[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Up-Armored Humvee pic **holy hell** (Page 1 of 3)
Posted: 11/9/2009 10:38:19 AM EDT
Damn, how long do the last with all that extra weight? Seems like it would be hell on the suspension.
Is that a block of chobham armor on the door? |
|
Quoted:
Damn, how long do the last with all that extra weight? Seems like it would be hell on the suspension. http://i33.tinypic.com/i2kf4i.jpg Is that a block of chobham armor on the door? Can I have one in matte black? Thanks. 
|
|
Quoted:
Damn, how long do the last with all that extra weight? Seems like it would be hell on the suspension. http://i33.tinypic.com/i2kf4i.jpg Is that a block of chobham armor on the door? Dunno, but it looks like they are some type of storage to me. Looks like there are some latches on those boxes. |
|
Quoted:
Damn, how long do the last with all that extra weight? Seems like it would be hell on the suspension. http://i33.tinypic.com/i2kf4i.jpg Is that a block of chobham armor on the door? I was wondering trhe same thing about the doors. Those must be a bitch to get open. How well did they reinforce underneath? I think this was the main part that REALLY needed it. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Damn, how long do the last with all that extra weight? Seems like it would be hell on the suspension. http://i33.tinypic.com/i2kf4i.jpg Is that a block of chobham armor on the door? I was wondering trhe same thing about the doors. Those must be a bitch to get open. How well did they reinforce underneath? I think this was the main part that REALLY needed it. I think they have some sort of hydraulic assistor. |
|
Quoted:
Damn, how long do the last with all that extra weight? Seems like it would be hell on the suspension. http://i33.tinypic.com/i2kf4i.jpg Is that a block of chobham armor on the door? They are hell on suspension parts when riding at the standard 3.5 ton gross weight. Uncle Sam buys all their parts though. Mine is going to be raodworthy in about 4 weeks, just in time for my Mens Weekend trip 
|
|
Quoted:
Thats an 1151 with a frag 6 uparmour kit with a DAM kit for hydraulic door openers (top of the door), the door boxes are not storage, just stacked ballistic glass. I read someone in Iraq found out the armored glass would break up or stop some EFPs. Is thats what its for? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Thats an 1151 with a frag 6 uparmour kit with a DAM kit for hydraulic door openers (top of the door), the door boxes are not storage, just stacked ballistic glass. I read someone in Iraq found out the armored glass would break up or stop some EFPs. Is thats what its for? I'm sure it helps... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Thats an 1151 with a frag 6 uparmour kit with a DAM kit for hydraulic door openers (top of the door), the door boxes are not storage, just stacked ballistic glass. I read someone in Iraq found out the armored glass would break up or stop some EFPs. Is thats what its for? I hope that if anyone knows that answer, they also have enough sense not to answer. Let the bad guys figure it out on their own. |
|
Quoted:
Wayyyyy too much for that 6.5L or 6.2L to kick around. Those trucks are seriously outside their designated role with that much weight on them. I agree, but there have been quite a few improvements to the 6.5 turbo in the past couple years. Its up to around 300 horse, but you have to remeber this thing was not designed to get over 55mph. |
|
Quoted:
Hell, if I had the money to buy it and feed it, I'd get me one of these: http://www.military-today.com/apc/m1117_guardian.jpg Textron M1117 Guardian (no doubt named after the book series that made the "V-450 SuperCommando" famous). That's a .50 BMG mounted alongside a 40mm Grenade Launcher.  I thought I was the only one that read those books.   
|
|
Quoted:
Hell, if I had the money to buy it and feed it, I'd get me one of these: http://www.military-today.com/apc/m1117_guardian.jpg Textron M1117 Guardian (no doubt named after the book series that made the "V-450 SuperCommando" famous). That's a .50 BMG mounted alongside a 40mm Grenade Launcher. That would probably be superior vehicle to the monstrosities the humvees have been turned into. They took what was originally intended to be a light transport vehicle and turned it into an armored personnel carrier that only carries 4 guys counting the driver 
I'm all for protecting our troops, but at least use a platform intended for the role instead of spending millions to slap armor plates on a vehicle not designed for it. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Hell, if I had the money to buy it and feed it, I'd get me one of these: http://www.military-today.com/apc/m1117_guardian.jpg Textron M1117 Guardian (no doubt named after the book series that made the "V-450 SuperCommando" famous). That's a .50 BMG mounted alongside a 40mm Grenade Launcher. I thought I was the only one that read those books. Nope. Reading 'em again right now, in fact. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Hell, if I had the money to buy it and feed it, I'd get me one of these: http://www.military-today.com/apc/m1117_guardian.jpg Textron M1117 Guardian (no doubt named after the book series that made the "V-450 SuperCommando" famous). That's a .50 BMG mounted alongside a 40mm Grenade Launcher. That would probably be superior vehicle to the monstrosities the humvees have been turned into. They took what was originally intended to be a light transport vehicle and turned it into an armored personnel carrier that only carries 4 guys counting the driver
I'm all for protecting our troops, but at least use a platform intended for the role instead of spending millions to slap armor plates on a vehicle not designed for it. Sounds like the development of the Bradley.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wayyyyy too much for that 6.5L or 6.2L to kick around. Those trucks are seriously outside their designated role with that much weight on them. I agree, but there have been quite a few improvements to the 6.5 turbo in the past couple years. Its up to around 300 horse, but you have to remeber this thing was not designed to get over 55mph. They fixed the PMC issue, the turbo leaking issue, the bad head-gasket issue, the weak block issue, the water jacket issue in the heads, and the too-small radiator? These are all things that plagued the 6.2 and 6.5 when they first came out, and then they were only at 150hp or so. I can only imagine how much hell it would be for them to try and move around 15,000 lbs. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Hell, if I had the money to buy it and feed it, I'd get me one of these: http://www.military-today.com/apc/m1117_guardian.jpg Textron M1117 Guardian (no doubt named after the book series that made the "V-450 SuperCommando" famous). That's a .50 BMG mounted alongside a 40mm Grenade Launcher. I thought I was the only one that read those books. Nope. Reading 'em again right now, in fact. Mobile One!
I reread the series over the summer. Great & fun reading! Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wayyyyy too much for that 6.5L or 6.2L to kick around. Those trucks are seriously outside their designated role with that much weight on them. I agree, but there have been quite a few improvements to the 6.5 turbo in the past couple years. Its up to around 300 horse, but you have to remeber this thing was not designed to get over 55mph. They fixed the PMC issue, the turbo leaking issue, the bad head-gasket issue, the weak block issue, the water jacket issue in the heads, and the too-small radiator? These are all things that plagued the 6.2 and 6.5 when they first came out, and then they were only at 150hp or so. I can only imagine how much hell it would be for them to try and move around 15,000 lbs. I'm not saying that it would be the engine I would pick for the uparmour trucks, but it does a fair job moving the weight. The soldiers always want faster trucks, but with that there is more parts breakage. You have to remember that everyone thinks they can drive, and only a handful can... |