Brand new FMTV spotted

Spotted this beautiful truck in Indianapolis. Appeared to be brand new. Took these with a camera phone so may not be the greatest pics.

Look like darn good photos to me. Thanks for sharing.

That lube diagram is a little confusing to me. Maybe it's just the angle I'm looking at it, but it doesn't look like the holes line up with the labels properly.

I agree. I count two T-handle filler tubes, two dipsticks and one coolant cap. You are right on the arrows not aligning with their respective caps/tubes. Once figured out, boy would that be easy to service though.

Looks like the lifting point is on some telescoping channel too. Probably helps in recoveries and for having a place to lift that's away from the frame.

Re: RE: Brand new FMTV spotted

maddawg308 said:

That lube diagram is a little confusing to me. Maybe it's just the angle I'm looking at it, but it doesn't look like the holes line up with the labels properly.

Click to expand...

Could get confusing after the first several paint jobs.

What's with the "No Step" on the bumper?

Extending lifting points outward makes sense to eliminate spreader bars.

RE: Re: RE: Brand new FMTV spotted

What a waste we had to tear off hundreds of the pretty Euro cabs to install armored ones on these and then they were close to being over the limit of the front axle.

The MTV wrecker is a shadow of a HEMTT wrecker ask any Soldier who has used both. The 900 Series trucks can run circles around these toys.

I don't mean to sound negative but the Army acted on some bad advice in buying these trucks I can not count on them if I have to overload them in a war like the old trucks could take.

There are documented cases of 2 1/2 ton trucks being loaded with almost 20 tons of ammo in the Korean war and getting it to the guns.

RE: Re: RE: Brand new FMTV spotted

who makes it? us made or oversea?

RE: Re: RE: Brand new FMTV spotted

Stewart Stevenson is the manufacture. They claim to have been producers of dueces. I agree with ArmyMan's comments. In addition to this, you can't fix them in the field with the old bailing twine and spring wire. On the up side you have better viz directly in front and I think the turning radius is better (of course that also means the flipping ability seems to be higher). Just don't think they were worth the money. Refurb on the older stuff would have been so much more efficient.

The overall good and bad is if the military had decided to refurb, we wouldn't have gotten all these trucks coming out on the DRMO market that we are buying up.

RE: Re: RE: Brand new FMTV spotted

i think it was a joint venture between a US company and Tatra. I used one over in Iraq decent enough truck but a bit too complicated for a knuckledragger like myself. I did like the on-the-fly tire inflation system and good front view given by the cabover design. I dont trust automatic transmissions in military vehicles, even Allison Transmissions which it felt like this was. Like ARMYMAN was saying i didnt get the feeling that you could really abuse it. The offroad capability is better though. Independent suspension all around, ride was great.

RE: Re: RE: Brand new FMTV spotted

I don't particularly like the look of them. They look too European as David and others have pointed out (no offense intended to Europeans or their truck enthusiasts...just that don't look like traditional American military trucks). As discussed elsewhere, the Army should have gone with the Oshkosh 7-1/2 tonners like the USMC did. Those trucks are really beefy as Jason (HALFTRACK) has shown us.

Now, even though I said that I don't like their look much, I DID try to buy one a while back. There were two coming up at an auction that a friend of mine found...but both were removed from the sale days before the auction was set to take place. One of the trucks was a complete 2-1/2 ton variant including the cargo cover; the other was a somewhat wrecked 5 ton (the rear drive shaft gave out and the rear of the truck did a pole vault causing the truck to roll...or so I was told).

Re: RE: Brand new FMTV spotted

cranetruck said:

....What's with the "No Step" on the bumper?....

Click to expand...

Does not meet MIL-STD-1472E for clearance on the size 12W combat boot, so should not be used as a step.

Re: RE: Re: RE: Brand new FMTV spotted

ARMYMAN30YearsPlus said:

What a waste we had to tear off hundreds of the pretty Euro cabs to install armored ones on these and then they were close to being over the limit of the front axle.


The MTV wrecker is a shadow of a HEMTT wrecker ask any Soldier who has used both. The 900 Series trucks can run circles around these toys.

I don't mean to sound negative but the Army acted on some bad advice in buying these trucks I can not count on them if I have to overload them in a war like the old trucks could take.


There are documented cases of 2 1/2 ton trucks being loaded with almost 20 tons of ammo in the Korean war and getting it to the guns.

Click to expand...

They were not "Euro cabs". The Steyr/Daimler/Puch cab was only the basis of the S&S design. The LMTV and MTV uses a US designed and built cab.

