The Jeep J8 at AUSA
Keeping with the spirit of next generation vehicles, for those of you that know, Jeep and AM General are in a cage match over the next generation military vehicle. While this is big Army, Jack had a good SOCOM post back in July you can check out about Jeep vs. Flyer. I’m personally not a fan of the Hummer. Big, clunky, expensive to repair and sticks out like a turd in a punch bowl in any Area of Operation. I hated driving the Hummer when I was in Afghanistan and much preferred the Toyota Hilux four-door. I got to check out Jeep’s J8 up close and it’s pretty bad ass. It’s also rumored that while the J8 has been making the circuit, the real Jeep contender and full specs are not going to be revealed until the very last minute.
I like that it has a diesel engine that gets about 30mpg, and from a tax payer perspective you save a massive amount due to the availability of an existing commercial parts inventory. -Brandon out
Weapons Support and Vehicle Storage
LPV can mount a variety of weapon support systems configured as follows:
• Mounting plate on A-Pillar to accommodate swing arm and LMG
• Mounting plate on rear tubular frame to accommodate geared traversing ring for LMG, HMG and 40 mm AGL
• Universal ammunition storage: close to front weapon position and traversing ring operator
• Storage racks fitted internally on the sides of the vehicle, aft
• 6 lashing rings for equipment tie-down
Vehicle Structure
A tubular frame is secured onto the 3-door vehicle chassis with flexible mounting bushes at key points to enable the vehicle chassis and frame to flex when operating over rough terrain. This tubular structure is the mounting point for many items:
• Heavy-duty front bumper with mounting points for winch, driving lamps, IR lamps, tie downs etc.
• Front wing, A-pillar, bulkhead, sill and driver protection bars fitted with:
- Rear crew area support for traversing ring
- Heavy-duty rear bumper with tie-down points and tow hitch
• A factory-fitted Payload Enhancement Kit increases GVW to 3,864 kg (8,518 lb)
LPV features 2 mesh seats and gunner’s sling, with height adjustment for driver and commander. Windshield can be removed to improve visibility. Soft top provided for transport and storage.
Engine
VM 2.8 L (2,766 cc) 4 cyl, direct injection, common rail, turbo-charged, intercooled diesel engine
Jeep J8
Jeep J8
{ 36 comments… read them below or add one }
Interesting design, would love to see the performance and efficiency of the engine.
This is the same engine they used in the 2005-2006 Jeep Liberty
2.8 L VM Motori CRD VGT I4
•Displacement:171 CID (2,766 cc)
•Stroke: 3.94 in (100 mm)
•Bore: 3.70 in (94 mm)
•Power: 160 hp (120 kW)
•Torque: 295 ft·lbf (400 N·m)
As for the efficiency I get 28mpg (CURB WEIGHT 5650 lbs)
I'm told the Hilux was a pretty popular truck with SF, kind of sad that the Tacoma stateside apparently only shares cosmetic bits with the Hilux, the actual chassis is apparently very different. Still cool looking trucks.
Also, are they planning to do two different versions, based on the 4-door and 2-door models? Because you have a photo at the top of the 4-door model, and the last two photos are the 2-door. Kind of reminds me of the brit Lannies.
Whatever happened to that requirement of a combat vehicle that could fit in the belly of an Osprey?
The Osprey thing got kanked, now it just needs to be compatible with CH/MH-47 helicopters.
How different is it to the J8 already in production in Egypt? That particular one didn’t pass US Emission regulations or something which is why it never came here, so apart from the engine, what is different?(You can see the current J8 at http://www.jgms.com/)
Also, this would in all likelihood cost nowhere near the $120,000 ish for a basic spec humvee, and if prices for commercial jeep wranglers are anything to go by, I’d wager it would cost something around $60,000. Pretty damn good deal.
And Brandon, while you complain about the humvee being a clunky turd, it would appear to have more space than this J8, and what are your thoughts on that?
The Jeep at AUSA looks like it is the BPV as it has 4 doors and a front window as opposed to the 2 doors and windowless design of the LPV.
Hi Bob-
It appears that way but the J8 is just as roomy in my opinion (4 door model). Better mpg and much cheaper as you pointed out. Brandon
Ah yes..
I should stop making the stupid mistake of comparing the 4 and 2 door models … :P
*smacks head*
Looks an awful lot like the LRDP vehicles of the North African Campaign in the '40's and the WMIK's of today. But probably has air conditioning and sprung suspension!
yeah leaf springs suck. . .
Yeah.. I'd trust something built by Chrysler to take into combat zones.. sorry, but no thanks. Jeeps, sadly, have lost any bit of reliability they've had in the last decade and half.
I know in theory the .mil vehicles would be better but no way I could trust that company.
This J8 reminds me of the British Land Rovers out there. My wife's 2010 Chrysler Town and Chrysler had problems with 800 miles on it when we first got it. It took the dealership 4 times to fix it over 2 month period.
Yeah. Remember the "gamma goat" in the 70's? What crap that was. I think the govt. helped bail out Chrysler back then by giving them that contract.
Had a Cirrus I called the Cirrus Lexus it cost me so much to keep working. Then again my '95 jeep has 190,000 miles on it.
