• Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!

  • Microsoft MSN, Live, Hotmail, Outlook email users may not be receiving emails. We are working to resolve this issue. Please add support@steelsoldiers.com to your trusted contacts.

Why the fuss?

Barrman

Well-known member
5,254
1,761
113
Location
Giddings, Texas
Before this turns into a bigger arguement. Think of it this way. What was your Unimog designed to do? Does it do that well? When asked to something it wasn't designed to do, does it do that something in a not so great way or not at all?

Every vehicle was design to do something well. The M35 series of trucks was designed around the REO Gold Comet OA 331 gasoline engine. The first real succesfull overhead valve truck industial/commercial use engine. Everything about the truck was made with that engine in mind from the Timken axles (later renamed Rockwell) to the hood size and the mission of the truck. Haul 2-1/2 tons of stuff over non roads and 5 tons of stuff on roads up to 30 mph. Fuel efficiency was probably only considered when deciding how big the fuel tank should be.

10 years later, NATO is now something beyond some State department staffers day dream, having a common supply chain is a real concern for all the forces that might be deployed to fight in the any day now battle going to happen in the Fulda Gap. The Multifuel engine is stuffed into the truck designed for the OA331. The hood had to be raised an inch or so, but it fit otherwise. It is just a happy coincidence that besides the grill gaurd and 4 parts inside the transmission everything else could still work.

Not as good though in some ways. My Gasser M35 will idle along at 400 rpm in 1st low at less than 1 mph without being heard 100 feet away. Unless I run over something. My whistler won't go that slow by about 5 mph and if the wind is right can probably be heard a mile away. My Gasser will out run the Whistler on flat ground by about 15 mph top speed. But it will only go half as far as my whistler going along at 54 mph because of fuel use. Then, the whistler will leave it behind in a cloud of black smoke in the hills. Which is better?

I personally can't fit in a Unimog. I have tried to get behind the wheel of one and just never made it all the way there. I can fit in a Gama Goat though. Does that make a Unimog a bad vehicle?

The 6.2 was designed to give average for the time (1980) performance when compared to a gasoline engine and provide great fuel economy. It wasn't designed for a turbo, it wasn't designed for high rpm operation. It was designed to give twice the mpg's of a gas engine at 2000 rpm. It was also designed from the ground up as a diesel and to last longer than the vehicles it went into. Remember, GM at the time of the 6.2 design was dealing with the converted gas to diesel engines in Buicks and Olds.

The Multi fuel in 2-1/2 ton and 5 ton trucks was a gasoline engine converted to diesel. They were also used as tractor engines by White. The tractor engines have a 2200 rpm governor enforced red line. They never throw rods. Yet, the same engine in a Duece will throw a rod enough that there are probably 5-10 threads about it in the past 6 months on here. Does that make it a bad engine? Nope, just operating beyond its design criteria.

The 6.2 was put into the HMMWV when they were not much heavier than a regular truck. Aluminum body tub and such just to keep the weight down. Remember, the HMMWV was designed in response to the rolling over M151. Huge frame down low to keep the center of gravity as low as possible so roll overs wouldn't happen. 30 years later, those same trucks weigh as much as my M35. That is asking a lot of any engine. Is the engine bad because it is driven at high rpm to move something twice as heavy as originally designed?

The Cummins 4Bt is considered a great long lasting powerful for its size dependable engine. Talk to some Frito Lay drivers and mechanics and they will say it is a slug always breaking down. When made to operate beyond the design, anything will fail.

I had a long talk with an officer assigned to a maintenance depot in 1991 in Iraq. 6.2's were breaking all over the place. Why? Gasoline was being put in the tank and IP shafts were breaking. Rebuilt engines weren't lasting more than a few hours because the same person who took it apart to rebuild would get down to the block and start putting it back together again sometimes even with new parts. They might have even washed their hands at some point in the rebuild. Does the failure rate of 6.2's in that condition make them a bad engine?
 

IdahoPlowboy

Member
286
13
18
Location
Ririe Idaho
I have many friends that work in our csms and I often visit them. They are very frequently replacing engines in the humvees. When I was deployed a majority if our trucks went down for engine issues. A majority of the mechanics Ive spoken to do not like them.
This was not my experiance with my time in the Army from 1984 to 1992 and we have had several 6.2 powerd trucks on the farm and ranch that have logged many hard miles with neglegt and abuse. We still have them on the farm because of low cost of maintenance and fuel economy. Most of the EX army mechanics that I have talked to that badmouthed them were not GM fans and there comments were biased. If CUCVs were Ford or Dodges I would still own one and enjoy them the same. I would really like to have a M880 and hope to someday.