TAACOM made the specs the FMTV was designed to meet-there was no "advice" from anyone outside the US Army that was considered. (If there was, the wreckers would never have been built) There is NO room for overloading these trucks-they were designed to meet a very strict set of load limits. Exceeding that requirement WILL kill people. Overload and you take responsibility for the result, not the manufacturer.

Re: RE: Re: RE: Brand new FMTV spotted

davidkroberts said:

i think it was a joint venture between a US company and Tatra.

I used one over in Iraq decent enough truck but a bit too complicated for a knuckledragger like myself. I did like the on-the-fly tire inflation system and good front view given by the cabover design. I dont trust automatic transmissions in military vehicles, even Allison Transmissions which it felt like this was. Like ARMYMAN was saying i didnt get the feeling that you could really abuse it. The offroad capability is better though. Independent suspension all around, ride was great.

Click to expand...

FMTV was a project that was won by Stewert & Stevenson. Tatra had nothing to do with them.

FMTV has Hotchkiss axles front and rear-NOT independent suspension.

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Brand new FMTV spotted

April 19th, 2008.

All things being equal, there's no way any of the FMTV's would have equalled properly modified and reengineered M35, M818, and M900 series vehicles...... If you want serious off road capability go for the larger series of modern M-series Unimogs, because that's what these remind me of without the axle flexibility. If history teaches us anything (shades of Young Frankenstein) it is that military missions are going to get more complex, armor is a given and up-armoring is going to continue, but simplicity of repair and reliability in the field will trump looks anyday.
For slightly more then 1/2 of what these European designed toys cost, we could've taken the M44 and related series vehicles right down to the frames and axles (and even replaced the axles if necessary), and put new powerplants, new transmissions, new cabs and fenders, and still had the reserve to overload and for the mission to grow..... The Army and the Air Force have the misbegotten belief that old is bad and new is good because our contractor's don't make as much on rebuilds.... BUT the one airplane the Iraqi's feared in Desert Storm, the A10, is an almost dead platform, and the AF is trying to convert the F-series fighters to ground attack... that ought to be rich.
The Marines realize that when they get a system that works.... they stick to it. The engineers of the 1940's and 1950's had no computers to fine tune and pare down weights, so they tended to overcompensate in the initial design....knuckledragging it was, but the bloody machines went like the B52, at least 35 years in most services and still operational. The Russians overengineered their vehicles also, and while they may not be pretty, they're simple enough even a caveman can fix them... The problem with our young soldiers today is that most grew up around the computer, not fixing Stone Age trucks, so they often lack the common sense that has historically allowed the American GI to improvise his way out of almost any difficulty.... But there has to be the basic solidity in the design to begin with.
TACOM designed the cabs????? They sure as hades look like European truck cabs, and remember, these are the same people that brought us the lovely electronic headlight switch that possibly a caveman can work, but I doubt it, based on the screaming I hear on here about them. (YES, Saddam's Nightmare has a TACOM switch fitted, and so far I love it!!!). No insults intended, but the basic M44 series platforms were much more substantial then the FMTV's, and I think even the S404.114 Unimogs had a better platform for it's size (but a LOUSY throwout bearing lube access design!!!), let's see if the new toys can handle 36 years of service and at least two wars behind them.... THEN WE'LL KNOW IF IT WAS AS CAPABLE AS THE DEUCE..... just my devalued worth, and no use , now for the opcorn: and sit back and watch.

Sincerely,

Kyle F. McGrogan

1971 Kaiser Jeep M35A2 Wo/W "Saddam's Nightmare" Desert Storm and Vietnam Deuce veteran truck
""??"" M105A2 Johnson Mfg. Co. 1-1/2 Ton Cargo Trailer, MERDC or NATO 4 color woodland scheme, Okla.Army NG.
1967 MEP23A Hercules Gasoline Generator Set, OD and in excellent condition at 7 hours on guage...
1963 Swiss Army Cargo Unimog S404.114 Mercedes Benz in NATO green

All still doing what they're designed to do......WORK

TACOM designs EVERYTHING thats related to anything with tracks or wheels on it...
Tank and Automotive COMmand....

emmado22 said:

TACOM designs EVERYTHING thats related to anything with tracks or wheels on it...
Tank and Automotive COMmand....

Click to expand...

