How can a Jeep do it and not a hatchback?

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: Popinski
Whatever vehicles in WWII.

They have extremely heavy tanks with low HP Diesel engines...they can run over anything and can still carry a bunch of things.


Low hp?

The M60A3 TTS has 750 hp/1575 ft lbs Continental V12 turbo-diesel. No idea how many psi that old air-cooled V12 is boosted to. I am certain it is significantly less than any current HD diesel pickup.
The M1 has a 1500 hp/3900 ftlbs Lycoming turbine.


I never drove an original GPW or M38, but I have logged plenty of hours in a M151.
Gearing.
1st gear was good for all of 9mph. Most of the time on pavement I just started in 2nd. It was roughly equivalent to a passenger car's 1st gear. You could get up to 55 mph on the M151 before it started to weave around in it's lane (the AMC built M151s tracked a little straighter than the Fords and you could get it to indicate just past 60 mph...the last number on the speedometer, but the transmissions required more deft clutch work to prevent grinding. Fords shifted better) Given the tendency for the M151 to flip over, you didn't want to these speeds very often.

Similar to the Samurai. You can go anywhere the big boys go in a Samurai, just at half speed. But you do end up with less dings on the rocker panels because of the shorter wheelbase. Probably a good thing to because the body is made of tin foil.

 

[Zaedock]

Originally Posted By: MrRPM
I would LOVE to challenge an old willys to a dual with my wrangler, what he makes up for in weight i have in power. I have had 5 people in my jeep with a hard top, full size spare tire (31-10.5-15) and equipment like a high lift jack, tow straps, fire extinguisher and tools and went off road threw some rutty trails. I say give me some stiffer springs and i could take 6 people without the heavy hard top on it and cruise below 40 MPH.


Not to be the negative Nancy, but wheeling with 5 or 6 people in a Wrangler is asking for trouble (there are only 4 seatbelts). I am an experienced wheeler and have rolled my Jeep numerous times. It can happen quick and when you least expect it. Even if you're only running mild trails on 31's.

 

[MrRPM]

Originally Posted By: Zaedock
Originally Posted By: MrRPM
I would LOVE to challenge an old willys to a dual with my wrangler, what he makes up for in weight i have in power. I have had 5 people in my jeep with a hard top, full size spare tire (31-10.5-15) and equipment like a high lift jack, tow straps, fire extinguisher and tools and went off road threw some rutty trails. I say give me some stiffer springs and i could take 6 people without the heavy hard top on it and cruise below 40 MPH.


Not to be the negative Nancy, but wheeling with 5 or 6 people in a Wrangler is asking for trouble (there are only 4 seatbelts). I am an experienced wheeler and have rolled my Jeep numerous times. It can happen quick and when you least expect it. Even if you're only running mild trails on 31's.





oh i completely agree, but when The Japanese were flying plains into our ships and the Germans where practicing the largest genocide ever that didn't matter. All i was saying the OP mentioned that new vehicles can't do or compete with wwII jeeps and was wondering why new cars are so fragile and all i said was i feel like my new jeep could do what the wwII jeep did under those less then ideal circumstances. theres a reason why we don't use jeeps like that anymore.

 

[Zaedock]

Originally Posted By: MrRPM
oh i completely agree, but when The Japanese were flying plains into our ships and the Germans where practicing the largest genocide ever that didn't matter.


??? Not sure what WWII has to do with overloading your Jeep, but OK. Just be safe out there.

Originally Posted By: MrRPM
All i was saying the OP mentioned that new vehicles can't do or compete with wwII jeeps and was wondering why new cars are so fragile and all i said was i feel like my new jeep could do what the wwII jeep did under those less then ideal circumstances. theres a reason why we don't use jeeps like that anymore.


I believe the OP was referring to a modern hatchback, not necessarily a new Jeep. Comparing a MB to a TJ or JK Rubicon (or even stock models) would be silly.

 

[meep]

Seems liked those big double-deuces had all of 60hp diesels in them, too. top speed was crazy low-- like 45 mph, but it could crawl anywhere, heavily loaded.

M

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: meep
Seems liked those big double-deuces had all of 60hp diesels in them, too. top speed was crazy low-- like 45 mph, but it could crawl anywhere, heavily loaded.

M


The M35 Duece and a Half had a multifuel engine with something like 120 hp. You could get them up to about 55 mph on the freeway. 60 if you had a good one.
The 5 tons and HEMTTs would run away from you going uphill though.

 

[MrRPM]

Originally Posted By: Zaedock

??? Not sure what WWII has to do with overloading your Jeep, but OK. Just be safe out there.



Well, the thread is about WWII jeeps? And comparing their abilities to new vehicle abilities?

 

[Zaedock]

 

[Chris142]

You cant compare a Jeep, Early Bronco, Scout or even a Samari to a 4x4 hatchback car. Jeeps and such have a low range transfercase and much more ground clearance than a car.

They are designed to be driven in rough terrain. A 4x4 hatchback is designed to get you to the store in 4 inches of snow.

 

[mopar_monkey]

very low gearing, relatively high torque which is more important in a vehicle like this, plus hp was mostly tested at the wheels, now it's at the crank so old numbers are deceiving.

 

[meep]

does anybody remember when it seemed like any non-V8 vehicle sat between 60-82 HP?? back in the 70's and 80's?

Aircooled VW bus--- ~45 HP. Water-cooled vanagon, 82HP. Subaru 1.8L, 82 HP. '86 escort... 8x horsepower... 76 VW rabbit... somewhere in there. 77 toyota... want to say it was 85hp...

and they all got us to work and school, and some would approach 100mph...

the early beetles were what... 36hp--

Now folks won't look at a 4-banger if it doesn't turn at least 150...

 

[Zaedock]

Originally Posted By: mopar_monkey
very low gearing, relatively high torque which is more important in a vehicle like this, plus hp was mostly tested at the wheels, now it's at the crank so old numbers are deceiving.


I'd be willing to bet the HP was determined with math (cylinder volume, comp ratio, stroke, etc).


Originally Posted By: meep
does anybody remember when it seemed like any non-V8 vehicle sat between 60-82 HP?? back in the 70's and 80's?

Aircooled VW bus--- ~45 HP. Water-cooled vanagon, 82HP. Subaru 1.8L, 82 HP. '86 escort... 8x horsepower... 76 VW rabbit... somewhere in there. 77 toyota... want to say it was 85hp...

and they all got us to work and school, and some would approach 100mph...

the early beetles were what... 36hp--

Now folks won't look at a 4-banger if it doesn't turn at least 150...



I do remember. I remember getting awesome mileage from the carb'd 4-poppers. My 83 Chevette bopped around just fine and was actually really good in the snow. My wife's old '84 Accord did well too.
I remember when my brother had bought a brand new 1985 Civic S hatchback. That thing was quick!

 

[Samilcar]

The old WWII jeep only weighed 2,300lbs. That's pretty light weight for a vehicle with 4wd and a heavy duty suspension.