• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Meet the GM Defense ISV Army Truck

WLSC

Full Member
Reaction score
349
Points
810
Really none of those. The Jeep, Bronco etc are all really street off roaders. The Jeep of today is more the Polaris, GM ISV etc.
Maybe but it dosent take much to turn a JLU in a beast. Even stock, they are very good. None of those are a perfect fit and the current JLU as to much electronics in them. I didn't put the Bronco in the list, they have IFV.

The Polaris and the like are a bit small IMHO. Can they be fully closed up?
 

Furniture

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,939
Points
1,110
Maybe but it dosent take much to turn a JLU in a beast. Even stock, they are very good. None of those are a perfect fit and the current JLU as to much electronics in them. I didn't put the Bronco in the list, they have IFV.

The Polaris and the like are a bit small IMHO. Can they be fully closed up?
The Bronco does anything a Jeep does, even with IFS, and has the size to fit people and kit in it. The CAF won't be rock crawling, so the extra articulation a solid front axel provides isn't really a game changer.

Anything the CAF buys will have all the electronics of a modern vehicle, we aren't going back to carbs and manual locking hubs. It's no longer the 90s, vehicle electronics are rarely an issue these days.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
17,945
Points
1,160
Maybe but it dosent take much to turn a JLU in a beast. Even stock, they are very good. None of those are a perfect fit and the current JLU as to much electronics in them. I didn't put the Bronco in the list, they have IFV.

The Polaris and the like are a bit small IMHO. Can they be fully closed up?

The Ukrainians don't seem to care ;)

Ukraine Is Using UTVs to Combat Russian Tanks​

UTVs with antitank guided missiles have been a staple in the conflict.

MFTOFGVNYRHNPPI633573HSK3Y.jpg



 

WLSC

Full Member
Reaction score
349
Points
810
Almost the same. IFS is way better for confort but the cost to get them as rugged, less fragile leave them behind SFA.

Your 100% right for electric, I should not even have brought that up.
 
Last edited:

WLSC

Full Member
Reaction score
349
Points
810
I knoooow! I’m old fashioned 😉 Not a lot of place for reloads 😜

We can debate which vehicle is better and probably will never have a final pick, you than agree that light vehicle are soooo under rated 🙂
 

KevinB

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Reaction score
12,638
Points
1,260
Almost the same. IFS is way better for comfort but the cost to get them as rugged, less fragile leave them behind SFA.
Honestly for most light/medium frame vehicles it’s not a major issue these days.
Damage on IFS is often more easily changed out than a fixed axle.

Keep in mind the Hummer was independent suspension (front and back) and it’s a beast.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
6,410
Points
1,160
The Bronco does anything a Jeep does, even with IFS, and has the size to fit people and kit in it. The CAF won't be rock crawling, so the extra articulation a solid front axel provides isn't really a game changer.

Anything the CAF buys will have all the electronics of a modern vehicle, we aren't going back to carbs and manual locking hubs. It's no longer the 90s, vehicle electronics are rarely an issue these days.
Vehicle electronics are very much an issue, unless you own a Toyota, not to mention modern ICE engines are failing at significant rates, thanks mainly to trying to squeeze more HP out of lighter and lighter engines, followed by an accountant that then squeezes the same engines for extra pennies by substituting plastic parts.
 

WLSC

Full Member
Reaction score
349
Points
810
Honestly for most light/medium frame vehicles it’s not a major issue these days.
Damage on IFS is often more easily changed out than a fixed axle.

Keep in mind the Hummer was independent suspension (front and back) and it’s a beast.

The Hummer was/is a class by itself. I don’t know a lot of vehicles that can fairly compare to it.

SFA are harder to repair than IFS but since they are less fragile, you spend less time repairing them 😁. Has a LUV type of vehicle, do we really need the exquisite SMP solution or a good and solid MILCOT (what ever the brand) really adapted for our need? I’m not talking about what we got in the last 20 years that were just really painted green.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Reaction score
12,638
Points
1,260
The Hummer was/is a class by itself. I don’t know a lot of vehicles that can fairly compare to it.
Which is one reason I think the Hummer would actually be a fantastic vehicle for the CA.
Not the behemoth Armored versions but as a Light/Medium UV.