Own and enjoy what ever you want, but there is no need to rain on other peoples parade with Hearsay and BS.
 

67_C-30

New member
645
3
0
Location
Sweet Home Alabama!
I have many friends that work in our csms and I often visit them. They are very frequently replacing engines in the humvees. When I was deployed a majority if our trucks went down for engine issues. A majority of the mechanics Ive spoken to do not like them.

I actually don't doubt that. The 6.2 is underpowered in stock form for a humvee, and they took a beating in that application. However, they will last forever in a pickup if they aren't beat to death. They don't mind being worked, but I wouldn't use one for a mud buggy. If you keep them under 3K they do fine. Most of the common issues, especially starter and flywheel problems, are caused by the glowplug system not functioning correctly or air leaks in the fuel system. I've seen guys spin and spin 6.2's and 6.5's with GP aren't working well, and they will eat starters, flywheels, and can even break the mounting ear off the block trying to spin the 21.5 : 1 compression engine over. A LOT of the broken cranks are a caused by the use of ether, again, when the GP's aren't working. These engines start with just a bump of the starter (hot or cold)when the GP's are working correctly and there is no air in the system. The starters last a long time when they are cranking correctly.

They are a very good engine when maintained as long as you don't expect Cummins or Duramax power, although a turbocharged 6.2 is fairly stout, and will live if the boost is kept below 10psi. They typically dyno at 400 - 440 ft lbs at the rear wheels at 10psi, and I've never had any trouble pulling anything I've needed to pull with them. My turbo'd 6.2 trucks pull better than any small block trucks I've had and at least as good as some of the smog era 454 trucks I've had. They get a whole lot better fuel mileage doing it too!;)
 

cucv1833

Member
533
4
18
Location
Lake Charles, LA
I have many friends that work in our csms and I often visit them. They are very frequently replacing engines in the humvees. When I was deployed a majority if our trucks went down for engine issues. A majority of the mechanics Ive spoken to do not like them.

I have seen them drive the HUMVEES in Iraq. there gonna break down alot when there overloaded with gear and armor in 130 degree weather. being driven like a bat outta **** all day every day. this is my first cucv im no expert.
in the service my vehicle had 903 cummins in it was good but also still broke down due to the application. I like my 6.2L just my2cents
 

MudderMilitia

New member
59
1
0
Location
Elk Grove Village, Illinois
Im 25 and my m1009 is my 1st military vehicle but definitly not my 1st k-series chevy truck. I absolutely love it and think these cucvs are a great "gateway drug" to anyone looking to get into military vehicles. I have had a love for military stuff thanks to my dad and his wwII jeeps and other military trucks. But I have seen how much work is involved to get one of those to good operating condition.

I was looking to get a daily driver that got better mpg then my 88 chev crewcab longbed and I found this truck in the local paper. So far I have put a little over 10k miles on it and I now drive 60 miles round trip to work in it. The IP has been rebuilt and I replaced the glow plugs, batterys, belts, and gp relay. I absolutly love driving this thing, I work as a custodian at an elementary school and all the kids love "Mr. Ryan's Army Truck" and it puts a big smile on their face everytime I drive by.
 

The Gimlis

New member
92
3
0
Location
Minden, NV
Okay, I knew I would get you guys going on this, and **whew!** I was right!

My attempt at creative writing in my original post didn't quite turn out correctly. I just should've asked why you guys like them. NO offense was intended. But I take no blame in your own arguments about engines, electric. We all need to quit trying to be offended by others's opinions.

To those of you who gave me your reasons - pro and con - THANK YOU! I have a better understanding now. They are a bit more than just a truck/suv in military clothing. I see the good points, price, diesel, etc. and just like everything else they have their problems, quirks and personalities. We have no need of one right now but I will look at them as potential MV in future if I do.

Again, thank you and relax!
 

67_C-30

New member
645
3
0
Location
Sweet Home Alabama!
Okay, I knew I would get you guys going on this, and **whew!** I was right!

My attempt at creative writing in my original post didn't quite turn out correctly. I just should've asked why you guys like them. NO offense was intended. But I take no blame in your own arguments about engines, electric. We all need to quit trying to be offended by others's opinions.

To those of you who gave me your reasons - pro and con - THANK YOU! I have a better understanding now. They are a bit more than just a truck/suv in military clothing. I see the good points, price, diesel, etc. and just like everything else they have their problems, quirks and personalities. We have no need of one right now but I will look at them as potential MV in future if I do.

