CADC selling M151A2

[rob love]

The M151A2 had a very smooth cross country ride with it's independent suspension. The only cross country vehicle that was smoother (that I have found) would be the Humvwee. It was a true M-series vehicle so had good commonality between the other M series like the M38 family, the APCs, the deuce etc. They were simple to work on, had good highway speed, and a modern engine. As with most vehicles though, the good highway speed = a little poorer performance when you wanted to climb a hill. It was hard to compete against the 5.38 gearing of the Willys Jeeps. The I***s on the other hand, you could lock in 3 of the 4 wheels, but it would then bog down on flat ground if there was loose sand or snow and you were towing a trailer. They were geared towards highway use it would seem.

The M151A2 had it's weaknesses, as do all vehicles. The U joints had to be greased, and there were 12 of them. The bearings had to be set properly. The rear suspension mounting points were prone to wear, causing the vehicle to be a little unstable if the problem wasn't detected. The transmission/transfer case were a little weak.

Of the 30 that I bought back in the day, only 4 of them had their engines replaced in service. The other 26 were still on their original motors. Then again, they only served for about 11-12 years, whereas the earlier CDN 2 Jeeps were nearing 20 years of service.

I know the above comparison doesn't mention the I***s much....too early in the morning to start down that road.

[Phil Waterman]

Hi Robert

Not a bad question, and it will be interesting to see what peoples responses are. Particularly now that both vehicles are out of military service and into the restoration arena.

They have both been replaced under a totally different philosophy of what a military vehicle is supposed be and how it does it.

Cheers Phil

[maple_leaf_eh]

Originally Posted by Robert Bergeron

I am going to stir a hornet's nest here : Where they really any better than the Iltis ? Don't shoot the messenger here !

The Iltis has a narrower track than the M-series vehicles. It could go into more places, but I watched one get remarkably well stuck crossing a tank rut. The short wheelbase give the Iltis a rocking horse ride. The M151A2 has a more car like ride.

The Iltis has soft seats covered in vinyl vs the M-series' horsehair and canvas over wire coils. I preferred the M38A1 passenger seat because you can take it out and sit on at ground level while going in and out of the back. The M38A1 seat is not adjustable. The M151A2 has two positions. The Iltis is on a slide and has a seat back adjustment too. So, for that alone, it is better.

The roll cage on the M151A2 becomes a structural member after a certain amount of rust and body flexing. There are 6 posts. The Iltis cage is less strong and is less protection during off-angle rolls. It has one big hoop and angled rear supports. Both are better than the nothing but the windshield frame on the M38A1.

The first horizontal edge under the M151A2 behind the wheels is a 1" cross section at the angle of the front footwell. That surface has been pounded on mine, and every cross member all along the underside is flattened, dented, torn or full of historic mud from hitting rocks and obstacles. Yes, there was an in-service reinforcing patch kit that doubles up the thickness on those wear surfaces, but they are patches over sheet metal, not conventional frame parts. The M38A1 has a proper frame to carry the vehicle. I don't recall the underside of the Iltis, but recall it is fairly smooth more like a VW Bug.

The batteries were placed in progressively more awkward locations as the models progressed. The M38A1 CDN1 had thumbscrews that were easy to forget. The CDN2 and 3 had a flip catch to get into the battery box which is handy in front near the firewall. The M151A2's are under the passenger seat, but still relatively easy to access. The Iltis is under the back seat (?) or the rear floor (?) and the doors are always under other stuff.

I think the mirrors on the Iltis were the best of all 1/4 tons. Easy to see and stay adjusted, and as I recall fairly big.

[rob love]

Iltis mirrors also worked the bottom mount loose and would rattle so bad you couldn't see anything. You then had to replace the mirror with arm which was considerable more expensive that a M-series mirror.

[Robert Bergeron]

Why was it called the Mutt ?

[David Dunlop]

Military Utility Tactical Truck, I believe.

David

[maple_leaf_eh]

Originally Posted by Robert Bergeron

Why was it called the Mutt ?

During my exposure to the M151A2 in service it was one of three names, none of which was MUTT.

- '74 Pattern Jeep, to distinguish it from the 67s and 70s on the floor
- Officer's Jeep, because it was nonstandard to the majority and didn't have quite the same performance. It was faster, so rather than make the Patrols in the Troop uneven, if anyone was going to take the '74 it was the Troop Leader. The OC might have one as his rover, but that was usually unnecessary for what we were doing on the trace.
- to some soldiers, it was The American Jeep because the dataplates said US Property. (See attachment)

I think MUTT crept into the vocabulary with one of those contemporary Jeep profiles like the Ballantyne series. Someone might be repeating a Ford Company marketing pamphlet, assuming the name was widespread. The same way 20 or 25 yrs ago, books on military trucks called the HLVW, a Percheron. Huh?

[rob love]

We also used "disposable Jeep" and "rollover Jeep".