Aircraft Crawler !

[TLCOR]

I really dont see much of a problem in any of those things, maybe the gear-ratio - but its 1:18, that helps a whole two revolutions. Id like to see how those internal braked planetary hubs looks like. Drawings ? Oh, and the axles are center pivoted, much like tractors..

Is everyting that aint chrome junk to you guys ?

 

[mikey_d05]

Let me see if I have this right, 20:1 ratio, the brakes are integrated into the hubs in some nighmarish configuration, no suspension and a 6.2 (not exactly what everyone is looking for as "the" diesel of choice") and you want one. Thinking outside of the box is good, but the box is there for a reason.

You forgot the fact that they undoubtedly weigh a metric ****load.

 

[mikey_d05]

Is everyting that aint chrome junk to you guys ?

Nope, but this truck would require as much or more effort to turn it into an off roader than a Pinto. Sometimes you've just gotta realize you're starting with the wrong platform. I love John Deere's new diesel, but throwing a 12 liter torque goblin into a K5 just aint gonna happen.

 

[cbbr]

Is everyting that aint chrome junk to you guys ?

I've noticed that you ask that type of question a lot in regard to what 'we' consider the 'normal' way to build a K5. I will give you my opinion. It's not that anyone is uninterested in axles other than the normal chevy (portal axles, stuff of of 50 year old Volvo's), they just don't make a lot of sense. Especially here in the US where that stuff is very hard to get parts for. I can essentially rebuild my Suburban using parts from almost any parts store or dealership. I don't have to wait a month for the part to be shipped from Europe or pay the freight.

As to things like aircraft haulers, they just don't make any sense at all for most people. They are cool to look at and a novelty, but for the amount of time and money it would cost to make one useful you could buy a small fleet of K5's.

like I said, the box (or "normal") is there for a reason. it's practical.

 

[mikey_d05]

As to things like aircraft haulers, they just don't make any sense at all for most people. They are cool to look at and a novelty, but for the amount of time and money it would cost to make one useful you could buy a small fleet of K5's.

like I said, the box (or "normal") is there for a reason. it's practical.

For the time money and effort you'd have to put into one of those things (especially after hauling aircraft it's entire life) you could probably build a V-8 tube thing.

If you need to tow 50,000 pounds to work and back, have at it, but the last time I hit the trail with that much weight my entire club was there with their tow rigs.

 

[TLCOR]

I've noticed that you ask that type of question a lot in regard to what 'we' consider the 'normal' way to build a K5. I will give you my opinion. It's not that anyone is uninterested in axles other than the normal chevy (portal axles, stuff of of 50 year old Volvo's), they just don't make a lot of sense. Especially here in the US where that stuff is very hard to get parts for.

Offcourse, I understand that very well. I like "everything" you guys (There, I said it again ) build, but it tends to be the same things.

And, I dont see one reason it'll cost anymore building one of these, versus a K5 eg.

 

[wazzabie]

Offcourse ! 6.2, Turbo 400, NP208..

I didn't have the diesel badge..

 

[original balzer]

NICE BUMPER THERE ROAD GRADER!

balzer

 

[TLCOR]

I dont think the Military cares much about weight-adding chrome badging.. (But *I* do love that badge - I tend to use it to aim the Suburban in right direction, when I was a kid and dad let me drive.. )

 

[DavidB]

I think it could be done. Everyone starts with a stock blazer and then changes everything about it anyways. From suspension to body to frame to steering to axles engine. Why not start with something different? A smarrt guy with a well setup shop/garage could make it work. And be way cooler than a blazer, too.

 

[TLCOR]

I think it could be done. Everyone starts with a stock blazer and then changes everything about it anyways. From suspension to body to frame to steering to axles engine. Why not start with something different? A smarrt guy with a well setup shop/garage could make it work. And be way cooler than a blazer, too.

Exactly, buddy !

 

[Zeitler]

you could always use it for snow-plowing

any closups of the axles?

 

[mikey_d05]

Because from all previous reports I've heard....

#1. They don't have a suspension.
#2. The axles are monsters that you'd probably end up getting rid of anyways.
#3. I doubt it's even a typical chevy frame.
#4. After a service life of towing aircraft, the engine and tranny are probably torn to hell.
#5. If all of the above are true, you're left with a cab, and it would have been easier and cheaper to buy a 1-ton in the first place.

