Why the Deuce Doesn't Have These I'll Never Know!

[Rolling_Eudaimonia]

Because it wasn't needed. The 2 1/2 ton cargo truck is not the last resource for moving cargo for the US military. If things needed to be transported off road further than what a Deuce or 5 ton could handle, there are always helicopters. I'm not saying that you can't put lockers in your truck, just that the military saw fit not to since it wasn't needed. Everything will get stuck, no matter what it is or how it's built. Eventually you will run into something it can't handle. The military chose not to over-design the trucks since it didn't suit the purpose. The title of this thread poses the question of why they were not built to your satisfaction and the answer is obvious and just as true as the first time the question was answered in this thread. The US military didn't feel the need to add lockers to the majority of the trucks. The Russian trucks are a completely different story and are built to deal with a completely different theater with different parameters. I'm sure if we had intended to invade the Soviet Union during the Cold War, we would have designed trucks to deal with the challenges there. Naturally the amount of tanks the Soviets had made an invasion suicide, so it was not seriously considered nor were vehicles to do so.

We designed our trucks supposedly to operate in all theaters of operations from Arctic to Tropical conditions. And since the Soviet Union and Western Europe were a major theater of operation for both the US and Soviets I don't understand why our trucks would be so underrated when compared to the opposition? It seems to me that if wanted to counter a rapid advance of the Soviet Union during the cold war we would have needed trucks that wouldn't have gotten stuck when attempting to resupply shifting front lines. Look at what the Germans did with either Opel Trucks in WWII they put Panzer I and II chassis on the back end to make them work better in snow and mud.

Just because the Russian's had an advantage in armor numbers doesn't make an invasion suicide if you have a 10 to 1 or better kill ratio. If Germany had attacked Russia first and not rest of Europe it possible that even if the Russian had produced 50,000 T-34 and T-34/85 tanks the superior capabilities of the German Panther and Tiger tanks would have offset the numerical advantage if Germany could have controlled the skies in conjunction with with armor advantages. Everyone talks about how great the T-34 is and in 1941 it was but by 1944 it was outdated in both armor protection and firepower when compared to the Panther Series tanks that had a 2000m standoff kill range on the T-34 and T-34/85. The IS series was the only tank in the theater that could tackle the Panthers and Tigers at range and they didn't have enough of them at the time. The Su-85 and Su-100 tank killers were medicore at best.

Would I have put money on the M48s and M60's vs the Soviet tanks? I think thing the T-55 and T-62 would have given the M60s' and M48s' a decent fight. I think however that limited depression of the soviet hemispherical turret would have proven a problem in a more defensive posture had the soviets not broken the defenses of Nato in a single push.

This is the video that seems to show the front moving and the rears not moving on the Deuce... Now both of the other tires on the truck could be spinning but it is sort of odd to get two sides of axles not moving usually you'll get one tire to slip and not the others.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdN9DwkqVdg&feature=related[/media]

 

[FreightTrain]

This is an easy one.Cause Russia did not and still doesn't have roads to most parts of the country their trucks have to travel.And where there are dirt roads the soil is a a true swamp/Bog.OUR trucks are built to what they would see.Paved roads,Dirt roads of the Americas and europe where pretty much every war has been fought.We designed our equipment to work over there.Narrow enought to go through rail tunnels,work on their road ways,etc.As for the torque you wanna put through these.You might wanna look at other weak links.Like the axles.That much torque your gonna be blowing axles and diffs constantly.Not to mention the stock transmission.So basically,Your gonna have to replace the engine(to get the torque you want),Transmission,Transfer,Axles,tires,wheels......wouldn't it be easier to get a 6x6 Kenworth chassis and drop a deuce body on it?

 

[Rolling_Eudaimonia]

Because it wasn't needed. The 2 1/2 ton cargo truck is not the last resource for moving cargo for the US military. If things needed to be transported off road further than what a Deuce or 5 ton could handle, there are always helicopters. I'm not saying that you can't put lockers in your truck, just that the military saw fit not to since it wasn't needed. Everything will get stuck, no matter what it is or how it's built. Eventually you will run into something it can't handle. The military chose not to over-design the trucks since it didn't suit the purpose. The title of this thread poses the question of why they were not built to your satisfaction and the answer is obvious and just as true as the first time the question was answered in this thread. The US military didn't feel the need to add lockers to the majority of the trucks. The Russian trucks are a completely different story and are built to deal with a completely different theater with different parameters. I'm sure if we had intended to invade the Soviet Union during the Cold War, we would have designed trucks to deal with the challenges there. Naturally the amount of tanks the Soviets had made an invasion suicide, so it was not seriously considered nor were vehicles to do so.

Oh and the TMs all refer to the transfer case as a "positive lockup" system, so I'd say that clenches that right there.

Yes it does... I've never seen in that in any of my manuals for the truck. It just says move to low range or high range when terrain demands it. Good to know. Still I would like it air-lockable because say I'm running 6x6 on the highway in snowy conditions I might want all the traction of six wheels in the straight runs but when I turn I want some of that slip so I don't wear out the u-joints so much.

So I have to say the Military speced out one thing I agree with.

 

[Rolling_Eudaimonia]

This is an easy one.Cause Russia did not and still doesn't have roads to most parts of the country their trucks have to travel.And where there are dirt roads the soil is a a true swamp/Bog.OUR trucks are built to what they would see.Paved roads,Dirt roads of the Americas and europe where pretty much every war has been fought.We designed our equipment to work over there.Narrow enought to go through rail tunnels,work on their road ways,etc.As for the torque you wanna put through these.You might wanna look at other weak links.Like the axles.That much torque your gonna be blowing axles and diffs constantly.Not to mention the stock transmission.So basically,Your gonna have to replace the engine(to get the torque you want),Transmission,Transfer,Axles,tires,wheels......wouldn't it be easier to get a 6x6 Kenworth chassis and drop a deuce body on it?

