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

[Ripcord01]

37 pages of hmmm.

 

[flighht2k5]

It still won't turn with both rears locked, which is why I recommended that all 3 have separate engagement. but in a few years when you get them installed I'm sure you will let us know. Hopefully it doesn't take you two more years to replace your broken axle shafts & other driveline / suspension parts that break under the extra stress.

I thought Marine trucks had lockers in them. They seem to operate fine. Lockers do not make it hard to turn a truck. My Unimog turns fine with them. All the issues people claim ie: bad on ice, plow straight and so on is either from going to fast or just someone talking out of there rear end. Lockers are worth there weight in gold.

 

[Rolling_Eudaimonia]

By defenition it's not a flaw. If you believe that it is, fine with me. I believe that you are flawed but I'n not constantly posting that. Maybe you could refrain from falsely labeling the truck as flawed.

Now as far as rectifying the flaw,you can't if its not there. You may mean improving you trucks tractive ability but thus far all you have done is talk, lots of talk. In this world there 2kinds of people, people of action and all others. I've not seen any action.

2flaw

noun
Definition of FLAW

1
a : a defect in physical structure or form <a diamond with a flaw>

b : an imperfection or weakness and especially one that detracts from the whole or hinders effectiveness <vanity was the flaw in his character> <a flaw in the book's plot>

2
obsolete : fragment

— flawed adjective
— flaw·less adjective
— flaw·less·ly adverb
— flaw·less·ness noun

Origin of FLAW

Middle English, flake, from Old Norse flaga stone slab, moldarflaga thin layer of turf; akin to Old English flōh flat stoneFirst Known Use: 1586


Flaw[2] - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary



I've put the definition in bold that fits my use of the term flaw. The weakness of the truck in the off-road arena are the open differentials. Thus by correcting this weakness in design the truck becomes more capable for its intended goal of driving off-road.

 

[Rolling_Eudaimonia]

I thought Marine trucks had lockers in them. They seem to operate fine. Lockers do not make it hard to turn a truck. My Unimog turns fine with them. All the issues people claim ie: bad on ice, plow straight and so on is either from going to fast or just someone talking out of there rear end. Lockers are worth there weight in gold.

Aren't the Lockers on the Unimog 406 series selectable? That is you can turn them on and off? I've driven a Civilian Series Unimog from the 1970's and it had a dial that you turned on to put air pressure to the unimogs' air lockers.

Lockers do reduce turning radius- however, the lockers I want are all air-lockers so I can turn them off and on at will.

 

[flighht2k5]

Aren't the Lockers on the Unimog 406 series selectable? That is you can turn them on and off? I've driven a Civilian Series Unimog from the 1970's and it had a dial that you turned on to put air pressure to the unimogs' air lockers.

Lockers do reduce turning radius- however, the lockers I want are all air-lockers so I can turn them off and on at will.

They are selectable, but when they are turned on it's not as bad as everyone makes it out to be. I had a ramcharger that I installed lock rites in. With the hubs locked it wasn't that bad cruising around on the street in the winter.

 

[drgreg]

I think we know what a flaw is, and in your case it is definitely misused. My education is in engineering. I do not agree that your conclusions would have passed a cost/benefit analysis. A vehicle platform with the M35's record of service, can hardly be considered flawed.
This is my major contention with this thread, you want to crap all over a proven design in favor of your unproven concept.

 

[rchalmers3]

I believe in this idea.

I strongly believe that you can turn a 50 year old cargo truck with a long wheel base, dual rear axles and manual steering into a 70's era Unimog 406 with short wheel base, single rear axle and power steering. But of course!

Knock yourself out buddy. But please pipe down a little 'till you get further along. Less time gabb'in and more time wrenching will benefit us all.

Rick out. Again.

 

[flighht2k5]

I believe in this idea.

I strongly believe that you can turn a 50 year old cargo truck with a long wheel base, dual rear axles and manual steering into a 70's era Unimog 406 with short wheel base, single rear axle and power steering. But of course!

Knock yourself out buddy. But please pipe down a little 'till you get further along. Less time gabb'in and more time wrenching will benefit us all.

Rick out. Again.

