Multifuel Engine life - the facts from Uncle Sam

[Bill W]

"They will run on stuff that would FUBAR just about any modern engine."

Well except stuff like laquer thinner

WM are you going to the GAMVPA rally this month

 

[wreckerman893]

I will be there with bells on.......well....maybe BDU's on

 

[Recovry4x4]

I know this is an engine thread but I have to toss this out for digestion. When the engineers designed these trucks in 1949, the very last consideration was driver comfort. There is something very appealing about this!

 

[Keith_J]

I know this is an engine thread but I have to toss this out for digestion. When the engineers designed these trucks in 1949, the very last consideration was driver comfort. There is something very appealing about this!

Have you driven a civilian truck from the 1950s? There isn't much different between a deuce and my grandfather's 1950 GMC in the comfort department.

The multifuel engines had extensive retrofitting to fix the problems. The only failed engine I ever saw on AD was due to engine overspeed and this was from brake failure/downshifting.

 

[saddamsnightmare]

September 13th, 2009.

What the multifuel will burn as fuel will total out any modern diesel engine, its the mass and the rpms involved that destroys the engine along with poor or no maintenance. When you think about it, the deuce is little removed from a Ford Model T or A in technology, yet 82 years after the end of production, 1 million of the 15 million T's built are known to be operable. How many dueces will bang along with parts availability into their 50's, 60's and 70's?? Mine is 38 and has been through two wars, and with only minor upgrades and repairs, she run's 95-98% of the time. Few modern vehicles can say that from what I've seen around here after four or five years of use.....

Cheers,
Kyle F. McGrogan

September 14th, 2009.

I had a 1951 Ford F6 Dump truck back in the 1980's with 34,000 original miles, 289 V-8 4 speed X 2 rear end gears, and a cab heater..... it's still running in SC, but the creature comforts weren't much better then a deuce with a cab heater, and the top end was just about as slow!

 

[bassetdeuce]

I guess the real question is how much ACTUAL overspeeding will it take to frag an LDT465, NHC250, or the 6.2L Detroit. No, I will not volunteer.

 

[Brock Steel]

My wifes truck has 65.490. Runs fine I do the regular maintenance oil, fuel & lube and away we go

 

[Lawrence of Arabia]

We lost one in Saudi, but the operator ran it low on oil. I lost one driving home from Grayling, but the operator overheated it. I have been a mechanic all my life and the reason I have always had a job is the keyword, "Operator".

 

[stumps]

Well, I have heard the 427 was a problem, but I will be a hard one to convince the 465 is a problem. We have several trucks with them, and they have been very dependable for farm use.
I find it hard also to equate the gloom and doom of the write-up with the success of the same engine in White 2-155 farm tractors. It is not at all unusual to find them with 8,000 to 10,000 hours on them and still going fine.

I did a little searching, and the engine in the White 2-155 farm tractor may share the multifuel block, but it is not the same engine. It is diesel only, has a 17:1 compression ratio, has a PTO power of 157HP, and has a governor that won't allow it above 2200rpm.

RPM is the key here. The military is perfectly willing to compromise longevity in an engine for the potential of increased performance - when you really need it.

A farmer is never going to need to push his engine to the red line, but rather is going to keep it at the governor, where the engine leads a comfortable cushy life. The farmer knows that he can barely make a living off of his fields if he keeps his tractor investment going for 20 or 30 years. Many tractors get passed down from generation to generation. He knows that if it breaks, he will have to pay for the repairs, and will have to suffer the down time.

A military truck driver is often in a field of fire, wants to get the hell off of the road quickly, and is frequently a kid. A kid that has no stake in the costs of maintenance and repair. It is not his truck, after all.

-Chuck

 

[zout]

The owner of our #2 M109A3 is a former Marine. The way he drove his unit back from Memphis makes me realize that should have had crates of engine's in Nam for replacements. He could not keep his foot out of the throttle and it was not a matter of understanding RPM-shift range-mph - he just flat wanted to go.
#1 has the Continental engine and #2 has the White I believe I saw.

That was a good article to post

 

[GoHot229]

I want to take aim at some miss-conceptions.....Mainely that the "kids" were driving these Deuces..."some draftee with-out a care who treated like pieces o'crap" Yea, to be sure there were those.... but by and far, there many more who did give a crap, because it made the difference between life and death in alot of instances. I was a Doorgunner on a Slick and my Crewcheif and I were always checking and doing meintenance that we were able. Some things we were not allowed to do because of the technical nature of it. And yea there were istances where Deuces, 5 Tons, M60 Tanks, APC's and such were intentionally (wink, wink ) let frag, because there were more problems than parts, so now we had the parts to canabalize. This was frigin Combat guys. Just saying that the 'kids didnt give a hoot' is easy enough to say, but were you there, or did you hear someone else say that ....so it must be the way it was.... Think again. Alot of us hated the war and deprivation that comes with it, but not keeping those things going and in good order, those things that might save your life.... well thats alot of here-say and not true. I think there may have been some "fast food" to the motors, quick exchange motors, and yea some failed, but in Combat, machinery was expendable ultimatly.
One point saddly lacking: these are after all 40ish year old units with a lifespan figured into their use. Look at your own Antiques, do you run them like raped apes? or your old riffles and guns, or motorcycles?
DDoyle, Thanks for all the information. Theres alot of truth throughout this entire thread, all eight pages worth, I'm not saying anyones right or wrong, just that the cleche version is not nessesarily apt .