Truth is, you can polish a turd, but the result you get out for the effort you put in just isn't worth it.

 

[TLCOR]

Because from all previous reports I've heard....

#1. They don't have a suspension.
#2. The axles are monsters that you'd probably end up getting rid of anyways.
#3. I doubt it's even a typical chevy frame.
#4. After a service life of towing aircraft, the engine and tranny are probably torn to hell.
#5. If all of the above are true, you're left with a cab, and it would have been easier and cheaper to buy a 1-ton in the first place.

Truth is, you can polish a turd, but the result you get out for the effort you put in just isn't worth it.

Ill Bite Back:

1. They have center pivoted axles, as I said above IIRC.
2. They are 5 ton ZFs with 1:18. You can hammer out with 60 inch tires, need I say more ?
3. So what ?
4. Might be, could be inverse also - never used. Does it matter ?
5. The above aint true.

To polish a turd is to put CTMs in your 10B..

 

[mikey_d05]

Ill Bite Back:

1. They have center pivoted axles, as I said above IIRC.
2. They are 5 ton ZFs with 1:18. You can hammer out with 60 inch tires, need I say more ?
3. So what ?
4. Might be, could be inverse also - never used. Does it matter ?
5. The above aint true.

To polish a turd is to put CTMs in your 10B..

Ok, I wouldn't build it personally, but some people would so this is my last post.
1. Fixed center pivots would be a nightmare offroading.
2. It's not a simple problem of "fixing" the ratio with big tires. Huge tires put that much more stress on the rest of the drivetrain leading to even greater expense.
3. So that means that your common budget swaps are no longer feasible.
4. Very true, but if you're trying to keep it down to a reasonable cost it does matter...a lot.
5. Depends on your intended purpose, the vehicle, and line of thinking. For my buildup plans it would be, and unless you plan to do exclusively mud bogging (which would require a built big block with the ratio offsetting tires) I think the statement holds true.

Lastly, I agree, 10 bolt and CTM don't belong in the same sentence.

 

[BadDog]

I looked at and considered those things a long time ago. On the plus side, they go pretty cheap at the military auctions, and they have some interesting steering that might be useful, and as I recall, clearance was also awesome due to the almost non-existent diff housing.

The real killer is the 18:1 gearing in the axles. Even if you reversed a range box (or two) to get 2:1 (or even 4:1, or more) over-drive, you couldn't really use it because your drive shafts would be turning fast enough at 40 mph to drive a normal vehicle at over 200 mph. To withstand that, you would need some VERY high precision shafts and joints that could survive it, not to mention whether the diff could handle it for any length of time. Not sure how reasonable that would be, and with a flipped range box (typically 2:1 OD depending on source), you would still be at 9:1 or so equivalent axle ratio so the engine is going to be reving to the moon to make any speed at all. Maybe a tricked out v-tech 4 banger turning 9k? Makes the Rockwell or Mog axle gear "problem" seem like a high speed alternative. If *ALL* you ever do is "crawl", then it might be something to look at with a 2:1 OD box, but even out here in the rocky desert, you frequently need some wheel speed to get through. So, realistically, having maybe 3:1 AND 4:1 od options along with shafts to handle it is required. Not exactly a slam dunk...

So, the hydraulic steering is really the only thing left that might be useful. But even that is heavy duty and bulky, as well as being very "used" by the time the auction them off. For off-road use, it would likely be far less than optimal in performance, weight, and bulk. Plus, with what it would cost for reconditioning the non-mainstream pumps, replacing questionable hoses/seals, replacing/matching the rams (built into the axles as I recall, so you loose them if you ditch the axles) and other hydraulic components that just won't work well on a flexible trail rig, you could probably just about pay for and build a system designed to be exactly what you need with a FAR better end result.

If I had room (large yard/shop) and spare time and found a great deal, I wouldn't mind playing around with one to see what could be done/salvaged, but I doubt it would prove very useful. Or someone with access to a machine shop combined with suitable skill, you might be able to replace/modify the planetary reduction in the hub to get a more reasonable reduction rate. That would be pretty sweet if you could drop it to something like a total axle reduction somewhere between 5:1 and 6:1. That would get you back in the realm of "common equipment" for the rest of the drive train, and it might be cool for a hard core heavy weight (4 seat + gear) off road truck.

