Gene wrote:
>Hey Gilmore..I saw the jeep -- remember that.
No one is doubting you here, just the story told to you.
> The place where the data
>plates go on the dash..well, there was never a screw in the holes.
The fact that this jeep dash appeared not to have rivets where the
data plate should be does not make the story true. It is possible that
this jeep was made up from a new body. I sold just such a new M-151-A2 body
(in a crate) to a fellow in Ohio several years ago. He then bought a
complete M-151-A2 kit (minus uni-body) from me and assembled a MUTT that
looked to be brand new. The kit he purchased from me was one of the 34 that
I disassembled from Air Force jeeps. I also included the data plates from
the jeep along with the kit. The data plate was from contract
DAAE07-77-C-3404 and the serial number was C151-08xxx. just like the jeep
in question's.
>The man who owns these vehicles has a bill of sale and proof it came from AM
>General.
The body or the whole vehicle? Does the bill of sale come from AM
General with the serial number on it?
I would love to see this data and be proved wrong. I think this info
if true, would be a great thing to have for evidence that the M-151-A2 was
allowed to be sold and used on the streets without having all the Federal
mandated and required safety equipment, pollution controls and vehicle
identification data.
> You don't think for a minute that AM would make them up special for
>the guy do you ??
Actually, yes. To be a legal vehicle, according to Federal statutes,
requires many items not found on the Government owned and operated
vehicles. It would stand to reason that laws must be complied with.
>They were most likely just simply pulled from the line of
>what ever was being done at the time.
This would be a guess as to how it was done. If it happened at all
it would have been at the end of a contract and not in the middle of it.
If you have ever researched the contract documentation and procurement
of vehicles specially designed and built for the US military, using
Government owned tooling and government utilization of reproduction rights
from subcontractor part manufacturers you would see that this would not be
likely. I have hundreds and hundreds of pages of this type of material from
the Ford Industrial Archives from the M-151 SMVO project that back this up.
This is why, when the Ford Tractor division wanted to sell the M-151 as a
"Specialized Farm Vehicle" the Government and the Ford Office of General
Counsel would not let them do so.
> Go see them in person and then report
>to the list with your dumb answers..
If it were closer I would indeed go and see for myself. As for my
answers being dumb.....I do not think fact, numbers and logic to be "dumb"
at all.
Let me pose another question using known facts, hard numbers and some
logic.
There is a number that when applied to vehicle numbers of Contract
DAAE07-77-C-3404 (Air Force) which the MUTT in question's serial number
falls, that will allow you to determine the US Air Force registration
(hood) number of these vehicles. This number is 7923.
Now, the three data plates I have before me from this contract have the
following stamped in the "VEN IDENT NO. space;
"78K364 C151-08287"
"78K368 C151-08291"
"78K581 C151-08504"
The first set of numbers are the USAF registration number of the vehicle.
The 78 indicates a 1978 vehicle, the K is the USAF letter identifying the
size of vehicle and the last three numbers are the actual USAF number for
the vehicle. The second set of numbers indicate that the vehicle is a
M-151 series. The third set of numbers are the serial number for the vehicle.
Where does the number 7923 come in? Subtract the USAF number (minus
the 78K) from the vehicle serial number (minus the C151) and you get the
prime number 7923.
Examples;
08287 minus 364 equals 7923
08291 minus 368 equals 7923
08504 minus 581 equals 7923
Now to find the USAF number of a MUTT in this serial number range that we
do not already know the number for we subtract the prime number 7923 from
the serial number and it gives us the USAF number.
Example;
The serial number of the MUTT in question is (C151) 08380 minus 7923 equals
457. We then add the 78K to this and we have the entire USAF registration
number of 78K457. This is the number of this MUTT when it was in military
service.
Now if vehicle number C151-08380 was just pulled off the assembly line
and sold to a solider as has been suggested then which jeep received the
USAF registration number of 78K457? If it was the next jeep off the line
which would have been serial number C151-08381, then how could the prime
number 7923 be valid on any vehicles produced after this one?
(C151) 08381 minus 457 equals 7924, not our prime number 7923.
Using a real stamped data plate from a later M-151-A2 in this same contract
proves that the prime number was constant and 7923
(C151) 08504 minus (78K) 581 equals 7923. If the number C151-08380 was
skipped from the contract then the prime number would not be constant and
would be one number higher.
Is it possible that AM General told the US Air Force that they had to
skip a registration number because they had to sell some else one of their
contract's jeeps..........?
>As far as the "C" goes it was just a
>stupid guess like your answers..Gene
Not a stupid guess at all. It would seem to make sense if the M-151-A2
contract and serial numbers were not known.........
Sorry you don't like my answers but I am just as happy to be proven
wrong as right. It's the true facts and hard data (not just someone's
story) that are important. If there is hard factual data to prove this
story I would love to see it.
Jim
NOTE NEW ADDRESS----NOTE NEW ADDRESS---NOTE NEW ADDRESS------AS OF
JANUARY 4, 2001---------
Jim Gilmore
13 Broadway 3rd floor
Jim Thorpe, PA. 18229
570-325-5216 phone
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 07 2001 - 09:34:11 PDT