Why not M998s at GL auctions????

[ssgtwright-usmc]

I have always wondered how come we never see M998s for auctions on GL.
Is their a reason for that?
You can always see the military driving them in convoys on the highways but then you see the civilian models on the highway also.
What reason doesnt GL sell M998 vehicles.

 

[wsucougarx]

As far as I know, it goes along with the ruling set by the govt. Basically it was deemed non-road worthy vehicle or something along those lines. Something about being for offroad use and therefore restricted to public sale. It's in the same category as the old army jeeps. Basically if GL were to sell a Hummer, they'd have to torch the chassis in a specific configurationa and literally smash the vehicle so guys like us couldn't really take it home and rebuild it. I'm sure someone in here has more specifics about it. This is the abbreviated version of what I know

 

[emmado22]

Basically thats it. Uncle Sam says they arent road worthy and dont meet DOT specs. (Think M151 from a while back)

The few that you see in private hands came out of the USMC/UD sale a while back, and Uncle Sam closed that loophole quick. Basically, what M998's that are floating arround out there, thats all there are going to be.

Current M998's are being rebuilt, ones that dont make the grade to be rebuilt get every usable piece removed from them, and sold as scrap after being made to fit on a 48X40 inch pallet after being torched.. I'll post pics of some that were sold at GL later today. I think I posted pics on here before of it, I'll see if I can find them.

 

[ssgtwright-usmc]

And yet, we can have the civilian (UGLY) models on the road for daily use driving.
Just doesn't make sence to destroy a good mv in which people like us would enjoy to own and drive.

 

[steelsoldiers]

There was also a deal between AM General and the government not to sell the military issue models because they would be in direct competition with the civilian H1's they were selling. That's a moot point now that AMG has discontinued the H1 program.

The H1's are similar on the outside to the HMMWV, but the inside is a different story. They have the stuff to meet DOT specs like a dash pad, a padded steering wheel, 3-point harness, airbags, and emissions equipment. The civi aluminum beadlocks are also DOT stamped Hutchison models.

 

[CCATLETT1984]

The hmmwv beadlocks have the DOT stamp on them too

They are also stamped "military use only"

 

[steelsoldiers]

You know what I meant The H1's are DOT approved for highway use, the HMMWV's aren't.

 

[maddawg308]

Re: RE: Why not M998s at GL auctions????

There was also a deal between AM General and the government not to sell the military issue models because they would be in direct competition with the civilian H1's they were selling. That's a moot point now that AMG has discontinued the H1 program.

Perhaps there is some way to contest this, to change the ruling now that AMG isn't making the H-1s anymore? Plus, the suspension of the HMMWV is the SAME as the H-1, so the suspension argument is moot. You can flip a Suzuki Samauri over easier than a HMMWV, yet you could buy those new from Suzuki. It's a moot point, as well.

I think it just goes back to the System not wanting civvies to own military equipment again.

 

[CCATLETT1984]

RE: Re: RE: Why not M998s at GL auctions????

The suspension is not the issue, its the lighting and safety/emissions systems that are not up to DOT standards. For the government to be able to release them as titleable vehicles, they (the government) would have to bring them up to code.

Its not gonna happen, ever.

As emmado22 stated, ALL hmmwv's that can be rebuild/refitted are being fixed up. If its not repairable, they strip them for ANY usable parts, and scrap the rest.

 

[hobie237]

Re: RE: Re: RE: Why not M998s at GL auctions????

The suspension is not the issue, its the lighting and safety/emissions systems that are not up to DOT standards. For the government to be able to release them as titleable vehicles, they (the government) would have to bring them up to code.

Really? Couldn't they just sell them "for off-road use only?" I mean, you can buy and title, say, a 4-wheeler, John Deere Gator, and a plethora of other vehicles, or hold the title to a race car that isn't close to street legal- you just can't register/insure/tag the thing.

I understand that they're nowhere close to street legal (well, if it was pre-airbag and pre-diesel emissions standards models, you could, but not a more recently built one) and therefore couldn't be sold as a road vehicle as-is, but they could still be sold.

I think it's simply an issue of not wanting to hand out military hardware to the general population, and I think that's ridiculous, especially when you can buy the SAME freakin' thing from the civilian market (or at least you could).

