my new deuce, 1994 m35a3

[bottleworks]

RE: dangerous truck

There are too many here who are quick to say "you can't do that" or "It WON'T work" or "The world is flat", etc. Will all those who have A3's please stand up. Oh...Only a couple. This guy has the right to be offended with the negative tone several of you conveyed.

And as for the paint comments...Grow up a little! It's going to be a fire truck. It's not your truck.

 

[cranetruck]

RE: dangerous truck

I agree with bottleworks....The center of gravity is what matters, empty it will be about 40 inches above ground, loaded with 500 gallons of water about 43 inches, which means that you have a theoretical tip over angle of about 40 degrees, still plenty safe.
The 5-ton can carry a bigger load, but the CG is also higher.
The traction is increased with a bigger load.
As mentioned above, sloshing is a big factor, so the driver must stay calm and use common sense at all times.
I'd say go for it. The A3 has single tires. Using tires with an aspect ratio of, say, 70% (that's the number after the slash in the tire number) will lower the CG.

 

[emmado22]

Since you wont listen to us, go over to www.firehouse.com or www.firerescue.com and see what they have to say about it...

Roscommon uses some hocus pocus math in their wildland engine design PDF file....

As for Bottleworks comment, no I dont have an A3, but I do know the frame, suspension, brakes and steering components are allthe same with the A2, therefore the A2 in that respect is basically the same...

Here is what the TM has to say about the A3's payload..

 

[cranetruck]

Okay Mark, but who is suggesting that a full 900 gallons would be driven off-road? Fully loaded it's within limits for highway driving.

 

[emmado22]

Nothing suggests it, but it's a decent possibility it could happen. I know first hand that the brush trucks around here go on and off road full and empty..

No one likes to drive with anything less than full, as even thought they have baffled tanks, they still slosh, and thats just bad...

With the state of the NFPA, nothing can be too safe according to them. I highly doubt they would say this truck is OK.

 

[chicklin]

In the first post he said it would be a "brush truck". Whether or not they would carry 900 gallons into the brush, I don't know.

 

[emmado22]

No fire engine I have ever heard off leaves the station with less than a full load of water................

 

[saddamsnightmare]

RE: dangerous truck

August 2nd, 2008.

Gentlemen:

I would go with Armyman30yearsplus comments just above. It may be prudent to use an M149 water buffalo, or a stripped M105A2 frame with additional tank, to lighten the load up on the deuce for off road work. The G742 series were specifically designed with a 2-1/2 ton off road total weight and a 5 ton on road weight because of the limitations of the frames, brakes, drive train and engine..... Just because the Forest Service or the DNR designed the rig, does not necessarily mean it can take that punishment.... I worked for the NPS, and our brains could come up with ideas that the Almighty himself would have trouble getting them to work... and need I remind you of our prescribed burns down in Arizona a couple of years ago, when the supervisors were told NOT to BURN???? Several houses and several million dollars later.....!
It has been my observation that here in Texas and back in West Virginia, many fire departments are dropping the G742 series trucks as brush fire trucks due to several safety and design issues, and are opting for purpose built (FWD, TEREX, NAvistar) large off road brush trucks. The deuce has its good points, agility is not one, neither is the strength of the parking brake to resist slloshing water in the tank and still hold... The A3's may have some minor improvements in steering, power and axles, but they are still G742's.. I might have suggested even one of the purpose built larger Unimogs instead.....
Given how little your department paid for the vehicle from the Government, they would have been wiser to obtain an 800, 900 or one of the GMC's from the 80's or 90's as the base vehicle, and the capacity increase and safety reserve would have offset any difference in cost. I wish you gentlemen good luck, because, I fear you are going to need it with this truck in any rough terrain you get into. I am VERY familiar with the limitations of the type, having used them for construction and logging trucks back in the mountains of West Virginia, so be sure to keep the cab doors unlocked and pick your jump site in advance, and you may make it when the truck doesn't.... I suspect most of us M35 owners on here who are not newbies, have a great deal more M35 time under our belts then most firemen will ever get in their lifetimes.... so if they are saying the truck's at it's operational limit.... I WOULD think about how I would convert, operate and maintain the machine in question.