Again, thank you and relax!
I think most of us took it like you meant it. There's nothing wrong with asking, and if we swayed you towards the darkside a little, that's good, too. They really are neat trucks, and I think you most people that like MV's would like them if they gavde them a chance.
 

ABN173

Active member
1,842
11
38
Location
FT Bragg, NC
For me its simple:

1. I drove them when I first came in the army when I was a private (1989-90) even had a few left when we deployed to Desert Shield.
2. They are built well.
3. They are economical 4WD trucks/Blazers.
4. I am still active duty and live in on base housing (much like a HOA there is no way they are going to allow me to have a M35, heck I even had to move my M116A2 trailer out of housing)
5. We can't buy HMMWV's on GL (besides scrap lots/pieces)
6. I like being different, I am one of the few CUCV owners on FT Lewis/McChord AFB and I am the only M1008 owner.
7. I am proud of my military service/career, What a better way to display it than own/drive a former MV?
8. We can't seem to find any of those $50 jeeps in crates we keep hearing about.

Maintenance wise I have had to do very little to my truck in the two years I have owned it. I think altogether I have only had to do the following stuff:

- fixed overflow nipple on neck of radiator
- replaced one headlight when low beam went out
- regular oil changes

This is extremely good when you consider this is my daily driver. I have also put driven it on several rally convoys and also to a remote training site a few times (Yakima, WA)

I have owned various civy trucks/ SUVs that have given me way more problems than my M1008 truck has. They had their place in the military, they were good then too otherwise the army would have only had 2 1/2 ton trucks or 5 tons.

-Dale
 

m1010plowboy

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
3,902
2,697
83
Location
Edmonton, Canada
Why CUCV

Stimulating thread! I wondered the same thing about MV's in general......

Then one got me!

The mud showed up and it got me through.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2t-ds8A9Lo[/media]

Then the snow fell.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qGYnrwz-e8[/media]

There's some pride that comes with an MV that just doesn't ride in a civi 4x4.

........and when all the civi 4x's line up and get stuck in the mud!

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3vL9RGJ3ek&NR=1&feature=fvwp[/media]

Camo Pride
 

Attachments

91W350

Well-known member
4,414
57
48
Location
Salina, Kansas
That 715 had about ten grand thrown at it by a guy that had great mechanical, design and fabrication skills. I would trade a 1009 and a low mileage M1008 for that one and never look back. It has to be the nicest M715 that I am aware of.
 

67_C-30

New member
645
3
0
Location
Sweet Home Alabama!
That 715 had about ten grand thrown at it by a guy that had great mechanical, design and fabrication skills. I would trade a 1009 and a low mileage M1008 for that one and never look back. It has to be the nicest M715 that I am aware of.
I have a M715 and a Cummins and 5 speed and they are DYING to get together! I'm am trying to keep the M715 original, but I keep finding problems with the Tornado. Temptation is about to get the best of me!!

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQ2N7E-nbuw[/media]
 

Attachments

270
5
0
Location
akron, ohio
hey plowboy, great vids of the m1010! glad to see im not the only one that takes an m1010 in places most trucks cant get to. what size lift and tires are you running? are those hummer wheels or aftermarket? tuff truck for sure, and similar stance to what we want ours to be. love to see more pics and stats!!
 

wallew

Active member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
2,520
18
38
Location
San Angelo, Tx USA Planet Earth
I've owned a deuce. Super singled it. Did a few other things.

Sold it (long story). You DO NEED Soldier 'B' a whole lot more than on any type of CUCV maintenance you will do. And if you can't or don't want to do your own maintenance you CAN take it to the Chevy dealer. It won't be cheap but they can fix most of the problems (probably not too good on the 24v system).

Bought an M1009 and an M101...

The Harley folks have a saying. "If I have to explain, you won't understand"

The CUCV thing is kinda of like that.

There were some where between 65k to 140k vehicles made for the CUCV program - numbers vary depending on whom you talk to. There are TONS of low miles vehicles still running around out there - for the numbers that were built I would guess the percentage of MV's still operation compared to civi vehicles, the MV vehicles win hands down because the military DID keep them running in most instances, though not all.

Plus there is the occasional 'gem' on GL...
2310 - Passenger Motor Vehicles at Government Liquidation

That's a BRAND NEW M1010 that sold for $12,300. Add in the fees and taxes and you are talking about buying a 25 year old BRAND NEW TRUCK for around $15k. Tell me where you can get ANY brand new 25 year old truck for $15K?

