Looking for Canadian M151A2 Pictures....

[Ed Storey]

The official nomenclature for the Canadian used (excluding the US supplied UN and ICCS vehicles) post-Second War 'Jeeps' was

M38CDN

M38A1CDN1
M38A1CDN2
M38A1CDN3

M151A2

Iltis

The MUTT portion of the US M151A2 MUTT designation means Military Utility Tactical Truck.

Here are a couple of scans of original Canadian manuals that show the official designation. I have yet to find any primary source documentation that refers to the Canadian Jeeps by 'Pattern' although if there is something out there I would like to see it. The CFR number does start with a two-digit year prefix which does indicate the year the vehicle was taken into service, but is not a 'pattern' indicator.

[rob love]

The terms "67 pattern, 74 pattern " etc were cdn nicknames for the jeeps, and not official. But their use was widespread. I think I may have some messages around where they were referred to as such, but certainly not in any publication.

By the way, I don't think the term M38A1 CDN1 was used either, but rather simply M38A1CDN, since at the time they would not have known that we would be making further purchases of this pattern vehicle (with some improvements).

[Scott Bentley]

Originally Posted by rob love

The terms "67 pattern, 74 pattern " etc were cdn nicknames for the jeeps, and not official. But their use was widespread. I think I may have some messages around where they were referred to as such, but certainly not in any publication.

By the way, I don't think the term M38A1 CDN1 was used either, but rather simply M38A1CDN, since at the time they would not have known that we would be making further purchases of this pattern vehicle (with some improvements).

I completely agree with you on this.

Generally everything starts its life "even" so to speak. I just think its interesting how the M38A1 was dubbed CDN, CDN2.... Rather than M38A1, M38A2.... as the A1, generally means "Amendment 1" and so on and so forth. The M38A1 is significantly different from the M38, enough one could argue, to have gotten a different "M" number all together, rather than just an amendment number.

The term "Pattern" is a generally excepted way of differentiating the generation of all sorts of "Army" equipment not just vehicles. In fact its almost the preference it seems sometimes.

Its kind of like referring to vehicles by their "Class"...
Walk up to any Soldier and ask him what an M35 Truck is, and the response could be anything. Most have no idea that its a 2.5ton MLVW unless they were bored enough to read the data plates while co-driving in one. Sames goes for my old M38A1 CDN2. When I told buddies I used to own an M38A1, they looked at me as if I had a toaster on my head. When I called it a 67 Pattern Jeep, the light came on.

When it comes to weapons, thats a whole other ball of wax

[Scott Bentley]

Well, here they are...

The Transactions are pretty much complete now. Just waiting on Mikes to be brought up from NB, and the other from AB.

Mike M's 151 will providing the "Heart" of the Restoration as its quite complete, the other will be donating its body and misc pieces.

I think I may go ahead and do some minor work to get it registered and rolling and then put a few miles on it while its still warm out.
Its definately going to need some "temporary" OD paint before it goes on the road.

Its going under the knife this winter for the actual Resto.

[Scott Bentley]

I found something on the G that answers my questions regarding what is a Jeep...

"Whats in a Name "MUTT vs Jeep"

FWIW, I wasn't trying to antagonize anyone here, just looking for some friendly debate. Nevertheless, I think i'll leave it alone.

I can hardly contain myself as my first A2 will be here on Saturday. It left Red Deer yesterday:

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by Ed Storey

Here are a couple of scans of original Canadian manuals that show the official designation. I have yet to find any primary source documentation that refers to the Canadian Jeeps by 'Pattern' although if there is something out there I would like to see it.

And here's the 1971 operator's manual for the Truck, Utility: 1/4 ton, 4x4:


But not until one looks inside they find out it's the manual for the M151-series truck!


H.

[rob love]

There were a few different DND operators manual for this truck, but the one you show was the most confusing. It showed all 3 models of the M151s, along with a bunch of variants, and of course had the french translations in it so the book was twice the size it needed to be.

Back in those days, it was always nice when the french side of a manual was in the back half of the book. You could undo the binder and remove those pages, thus lightening you overall bookweight by more than half. Eventuall I think the DND caught on to this and started printing the pages side by side or even with a Englsh column and a french column next to it on the same page.

The other odd part of the books back then were the empty pages with "this page intentionally blank" on them.

[Scott Bentley]

Since we're on the topic of of nomenclature, I want to throw this out there.... Keeping in mind I am a through and through "Jeep Guy" even though it wasn't always in MV's. Keeping in mind i'm not debating just MV's here.

What makes a "Jeep" a "Jeep"?

I have continually read that the M151 line is not a "Jeep". What makes it not a "Jeep"?

Is it because of who manufactured it?
There are a few other vehicles out there that have been endowed with the title "Jeep" that have never physically had Jeep scripted into the Body. There were many other "Jeeps" that were not built by Willys, Kaiser or the Jeep Corporation that are still "Jeeps". I realize much of this was to do with the war effort and was contracted to other production lines. There are plenty of Ford "Jeeps" rolling around out there that don't even raise an eyebrow.
My 76 "Jeep" CJ-5 rolled off an assembly line owned by AMC, the same parent company that built both of my 74 M151A2's. In this case, for the A2 anyway, it was built by a company that built "Jeeps" and owned the rights to it. Had the M151 ever been sold to the public in civillian form by AMC, i'm sure it would have been under the "Jeep" product line.

I just find it entertaining how some (not speaking directly about this forum) are very emphatic about the M151A2 not being a Jeep. Other than rumour, urban legend, hearsay or the big fish story that grew, what was the legitimate reason for the M151A2 not being considered a Jeep?

If it is not because of the manufacturer, is it because of the vehicle itself?
The M151 is an open top, 2 door, 4 seater, 1/4 ton Utility Vehicle. So technically, it has all of the same characteristics as the earlier "Jeeps" including the M38A1 which was in service during the same timeframe. It does have a Uniframe and Independent Suspension, which is remarkably different than the other "Jeeps", but one could argue that can't be the sole reason for why its not a Jeep.

Another arguement could be that brand names and vehicle type may have crossed paths here. The M715 is also a "Jeep" but shares none of the characteristics of other "Jeeps" as its a 5/4ton truck, but has "Jeep" scripted into its tailgate. So if the term or title "Jeep" is not determined by its legal brand name, who has the last word as to what is and what isn't a Jeep?

I'm not trying to aggrevate anyone on here, I just find it interesting when people say that the M151 is not a Jeep. If this is in fact the case, maybe there are a few other "Jeep" platforms in the MV community that aren't "Jeeps" either.

So, someone put this to bed for me.

As a final parting shot, when I registered my M38A1 for the road, the DMV called it a 1967 Kaiser, 2 Door, Convertable, Utility Vehicle on the registration. Seems they didn't think it was a "Jeep" in the legal sense either

Scotty B