URAL w/ Cat/Allison combo..

[tamangel]

The URAL Truck mighty off-roader goes that bit better with an Allison box..

The URAL Truck mighty off-roader goes that bit better with an Allison box says Biglorryblog! - BigLorryBlog

Nice rig..

Mike

this blog is great for world trucking, here's their group of pic's/articles with search word 'Military Vehicles'
http://www.roadtransport.com/blogs/big-lorry-blog/military-vehicles/

 

[roger-wilco-66]

The URAL Truck mighty off-roader goes that bit better with an Allison box..

The URAL Truck mighty off-roader goes that bit better with an Allison box says Biglorryblog! - BigLorryBlog

Nice rig..

Mike

this blog is great for world trucking, here's their group of pic's/articles with search word 'Military Vehicles'
BigLorryBlog: Military vehicles Archives

Thanks for sharing these links, Mike. Great reading!

Mark

 

[spicergear]

Very nice rig...I love those tires too!

 

[Victor]

Russian vehicles are not as good as USA or German. They are not so reliable. Just because it looks exotic it is not means it is good.

 

[Barneyszoo]

Nice can you find them here or do they have to be imported? I'd like one for a project.

 

[davidkroberts]

Russian vehicles are not as good as USA or German. They are not so reliable. Just because it looks exotic it is not means it is good.

are you kidding the Ural and Zil wrote the book on battlefield reliability. They are still driving them everyday in afganistan that were left over from the occupation in the 80's. The entire truck was designed to be driven through russian swamps and snow by conscript army privates. Ive never heard aanyone call them unreliable. Have you ever driven one?

 

[combat32]

I drove one at the tail end of Desert Storm, I kind of liked it, We picked up several ex Iraqi trucks after the ceasefire.Used it for a daily driver for about a month, but had to chunk a thermite in it before we pulled out of southern Iraq in Jun of 91, kind of broke my heart.

 

[DanMartin]

are you kidding the Ural and Zil wrote the book on battlefield reliability. They are still driving them everyday in afganistan that were left over from the occupation in the 80's. The entire truck was designed to be driven through russian swamps and snow by conscript army privates. Ive never heard aanyone call them unreliable. Have you ever driven one?

 

[Victor]

are you kidding the Ural and Zil wrote the book on battlefield reliability. They are still driving them everyday in afganistan that were left over from the occupation in the 80's. The entire truck was designed to be driven through russian swamps and snow by conscript army privates. Ive never heard aanyone call them unreliable. Have you ever driven one?

David,
with all do respect,
you have wrong information.
Q: are you kidding
A: Nop

YOU: the Ural and Zil wrote the book on battlefield reliability.
ME: Ther is no such a book. However, if it is exist, Ural and Zil wrote book about Cat, Cummins, Alison, Rockwell etc. Whey had time to write this book (if any) because whey were in garage.

YOU: They are still driving them everyday in afganistan that were left over from the occupation in the 80's.
ME: possibly. Have you look at odometer? Have you look at service record? Do you know it is very common to change head gasket at 30,000 miles and rebuild engine on 50-70,000 miles? When you get brand spanking new truck you need to put into garage and go through ALL bolts to tight them up to the torque. And redo again after 1,000 miles. Including head bolts. Every other oil change you need to adjust all wheel bearings. I can go on and on.

YOU: The entire truck was designed to be driven through russian swamps and snow by conscript army privates.
ME: I am not arguing about design. Design is good. implementation is bad. Still is bad. Tolerance is bad. Oils, filters, lubricants are bad. Wires are bad. Switches are bad. List is big. Design is very good. Very simple, very few thinks to brake. I like design.

YOU: Ive never heard aanyone call them unreliable.
ME: Very few people have them who can communicate with you. And who is on this forum are collectors. Ask owners of Zil or Ural how many miles they drove. How much load. My 1994 International 4700 has 375,000 miles, another GMC T6500 260,000 miles. David, If you see stars on the side of some Russians trucks it means 100,000 Km (50,000 miles) with out total rebuild. maximum I'v seen 3 stars total.

YOU: Have you ever driven one?
ME: I have extensive practice and knowledge of this trucks. Yes. I Have driven too many. I learned to drive on Zil 137 in 1984. Learned mechanical trade on ZIL, GAZ, Ural, MAZ, KrAZ. Learned later in my life Tatra, Shkoda and KamAZ. I actually was teaching people for 1.5 year how to drive and repair this and many other equipment.

I can put parallel to 1986-90 Jaguar XJ6. Nice car, exotic, drives awesome. If it's working.

Russian truck for collectors - could be. For job to do - think twice.

 

[Victor]

Just want to add:
my knowledge is limited up to 1991. I don't come across these trucks any more. I'd like to keep this way.

 

[JasonS]

David,
Have you look at service record? Do you know it is very common to change head gasket at 30,000 miles and rebuild engine on 50-70,000 miles?

How is this worse than the mutifuel?

There, I've said it. Flame away......

