military trucks

[chevyCowboy]

so a buddy of mine works at the omaha auto auction and he told me to day that they have 4 old military trucks that are all diesels they are 80s trucks so prolly going to be 6.2s i havent been able to look at them but there are 4 two blazers and two pickups. i have been looking for a 6.2 to use as in my truck if these dont have alot of miles which from what i hear the military trucks dont usually would they be worth the money just for the block. my buddy figures they wont go for over 500 and prolly less

 

[MRB 6.5TD]

Around here they seem to go for a grand... If you can snag one up for 500 or so, absolutely do it.

I've seen complete intake/turbo manifold exhaust on the bay for a few hundred, and when you buy an ATT throw the GM-X on the military unit

 

[big block 88]

If you just want the motor's I will take the K5. Generally these trucks are in pretty good shape. The AirForce ones tend to be the nicest. We have bought duece and a halfs up there in the past. The k5
s and pickups will either go for penny's or for a ton of money. I have seen them sell anywhere from 250 bucks to 5000 bucks depends on the day.

 

[Unit453]

The K5's are 3/4 ton and the pick ups are 1 & 1/4 ton. The pick ups are about as stout as you can get. Drop it off a cliff and drive away.

 

[Acesneights1]

They are called cucv. I am contemplating buying one for a beater for firewood.

 

[big block 88]

They do NOT come much stonger or tougher than the old CUCV's 6.2 TH400 14 bolt Dana 60 (I think) 4.56 gears, they are just awsome work trucks.

 

[Detroit Dan]

either one would make a beast of a plow truck. I've thought about a military Blazer for a second plow rig. the Blazers were 3:73 with a gov lock rear, beefy springs would carry a Vee, and imagine the maneuverability.

 

[davo727]

I have a 86 Military CUCV truck, mine is the M1028 which is more heavy duty than the reg M1008 truck.

The 1008 is a 1 1/4 ton, 6.2, turbo 400, np208 transfer case. 14 bolt full floater rear, 4.56 gears and detroit locker. Dana 60 front. I think the gvw is 8800 or 8900 lb.

My 1028 comes with a limited slip in the front dana 60 and overload springs in the rear and the gvw is 9400lbs.

The M1009 Blazer cucv has the same motor, trans and transfer case but only has 10 bolt axles with 3.08 gears.

 

[DEERE3594]

My buddy has a cucv that is mint with 40k on it, That thing stock will go alot of places off road and hauls tail pretty good too, if you want it just for the motor it would also be worth it. They do use a 24volt system though..

 

[Acesneights1]

Where can you buy these direct ?

 

[packratt]

Try http://www.colemans.com/milveh.htm

 

[Detroit Dan]

The M1009 Blazer cucv has the same motor, trans and transfer case but only has 10 bolt axles with 3.08 gears.

Are you sure? I've been under the impression for many years they were 3:73. Not sure where I got that from, but I drove them in the service and my PD had one for years, so I've been around them a lot. I know almost all the civilian ones were 3:08. They are pretty responsive down low, with a th400 which makes it seem like they must be 3:73s.

 

[Unit453]

I drove them quite a bit as well and as most recent as 2001. I thought they had some decent get up to'em.

Dan, what branch were you in?

 

[Acesneights1]

Where can you buy them direct from Millitary. That guy wants top dollar.

 

[MRB 6.5TD]

either one would make a beast of a plow truck. I've thought about a military Blazer for a second plow rig. the Blazers were 3:73 with a gov lock rear, beefy springs would carry a Vee, and imagine the maneuverability.

You're absolutely right here bud. 3/4 ton, nice 8' plow, what a nice plow-rig is right... super maneaverable compared to pickups. Great Idea... got my wheels spinning.

 

[davo727]

http://www.govliquidation.com/vehicles.html

http://www.steelsoldiers.com/showwiki.php?title=wiki:Cucv

From wiki:

The GM CUCV's were produced in the 1984-86 time period (mostly 1984) and were powered by 6.2L Detroit Diesel V8 engine. The GM CUCVs were assembled mostly from the heaviest duty bits and pieces from the light commercial truck lines. The CUCVs came in three basic body styles, a pickup, a utility and an ambulance body. A chassis cab fitted with a service body could be called a fourth. They were given “M” numbers and the trucks were all rated as 1-1/4 ton (commonly called a “five-quarter”), even though some of them had payloads in excess of that. The M1008 was the basic 5/4 cargo truck, the M1010 was the ambulance and the M1009 3/4 ton utility rig, which was a stripped Blazer uprated to 3/4-ton capacity. In the truck lines there were some heavy duty variants, to include the M1028, M1028A1, M1028A2 and M1028A3 shelter carriers, the shelter being a mobile command or communications enclosure. The M1031 was the chassis cab which was most commonly found in the two door version. These latter trucks were all rated for heavier 3,600 or 3,900 pound loads, vs. the M1008s 2,900 pound load capacity. The M1028A2 and A3 models had dual rear wheel Dana 70 axles and are uncommon.