SFA are harder to repair than IFS but since they are less fragile, you spend less time repairing them 😁. Has a LUV type of vehicle, do we really need the exquisite SMP solution or a good and solid MILCOT (what ever the brand) really adapted for our need? I’m not talking about what we got in the last 20 years that were just really painted green.
The problem when using terms like MILCOT is one generally ends up watering down requirements to fill with a COTS offering.

COTS items are great for domestic admin vehicles; Duty vans, staff cars, and the RSS pickup ;)
They generally fail badly when shoehorned into roles that require Military systems.
 

WLSC

Full Member
Reaction score
349
Points
810
Which is one reason I think the Hummer would actually be a fantastic vehicle for the CA.
Not the behemoth Armored versions but as a Light/Medium UV.


The problem when using terms like MILCOT is one generally ends up watering down requirements to fill with a COTS offering.

COTS items are great for domestic admin vehicles; Duty vans, staff cars, and the RSS pickup ;)
They generally fail badly when shoehorned into roles that require Military systems.

Or Kingston JLU with cheap tires and winches 😁!

Polaris and the like aren’t COTS? We are talking « Jeep » vehicle type, not heavier vehicles. I would not even talk about COTS for that except some full size pickup and I dont see s use for that.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Reaction score
12,638
Points
1,260
Or Kingston JLU with cheap tires and winches 😁!

Polaris and the like aren’t COTS? We are talking « Jeep » vehicle type, not heavier vehicles. I would not even talk about COTS for that except some full size pickup and I dont see s use for that.
The only Mil Polaris I have any experience with are ones USASOC have, and they are definitely not a COTS system.
It’s a ground up purpose built system that externally resembles the commercial versions.

Same with the GMVW1.1

WRT the Jeep’s, I don’t see the appeal for a Mil role due to limited space (you need a real 4+1 vehicle at min), and top heavy when weapons etc are added.
 

OldSolduer

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
7,069
Points
1,110
The only Mil Polaris I have any experience with are ones USASOC have, and they are definitely not a COTS system.
It’s a ground up purpose built system that externally resembles the commercial versions.

Same with the GMVW1.1
Maybe the CA doesn't need a purpose built vehicle but something more robust and easy to maintain than a Ford 150 is needed.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Reaction score
12,638
Points
1,260
Maybe the CA doesn't need a purpose built vehicle but something more robust and easy to maintain than a Ford 150 is needed.
I’d say that we are dumping Hummers like they are going out of style down here.
For 95% of the unarmored wheeled roles the Hummer can do it - heck it can be a Gun Tractor for a M777 in a pinch if needed, and does a great job with mortars and the M119A3 as a gun tractor.

For lighter roles the GMVW1.1 ‘Flyer’ or Polaris LTATV can fill that.
 

WLSC

Full Member
Reaction score
349
Points
810
The only Mil Polaris I have any experience with are ones USASOC have, and they are definitely not a COTS system.
It’s a ground up purpose built system that externally resembles the commercial versions.

Same with the GMVW1.1

WRT the Jeep’s, I don’t see the appeal for a Mil role due to limited space (you need a real 4+1 vehicle at min), and top heavy when weapons etc are added.

I’ve put Jeep between brackets because yes, it wound hard to fit a 4+1. 3+1 would « work » for that platform but not more.

The thing is I don’t think that the 100% military spec vehicle is always necessary for everything on wheels.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Reaction score
12,638
Points
1,260
I’ve put Jeep between brackets because yes, it wound hard to fit a 4+1. 3+1 would « work » for that platform but not more.

The thing is I don’t think that the 100% military spec vehicle is always necessary for everything on wheels.
Not everything -I laid out where I think COTS systems fit.
Duty Van's
Staff Cars
RSS/LO Domestic Rovers that see very limited off road usage.

The issue is with dedicated Comms, Weapons/Mounts, Electrical, Lighting, tires, and often fuel requirements, you get so far away for a typical COTS vehicle that you end up with a purpose built system anyway.

The last decent 4x4 the conventional got was the 5/4t Chevy, in the 70's.
*I leave out the CUCV 5/4 was from a USMC contract overage (due to USMC Hummer acquisitions) in the 80's that was acquired only in limited numbers for the Militia.
**I also leave out the various CJ Jeeps the CAF bought as they where mostly MP vehicles and never acquired in any numbers, but also impractical as a GP Mil vehicle.

