Why no Multi-Fuel engine?

[Gman021]

Let me preface this by saying I am still constantly reading and gaining information about military trucks and I don't know a lot (college classes take up a lot of time).

But why don't 5 tons are other military trucks other than the m35a2 have multi fuel engines?

 

[swbradley1]

The M54 did have a MF engine.

 

[Gman021]

The M54 did have a MF engine.

Any particular reason why the 900 series don't have them? From what I have read, they are pretty reliable and can run on anything combustible. So why limit trucks to only diesel?

 

[Warthog]

The multifuel is a 50+ year old design. Modern improvements and the EPA.

 

[197thhhc]

They went to just diesel because in the late 1980s the military retired gas engine vehicles. There is no need to have multifuel when you only have diesel. The 5ton wrecker I started out on, when I was in the Army, was a multifuel and then I got a 900 series wrecker. The power of the Cummins engine compared to the multifuel was night and day.

 

[Gman021]

I had a feeling it had to be power. I wish they had been able to develop a modern day multi-fuel that was capable of producing enough power but still be able to run on anything.


Thanks for explanations.

 

[KsM715]

At some point in time somebody in charge sat back and thought about it.

When was the last time, out in the field in combat, did someone run out of fuel and actually have enough "other fuel" on hand to fuel up and move a convoy. If a single vehicle gets lost on it's own and runs out of fuel, what are the chances its going to be carrying enough waste oil to dump in the tank and keep going? It sounds good in theory, but in reality its a non issue (for the military)

 

[73m819]

The multi-fuel is a WW2 German design, mainly the Russians and the US copied it because the next war was "supposed" to be fought in Europe, the multi-fuel is a DEISEL engine that CAN run on battlefield collected fuel "if needed", NOT a run on anything forever engine, the thought was that the motor can be replaced but the mission was completed and got the personal back.

All the 5t 39 series A2s were multi-fuel

 

[73m819]

The M54 did have a MF engine.

It had a GASSER, the 6602, a 602 ci six
The m54a2 had the multi-fuel

 

[scopionf89]

My platoon SFC that I had back at Ft. Stewart when he went into Iraq in 2003 said he had to run his m35a2 at one point on kerosene. They ran low on fuel and raided an Iraqi storage depot. So it has come in handy since Vietnam.

 

[patracy]

As owner of a M543A2 wrecker, I can assure you that you'd wish it had some other engine in a heavy 5 ton.

 

[wreckerman893]

I had a five ton tractor with the multi-fuel in it. It would not pull a greasy string out of a fat cat's arse.

 

[BBoomerBootCamp]

WM, you do have a way with the words!

 

[LiveFreeOrDieTryn2B]

I agree the multifuels lack power and an updated one would be great but it is what it is. On another note Better to have it and not need than to need it and not have it.

 

[erixun]

I had a five ton tractor with the multi-fuel in it. It would not pull a greasy string out of a fat cat's arse.

You owe me $19.99 for a new keyboard, I blew coffee all over mine with that comment!!

 

[vtdeucedriver]

The theory was the thought on MF but if you do the research and talk with the drivers who operated them when they first came out, you will find that reliability was not its strength. There was certainly a reason why Continental had full time field reps in Vietnam and the army had a red ball program set up from the factory to the maint depots in Vietnam.

 

[swbradley1]

It had a GASSER, the 6602, a 602 ci six
The m54a2 had the multi-fuel

Correct. Sorry, I was using the generic form of the answer.





I'll put a helmet on.

 

[Scarecrow1]

I have always suspected the main reason was due to the short life span of the multi fuel combined with the poor power out put. Even with experimentation of the turbo projects the power was at best marginal. I am sure some where in a little room that doesn't exist someone said enough of this and closed the books on the multi fuel project.
If we had had to go into Russia with it's vast time zones alone the only thing that was plentiful to burn was wood and since the trucks couldn't run off of it then Diesel was the best choice. To this day I still wonder why the Abrams is one of the few weapon systems that runs off gasoline and not Diesel like almost every thing else in the field.........

 

[Katahdin]

First time I've looked this up, but the M1 Abrams engine is a multi-fuel: http://www.honeywell.com/sites/aero...3E9_H52422376-8368-1EC3-AA6D-83165D399CBF.htm

 

[TehTDK]

Present day vehicles with MF capabilities (Possibly more, but these i know for certain):
- US M1 Ambrams has a turbine multifuel engine
- German Leopard I+II's has a conventional multifuel engine thats is more economical then the turbine (Leo2's has a rated output of 1,500 HP)

So to say that MultiFuels are outdated is not exactly correct