 

[mudguppy]

... possibly. Have you look at odometer? Have you look at service record? Do you know it is very common to change head gasket at 30,000 miles and rebuild engine on 50-70,000 miles? When you get brand spanking new truck you need to put into garage and go through ALL bolts to tight them up to the torque. And redo again after 1,000 miles. Including head bolts. Every other oil change you need to adjust all wheel bearings. I can go on and on. ....

apparently, you have limited experience working on the current inventory of wheeled vehicles in the military.

have you ever looked at the service records for a HEMTT, HETT, or PLS? no, they don't get head gaskets changed every 30k miles; this is because they usually need a new engine way before 20k.

adjust the wheel bearings every other oil change? oh, that's ok - you won't get that far with the FMTVs without having to change the bearings, planetary hubs seals, and inner axle seals; and once you do that, you'll spend the rest of the afternoon getting the shim pack on the planetary hub bearings correct just so you can get it back together.

and, like JasonS said, do you really believe that you'll get 70k miles out of a multifuel engine? how about 50k?

you may not like the URALs, but i wouldn't hold US equipment on a much taller pedestal.

 

[saddamsnightmare]

February 5th, 2010.

Gentlemen:

I have tended to find that the Russians overbuild everything, knowing it is gonna be worked on by some peasant who can barely fix a farm tractor. Their locomotives, airplanes and trucks tend to be thought out for maintenance purposes.... The MIG-25 Foxbat has all its radios and gear that needed servicing mounted behind the pilots seat, set up to rise out of the rack when air or hydraulic valves were actuated, so the equipment could be reached easier... Their Diesel locomotives back in the TEM series tended to be similar. The problem might have been in inspection before assembly, BUT if the equipment passed it usually ran. Watch the videos of the russian loggers beating the tar out of these trucks, if they can take that and run (like our logging deuces), they must be pretty well built.
BTW..... I have seen more modern American (and Japanese...I might add) civillian vehicles broken down at the side of the road or subjected to recalls, then either my 1971 Kaiser Jeep M35A2 or my 1963 Mercedes Benz SWISS S404.114 Unimog, I suspect both of these vehicles will be around much longer then their civillian counterparts with just routine maintenance. The biggest failing on the multifuel is the dry starts, once fitted with one of JATONKA's lube filter systems, it ought to hold up as well as most modern diesels IF it is not abused.


Cheers,

Kyle F. McGrogan

NB: I'd buy one of the russian 4X4's if I had the money just to see how well they really hold up in normal day to day use......


Cheers,
Kyle F. McGrogan

 

[nhdiesel]

I think the comparisons haven't been 100% fair. Comparing any all-terrain vehicle to an International 4700 (or any other highway truck) isn't fair. Also comparing overall mileage numbers isn't fair. Try comparing the terrain these vehicles spend their days in. If I had to drive lots of miles on pavement or mild dirt roads, I wouldn't choose a Ural (or a Deuce, 5-ton, or anything similar). But if I was in Siberia and had to get from Point A to Point B, with no roads, I would jump at a Ural.

When it comes to 3rd world vehicles, they tend to have very poor fit & finish and tollerances are a joke. But the overall brute strength is there. There isn't a vehicle made that spends 8+ hours a day up to the axles in mud and doesn't require bearing adjustment, or replacement, every several thousand miles. The important thing is that they made it to the shop for that maintenance. They aren't out in the field broken down. Where other trucks would be breaking axles and drowning the engines, Urals end up needing some maintenance. I'd say that makes it a reliable, rugged truck.

Jim

 

[duncan]

I'll just chip in here to add to the before mentioned fact that mileage is not the way to compare vehicles like this. You have to factor in the driving conditions (road quality, weather and cargo).

So maybe ural, zil, kraz, uaz, kamaz, tatra, etcetera didnt write the book on reliability.... but they sure as **** wrote the epic book of "getting there no matter what".

Edit to add: I guess the older german/austrian/swiss trucks (MB unimogs, G wagen, steyr pinzes, etc) could take the price for reliability.

 

[Victor]

apparently, you have limited experience working on the current inventory of wheeled vehicles in the military.

have you ever looked at the service records for a HEMTT, HETT, or PLS? no, they don't get head gaskets changed every 30k miles; this is because they usually need a new engine way before 20k.

adjust the wheel bearings every other oil change? oh, that's ok - you won't get that far with the FMTVs without having to change the bearings, planetary hubs seals, and inner axle seals; and once you do that, you'll spend the rest of the afternoon getting the shim pack on the planetary hub bearings correct just so you can get it back together.

and, like JasonS said, do you really believe that you'll get 70k miles out of a multifuel engine? how about 50k?

you may not like the URALs, but i wouldn't hold US equipment on a much taller pedestal.

I have absolutly NO, "0", Nada experience with US military equipment. Actuly joined this forum to pickup your knowledge and experience. i am thinking to get M924 or M1086 to build log truck. Your information is make me think. Thanks.
I hope my 6 years with USSR toys give you enough info to make a educated desision.

February 5th, 2010.