I'll add that it's even more ridiculous when you think about the fact that they'll sell them (and even more dangerous equipment) to foreign governments, who may or may not turn on us, who may or may not lose track of them and/or sell them to people we don't want having them.

 

[emmado22]

Uncle Sam probably COULD sell them as off road use only, but bottom line, the whole HMMWV fleet is under a rebuild/reset program. If it's rebuildable, it gets rebuilt. If it's not, it gets parted out and the rest is scrap metal at best.


The whole off road use only thing is hard to enforce.. Look at all the USMC humvees that got out there thru the USMC/UD auction.. All those SF-97's were stamped OFF ROAD USE ONLY, but, well, lets just say I know of several M998's that have 100% street legal paperwork and tags, and are driven on roads just like every other car out there...
Seems after retitling or two as they got from UD to the auction company to dealers who got titles in their states then to the end customer, the off road use only thing fell to the wayside, right or wrong....

 

[hobie237]

I can appreciate the fact that they need every one that they got and they're rebuilding them and such, but that's a different argument from the "they're too dangerous" crappola that the government trots out.

Sorry, but my tax dollars paid for (or, rather, pay the interest on the national debt that pays for) those vehicles. I should be able to buy one, and either use it off-road, or retrofit whatever I need to meet applicable standards so that it can be driven on the road. There's a pretty big difference between "sorry, we just don't have any surplus to get rid of right now" and "even if we had one to sell, you couldn't buy it."

Sure, "off road only" is hard to enforce- but that's NOT uncle Sam's problem, just like it isn't John Deere's problem if you drive a Gator on the road, or Yamaha's problem if you take your Raptor out on the streets. As pointed out before, the only reason they're NOT street legal is because the design hasn't changed with the DOT requirements through the years of production, so even a 2008 HMMWV is, really, a 1985 model by design, with a few tweaks here and there.

 

[emmado22]

I 100% agree, but it's not gonna happen. You can blame the M151 sales and deaths for that.....

 

[hobie237]

Yup, and it's unfortunate. Sigh, just falls into a long series of gripes I have with the gubmint.

 

[bulldog_mack13]

"The suspension is not the issue, its the lighting and safety/emissions systems that are not up to DOT standards. For the government to be able to release them as titleable vehicles, they (the government) would have to bring them up to code. "

And A M35A2 is ? LOL

 

[hobie237]

"The suspension is not the issue, its the lighting and safety/emissions systems that are not up to DOT standards. For the government to be able to release them as titleable vehicles, they (the government) would have to bring them up to code. "

And A M35A2 is ? LOL

A vehicle only needs to meet the standards for the year of manufacture. M35s are WAY before anything resembling a tough standard came into play. Even my M1008 has no airbag, no emissions system, etc., because the applicable standards weren't in place until the 1990s.

So, an M998 from, say, 1985, should be road legal. But one produced in 2008, that still uses the 1985 design, would not be.

 

[ssgtwright-usmc]

With so many people making items for after market use you would think someone would come up with an idea to make some kind of after market upgrade kits like a dash board adaptor, new wiring for lights and even a new seatbelt adaptor for use.
Too bad that their is not some kind of after market kits available to upgrade them to the DOT standards.

 

[sak00]

opcorn:

 

[hobie237]

With so many people making items for after market use you would think someone would come up with an idea to make some kind of after market upgrade kits like a dash board adaptor, new wiring for lights and even a new seatbelt adaptor for use.
Too bad that their is not some kind of after market kits available to upgrade them to the DOT standards.

It wouldn't be too hard, particularly for anything pre-airbags (1989?). Lighting could be accomplished via generic stuff at any auto parts store (like the $3 trailer license plate light I have on my truck to make it legal) or junkyard parts, the only tricky issue would be airbag installations for post-airbag years.

I think there would be aftermarket suppliers if there was a demand. Since the military is not releasing the vehicles, it's a moot point.

 

[maddawg308]

You would think, as well, with the military needing as much money as they can get, that they would reconsider selling the older HMMWVs if and when they become available, as there is a ready market for them, and the $$$ the sales would bring for such a large number of HMMWVs would pay for a lot of new equipment....