[Sudarshan]

Hi all , I am an old school guy ( solid axle ), but this debate has made me curios & I Decided to dig some more about IFS .

There is another reason , Why a person like DB sir chose the IFS way ? he could have chosen the conventional all leaf solid design which would have saved costs ( for him & us )

Anyways I have found something Interesting ( though its not a Jeep thing )

This is the MA3(Z ?) 537 series vehicle ( USSR ) & this was in late 60s

22 tons of empty vehicle which tows 75 tons( trailer) in all & its 8X8 .This is a military purpose vehicle

this 'thing' has IFS/IS ,( torsion bar )

I think this all depends on design .

Have a look

The front suspension


@ Jeepster, Forget the Humvee/hummer this is huge ,follw me


Sudarshan

[headers]

Sir Nothing wrong with IFS, IRS, if a IFS IRS Offroad vehicle could get a free WA, Suspension check done after every OTR.

Infact, if M&M are affirmative to the above, my THAR is on the way


The point is the ease of damage during the offroad especially with new comers who learn the ropes. No offense to anyone here! just my POV

[Jaggu]

I don't think its fare to compare a 22 ton vehicle IFS with a 1.7 ton one. The dynamics will totally change just because of the 20 tons right?

Moreover the way 22 toner is built vs the 2 toner, components will be like twigs in comparison.

[Sutripta]

Originally Posted by Sudarshan

This is the MA3(Z ?) 537 series vehicle ( USSR ) & this was in late 60s
....

Sudarshan

Thats a tank transporter, isn't it?

Incidentally, what type of suspension do tanks and bulldozers have?

Regards
Sutripta

[Sudarshan]

Originally Posted by Jaggu

I don't think its fare to compare a 22 ton vehicle IFS with a 1.7 ton one. The dynamics will totally change just because of the 20 tons right?

yes its no comparison ,its a 8x8. but see they have introduced it 50 years back , haven't they cared for GC , handling ? & that too for a multi role military vehicle .

The comparison is only for the thought/principle.

Moreover the way 22 toner is built vs the 2 toner, components will be like twigs in comparison.

My point is if something can be designed & made for 22 tons then why not for 2 tons ?

its been done with hummer/humvee, Land Rovers, even with Tata safari & gurkha ( being exported ) . not a big deal .

Components will be smaller but suitable for the light weight & stress .

what if I try to make a 3ton working replica of this

@ Headers , you are worried about maintenance costs , yes its costly(breakages/wear tare) & not simple to wheel alignment point of view .

& why you call it wont be easy to cope for new comers , every body will need to learn how to live ( & die ) with it ,( including me ) .

But to be honest I felt it easier to handle even on off roads .

Sudarshan

P.S. @ Sutripta , I just saw your post , yes its the tank transporter ( the fifth wheel version ) & about the tanks , I dont have correct Idea .( sort of springs on each roller wheel & rocker between two roller wheels ? )

[headers]

Originally Posted by headers

Sir Nothing wrong with IFS, IRS, if a IFS IRS Offroad vehicle could get a free WA, Suspension check done after every OTR.

Infact, if M&M are affirmative to the above, my THAR is on the way

Originally Posted by Sudarshan

@ Headers , you are worried about maintenance costs , yes its costly(breakages/wear tare) & not simple to wheel alignment point of view .

Sir, IF I buy a vehicle, especially an Offroad vehicle, Should I not be worried about the maintenance costs.

[Sudarshan]

Originally Posted by headers

Sir, IF I buy a vehicle, especially an Offroad vehicle, Should I not be worried about the maintenance costs.

Yes ,I agree to you , 100%.

finally we are not richi rich , every rupee counts .There is no second opinion on that .

But this is future. I remember when the M 800 was first introduced everybody had doubts about its durability/reliability , but it passed the fiats & ambys & now such technology (FWD) is main stream .

I wanted to share the 8x8 only for academic purpose .

Sudarshan

[offroad_maniac]

Originally Posted by Sudarshan

yes its no comparison ,its a 8x8. but see they have introduced it 50 years back , haven't they cared for GC , handling ? & that too for a multi role military vehicle .

Here is another jeep, M151 (The MUTT) which was also military designed vehicle running monocoque chassis & full independent suspensions. the prdecessor of the mighty HUMVEE.



More info here.

Added just like that

[Jaggu]

^^^ This one was a failure due to topples right?

[ex670c]

Originally Posted by Sudarshan

that too for a multi role military vehicle .

My point is if something can be designed & made for 22 tons then why not for 2 tons ?

Hi Sudarshan JEE,

How many roles did the MAZ537 fulfill?

I think it was primarily to move tanks faster on the road, not off-road.

If it was so successful, then it would have been carried over to many more vehicles.

The Tatra Spinal Column Chassis, has not been copied into many vehicles(Styer Pinzgauer/Halflinger)?

What are the physical dimension of a 22Ton PMT and a 2Ton Light 4x4 250Kgs Reconnaissance Car?

YouTube - offroad maz 537

YouTube - MAZ 537

Regards,

Arka

PS - Most Modern Tanks use Hydro-Pneumatic/Oleo-Pneumatic and the Russians use Torsion Bar Independent Suspension for the Swing Arms

[Sudarshan]

Originally Posted by ex670c

I think it was primarily to move tanks faster on the road, not off-road.

Max road speed 60 km/hr

Max safely allowed road speed 55 km/hr

average speed 25/30 km/hr

Primary Automobile variants were also for cross country use

yes its a tank transporter ( with mods )

This will be interesting ,have a look

TAK-4T Independent Suspension System-Improved off-road capability. Increased payload, unmatched combat performance.

Sudarshan

[Sutripta]

Originally Posted by ex670c

PS - Most Modern Tanks use Hydro-Pneumatic/Oleo-Pneumatic and the Russians use Torsion Bar Independent Suspension for the Swing Arms

Was trying to figure out how the wheels interacted: independent or coupled? And if they are coupled along each side but not across, would it qualify as independent?

Regards
Sutripta

[ex670c]

Originally Posted by Sutripta

Was trying to figure out how the wheels interacted: independent or coupled? And if they are coupled along each side but not across, would it qualify as independent?

Regards
Sutripta

Hi Sutripta,

If they are coupled on One Side then it will be a Bogey Suspension.

The fore-runner to modern Tank Suspension :-

Christie suspension - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

YouTube - Christie suspension

YouTube - Soviet BT-1 prototype tank

YouTube - Tank Suspension Revealed

Regards,

Arka

[jeepster]

did any one noticed the Humvee (HMMWV) with TAK-4 suspension.

• Ground clearance increased to 17 in. (432 mm) to improve mobility and help counter underbody blasts

• 2,500 lbs. (1134 kg) payload capacity restoration

• 46% improvement in braking

: Oshkosh Defense

Oshkosh Customizes the HMMWV for Rough Rides - Defense-Update

[Sudarshan]

Originally Posted by jeepster

did any one noticed the Humvee (HMMWV) with TAK-4 suspension.

Fantastic, I think I have posted its pic on FB ( the kit )

Somebody do this with Thar ( may be I will , so help me God )

Thanks Nikhil for sharing

Sudarshan