What would be the fun in that... Yeah, the Transmission I'm looking at is the Fuller 6spd Medium duty model with a rated 860ft-lbs of torque max. The Transfer Case Oshkosh 55000 series that can handle the torque. I'm not sure about the half shafts yet. I think I want to use custom half shafts in the axles probably Stainless Steel 416 grade or better. I'll have to get my brother the engineer to spec it out. And the propeller shafts I'm thinking Dana 1710 series models should do the trick. I do wonder if the ARB Air Lockers will handle the torque. they work fine in a Jeep with 454 and 2.5 ton axles but I'm not sure if they are made for a constant 800ft-lbs of torque... I know the stock axle can only handle 1100ft-lbs max. I think I'll need to increase that figure to 2200 or better if I want usable axles.

 

[oddnor]

I like discussions, and my truck with air locker.
Her is some pics from Norway

Have fun......

Odd

 

[BFR]

doctor?

 

[Rolling_Eudaimonia]

doctor?

Spies Like US...

I can use a Decoder Ring from Captain Crunch Box to break Chinese codes as well...

 

[Hammer]

I'm not sure about the half shafts yet. I think I want to use custom half shafts in the axles probably Stainless Steel 416 grade or better. I'll have to get my brother the engineer to spec it out.

Didn't you LOOK at the link I posted earlier?
The axle shafts are alloy, in either stock diameter 16 spline, or larger 2" diameter 47 spline (same diameter as the 5 ton axle shafts btw).
Half shafts? This isn't an independent suspension vehicle here

 

[Rolling_Eudaimonia]

Nope I didn't see the link until just now... And I always call the axle shafts half-shafts because well they are half of a complete axle independent or other wise. I know it isn't technically correct but it is how I keep it straight that in side that axle there are two shafts and a diff at work.

 

[Rolling_Eudaimonia]

I like discussions, and my truck with air locker.
Her is some pics from Norway

Have fun......

Odd

Lucky, that you have air-lockers.

 

[hatteras4164]

Build your truck and then tell us with pics and video how it works

 

[joec]

http://www.ouversonengineering.com/axle_products

Those are about the best axle shafts you can get!
And if you want to put in lockers now, but upgrade axle shafts later, then get his locker.
He can make a few mods to it and it will still work with the 2" 47 spline shafts as well.

Yes it doesn't get any better then them. Even with their 16 spline. They are pretty hard to break. With there end caps or hubs. Put their locker in their. with the hub set up. Or one hub and one cap on both tandems. And a set of locking hubs in the front. All 3 axle's with detroit lockers and after market axle's. Souds pretty good to me...

 

[joec]

doctor?

LOL..LOL..LOL..LOL......

 

[Firefighter294]

Build it and they will come

 

[SasquatchSanta]

I've watched you guys run around in circles about the multi-fuel aspect of the engine spewing misinformation like it is manna from heaven. .......

 

[m16ty]

If we don't know what we're talking about (spewing misinformation and such) why do you even ask ? I guess you're trying to educate us.


I typed more but remembered the rule about no personal attacks so I erased it and will just leave it at that.

 

[jimk]

Norwegian M621 rear axle components

 

[Yarb]

Rolling_Eudaimonia

I have a graduate degree in systems engineering from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University with a specialization in hardware, aircraft systems, etc. I mention this because it's relevant to what you are about to read.

For you to believe that you know more than the team of engineers that spent tens of thousands of hours designing the M35 is a joke. The engineers, that already have their PHD's, have to make trade-offs when choosing systems (axles, etc) to meet as many "requirements" as possible with as few trade-offs as possible.

Perhaps using lockers with a heavy load on-road frags axles when run the type of hours non stop ops calls for. Perhaps the benefits of having lockers do not outweigh the costs. When lockers are needed, they are installed as with Marine Corp trucks. Also, I'm sure the Soviet trucks have a whole different set of requirements.

By the way, I don't post much here but I read alot and this site is great.

 

[Flea]

Winch > Lockers. Less work to install it, cheaper and probably easier to come by, and FAR more useful. If you're in a position driving and you get a 6 ton 6x6 with just ONE locker stuck (I mean completely immobile, down to the axles, wheels in the air, snow at the windows kinda stuck -- if you can move, you're not stuck), you're WAAAY beyond what the truck was designed to do.

Don't bother trying to re-invent the wheel here! Just accept that there are significant shortfalls to off-roading a truck the size of a day-cab. It's not a CJ or a mud hog, it's a tactical vehicle designed to get the job done over rough terrain. Keep in mind, too -- the military would find a route around most obstacles that would get vehicles stuck; immobility is what gives the enemy a decisive advantage.

 

[ATC]

There are lots of people like this on message boards: They start a thread with ideas of what they want to do (which usually never happens due to cost, time restraints, or lack of knowledge (which circles back to the cost thing...if they can't do it they have to pay someone else to do it)), and ask for "help" (more-so to capture our attention and to make the poster 'popular' among the board). They portray their idea as masterful and will shoot down any suggestion that they do not agree with 100%. Even through links, TM's, schematics, pictures, and personal experiences...you cannot change their mind because they are too ashamed to admit that they are wrong.

I've seen it hundreds of times on dozens of message boards. I think I can add another tally-mark to my board with this one

Cheers