BTW, Chrysler developed the M1 Abrams and you might want to look at Chrysler's proto for the HMMWV contract (google "Expanded Mobility Vehicle"). It'll look familiar.
Yeah, Abrams very impressive and they competed for the HMMWV contract but all that was along time ago. I really have a hard time believing any of that institutional knowledge and skill still exists in Jeep/Chrysler after a decade and a half of acquisitions, divestitures, and bail-outs.
Yes and don't forget the outsourcing and the constant pressure of using the cheapest parts.
Surely any new veh would require a V-shaped hull?
This is a good jeep that is probably not going to be built by Chrysler, rather it is based on the Israel Storm 3 jeep (which in turn has it's base in the J8).
Another good contender would be the Zibar:
http://www.jeepolog.com/UserFiles/english_pages/z…
Looks like a huge step backwards to me. Doesn't appear to have any type of blast and/or projectile protection for the crew. Who else remembers deploying with HUMVEEs with the cloth doors?
I did, and I almost cried inside my heart – Full can Humvees is a metal coffin – Half can half cloth Humvees? You do the math. Good thing we didn't get any engagement that day, else I may not be here to comment this article
That's the real question, isn't it? Does the Army have a valid requirement for a thin-skinned combat vehicle these days? Would the public tolerate more soldiers coming home dead from IED blasts in a $60K jeep when they might have survived in a $250K MRAP? I realize you can't take the MRAPs where the jeeps/humvees go, and I realize that cost does matter. But I wonder if the standard of protection has shifted permanently as far as the American public goes?
This isn't meant to replace "big Army" vehicles; it's for SOCOM units with different operational needs. The other contenders in this category are essentially tube-frame dune buggies.
either hilux's or landrovers i think are better four wheeldrives, ike the wmik's the oms sporrt around in
…I want one.
As far as cost goes, your average solider has an 400k life insurance, so lets say 4 people per HUMVEE. So that is like $1,600,000 just in life insurance, that doesn't include the training per solider, the equipment, weapons, cost to bring the solider over there, and many other factors. It is just cheaper to keep your soldiers alive and as a bonus they get to go home to their families. So instead of a vehicle that looks like something you can go over to the nearest jeep dealership and buy, why not design a vehicle that meets the needs. So it might be cheaper in the long run to just do the right thing and no go for the cheapest bidder, but that will never happen. Rant complete
Absolutely agree with you. The problem is most that feel this way stay quiet when it comes time to support a budget many describe as bloated but then rise out of the darkness when the crap hits the fan.
We went through this with body armor in the '03 time frame. Support troops and the public were screaminmg about why we were deploying support troops without body armor but were SILENT when the funding for it under the previous administration got cut to only supply combat arms troops.
I remember that….the media had a news report on families were buying body armor on internet (like Ebay) for troops deloyed.
As for protection; Do we need a 500,000 USD vehicle to pick up 3 people at the airport and take them to the tent over? Should we be using a MRAP to move 2 soldiers 10 miles not in a direct combat area? Perhaps we should use the 100K Up armored HMMWV? Do we need a light weight vehicle easily maintained that can move a team up a goat trail instead of walking? It has the same level of protection as a gunt on foot, has the speed and size to go farther, and can haul a crew serve spot on. I think that is a **** yea. We do have a significant purpose and need for a light weight unarmored vehicle. How many mine blast have we experianced on the highway driving to a field exe? As for the foriegn contenders, they have just as many problems when you dump a 18yr old kid under the hood and hand him 2 monkey wrenches to repair a electronic fuel injection systems. That is where the maintainability comes in. Seeing the coalition forces have just as many problems with Range Rovers, Land Rovers, Mercedes etc. They are not built better, we just don’t know crap about it. Each vehicle has its purpose and its a no brainer that you don’t take tin foil to a gun fight and you don’t take the kitchen sink to stop a sunburn.
This is a good idea going back to jeeps is what we should have done long ago the Hummer was too BIG and bulky and gas eating. I prefer a smaller lighter 4×4 jeep to recon with anyway.
I want one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Apparently.
me 2, I WANT ONE i alrady haved 2 jeep wranglers ,oprated one mil-jeep in 1978 in U.S.M.C., NOW I WANT ONE ,WANA DHEM.
WANT IT
… Just, want it.
I like it. I spent most of my career in SF and all but one year of that on different A-Teams. We pretty much universally hated the damned Hummers; too wide, too slow, too heavy, etc. You could actually fit 2 of them in an MH-47, but you had to leave the ramp open, fold the mirrors in all of the way, and exit from the top of the thing through the gun ring. We had constant overheating problems with them in the desert and despite trying very hard to “accidentally” not get supplied with them and use Toyotas that we bought off of the economy wherever we were they always found us and managed to get the damned Hummers to us. Funny thing though, they never seemed to be able to consistently get anything else to us in the US supply train.
I’d love to see this thing thoroughly tested by REAL SF operators and let them make the decision instead of a bunch of pin heads up in procurement somewhere.
There might be a better solution for SOCOM. Its called the Pinzgauer. Check one out. 4 or 6 wheel drive, nimble, small tire patch/ pressure that can help if mines are set for heavier weight vehicles. Lots of countries use them. Proven track record.