Iltis - underpowered, narrow and too little space for more than 2 folks for anything longer than a weekend. Set the bar for rollovers that even the TAPV has trouble catching...
LSVW - the vehicle that failed every trial it went into, screeching brakes, and a fuel heater that liked to spontaneously combust, also to narrow a wheelbase - and due to height was tippy.
GWagon - narrow and tippy due to height, the turbo charger often clogged (at least in Afghan) and left it a limping dog.

Honestly in the space the CAF got 3 vehicle the US DOD had the Hummer, wonder what of those 4 was the best value for the $...
Yes the Hummer is fairly large, and wide - but you really can't tip it, and it's a 2.4t rated vehicle (don't load it like that off-road, but its fine for on road usage at that load).
 

WLSC

Full Member
Reaction score
349
Points
810
Not everything -I laid out where I think COTS systems fit.
Duty Van's
Staff Cars
RSS/LO Domestic Rovers that see very limited off road usage.

The issue is with dedicated Comms, Weapons/Mounts, Electrical, Lighting, tires, and often fuel requirements, you get so far away for a typical COTS vehicle that you end up with a purpose built system anyway.

The last decent 4x4 the conventional got was the 5/4t Chevy, in the 70's.
*I leave out the CUCV 5/4 was from a USMC contract overage (due to USMC Hummer acquisitions) in the 80's that was acquired only in limited numbers for the Militia.
**I also leave out the various CJ Jeeps the CAF bought as they where mostly MP vehicles and never acquired in any numbers, but also impractical as a GP Mil vehicle.

Iltis - underpowered, narrow and too little space for more than 2 folks for anything longer than a weekend. Set the bar for rollovers that even the TAPV has trouble catching...
LSVW - the vehicle that failed every trial it went into, screeching brakes, and a fuel heater that liked to spontaneously combust, also to narrow a wheelbase - and due to height was tippy.
GWagon - narrow and tippy due to height, the turbo charger often clogged (at least in Afghan) and left it a limping dog.

Honestly in the space the CAF got 3 vehicle the US DOD had the Hummer, wonder what of those 4 was the best value for the $...
Yes the Hummer is fairly large, and wide - but you really can't tip it, and it's a 2.4t rated vehicle (don't load it like that off-road, but its fine for on road usage at that load).

The idea of a COTS, really modified for military used has been canadianized (read done on the extra cheap x 10). I will put this as an exemple (I’m sure you know about that) not for the platform but with what can be done : Jeep J8 - Wikipedia

AA889089-6A55-4B99-9646-FC8B0D511EAD.png
 

WLSC

Full Member
Reaction score
349
Points
810
Not everything -I laid out where I think COTS systems fit.
Duty Van's
Staff Cars
RSS/LO Domestic Rovers that see very limited off road usage.

The issue is with dedicated Comms, Weapons/Mounts, Electrical, Lighting, tires, and often fuel requirements, you get so far away for a typical COTS vehicle that you end up with a purpose built system anyway.

The last decent 4x4 the conventional got was the 5/4t Chevy, in the 70's.
*I leave out the CUCV 5/4 was from a USMC contract overage (due to USMC Hummer acquisitions) in the 80's that was acquired only in limited numbers for the Militia.
**I also leave out the various CJ Jeeps the CAF bought as they where mostly MP vehicles and never acquired in any numbers, but also impractical as a GP Mil vehicle.

Iltis - underpowered, narrow and too little space for more than 2 folks for anything longer than a weekend. Set the bar for rollovers that even the TAPV has trouble catching...
LSVW - the vehicle that failed every trial it went into, screeching brakes, and a fuel heater that liked to spontaneously combust, also to narrow a wheelbase - and due to height was tippy.
GWagon - narrow and tippy due to height, the turbo charger often clogged (at least in Afghan) and left it a limping dog.

Honestly in the space the CAF got 3 vehicle the US DOD had the Hummer, wonder what of those 4 was the best value for the $...
Yes the Hummer is fairly large, and wide - but you really can't tip it, and it's a 2.4t rated vehicle (don't load it like that off-road, but its fine for on road usage at that load).

I know the Hummer fairly well. Bur what can I said, I like nimbleness. It’s a quality by it’s own 😜
 
Top