine, trans, adding insulation/muffler/better seats and power steering) The S. Koreans did a nice job doing just that. Check out the Kia trucks.
Remember also that the FMTV is already on the second generation. The first one was a nightmare and Oshkosh was brought in to fix/rebuild/build them. Frozen injectors, trans control problems, doors falling off, plastic handles shattering, brakes locking on in cold weather. But the FMTV series was a HUGE upgrade in driver comfort. Was reliability was better for the 2 year old FMTVs than the 35 year old M35s? Yeah... Was that a design issue or an age issue? Get what I'm saying?
A horse is vastly more complicated and delicate than a truck. The truck IS a simplification. As for what older technology has over "new" systems... time and modification. The failure issues of the M35 were well known and easily solved. Again, the series is still in production and does a fine job in Korea. M35 issues: Engine power and emissions . (Easily solved) Driver comfort (easily solved) Even the A3 iteration was a partial step in the right direction without the FMTV cost.
Thats a right a truck never ever needs attention. Never needs fuel, never needs oil changed, never needs gear oil changed or greased. You're right. a truck can sit for years and need zero attention to get it running again. The seals won't dry out from sitting and they won't leak.. You're right. you obviously didn't read my post about poorer nations using Unimogs. So that is a non issue. A Unimog is not have a higher load height, and Unimog with fast axles can cruise at 65 easily.
a horse is not vastly more complex. The M35 did an average job. There are civilian trucks that can do the job for cheaper and better reliability. The M35 was average off road. It isn't as stellar as everyone thinks its is. Thats awesome that Korea is still using it. That doesn't mean anything to me. If the Military was smart. it would use the Unimog. And don't say its expensive. Smaller nations with smaller budgets can afford it, the U.S can afford it.
Not a pedestal, just an engineer who appreciates the benefits of simplicity. Again, look at the Kia trucks. Still in production and every bit as functional as the FMTV, they are what the M35 series could have been had we simply upgraded. The cost savings would have been significant. Nothing is perfect, but trying to compare a bone stock 1950s design M35 to an FMTV is a bit silly. But then again, the DOD has tax dollars to burn, right?
if simplicity is so wonderful, why are we not riding around on horse and buggies? Im pretty sure you are driving around in something that is light years more complex than the horse and buggy. But yet, the M35 is so amazing because its simple. But it had more parts than the CCKW it replaced. BUt yet, the M35 is more reliable. Well ive driven LMTVs for thousands of miles, and have yet to see one break down. I wish people would get over older is better. Its not.
Cool - I actually have both a M35A2 with a whistler turbo and the MAN L2000 4x4, which is the european civilian version of the LMTV. Both have similar Steyr-based cabs.
The MAN (LMTV) is build as an expedition RV. The M35A2, I try to keep in original shape. And I agree with this video. The LMTV or in my case MAN L2000 is a much smoother ride. The visibility is great. But the whislter turbo makes the M35A2 a piece of art.
DEEMI Search and Rescue just got in three of these vehicles. They came out of the Red River Army Depot in Texas through the DOD Excess Program. So in addition to two M998, one M996, we also have one M1078, one M1079 and one M1083.
Murika
A horse is when you look at failure modes and required support. A horse requires constant attention to keep it in working shape. A truck can sit in a shed, never gets sick, doesn't need rest.
As for 'mogs... seeing as they cost 5-20 times what an M35A2 does, cost might be a concern. 'Mogs are also smaller, have a lower top speed (45) and a higher loading height that can cause issues.
Unimogs are a better match for a Pinzgaur than a M35A2.
But we have used 'mogs here. Check GL.
A: if it's one of the tandems, you chain it up. Same thing if you break a dog-bone.
B: steer axle you're pretty much SOL if it is a major issue, but you can still grind metal as long as the wheels are intact, even if the driveshaft/diff/etc is coming apart.
Honestly, they could have upgraded the M35 to this standard and above rather easily. (tires, engine, trans, adding insulation/muffler/better seats and power steering) The S. Koreans did a nice job doing just that. Check out the Kia trucks.
Remember also that the FMTV is already on the second generation. The first one was a nightmare and Oshkosh was brought in to fix/rebuild/build them. Frozen injectors, trans control problems, doors falling off, plastic handles shattering, brakes locking on in cold weather.
But the FMTV series was a HUGE upgrade in driver comfort. Was reliability was better for the 2 year old FMTVs than the 35 year old M35s? Yeah... Was that a design issue or an age issue?
Get what I'm saying?
A horse is vastly more complicated and delicate than a truck. The truck IS a simplification.
As for what older technology has over "new" systems... time and modification. The failure issues of the M35 were well known and easily solved. Again, the series is still in production and does a fine job in Korea.
M35 issues: Engine power and emissions . (Easily solved) Driver comfort (easily solved) Even the A3 iteration was a partial step in the right direction without the FMTV cost.
Might want to check that. Lose the electrical system and you lose the engine and trans in the FMTV. Both are processor controlled.
Thats a right a truck never ever needs attention. Never needs fuel, never needs oil changed, never needs gear oil changed or greased. You're right. a truck can sit for years and need zero attention to get it running again. The seals won't dry out from sitting and they won't leak.. You're right. you obviously didn't read my post about poorer nations using Unimogs. So that is a non issue. A Unimog is not have a higher load height, and Unimog with fast axles can cruise at 65 easily.
Yu ummm how is the m35 going to drive on broken axles?
I love how you guys hold the m35 up on a pedestal. It was an avg truck that did an avg job.
a horse is not vastly more complex. The M35 did an average job. There are civilian trucks that can do the job for cheaper and better reliability. The M35 was average off road. It isn't as stellar as everyone thinks its is. Thats awesome that Korea is still using it. That doesn't mean anything to me. If the Military was smart. it would use the Unimog. And don't say its expensive. Smaller nations with smaller budgets can afford it, the U.S can afford it.
Not a pedestal, just an engineer who appreciates the benefits of simplicity.
Again, look at the Kia trucks. Still in production and every bit as functional as the FMTV, they are what the M35 series could have been had we simply upgraded. The cost savings would have been significant.
Nothing is perfect, but trying to compare a bone stock 1950s design M35 to an FMTV is a bit silly. But then again, the DOD has tax dollars to burn, right?
if simplicity is so wonderful, why are we not riding around on horse and buggies? Im pretty sure you are driving around in something that is light years more complex than the horse and buggy. But yet, the M35 is so amazing because its simple. But it had more parts than the CCKW it replaced. BUt yet, the M35 is more reliable. Well ive driven LMTVs for thousands of miles, and have yet to see one break down. I wish people would get over older is better. Its not.
european style cabover...m.a.n.-steyr licenc...