LMTV cab front collision damage with pics

[Suprman]

Here are some pics I thought I would share. This truck was in a convoy that had to stop quick. This truck hit the back of the truck in front of it. The impact was a bit offset towards the passenger side. Not sure about how fast they were traveling when it happened. Both driver and passenger had leg injuries. You can see how the cab is crushed in the footwells. The doors bent and popped open. The bumper is only damaged in one spot on the passenger side. The impact was largely above the bumper so the cab took the brunt of the impact. The truck frame is largely undamaged. I think the result would have been alot different had the truck in question hit a civilian vehicle with lower bumpers, I think the bumper and frame structure would have taken more of the impact and there would have been less cab damage.

 

[mkcoen]

If he rear ended another FMTV then the bumpers wouldn't have meant much.

I'm watching for an opportunity to get one of these. How are the brakes in a normal driving situation? Would this have been a driver inattention issue or just lack of capacity to make a sudden stop?

 

[Suprman]

I think the brakes work fine. To me at least I think there is significantly less air brake delay than the m939 trucks. The first variant trucks do not have abs. This is an A1 that did have abs. I think someone was just not paying proper attention. Convoys usually do not travel at high speed.

 

[Suprman]

 

[MaiNiaK]

Did you buy this truck Suprman?

If so, and the doors are messed up. I'm looking for an outer and inner window sweeps for the drivers door. (Can't seem to find these anywhere)

 

[Suprman]

Its mine. I have several LMTV parts trucks. Email me a pic of what you need will atpawnking dotcom

 

[NDT]

That damage is one of the reasons cabovers are so unpopular here in the US.

 

[tim292stro]

I have seen this kind of accident damage on the bus conversion forum I'm on. Driver-forward designs are very hard on the driver in a wreck - modern civilian vehicles use the first and last 2-3 feet of the vehicle to crumple in a front-end rear-end wreck. Think about where the driver sits in one of these...

I really have no interest in being party to the crumple zone in a crash

 

[gimpyrobb]

Its mine. I have several LMTV parts trucks. Email me a pic of what you need will atpawnking dotcom

If you plan on fixing it, I have access to a new cab.

 

[Suprman]

Thanks I have an extra cab here but it's easier to part it out. I don't have it in me to put something like this back together. It would be very expensive and a lot of work.

 

[infidel got me]

Permanent leg damage for sure! Would not have wanted to been in that convoy.

 

[JohnnyBM931A2]

I have seen this kind of accident damage on the bus conversion forum I'm on. Driver-forward designs are very hard on the driver in a wreck - modern civilian vehicles use the first and last 2-3 feet of the vehicle to crumple in a front-end rear-end wreck. Think about where the driver sits in one of these...

I really have no interest in being party to the crumple zone in a crash

Agreed. We have an Isuzu box truck at work, and I always think about what would happen if I ever had an accident while I was driving it. Luckily I don't have to use it very often.

 

[Suprman]

Don't think for one minute the M939 trucks are any better. I saw one that was a front collision the front area was bent up a bit not too bad but the doors popped open and the entire cab folded at the door sills.

 

[sandcobra164]

I'll take my chance on a M939 anyday. I can replace metal, bumpers and radiators any day. I can't rebuild my legs. I operate an LTAS Cab Wrecker for my job in the National Guard. It looks way thicker and better built. I'm the slowest truck in the convoy either way and I watch ahead. Safety First!!!

 

[Suprman]

The M939 cab I saw folded into a V. It fared no better than the cabover. There's no replacement for a careful operator in any of these trucks they all lack modern vehicle safety features.

 

[tburk49760]

Time to build a bull bar...

 

[Lmtv772]

Time to build a bull bar...

Good idea

 

[sandcobra164]

The M939 cab I saw folded into a V. It fared no better than the cabover. There's no replacement for a careful operator in any of these trucks they all lack modern vehicle safety features.

I'll never say anything is completely safe. I will just say that with an M939 truck, it has to bend and reshape a thick bumper, thick frame rails, engine block and multiple other heavy built stuff before that stuff started shifting around and impacting the cab. I will agree that the best option is a careful operator.

 

[Suprman]

The one I saw the front held together and the door area took the impact by bending the cab in a V. I do agree the front area having that big protective chunk in front does appear good at first look. If the m939 had an integral cab like the big high top rops cab then I think the result would be different. I don't know if you have ever seen a m939 frame flex when off-roading but it bends significantly.

 

[aleigh]

The safety merits of having a lot of metal in front of you are undeniable, but, I wonder about some things. If the engine is in front of you that is great so long as the engine stays fast to the frame. That's a lot of mass with forward moment but the mounts are just mounts. Car engines are designed to push under the car as it crumples - trucks, doesn't really seem that way.

A lot of guys say that the cabovers are popular in the US for the safety aspect. Maybe. It sounds reasonable. But I can think of other things. In europe, where cabovers are all over, their taxation / laws are on the combination length not the trailer. Here my understanding is the trailer length is tariff but the tractor can be "whatever" up to some limit, it does not deduct from the trailer capacity. Which brings me to -

The US is really big. Most of the trucks I see on the highway these days are sleeper cabs. I can't imagine a tilt cab sleeper cab - that would be a lot to tip up. So if you have no legal / money incentive to keep the tractor short because it is not deducting from your commercial capacity, and the market wants sleeper cabs... seems like the only logical option is exactly what we have.

I see cabovers in the city all the time, where the sleeper cab angle doesn't matter. Probably easier to get around town too.