Drive safe, live long, and thanks for being out there on the front line, we justwant to see you, and the truck get back in one piece after the fire call....

Sincerely,

Kyle F. McGrogan

1971 Kaiser Jeep M35A2 Wo/W "Saddam's Nightmare" Desert Storm and Vietnam Veteran Deuce
1968 Johnson Corp M105A2 Cargo Trailer 1-1/2 Ton
1967 Hercures MEP023A Gas gen -set APU
1963 Swiss Army Cargo Unimog S404.114.

N.. Savoy, Texas VFD has a spare M35 that they were going to use for a brush truck, but now they are thinking of getting rid of it... I have no other information other then they asked me if I'd make them an offer... Steel Soldiers in Texas might want to inquire....

 

[EdMontana]

Re: RE: dangerous truck

Will all those who have A3's please stand up. Oh...Only a couple. This guy has the right to be offended with the negative tone several of you conveyed.

And as for the paint comments...Grow up a little! It's going to be a fire truck. It's not your truck.

Agreed 100%, for those that were disrespectful ......I suggest you to grow some balls first and act like an educated adult .

I may not like YOUR truck and so what? will I call YOUR truck ugly? ....for what reason someone do that? hurt the owner feelings? show how low ball he's for the owner? show his true colors for everyone else? I don't get it.......

One of the things I got from my father....."If you can't say something positive, just than don't say anything"

Ed

 

[Cdub]

Not for me to tell anyone what to do, but a word to the Wise…………

Yes, These guys know what they’re talking about……..!!! Some of the comments may
be just a little out of line, but there is a lot to consider here. Your chatting with a group
of EXPERTS in there fields in either Fire or Military experience.

I think it may be time to suck it up and re-engineer your wheeled platform.

I would hate to see a fireman get him self hurt because of an engineering flaw.

Cheers,

Craig

(Son of Fallen Fighter Captain Richard Lee Williams)
Hackensack, NJ Fire Dept.

 

[Daneil]

Devils advocat here. I don't know the true terrain he will have to cover but it looks pretty unchallenging. (THIS IS JUST A TERRAIN MAP FOLKS. THIS BY NO MEANS IS ADVOCATION FOR DOING ANYTHING UNSAFE) Terrain composition is something totally different. I don't know the area so I can't say weather this set up would work. Better Safe Than Sorry is the way I would go. I personally like ArmyMan's idea. Your doing a tuff job that not many people want to do. For that I comend you. As far as the color goes, It's a FIRE TRUCK. It's supposed to be RED. Anything suggestions saying different is pure stupidity in my mind. http://maps.google.com/maps?sourcei...9US270&q= fife lake michigan&um=1&sa=N&tab=wl

 

[chicklin]

Re: RE: dangerous truck

Agreed 100%, for those that were disrespectful ......I suggest you to grow some balls first and act like an educated adult .

I may not like YOUR truck and so what? will I call YOUR truck ugly? ....for what reason someone do that? hurt the owner feelings? show how low ball he's for the owner? show his true colors for everyone else? I don't get it.......

One of the things I got from my father....."If you can't say something positive, just than don't say anything"

Ed

The bulk of the argument here is not about whether anyone thinks the truck is ugly. I only saw one post about that and I assumed it was in jest, maybe not. The issue at hand is safety and I think everyone has the right to make constructively critical remarks towards that end. Also, I agree there is no place here for disrespect on either side of the issue. The truck's owner should not take much offense at a bunch of guys looking out for his and his fellow firefighters' safety (not saying that he his).

 

[Somemedic]

RE: dangerous truck

I have worked for NPS and a few other agencies and have driven a butt load of trucks but never saw a water buffalo used in conjunction with sn off road suppression op. You would have the water available yet could cut it loose ITSHTF and would be able to recover a rebuildable portable tank.

Also if u look for it the military already has a manual for converting humv's and dueces into type2 and type3 suppression trucks.

That duece won't do well off road with that size tank. Might go with a 300 gal and a buffalo. Would be very cool, versatile, and go anywhere.

Just me talkin...

 

[Elwenil]

RE: dangerous truck

Ok, lets look at the facts here.