I've owned a 1988 Suburban with the factory installed (ie as delivered to the dealer) Banks powered 6.2L engine. I LOVED THAT TRUCK. Right up until it puked it's rear main seal. Froze the engine. So yeah, I've got experience in both the civi and the J-code 6.2L...

Oh, and we DO HAVE A SECRET CLUB. I'll probably get pitched out for telling you about it. We have a secret handshake, meetings ONLY CUCV owners are allowed to attend. And if you EVER collect all the MAIN VARIANTS of the CUCV you can even get a nifty decoder ring that lets you decode all the secret messages sent out over the web on where to get parts and trucks, etc that all you mere mortals never hear about...

There are so many reasons, that it would take a couple of BOOKS to express why we love this truck so much.
 
270
5
0
Location
akron, ohio
my reason for buying an m1010? simple... diesel, 5/4ton, 4x4, has box on it to make into camper, has virtually no rust( some minor surface), had only 11,200mls @ time of purchase... and the number one reason i bought a cucv...$1600 bucks and i drove it home over 100mls from south of Pitts!!! i looked for a duece for a long time... never would have found one driveable for that price, plus it would have taken alot more work to make into a B.O.V./CAMPER...
 

armytruck63

Active member
1,663
10
38
Location
Redlands, CA
I see the good points, price, diesel, etc. and just like everything else they have their problems, quirks and personalities. We have no need of one right now but I will look at them as potential MV in future if I do.

Again, thank you and relax!
When the time comes and you want a second MV to compliment your M35A2, really think about a CUCV.

I've owned two M1009's and I've had the current one for 10 years. It is my "jump in and go" military vehicle. When I first drove an M1009, I was impressed with its jeep-like turning radius.

Are they perfect vehicles? Not by a long shot. The mid '80's were not exactly the zenith of quality control for US car manufacturers. That being said, probably the most complicated parts of CUCV's are the glow plug and charging systems. There is plenty of technical information on both to help you with any problems. There are also some easy and effective modifications to the glow plug system that can make it more relieable - see the Doghead glow plug modification information here.

Once the engine is running, it is totally mechanical. No computer to make it burp or worse.

I like my M1009 because I can do a few quick PM checks, pack it up, and drive it for 400 miles in the desert in one weekend with no trouble.

PS: I like your thread because of all the interesting points everyone has brought up.
 

ARS1776

New member
2
0
1
Location
Lakewood, CO
Back in November I used my totally stock M1008 to pull a friend's broken 3/4 ton diesel extended cab longbed Chevy- loaded with gear- out of a wilderness area where we'd been hunting. In 6" of mud.
With 18" of snow on top of it.
At 10-11,000ft altitude.
It was about a 12 mile drive on non-maintained trail. The truck I pulled weighs over 6k pounds, empty. We only had to winch once. I then drove the CUCV back over Vail Pass, through Denver, and home. That truck never missed a beat- never even really got hot with all the high-rpm/low-speed abuse on the trail. I have right at $2200 invested in the M1008 including purchase price and a couple minor fixes. Best pickup I've ever owned, hands down. I'm going to to start building something special out of it in the spring, but even completely unmodified I've been nothing but pleased with it. What's the old saying- a bargain at twice the price?

The 6.2 has been a good motor for me, even in HMMWV's. We had a bunch of early HMMWV's at Ft. Carson with the TH400-6.2 in them. Without a million pounds of armor and hardtop on them the HMMWV's are pretty fun to drive, even at 5600 feet. Even the M997 ambulances did ok. Our M1114's in Iraq with the 6.5 turbo diesels didn't hang so well, but those trucks weighed around 10-11k pounds and we drove the **** out of them, all day every day. I don't think even a Duramax or 6BT would survive the kind of hammering they got, and for all that we only changed engines once on most of them (the CO's truck went through two.....) and they were used when issued to us.
 
Last edited:

1984M1009

New member
106
0
0
Location
Phoenix, AZ
I bought my M1009 because it was the cheapest K5 I could find that wasn't totally thrashed

I refuse to own anything carburated so it was either a 6.2 or TBI 350 the 350 is much better on power but the 6.2's low end torque makes it great for off roading which is all I use mine for.

Also the 700r4 is a POS the turbo 400 is way more robust

As far the M1008's go Finding a K30 is not easy anymore so the Chassis and axles alone make them desirable

I would have bought a civilian K5 if I found a Tbi truck that wasnt a basket case my M1009 has rust on the fenders but other that it is decent shape
 
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website like our supporting vendors. Their ads help keep Steel Soldiers going. Please consider disabling your ad blockers for the site. Thanks!

I've Disabled AdBlock
No Thanks