 

[redcoat54th]

Now all one has to do is read the thread and pick up the hints and tips based on the Army's combat experience. How many 30 odd year old civvy trucks are still as durable as the deuce? Bash anything and its not going to hold up as it would with due care and attention.
I learned a lot reading through the pages and plan to drive my Deuce accordingly. I hope to be able to pass my truck onto the next owner knowing that he will be able to pass it on also. History you can drive! With a little attention to detail it will be around long after we are not. Sad, but the grandkids will have fun.....

 

[stumps]

. ...How many 30 odd year old civvy trucks are still as durable as the deuce? .....

One thing has to be considered before you make that comparison, and that is: How many civvy trucks have had the benefit of a motor pool that would replace any part, large or small needed to make the truck road ready again? My deuce may have been built in 1969, but how many engines, transmissions, transfer cases, differentials, and body panels has it had replaced since it was new? [ Remember the story of grandfather's axe? It was 100% original. Over the course of its life, it had 10 handles and 3 heads replaced...]

Civvy trucks don't get that kind of service. They are disposable after a certain point. The military knew they were stuck with the deuce, so they did whatever was necessary to make sure their fleet was always combat ready.

-Chuck

 

[GoHot229]

Stumps, I like that Axe story......

 

[saddamsnightmare]

October 21st, 2009.

Now that my Multifuel has has the rear main seal and carrier gasket replaced, she behaves fine, with no more leaks then any other 38 year old truck. Likely the radiator will be the next recoring job, as its starting to show wear. To quote "Wreckerman" above ...
"Tough as a Woodpecker's Lips!". I get to see a lot of like new FMTV's come outta Red River Army Depot, and while they have a lot of bells and whistles, they don't seem like it would take much to overload the truck (particularly the front axle- just uparmor the cab), and between you and I.... no snout between me and the bad old world. The deuce is simple enough that it had a certain degree of reserve capacity engineered in, all I can see between it and the 5 tons is axles springs, transmissions and possinly engines, the frame seems fairly similar. When you design a military truck, one should allow for mission change and weight creep (up),'cause it's gonna happen. Many other armies choose to upgrade their deuces and 5 tons, I guess the Military Industrial Complex over here couldn't make enough loot on the deal so the deuce went. Her sister the B-52 soldiers on.

\Just my two cents worth, and I'll almost alway defer to David Doyle (wheres that book on the G742 series????) when it comes to paperwork.... He knows where its at.

Cheers,

Kyle F. McGrogan

 

[t120r]

multi fuel

Well I have a multi fuel I bought 5 years ago. Drove it out to Wyoming. Yes the engines are old and yes I keep the oil and filters changed and yes the comfort of the cab is first class and yes I drove one in Vietnam and yes they had problems like anything mechanical.

I also own an old collection of BSA and Triumph motorcycles. These are as old as M35A2's. These run better today just as m35's do. I have twisted more wrenches then most people and I would say the oil today is so much better then the old days these engines are much better.

While in Vietnam more Detroit diesels were problems then multi-fuels. Multi-fuel engines even as designed will outlast many newer electronic diesel engines of today. Just because your neighbors 2009 dodge ram with cummins 350HP engine is fast and does this and does that does not mean it will last like the old engines.

IMO the multi-fuel machining is equal to anything up to 1990. These are military engines. These were I think way ahead of there time. 1949-2009. That is a long time for a Reo style truck to be in use. The HMMV will not be around much longer. Why? Because the thing is a piece of S---. The current vehicles in Army inventory did not have the same testing as yesteryear vehicles. This is why the multi-fuel shines as an example of the military doing there job in regards with producing a truck on war combat experience.

Just my opinions. By the way back in the 60's the British bikes and Harley;s were road hard and put away wet . The old brit bikes are still here. Why? Because of the modern oil and the basic engines designs were good (for there day) As far as the Harley goes the only reason no one rides the old ones are they are a beast to start. Theie engines were of sound design just like the multifuelers are.

So we have a multi-fuel engine with good care equals around 15 years of life. That is good I think

Just my 2 cents

Sjones
T120R Md.

 

[dieselolds]

My dad used old M35a2 trucks as company trucks 10+years and got them road legal as 5 tons.
The only things to fail was rust, a lot of tires some tire chains and a in tank fuel pump.

 

[jfnemt1ff1]

I also think the newer motor oils will play a big part in the life of the engine. And I bet with the spin on oil filters is only going to make them run longer.
John

 

[jatonka]

I never consider that the multifuel engines in my trucks won't outlive me, I just wanna know where do we get new liners and bearings for them? JT out

 

[orren]

Bjorn,

Do you know what, if any, numbering designation there might be
to distinguish the new redesigned Continental from the old?

I have a LDT-465-1D that I might need to replace.

Thanks,
Orren

The army elected to stay with the multifuel for the, then new m656/xm757 series of 8x8 5-ton trucks, so the advantages must have outweighed the (operator) problems. Continental did add some design changes, though, a 5th piston ring and tighter tolerances to give it a higher governed rpm (3,000)....