Was this a knock on me? No one ever said the 2.5 ton would ever be equal to a Unimog. But lockers would improve the off road prowess of the truck and move it a notch above average.

 

[KsM715]

I think we know what a flaw is, and in your case it is definitely misused. My education is in engineering. I do not agree that your conclusions would have passed a cost/benefit analysis. A vehicle platform with the M35's record of service, can hardly be considered flawed.
This is my major contention with this thread, you want to crap all over a proven design in favor of your unproven concept.

If it were a "flaw" it would have been fixed in the first years of production. The designers knew what they were going for and who would be using the trucks, young, inexperienced drivers. The designers came from the old school way of designing stuff, the K.I.S.S. way of doing things.

You want to do it your way, go ahead no one is stopping you, but I want to see you "toss the keys" to an "unkown to you" 18 year old and tell him you want to see that truck at the top of that seemingly unsurmountable hill by the end of the day, with no training and tell let him know he is not responsible for broken parts as long as he doesnt abuse it, but give him no definition of abuse, just tell him that truck was build to make it to the top of that hill. I bet you'd end up with a pile of broken parts before the end of the day.

 

[flighht2k5]

If it were a "flaw" it would have been fixed in the first years of production. The designers knew what they were going for and who would be using the trucks, young, inexperienced drivers. The designers came from the old school way of designing stuff, the K.I.S.S. way of doing things.

You want to do it your way, go ahead no one is stopping you, but I want to see you "toss the keys" to an "unkown to you" 18 year old and tell him you want to see that truck at the top of that seemingly unsurmountable hill by the end of the day, with no training and tell let him know he is not responsible for broken parts as long as he doesnt abuse it, but give him no definition of abuse, just tell him that truck was build to make it to the top of that hill. I bet you'd end up with a pile of broken parts before the end of the day.

But it sure seems to work for the Germans, Aussies, Swiss, Belgians, and new Zealand army's.

 

[KsM715]

How many of them have a military as big as ours?

Hate to bring it up (not really) but I believe the Germans lost because they were simply out numbered. Build simple stuff, and alot of it.

 

[flighht2k5]

How many of them have a military as big as ours?

Hate to bring it up (not really) but I believe the Germans lost because they were simply out numbered. Build simple stuff, and alot of it.

That doesn't change the fact they have 18 year old privates that beat the crap out of the trucks. And as far as simple technology, the idea has been around for over 60 years so I think it's a little proven idea.

 

[Chief_919]

But it sure seems to work for the Germans, Aussies, Swiss, Belgians, and new Zealand army's.

All much, much smaller forces that never really left their home country or hand to worry about the logistics of beinga global, expeditionary force.

Logistics are a bitch when you have forces around the globe.

Logistics are far simpler when your forces are 99% within a few hundred miles and the plants making your parts are smack in the middle of that.

Much of the design of US military equipment reflects the desire for simplified logistics. Common headlights, switches, etc as well as going with more robust, simpler designs that are easier to operate and less likely to break.

 

[flighht2k5]

All much, much smaller forces that never really left their home country or hand to worry about the logistics of beinga global, expeditionary force.

Logistics are a bitch when you have forces around the globe.

Logistics are far simpler when your forces are 99% within a few hundred miles and the plants making your parts are smack in the middle of that.

Much of the design of US military equipment reflects the desire for simplified logistics. Common headlights, switches, etc as well as going with more robust, simpler designs that are easier to operate and less likely to break.

Wow this has nothing to do with lockers in a truck. If every truck had lockers then logistics wouldn't be an issue. With all due respect, you are ignorant and you have zero experience with trucks such as a Unimog. They are very reliable and simple to work on. They have had lockers in them since day one. Just because we didn't use them in our tricks doesn't mean it's a new fangled contraption.

 

[AceHigh]

With all due respect, you are ignorant and you have zero experience with trucks such as a Unimog.

With all due respect? An apology is in order!

