M1083A1 or m923A2?

[ramdough]

All,

I am looking at building a 5 ton overland camper setup. At this point I have narrowed my search to two options. I plan to drive long distances, carry a lot of supplies, and go off-road.

I am on a budget and plan to do most of my own work.

Reliability is my highest priority, capability off-road, and comfort are important in that order.

I have narrowed my search to two options based on surplus availability.

I like the specs and apparent ergonomic improvements of the m1083, but I am concerned about all of the complexity and expense of parts and repairs.

What do you all think?

Thanks in advance!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[f8617]

wrt m923 & cummings250 engine, checkout https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7GBGjIJVs8

 

[mkcoen]

Having had a M923A2 and currently having a M1078 I have to say I enjoy both of them. I do like the M1078 simply because it's a 2 axle vs 3 and that you're looking at a 3 axle FMTV. I think the only thing more complicated between the 2 would be the electronics. If you're good with a multi-meter, or know someone that is, you should be fine with the FMTV. I'm not sure about comparable lengths but would think the FMTV would be shorter which could be beneficial in off road situations. The M923A2 does have a higher on road weight capacity than the FMTV so that might be beneficial in your bed build out. So basically I'm saying they each have their pluses and minuses and you just need to decide which factors are most important to you.

 

[ramdough]

Thanks for the fast response. Both trucks I am considering are 6x6 with 5 ton capacity and 14' beds.

The fmtv is a tad shorter due to the cab design and has a tighter turning radius, more cab space and probably an easier to make comfortable cab.

My biggest concern is future cost and labor to upkeep. I am decent with a multimeter, but sometimes electronics can still be hard to debug. Especially if the manual does not match what someone has modified.

I also would want to tune either engine for more fuel economy.

Generally speaking, the fmtv looks like a better fit, but I have heard reliability stories that make me concerned. Plus cost and difficulty of parts.

Does that affect your answer at all?

Thanks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mkcoen]

The 923 actually has a 10 ton on road capacity so is a bit more robust. The parts for both mechanically are generally available commercially. Body parts are more difficult to find for the FMTV but should become easier to find as more are released.

I'm not familiar with the CAT 3126 so not sure how that compares with the Cummins in the 923.

 

[ramdough]

The 923 actually has a 10 ton on road capacity so is a bit more robust. The parts for both mechanically are generally available commercially. Body parts are more difficult to find for the FMTV but should become easier to find as more are released.

I'm not familiar with the CAT 3126 so not sure how that compares with the Cummins in the 923.

I have heard mixed reviews on the CAT.

How would you compare the comfort in driving your two trucks?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mkcoen]

How would you compare the comfort in driving your two trucks?

Both are extremely comfortable to drive although I believe the FMTVs put out more heat to the interior since you're sitting directly over the engine. The FMTVs have better maneuverability but steering and braking are easy in both. Visibility isn't really an issue since you'll have a box on the back of either. I think getting in and out of the cab on the 923 is easier especially if you have any considerations of that type. The FMTV is easier than a Gama Goat to get into but that's not saying much.

 

[DiverDarrell]

FMTV has more room in the cab for stuff behind the seats. The cab over makes nosing up to things easy, and access to the engine with the cab up is nice.

 

[ramdough]

I am guessing that the view from the FMTV of the ground in front is better, better door seals, better wipers, more space..... probably easier to soundproof the cab (fewer air leak paths, easier to add matts than seal leaky seals). I am assuming I could make it more comfortable for 6-10 hour drives.

My biggest concern right now is reliability and parts availability. I really don't want to break down and not have parts. Also, I will be working on it myself. I don't mind fixing something that is broken, I just don't want to have to fix something every time I drive it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ramdough]

By the way, I am 6'1", my wife, who will also drive is 5'1", so would need to make the seat adjustable for both people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ramdough]

Both are extremely comfortable to drive although I believe the FMTVs put out more heat to the interior since you're sitting directly over the engine. The FMTVs have better maneuverability but steering and braking are easy in both. Visibility isn't really an issue since you'll have a box on the back of either. I think getting in and out of the cab on the 923 is easier especially if you have any considerations of that type. The FMTV is easier than a Gama Goat to get into but that's not saying much.

How rough of a ride is it? Do you feel beat up after a long drive, and can you improve the comfort easily.

I drive now a 4x4 that is not entirely smooth driving, but I imaging the 5 ton trucks are way worse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ramdough]

Robert at TMG claims to have a 923 that gets 14-16 MPG after some mods and tuning.

