> The Italian truck that you are interested in is a Canadian made ( Western
Star in B.C.)
> Iveco Fiat 40-10WM . My friends in the forces tell me that they are not
very well liked
> and have had numerous problems with them
They do have a number of problems, not least of which is the metallic break
pads which make any sort of tactical night move a bit tricky if not
downright impossible. One good application of the brakes and anyone on LP
will know the Canucks are on the move.
One of the issues I heard about was cracked and cracking frames, and when I
was on exercise Cougar Salvo at Ft. Lewis WA with the reserves, NDHQ
actually 'invited' a number of representatives from Western Star to observe
their trucks in action (nice way of saying - "there...see what we mean!")
Our goverment is partially to blame for the frame cracks, as the vehicles
were evidently initially designed to have X-number of configurations
utilizing various specially designed rear bodies, pods and what-have-you to
maximize interchangeability of parts. Well, the Canadian government decided
that the communications/CRTTZ pods then currently fitted to the 1976 Chevy
"Five-Quad" and the odd CUCV were ideally suited for reworking and
reinstallation on the new LSVW cab-and-chassis, and a great many Quebecois
were put to work refurbishing and re-skinning pods which in some cases dated
back to the 70's. Bottom line was that the old pods apparently considerably
heavier than the units purpose-designed by Iveco, and thus the suspension
and frame-crack problems reported to the manufacturer.
There's another story making the rounds that I've not been able to verify.
Basically, Western Star acquired the North American rights to the
manufacture of the Iveco design, but saw a number of deficiencies with the
design's suitability for North American deployment, and set about to correct
the most egregious of them. The resulting prototype was delivered to NDHQ
for evaluation and given a passing grade, thence to enter production as the
LSVW intended to replace the Five-Quad and CUCV vehicles currently in stock.
Enter Iveco, who then remind Western Star that their agreement is to
manufacture the Iveco design as blueprinted and not some upgraded/uprated
hybrid, leaving Western Star to manufacture the truck according to the Iveco
design, and NOT the example tested and okayed by the Defence establishment.
There were some lawsuits that went back and forth between Western Star and
the Feds concerning contracts unfulfilled and what-have-you, but I don't
know what became of them. I do believe that the LS is now out of
production, and that Western Star, already at the prototype stage for the
Iltis replacement project, is now no longer in contention.
The vehicle itself which I drove on exercise for the better part of two
weeks was a lineman's variant of the basic LS, and I found it's
off-roadability to be quite good. The turning radius is very nice in
comparison to something like the Humvee, and with the difflock engaged it
motors through muck quite ably. Aside from the horrific noise of the brakes
(causing many an American soldier on post to laugh when we passed them by on
the way to the Soldier's House or PX), the vehicle isn't too shabby. The
spare-tire carrier is a bit of a problem, as it is quite like the old CMP
pattern style between the cab and box, and when you lower it to release the
tire, woebetide anyone who doesn't let the thing up gently. It tends to
snap back up without the load of the tire, and if any body part is in the
way...well..ouch.
If you want to have a look at one, they look almost identical to the ones
the RAF seems to be surplusing with some regularity. I've seen a couple on
various websites over the last couple of years - and in Army Motors.
Andy Hill
MVPA 9211
Vancouver, B.C.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 23:13:21 PST