 

[badga the badger]

2flaw

noun
Definition of FLAW

1
a : a defect in physical structure or form <a diamond with a flaw>

b : an imperfection or weakness and especially one that detracts from the whole or hinders effectiveness <vanity was the flaw in his character> <a flaw in the book's plot>

2
obsolete : fragment

— flawed adjective
— flaw·less adjective
— flaw·less·ly adverb
— flaw·less·ness noun

Origin of FLAW

Middle English, flake, from Old Norse flaga stone slab, moldarflaga thin layer of turf; akin to Old English flōh flat stoneFirst Known Use: 1586


Flaw[2] - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary



I've put the definition in bold that fits my use of the term flaw. The weakness of the truck in the off-road arena are the open differentials. Thus by correcting this weakness in design the truck becomes more capable for its intended goal of driving off-road.

hmm....whos copying and pasting now? just pointing out a double standerd.

 

[Chief_919]

Wow this has nothing to do with lockers in a truck. If every truck had lockers then logistics wouldn't be an issue. With all due respect, you are ignorant and you have zero experience with trucks such as a Unimog. They are very reliable and simple to work on. They have had lockers in them since day one. Just because we didn't use them in our tricks doesn't mean it's a new fangled contraption.

Well, lets see.

My experience with the Unimog.

On the civilian side, I owned a Swiss 404 for many years.

One the military side, I have 19 years experience working on the 419's the US Army uses as SEE tractors. In fact I have even been responsible for maintaining a fleet that included both 419's and M35A32's and M35A3's in combat.

When my unit fielded the 419's I actually went to the factory training from Freightliner, which included a technician/instructor from the factory in Germany.

Thats right- I not only have owned and worked on my own Unimog, I have been factory trained on them and I have actually been responsible for maintaining a fleet of them and other trucks under combat conditions in Afghanistan.

Guess what- the 419's were way more problematic than any of our other trucks were, and way more problematic than any of our other heavy equipment was. Either way you classed it, they failed.

I replaced a bunch of Unimog axles. Only a few M35 series or 5 ton axles, despite having 10x more of them. Most of the issues caused by the 19 year old operators running diff lock when they shouldn't.

Easy to work on? Not really, not when compared to an M35A2. Ever done a clutch on one? What a pain in the ass.

I know all the Unimog hobbyists see them as the best thing since sliced bread. Good for you. Those of us professionals who have actually used them as intended, in military conflict, will have a much different opinion of them than the hobbyists who go rock crawling on weekends.

Perhaps you should know your audience before calling people ignorant or inexperienced...

 

[KsM715]

With all due respect? An apology is in order!

 

[stumps]

Well, lets see.

My experience with the Unimog.

On the civilian side, I owned a Swiss 404 for many years.

One the military side, I have 19 years experience working on the 419's the US Army uses as SEE tractors. In fact I have even been responsible for maintaining a fleet that included both 419's and M35A32's and M35A3's in combat.
...

That's it boys and girls, I think we have a winner!

I'd like to thank everyone for playing!

-Chuck

 

[Rolling_Eudaimonia]

I think we know what a flaw is, and in your case it is definitely misused. My education is in engineering. I do not agree that your conclusions would have passed a cost/benefit analysis. A vehicle platform with the M35's record of service, can hardly be considered flawed.
This is my major contention with this thread, you want to crap all over a proven design in favor of your unproven concept.

Yeah, well I would disagree with this statement: "... conclusions would have passed a cost/benefit analysis." After all every one of our competitors use air-lockers in their trucks-- how expensive can it be. The facts are simple if you want a truck that works well off-road use Lockers. If you want a truck that gets stuck easily off-road use open differentials. This is not a matter that requires a degree in Engineering. All one has to do is a little empirical testing: if your truck gets stuck going up a simple hill that would seem like a weakness in the design. If your truck spends more time stuck than it does reaching the destination that is a weakness. And since you've driven your M35A2 or M35A3 off road for any period of time you'll find that your truck gets rather bogged down in many simple conditions.

This video is of me driving over a section of soft ground only two or three times. If I had lockers this wouldn't have happened to me. I would call this a weakness in the design. If you feel it isn't-- what I can I say. I disagree. You can call it what you want.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6WvJWwTXSU[/media]

Compare it to truck:

[media] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mi8SlYGt0YMthis[/media]


Tatra T-815 series trucks or T-813 either one comes with fully locking differentials and independent suspensions systems. These trucks have had their engines tuned but the drive trains are basically Military Stock. To me this this a superior design to the M35A2's systems and they've been service just as long as the M35A2's.