 

[TLCOR]

Ok, I wouldn't build it personally, but some people would so this is my last post.
1. Fixed center pivots would be a nightmare offroading.
2. It's not a simple problem of "fixing" the ratio with big tires. Huge tires put that much more stress on the rest of the drivetrain leading to even greater expense.
3. So that means that your common budget swaps are no longer feasible.
4. Very true, but if you're trying to keep it down to a reasonable cost it does matter...a lot.
5. Depends on your intended purpose, the vehicle, and line of thinking. For my buildup plans it would be, and unless you plan to do exclusively mud bogging (which would require a built big block with the ratio offsetting tires) I think the statement holds true.

Lastly, I agree, 10 bolt and CTM don't belong in the same sentence.

Im at it again, buddy..

1. True. You could might swap in some 56s with *HD* tractionbars. But you'll be way better of with a properly built 4-Link, in the lenght.
2. Thats the same thing with every other vehicle. It all comes down to what your drivetrain consists of, you'll have to aim on highgeared components to compensate, though.
3. What ?
4. Yes.
5. Well, somewhat maybe. I dont see the big of a problem here, and nor do I like mud..

 

[mikey_d05]

Im at it again, buddy..

1. True. You could might swap in some 56s with *HD* tractionbars. But you'll be way better of with a properly built 4-Link, in the lenght.
2. Thats the same thing with every other vehicle. It all comes down to what your drivetrain consists of, you'll have to aim on highgeared components to compensate, though.
3. What ?
4. Yes.
5. Well, somewhat maybe. I dont see the big of a problem here, and nor do I like mud..

I give up, all of the suggested solutions have pretty much already been shot down. Go for it, buy one, and see how much money you have to sink into it to get it trail worthy.

 

[cbbr]

I still want to know why you would buy such an expensive PITA just to be "different". Not better mind you. like I said earlier, there is a reason that there is a "norm" and thank goodness someone figured it out before I got here because I need all the help I can get.

 

[TLCOR]

I looked at and considered those things a long time ago. On the plus side, they go pretty cheap at the military auctions, and they have some interesting steering that might be useful, and as I recall, clearance was also awesome due to the almost non-existent diff housing.

The real killer is the 18:1 gearing in the axles. Even if you reversed a range box (or two) to get 2:1 (or even 4:1, or more) over-drive, you couldn't really use it because your drive shafts would be turning fast enough at 40 mph to drive a normal vehicle at over 200 mph. To withstand that, you would need some VERY high precision shafts and joints that could survive it, not to mention whether the diff could handle it for any length of time. Not sure how reasonable that would be, and with a flipped range box (typically 2:1 OD depending on source), you would still be at 9:1 or so equivalent axle ratio so the engine is going to be reving to the moon to make any speed at all. Maybe a tricked out v-tech 4 banger turning 9k? Makes the Rockwell or Mog axle gear "problem" seem like a high speed alternative. If *ALL* you ever do is "crawl", then it might be something to look at with a 2:1 OD box, but even out here in the rocky desert, you frequently need some wheel speed to get through. So, realistically, having maybe 3:1 AND 4:1 od options along with shafts to handle it is required. Not exactly a slam dunk...

So, the hydraulic steering is really the only thing left that might be useful. But even that is heavy duty and bulky, as well as being very "used" by the time the auction them off. For off-road use, it would likely be far less than optimal in performance, weight, and bulk. Plus, with what it would cost for reconditioning the non-mainstream pumps, replacing questionable hoses/seals, replacing/matching the rams (built into the axles as I recall, so you loose them if you ditch the axles) and other hydraulic components that just won't work well on a flexible trail rig, you could probably just about pay for and build a system designed to be exactly what you need with a FAR better end result.

If I had room (large yard/shop) and spare time and found a great deal, I wouldn't mind playing around with one to see what could be done/salvaged, but I doubt it would prove very useful. Or someone with access to a machine shop combined with suitable skill, you might be able to replace/modify the planetary reduction in the hub to get a more reasonable reduction rate. That would be pretty sweet if you could drop it to something like a total axle reduction somewhere between 5:1 and 6:1. That would get you back in the realm of "common equipment" for the rest of the drive train, and it might be cool for a hard core heavy weight (4 seat + gear) off road truck.

Good points there BadDog, especially the one about re-gearing the axles themselves somehow. If you for example have 49s, then you'll need some WB. With this WB you should have quite some lenght/room for mixing and reversing components. Offcourse it'll rotate fast, though. How about reversing a transmission ?