Any idea how easy it would be to improve the 1083 by a similar margin?

I realize that with a box, the numbers will fall drastically.

Thanks again everyone.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DiverDarrell]

That is a lot of mpg for a 6x6. My jeep wrangler gets worse, but then again you don't buy a jeep for mpg. I don't think the cat will get that kind of mpg. The 3126 or c7 may have some programming you can do but it may scarafice torque. The cat engine has parts that are ready available along with the Allison trans. Common school bus, small dump truck set ups. In your shoes, I would try and drive both. I would also ask other owners of each truck what mpg they get. My 1078 I don't want to know, but it can't be much worse than my jeep. I think of it more as smiles per mile. I get way more smiles in the Lmtv than any of my other vehicles.

 

[mkcoen]

I have a 1078 not a 1083 but you're more than welcome to drop by and take it for a spin. I'm about 20 miles north of San Antonio off Hwy 281.

 

[Smckerigan]

I have a M925A2 and I would take it over my lifted Jeep Wrangler on dirt roads as it rides a lot better off highway,

 

[ramdough]

I have a 1078 not a 1083 but you're more than welcome to drop by and take it for a spin. I'm about 20 miles north of San Antonio off Hwy 281.

Thank you sir for the offer. I will most likely take you up on the offer some day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Suprman]

The lmtv cab is significantly more comfortable and the ride is day and night compared to an unloaded m939 truck. Alot roomier for us tall guys. Better sealed from the elements and much better heat. Headlights are in a more useable location. Alot of the parts are off the shelf stuff. Parts are available but the m939 parts are more plentiful and can cost less. Either
truck will need to work the kinks out and learn the vehicle itself to make it road trip reliable.

 

[Duckworthe]

My M1078 gets a happy 8.5 mpg on a great day. Last trip from San Diego to Las Vegas and back was around 7mpg. They are big and flat nosed and are heavy pushing huge tires. I don't think you will ever get more than 9.5 mpg out of FMTV. If someone out there has do this, please let me know. The exhaust really isn't all that restrictive like cars are today. The military doesn't really have to worry about all the smog rules as they are building for power. Just listen to a military cargo aircraft compared to a civilian cargo aircraft. However, the FMTV trucks do meet the EPA's requirements and have the sticker on the valve cover to back it up. I agree that it is smiles per mile. These truck are neck breakers when you drive them. By that I mean, everyone does triple takes at them! I can tell you that LMTV's are a very smooth ride. Some put air ride seat in them but I don't see why as mine rides so very smooth that it seems unnecessary. I just installed some aftermarket seats. Anyway, good luck on your decision making.

 

[fuzzytoaster]

The M923 will be better suited for your needs due to simpler design, easier to source parts, and general costs. If you managed to get an M923A2 your mileage would be between 8-12 mpg compared to the 5 of the 1083A1, this is assuming for cargo truck configuration not carrying a box. The other upsides of the M939 series truck reliability/emergency wise are you can drive without a drive line in case of an emergency (front or rear), if you need a tow you just put the transfer case in neutral (no need to drop the shafts or pull the shafts), and the truck can operate without without power by locking the fuel shutoff into position.

What do you plan to do for the camper setup? You'll need to measure your max allowed height etc etc to factor into this too. I have an M1079 box (for sale) but when it was mounted to the truck it was tall!

 

[ramdough]

My M1078 gets a happy 8.5 mpg on a great day. Last trip from San Diego to Las Vegas and back was around 7mpg. They are big and flat nosed and are heavy pushing huge tires. I don't think you will ever get more than 9.5 mpg out of FMTV. If someone out there has do this, please let me know. The exhaust really isn't all that restrictive like cars are today. The military doesn't really have to worry about all the smog rules as they are building for power. Just listen to a military cargo aircraft compared to a civilian cargo aircraft. However, the FMTV trucks do meet the EPA's requirements and have the sticker on the valve cover to back it up. I agree that it is smiles per mile. These truck are neck breakers when you drive them. By that I mean, everyone does triple takes at them! I can tell you that LMTV's are a very smooth ride. Some put air ride seat in them but I don't see why as mine rides so very smooth that it seems unnecessary. I just installed some aftermarket seats. Anyway, good luck on your decision making. View attachment 652495

Do you have a build thread or website? I would love to see what you have done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk