[ihc] Re: making a 1/2T a 3/4T

["Dennis Bernth" <scoutdude@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

  Ryan-
  If you think that there are no civilian spec vehicles in the military, you
are dead wrong. You only have to look back to the 60's and 70's- the
military (some branches more than others) used Scouts and Scout II's. AFAIK,
and Howard can correct me on this if I'm wrong, there was no massive
military contract for Scouts. The specs were the same as those of other
contemporary Scouts and Scout II's. They had a need for such a vehicle in
numbers that didn't call for development and bidding and such, so they
ordered them. ANY branch of government (and Ed S. I'm sure can back me on
this) has 'loopholes' in the acquisition process that allows for buying
outright without going through all the hoops that are normally necessary. We
did it on occasion with squad cars, and the military does it with what they
need. It's actually a cost effective way to cut some red tape and get
limited numbers of specialized vehicles without the hassle of normal
government procurement. I bet Mac can do some 'scouting around' his place
and find us some vehicles that don't fit the 'mil-spec' definition.
  As for the Dodge full time units of the 70's, I'm REAL familiar with how
they worked- I had several, and had the front ends apart on them. There were
NO axle disconnects on those critters at all- that's why they were full
time. I HAD a heavy 3/4 ton Dodge with the full time, 8 lug HD Dana 44, and
the only difference between the layout of it and my normal five lug half ton
Dodge was the eight lug wheels.
  As for the military getting what they wanted, to some extent you are
correct- but WHY would the military be sourcing 8 lug Dana 44's for Chevy
pickups when they are already sourcing the 8 lug Dana 60 in the CUCV? And I
doubt GM would build a 'special' Dana 44 with no hubs and axle disconnects
for a limited number of military pickups- limited number because I can't
ever recall anyone mentioning such a beast. And, if the 10 bolt was good
enough in the CUCV Blazer, and the CUCV cargo vehicles like the pickup and
ambulance and shelter vehicle needed a 60, why confuse the parts issue even
more?  I think if you do some serious checking you will see those are Dodge
military axles, no matter what the guy tells you, and they won't have an
axle disconnect.
  Dennis
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Ryan Moore" <baradium@domain.elided>
  To: <scoutdude@domain.elided>; <ihc@domain.elided>
  Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 12:17 PM
  Subject: Re: making a 1/2T a 3/4T


  >
  >
  >
  > >From: "Dennis Bernth" <scoutdude@domain.elided>
  > >Reply-To: "Dennis Bernth" <scoutdude@domain.elided>
  > >To: "Ryan Moore" <baradium@domain.elided>,<ihc@domain.elided>
  > >Subject: Re: making a 1/2T a 3/4T
  > >Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 09:29:37 -0600
  > <snip off mime headers>
  > >   IF there are 3/4 ton Chevy pickups in the military, they're probably
  > >locally sourced or gotten from GSA and are not mil-spec. There was a
half
  > >ton Chevy 4x4 on Ebay a while back that was supposedly bought from a
DRMO
  > >auction; it was painted up like a CUCV, but was half ton civilian all
the
  > >way. I would guess that local bases have some leeway when they need a
  > >utility vehicle to requistion one from GSA, who probably had a lot full
of
  > >Chevy 4x4's that they had bought for the USFWS, Forest Service,
National
  > >Parks, etc.
  >
  > except that's not how the military does things... all thier vehicles are
  > specifically built for the military and are a mil-spec, just of a
different
  > type.
  >
  > >   I'm aware the Dodges weren't tabbed as CUCV's,  I used that
terminology
  > >because they are what the GM CUCV's replaced. I don't know what the
  > >military
  > >called em to be honest.
  > >   The guy with the axles either doesn't know what he has or what they
came
  > >from, or they're not what he says they are. AFAIK, any Dana 44 front
used
  > >by
  > >GM would have lockouts, or lockouts could be installed. I'm not sure
what
  > >GM
  > >used for front axles post-1988, but I don't think they're HD 44's-
IIRC,
  > >they're a coil sprung, independent suspension type, nothing like a
'normal'
  > >44 you could use under a Travelall.
  >
  > I promise they are Dana 44s, dana 44s look nothing like a 10 bolt GM.
For
  > one thing, a 10 bolt GM has a round cover.  BTW, these aren't coil
sprung,
  > and remember, we are *not* talking about 1/2 ton pickups.
  >
  > >The 'ONLY' front 44's that I know of
  > >that don't have normal hubs that can take locking hubs are the
morphodite
  > >Dodges. Even when Dodge went to front axle disconnects in the mid-80's,
it
  > >kept the same outer hub style, just used a chrome 'cover' on the
outside to
  > >replace the locking hub assembly since the lock in, lock out function
was
  > >done by the axle disconnect.
  >
  > sure you aren't thinking of the dodge full time units?  that's how they
  > worked.
  >
  > >I also don't think GM used front 44's after
  > >about 1977- they went to their own 10 bolt, which uses most of the same
  > >suspension parts (ball joints, locking hubs, etc) as the earlier 44's.
  > >   Dennis
  >
  >
  > When GM went to the 10 bolt, not all trucks got the 10 bolt, some still
got
  > the dana 44, and I want to say that the 3/4 tons got them more than
others.
  > Also, remember, the military got whatever it wanted, and if they wanted
dana
  > 44s, they'd get them.
  >
  >
  > Thanks,
  > Ryan
  >
  > _________________________________________________________________
  > Free up your inbox with MSN Hotmail Extra Storage. Multiple plans
available.
  >
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=hotmail/es2&ST=1/go/onm00200362ave/
direct/01/