M816 vs M819 Wrecker

[M1075]

I am looking into getting a M819 wrecker. Juding by the -10, key differences on the M819 vs M816 are the 5th wheel, longer wheelbase, longer crane length, 12.00x20 tires, and lack of rear winch. Are there any other key differences to take into consideration?

Does anyone know if there were more M816s fielded than M819s? I am familiar on the market prices of the M816, but I haven't seen many M819s for sale. Are the prices similar to the M816, less than, or more than? I would expect with less supply and more versatility they would cost more, but I'm just guessing.

 

[rumplecat]

The prices on the two seem all over the scale! Prior to my getting my wrecker, Memphis Equip. and other commercial folks would push the cost of an 816 up to $14K, but last week I saw one in AL sale for $4 grand. From what I have seen both the 816 & 819 sale pretty close to the same, the 40,000 drag winch is offset by the 5th wheel, depends on who wants it and how bad!!!
James G.

 

[jh1990]

an 819 would be pretty cool, they both have front winchs right?

 

[DDoyle]

IIRC - the tire size is different as well. The M816 is designed for vehicle recovery and use as a crane. The M819 (and predecessor, the M246) was designed for aircraft recovery. It towed a long, but relativey low weight capacity low boy trailer, and used the extra boom length to lift aircraft and place them on the trailer.

HTH,
David Doyle

 

[73m819]

the 1200x20 is a NO get item unless you want new, the 819 is a bit heavier, the 819 has the m62 still crane,very few 819s or for that matter 246s were used compaied to the 543,m62,or the 816, also the 819 is the last of the tractor wreckers , the 900 series does not have the tractor wrecker in its series.

in the furture i plan to mount a heavy hyd, drag winch in the frame under the fifth wheel, and fairlead it out the back.

the way the 819 is longer, sets the crane more forward which makes it better for lift towing. less front lift as found on the standard wrecker

with my 1200x20s the 819 does between 60 to 65 mph on the freeway (according to my wifes spoeedo), but does not like long hills.

the 819 does lack storage space for all the goodies but that can be delt with,

 

[jh1990]

if you could trade you 819 in for a 816, would you Ron?

 

[73m819]

NO

 

[M1075]

In regards to the tires on the M819, I read some interesting things in the -10.

1. Different tires are shown for front (16 ply) and rear (14 ply), both 12.00X20. How can this be?
2. Ground clearance for M819 is shown to be the same as standard, 10.5 inches. This should be more with the taller tires.

 

[M1075]

Ron,

Have you used your M819 to pull trailers? Which ones?

 

[73m819]

theres a lot in the tm that just goes standard, speed, ground clearence just to name a few, a far tires as tires go, id guess its for the total conbined gross weight, though it seems like a bit of over kill.
i cant find 1200x20s except NEW, since the price for 12 plus tubes, flaps, is out of the question and if i tore up a tire id need another new one, so i planed on spacers and bridge truck rims and run 1400Rs duels, good plan but upon some research ,found out that good plan is a bad plan, WONT WORK, so now the plan that will work is 1400Rs singles on hemtt rims so im tracking in one line. i fought singles since i got the 819, i came to the fact that it has to be singles or the 819 is not on the road, so singles it is, and no going to 1100s is not a option

 

[M1075]

Re: RE: M816 vs M819 Wrecker

the 900 series does not have the tractor wrecker in its series.

Ron,

I think there was a M933 tractor/wrecker as part of the M939 series.

 

[73m819]

RE: Re: RE: M816 vs M819 Wrecker

wow, thanks, i didnt know that, that must be a real rare truck, what tires did it use
no trailers yet, id like to find a long goose neck lowbed

 

[CUCVFAN]

RE: Re: RE: M816 vs M819 Wrecker

I am very curious about this. I had never seen a M933 data plate and there is no mention of it in the current manuals. I wonder if it was actually produced? That would be a cool truck. Does anyone have an early M939 manual that shows anything about it???

 

[CUCVFAN]

RE: Re: RE: M816 vs M819 Wrecker

I take that back. It is mentioned in a few of the PDF's I have, but there is no specific information. I'm guessing it was planned but not made? Even the data plate above has no weights or payload data on it....

 

[emmado22]

RE: Re: RE: M816 vs M819 Wrecker

I couldnt find that NSN anywhere......

 

[73m819]

RE: Re: RE: M816 vs M819 Wrecker

m1075, where did you find that data plate pic???

 

[M1075]

RE: Re: RE: M816 vs M819 Wrecker

http://www.mvdataplates.com/

 

[tsmall07]

Digging up an old thread, but i'm interested to know what the differences are between the M816 and the M543A2. Visually, they look very similar. Thanks in advance for the help

 

[sandcobra164]

Visually, air cleaner is moved to driver's from passenger side fender for the M816. The grille is extended from the headlights on the M816. Functionally, the M816 has a 14L NHC 250 Cummins as it's heart instead of a 7.8L Turbocharged Multifuel that the M543A2 has. The Wrecker Body between the two trucks are very similar, almost interchangeable from what I've read. As far as capability, I've driven an M816 in a Parade once and it drove like an M809 series 5 ton with some weight in the back. I've driven a Deuce I owned before and combined with a trailer that would make it weigh comparable to an M543A2 and it was very sluggish to get rolling. I do realize that the M39 series 5 ton A2 would have an LDS in place of the LDT I had in my example but the Cummins in the M816 has over 200 foot pounds of torque over the best stock LDS. I'm sticking with the big N/A Diesel.

 

[tsmall07]

Exactly what I wanted to know. Thank you for such a thorough response