And TACOM gets visited by civilian product suppliers & "consultants" everyday! And the input from these "consultants*" is listened to & acted upon frequently. The designers are looking to save weight in critical areas, without giving a lot of thought to the survivability of the item in day-to-day operation. I see it daily -

And as a supplier to the guys building the newer trucks, most of the engineers I've met thus far have never been in combat, nor have they done work beyond textbook theory... Just spent 3 days last week with a group of Mechanical Engineers that are trying to design wiring harnesses that function; they have literally no EMI/RF shielding knowledge, no knowledge of how to get connectors properly designed, etc... Even more laughable is the desire to use LED headlights, plastic wiring connector housings, etc., I'm well aware of the desire to use COTS items, but my prayers to the troops using this crap if it should fail...

I've never been in any branch of the service, but I do realize proper design & engineering. I don't care if the rocker switches used for the lights (all 7-8 switches, in the case of one vehicle program) look 'futuristic and industrial', to use the term from one 'engineer' - I just want the freakin' switch to do it's job if a soldier is getting shot at!
The engineer was more concerned that the switch looked good - and yes, it's a plastic switch, an off the shelf industrial switch they wish to use for lighting operation - And yes, I took in an old mechanical 3 toggle mil truck light switch to show them what works well; it was laughed at as looking too antique... sigh...

*Definition: "Consultants" - "Guys that know 50 ways to make love, but don't know any women..."

"Tanner"

I agree 100% with having experience with the FMTV dump trucks and the older 900 series 5t dumps. At Ft. Leonard Wood, if we put a little too much gravel on the FMTVs, they could not raise the dump body, we had to take a wheel loader and scrape off gravel so it would dump. The old 900 series 5 tons.....we literally had gravel heaped and spilling over the sides and those old girls raised and dumped the load without much grunting. Being a military wheel vehicle mechanic myself, I will always prefer the older M35s and 5 tons to the newer "crap". I also believe that they could just keep rebuilding the M44 series for another 30 years and still have great trucks. I'm not a huge fan of the A3 varient, but I think if they kept the old multifuel and added power steering to all of them, we would have one heck of a truck that could soldier on for many decades. We have some great machines now in the military, but they are not easy to fix and when they go down, they are deadlined. The older deuces and 5 tons, you could fix, or snach a part from another and have it going up in hours instead of days or weeks. I know my rant won't mean anything to the military, but I just wanted to chip in my 2 cents also.

Yea lets refurbish the antiques that were modern in 1950 !!! !!!These are very very good trucks, they are designed by good people and they work, they are up to date, our Military mechanics need to be in the modern world,lets get out of the stone age. nothing is cobled together on the road its towed or burned, guys with brains will make things work just like in the past anyway, the B17 was said to be so high tech for only two pilots to fly it... it needed more, yea that was a farce too,, if U don't like the way it looks thats an opinion and not what it was made for, as for function I get a kick out of all us backyard mechanice saying it doesnt work when all the questions were corrected in other posts by Bob, and found to be only speculation and not true, I know more guys who would drive these than any of the antiques any day of the week, any where, just answering the negative parts ...do not mean to be mean or anything, but only one guy here has experience that doesnt like em, and He is comparing apples to oranges, The 900 is the last of an erra,and yes a great one at that, I look at them and see so much more than U guys its just funny to me.the truth is they out performed all in the trials,and they have an awesome drive train. and i will say it again, we seem to think the 18 year old drivers are going to sit and cobble trucks together in the field, thats funny to me too.new is better .they are very nice trucks, BUT as for me personally i also like the M series better but they are a chore to drive next to these and there is just no reason to have a truck series that fatiging like that anymore. we just dont need to over load the crap out of the trucks, we have enough and much better ways to do it.and i will also add that overloading a truck in a tactical situation will just get it stuck.and is dangerous no matter who they are. ...Randy

No past truck can perform up to the specification of FMTV in VCI/offroad mobility according to the test parametrers issued by TAACOM (the original spelling when I was dealing with them-Tank Automotive and Armament Command) at the old Chrysler Tank plant in Centerline. IF the old trucks could have met the specs they would have continued to be used. The specs were written to meet the 1982 needs of the Army's percieved needs for a tactical truck-armor was never required, in fact, it was strictly forbidden as an example.

No dancing around those specs with personal anecdotes is going to change those facts-ignoring those facts that anyone of you may find distasteful or disagree does not change those facts. The specs were laid down by TAACOM, and we (the suppliers ) had to perform to their standards. The GM/MVO (TTC truck) actually outperformed the S&S and the Teledyne truck but cost roughly (as I remember) 15-20% more than the S&S truck, hence losing points in the evaluation for not meeting the best value for the dollar spent. I did not like it, but it simply did not matter, TAACOM got what they wanted and that was fielded (with all it's attendant and functional problems).

Sorry guys, the FMTV is what it is and no amount of complaining is going to change that. The mission changed faster than the design requirements.