Gentlemen:

I have tended to find that the Russians overbuild everything, knowing it is gonna be worked on by some peasant who can barely fix a farm tractor. Their locomotives, airplanes and trucks tend to be thought out for maintenance purposes.... The MIG-25 Foxbat has all its radios and gear that needed servicing mounted behind the pilots seat, set up to rise out of the rack when air or hydraulic valves were actuated, so the equipment could be reached easier... Their Diesel locomotives back in the TEM series tended to be similar. The problem might have been in inspection before assembly, BUT if the equipment passed it usually ran. Watch the videos of the russian loggers beating the tar out of these trucks, if they can take that and run (like our logging deuces), they must be pretty well built.
BTW..... I have seen more modern American (and Japanese...I might add) civillian vehicles broken down at the side of the road or subjected to recalls, then either my 1971 Kaiser Jeep M35A2 or my 1963 Mercedes Benz SWISS S404.114 Unimog, I suspect both of these vehicles will be around much longer then their civillian counterparts with just routine maintenance. The biggest failing on the multifuel is the dry starts, once fitted with one of JATONKA's lube filter systems, it ought to hold up as well as most modern diesels IF it is not abused.


Cheers,

Kyle F. McGrogan

NB: I'd buy one of the russian 4X4's if I had the money just to see how well they really hold up in normal day to day use......


Cheers,
Kyle F. McGrogan

All USSR engineers ARE designed to overbuild. It true with big "+".
By the way, unlike all other worlds drivers russian drivers mostly repairing their owend trucks. Other words: You can not be driver only - you must to be mechanic/driver.

I think the comparisons haven't been 100% fair. Comparing any all-terrain vehicle to an International 4700 (or any other highway truck) isn't fair. Also comparing overall mileage numbers isn't fair. Try comparing the terrain these vehicles spend their days in. If I had to drive lots of miles on pavement or mild dirt roads, I wouldn't choose a Ural (or a Deuce, 5-ton, or anything similar). But if I was in Siberia and had to get from Point A to Point B, with no roads, I would jump at a Ural.

When it comes to 3rd world vehicles, they tend to have very poor fit & finish and tollerances are a joke. But the overall brute strength is there. There isn't a vehicle made that spends 8+ hours a day up to the axles in mud and doesn't require bearing adjustment, or replacement, every several thousand miles. The important thing is that they made it to the shop for that maintenance. They aren't out in the field broken down. Where other trucks would be breaking axles and drowning the engines, Urals end up needing some maintenance. I'd say that makes it a reliable, rugged truck.

Jim

Jim, I actually was comparing same driving conditions: day-to-day on pavement. Except, pavement is not as good as in USA. I'd say some think like in NYC.
YOU: But if I was in Siberia and had to get from Point A to Point B, with no roads, I would jump at a Ural.
ME: Realistically - helicopter is the only way, my friend.

Here is some story: in spring 1989 I was in Siberia on a road. About 4 feet deep mud. Me and few guys needed to get from A to Z. We cut 100 foot tree and used mid section about 45 feet to connect 2 Urals together. Kind of "Push-Pull" technique. After 2 days we progress about 30 miles. On the third day both trucks sunk down. I think they (trucks) still there under mud. We walked back.
The End.

I'll just chip in here to add to the before mentioned fact that mileage is not the way to compare vehicles like this. You have to factor in the driving conditions (road quality, weather and cargo).

So maybe ural, zil, kraz, uaz, kamaz, tatra, etcetera didnt write the book on reliability.... but they sure as **** wrote the epic book of "getting there no matter what".

Edit to add: I guess the older german/austrian/swiss trucks (MB unimogs, G wagen, steyr pinzes, etc) could take the price for reliability.

duncan, don't put Tatra in this list. Tatra is 10 times better. It is not soviet vehicle. It is European vehicle abused by communists during production. I can put Tatra together with Unimog.

Guys, I'd like to help you out with making your decision about Ex USSR vehicles by giving you as much correct info as possible, so you can make right parches. If you desighted to go this way here is the order I'd put by abilities and durability starting from lowest to highest:
GAZ
ZIL, MAZ
Ural
KrAZ
KamAZ

Another think, If you buying any think made before 1990 you need to see:
Choice 1 (best) - star with hammer and sickle. it means Red Army government order.
Choice 2(good) - stamp of quality with CCCP inside. It looks almost like a Diamond Christler mark.

And last: get diesel YaMZ (RM3)

Don't pay upfront. NEVER!

 

[tatra813]

I like this thread!

 

[tamangel]

If you desighted to go this way here is the order I'd put by abilities and durability starting from lowest to highest:
GAZ
ZIL, MAZ
Ural
KrAZ
KamAZ

bummer, I kinda fancied the GAZ66

Mike

 

[davidkroberts]

I will have to say Victor you probably have much more experience messing with eastern block vehicles than i do. When comparing apples to apples between a Zil/Ural and a military 5 ton I still believe the Russian Block vehicle is superior for battlefield reliability if not overall reliability.

Victor please dont be a stranger here. We have few people here with real world experience in russian designed engines and systems. You will be welcome here. If you have questions about US designed vehicle repair issues you have come to the right place.

Dave

 

[davidkroberts]

although after owning a Mercedes 404 i cannot say anything negative about german engineering. That truck is an absolute masterpiece. With the exception of the throwout bearing its perfect in my opinion