1, The comments made about the trucks color are obviously a joke. Anyone who knows Mike or has been an active member of this forum for any length of time can attest to that.

2, The military specs are plain to see, but it's also well known that the military engineers everything with a certain margin of error due to the tendency for young soldiers to get into trouble with equipment.

So one could assume, as many Deuce owners have proven, that they can carry a reasonable amount over the military specs. At the same time we must consider the similarities to firefighters fighting a fire and soldiers fighting a war. It would seem to me that the original military specs are valid to be used and adhered to in both cases. I know some of the local firefighters here drive a lot of different trucks, but I would not trust some of them to push my lawnmower. Add to that the fact that I think it's very responsible for a agency that is given the job of public safety to ignore a lot of valid design concerns and weight limits that are plainly posted on the data plates and relevant manuals.

I think the advice given here is reasonable and honestly concerned. Those may take offense to someone making the statement that someone could get killed but can anyone you really honestly say that Mark is being unreasonable? We are talking about safety here and we all know that the chances of someone surviving a military truck rollover are slim due to the cab design. I think we can take it to heart that trusted, long time members of Steel Soldiers have nothing to prove and are just concerned about someone's safety and are offering advice based on their experience in good faith. Those that are quick to take offense may want to step back, look at it from another angle and decide for themselves if there is really an argument worth participating in here at all.

 

[poppop]

RE: dangerous truck

Well I guess I am going to have to remove the 1200 gallon tank from my 1964 Ford F600 single axle truck. Its only been mounted 20 years. Then there's the 1500 gallon tank on the 1963 Chevy C60 single axle. The ford has been to several fires to feed the pump trucks. I also raced it across a cotton field when my picker was on fire, but then it only had 100 gallons of water in it, thats why the picker was totaled. Also I guess I will have to quit putting 350 bushels of corn, 19600 lbs, on the GMC 6500 single axle and driving it to the elivator in town. Oh, I almost forgot my 1964 GMC 6000, made into a ten-wheeler, that has been hauling 600 bushels of corn, 33600 lbs, for 30 years. And I guess it is impossible for the grain trucks to have dump bodies.

 

[Westech]

RE: dangerous truck

man even 10k in the back of a M35 type is nothing. I have seen many posts here on SS where there was a FULL load of mulch, sand, gravel ect... If you drive with your head on, take it ez, you will be FINE!

 

[chicklin]

RE: dangerous truck

I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that an M35 can carry 10k+ lbs, it's the potential grade and off-road requirements of a brush truck that is the issue. Hauling corn and mulch around the farm or into town is one thing, driving up the side of a hill, in the woods, with 900 gallons of water sloshing around, to get to a fire is another.

 

[emmado22]

If an individual truck owner chooses to overload his truck, thats his (not so smart) business... he is the owner/operator, and knows the risks... And oh yeah, the NFPA doesnt apply.............


If a Fire Dept puts a truck they know is not safe in service and something happens, the lawyers will be circling before the ambulance gets to the hospital. They will sue the FD, the town, the county, the state, whoever they can.... Whatever $ they save by buying a substandard truck for the job will be paid out MUCH more in a law suit. ( a decently equipped fire engine runs 500,000 to a million dollars new...) Then you get the NFPA involved.. Thats a whole different mess.

Go ask someone in the fire service about the NFPA and all the rules... They are (mostly) there for a reason.

 

[poppop]

I know that farmers are a different breed and strech the limits. But then every fertilizer dealer I know has 1500 gallon tanks on spreader rigs racing through fileds spraying liquids that weigh 10.5 lbs per gallion. The dry spreader trucks haul 10 to 12 tons per load and spread this over uneven ground. No vehicle is safe if the driver does not operate it in a safe manner. My M151 Mutt was mustered out of service because of its roll-over potiental when in most cases if the driver was operating it in the correct manner it would not have over-turned.

 

[EdMontana]

Re: RE: dangerous truck

Ok, lets look at the facts here.

1, The comments made about the trucks color are obviously a joke. Anyone who knows Mike or has been an active member of this forum for any length of time can attest to that.

.

Hummm, was not just about color...anyway, the poster had FIVE posts only, I doubt he knew that he would be welcomed by a joker.....