All the CUCVs were powered by GM’s 6.2L J-series Detroit Diesel V8 engine non-emissions diesel. These were rated at 135 hp (101 kW) and 240 lb·ft (325 N·m), which was 5 hp (3.7 kW) more than the emissions gasoline engine of the time. They were all equipped with the TH-400 automatic. All but the M1028A1 and M1031 used the NP-208 chain drive transfer case. The M1028A1 and M1031 units had a slip-yoke rear output version of the NP-205, which was specified mainly for its PTO capacity.

The M1009 Blazer used a standard 10-bolt front axle, but had a 10-bolt in back with an Eaton Locker (“Gov-Lok”) and 3.08:1 gears. The trucks all used open Dana 60 front axles, with the M1028 and M1031 series rigs having a Trac-Lok limited slip. In the rear, the M1008s used the beefy GM 10.5-inch (270 mm) “14-bolt” rear axle with No-Spin lockers (the commercial trade name for the Detroit Locker). Axle ratios were 4.56:1, though the duallies are reputed to have had 4.88:1.

As with other military vehicles, the CUCVs used a 24-volt electrical system. It was actually a hybrid 12/24-volt system that used 24-volts under the hood, complete with dual 100 amp alternators, the mandatory NATO slave receptacle for jump starting any NATO vehicle, and hookups for military radios. The rest of the truck was 12-volt.

GM produced some 70,000 from 1983 to 1986 most for the military. For the past several years, GM Defense has been working over the newest GM trucks as CUCV-II and CUCV-III units for a new generation. The older Dodge M880s were used on the battlefield in some of the brush wars of the early 1980s and the results were reported to be “disastrous.” Likewise, the GM CUCVs saw combat time in Desert Storm and as one unit commander said, the results were “less than desirable.” As a result most CUCV's were replaced by the same HMMWV's they were to augment.

The GM CUCV may not have made the grade as a battlefield vehicle, but it served well in its original role as a dollar-saving bridge between out-and-out tactical vehicles and dedicated civilian vehicles. Like the rear echelon human troops, they provided support for the major goals of the military, namely to project a mighty frontline tactical fist wherever needed. There are still many CUCVs wearing green but there are also many that have passed through the surplus gates into civilian life

 

[davo727]

The starter is 24 volt and the glowplug relay gets its 12 volt power from a resister bank which drops 24 volt down to 12 at the relay.

So the NATO jump start plug on the front grill, the starter and glow plug power supply are 24 volts. Everything else is 12 volt.

The left alternator is 12 volts and charges the front battery. The rt alternator is an isolated ground style and instead of the rectifier being grounded to the case it is isolated and it receives 12-14 volts from the left alternator and then it adds another 12 volts( 14 actually) and outputs 26-28 volts to charge the rear battery.

 

[big block 88]

Excellent info man thanks.

 

[Detroit Dan]

Davo, I'm going to bow down here to your apparently superior knowledge after that book you just wrote on the subject. Don't know where I got the 3:73 thing from, but I'm not going to argue with your wealth of knowledge. I can't believe they were as snappy as they were with 3:08s and very little HP and torque.
I don't get where they come up with the 3/4 ton image, they had 6 lug wheels. Beefed up springs and presumably cooling would be the biggest differences, but it was all still riding on puny axles with puny bearings. Not that it was a problem, I used to torture them and the only things I was ever able to break was lockers and rear u-joints.

 

[Detroit Dan]

Nick, I was USMC-MP stateside back in the 80s. This was just prior to HMMWVs, we had a lot of Dog-dge 6 cyl and 318 880s, and tons of new Blazers and 5/4 Chevys. So obviously the Chevys seemed fast, tough and bada55 compared to anything else available to us at the time. I actually remember seeing my very first Marine Corps HumVee just before I got out, didn't even know what it was at first, thought it was some crazy looking NATO foriegn vehicle.
When my PD was getting rid of our Mil Blazer I wanted to bid on it, but I missed the auction because no one told me it was happening. Truck was real nice except for starting issues and some rust starting underneath. Had nice paint and 31" mud tires. Somebody bought it and parted it out just for the doors, tires and front fenders.
With the help on this site I could have got it running good and made a mean snow-fighter out of it.