Brent Boxall
Colin Brookes wrote:
> In message <m0xwOkV-0003ZQC@fwd14.btx.dtag.de>, Andreas Mehlhorn
> <a.mehlhorn@t-online.de> writes
> >> The Unimog has quite good offroad capabilities as far as not bottoming
> >> out (short overhangs), however it is drastically underpowered and this
> >> needs to be kept well in mind all the time.
> >>
> >
> >For which reason do you need a lot of power off-road? To turn the
> >wheels and throw the mud?
>
> There is a difference between a 'lot of power', and my comment that it
> is underpowered.
>
> >If you are in real heavy off-road conditions, you drive slowly.
> >5 mph or so, sometimes slower. And for this speed you don't need
> >much power. You need a gearbox which offers a wide range of gears
> >for slow speeds.
> >
>
> crawling about the countryside at 5 mph holding up other vehicles in
> joint manouvres didn't strike me as very practical. To use an engine
> for off road 1.5 ton load carrying that relys on nearly 5,000 rpm to
> achieve only 80 hp, surely must strike you as a bit odd. Put a 20%
> reduction in rpm due to drag off road, and you are down to about 35 hp.
> Compare that to the FV1604 ordinary old 'box radio truck', the same
> rated Nato 1.5 ton, of the same period, with an engine achieving 98 hp
> at only 3,750 rpm.....that's about twice the torque power output for the
> same rated vehicle. For load carrying in off-road (difficult terrain),
> it's bottom end power that is req'd, not hp at high rev's.
> The GFR field car, the 'Munga', suffered the same fate as the 'Unimog'.
> Nice performers when empty, it's little 980cc 3 cyl engine screaming
> like a lawn-mower. But pick up 4 x 12 stone paratroopers each with 68
> lbs of kit plus weapons and ammo from a DZ and it's quicker to get out
> and run from the exposed field of fire. It's no surprise they eventualy
> replaced it with an update of the incredibly successful Kubelwagon from
> two decades back, the VW181 (first 1500 and then uprated again to
> 1600cc).
> It must be born in mind that Criteria effecting military decisions are
> often different from one place to another, as well as one period to
> another. The Criteria for that period in the GFR, with 'The Airlift',
> still clear in everyones minds, was fuel economy for mass produced
> field equipment (field cars and small load carryers). It's not the
> criteria for the US collector, or performance off-road.
>
> >If your aim is to win the PARIS-DAKAR Rallye, you need much power
> >off road, but if you want to drive in really difficult areas, where
> >all other vehicles surrender, the good old underpowered UNIMOG is
> >first choice.
> >
> >Regards
> >Andreas
> >
>
> Not if you have real experience of their capability. That one extra
> gear does little to improve it, let alone the extra drag losses it
> incurs.
>
> regards
> Colin Brookes
> Invicta Military Vehicle Preservation Society (IMPS)
> colb@xtra.co.nz
>
> ===
> To unsubscribe from the mil-veh mailing list, send the single word
> UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of a message to <mil-veh-request@skylee.com>.
===
To unsubscribe from the mil-veh mailing list, send the single word
UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of a message to <mil-veh-request@skylee.com>.