Clarifications, etc: 1. Do portals mean a taller vehicle? l2sfbc.com/does-a-portal-axle-system-mean-a-lift/ 2. Part 1 of the Unimog drive 3. You may like this Tatra 8x8 ruclips.net/video/4EwI5YOdP4g/видео.html 4. And this Gaz Sadko ruclips.net/video/4SN3PlALNXY/видео.html 5. Unimog story l2sfbc.com/unimog/
I drove a Unimog converted to High rail to run on railway tracks. It was a rail grinding operation, the Unimog was set up as a fire fighting rig to deal with the spot fires caused by grinding. The Unimog was chosen because of its reverse speed ability. I can attest that it does go slightly faster in reverse. Driving on the rail in reverse at 90klms per hour with your hands off the steering wheel (not used on rail) was just a tad unsettling at first. Yes it went faster in reverse!
My experience in a Mog is sitting on the bench seats in the back with 20 fellas, all smoking and telling dirty jokes until the driver stop and tells us to get out and we disappear into the bush on another job.
Great video and analysis. Spot on. Yes, they’re big and slow, but when Rangers, Jeeps, etc are operating at ~90% capacity and capability, Unimogs are at ~50%… hence increased longevity and lower stress on the vehicle when performing high stress tasks i.e dynamic off road maneuvering with a payload. Also, the Ranger, for example, is inherently engineered to be a high capability on road vehicle with limited off road capabilities, whereas the opposite is true for a Unimog. The Unimog is right for you if you want a vehicle specifically engineered and designed to be highly capable off road with limited on road capabilities.
Robert, if you have time have a good look at the DAF YA328 Dutch army truck: its suspension and drive-train are incredible. These trucks (6 tonne tare, 3 tonne payload) thus the big number 9 on the yellow plate, these are now no longer made, probably due to the cost and complexity - but what a beast. There is one on the Sunshine coast, having been repaired.
Interesting video highlighting some of the features that would have enticed the Australian Army to purchase Unimogs. Way back in the 70's I had the TINY equivalent developed for the Austrian Army by the Styer Puch company - a Haflinger. I used it as a stockmans vehicle on the farm (sheep) - Incredible vehicle, the pair I had when sold had averaged 9mph from their lifetime use
They were also popular (Haflinger) on the banana plantations in Coffs Harbour in NSW. The ability to climb steep muddy slopes on the plantations was impressive!!
I had forgotten the hand throttle had to be at the idle detent, plus IIRC, they had an exhaust brake with the button on the floor which was operated by your left heel. To shut it down it was press button and key off at the same time
I get the feeling that you heard the leaf spring myth many, many times, the way you adressed it...😁 As for the Unimog: i have seen a few here in europe where people put a small metal shelter on the back, (the sort that gets used for remote radio stations and stuff. So small enough to fit on the back of a Unimog, and also with a door and sometimes even window, and weatherproof.) then anchored it in different ways and use it for overlanding/offroad camping.
Thing with the MOG is: You absolutely can get it with a low-range and even a working group. The gear ratios get quite hideous then, but it is excellent for work and some really spice offroad endeavors.
Cracks me up when people say must have leaf springs to carry heavy loads. Obviously they have no experience with progressively rated coils, or even airbags as used in so many trucks and buses.
The Tyres used by the Army are a compromise - Highway/X Country. Tyre pressure mangement is vital to get the best out of the Highway/X Country tyre - If you want real X country capability - use the tractor tyre!! Remember these trucks are built by MB TRac - Mercedes Tractor arm... The Mog is actually a tractor....
Hey, maybe in part 3 you could show how the twin reduction gears (some have a second reduction) work on the Unimog . And if they are actually useful off road on slippery conditions, or are they just for towing?
In the first traction demo on the wet grass I don't think the old tires were the key factor. Certainly it was A factor, but I suspect had you started out fully locked it would have made it up as opposed to first spinning/digging ruts then slowly upping the traction devices from 2wd to 4wd to 4wd locked. Of course I wasn't there and it's hard to tell details in video, and a heavy truck on soft surface is always a difficult thing. My thinking here is that a newer tire may have a softer/grippier compound and be more flexible, but on this surface I don't believe that would offer much advantage. On rock or other hard-packed surfaces I think the old tires would very much come into play.
Yes, not an exact comparison. However, the compound of a tyre has a huge effect on adhesive (molecular) grip, and micro-mechanical grip, and old tyres lose that ability. On large rocks it's macro-mechanical and older tyres are less disadvantaged.
Old mate trained army personnel in mogs and landrovers. And was a mechanic. He had a offroad workshop comp rigs you name it... asked him about mogs. Reply was how many people ex military have mogs?. Bugger all for a reason. All these blokes need to go anywhere is a 303 a swag a billy and a hilux ute.
I believe that you were incorrect with your demonstration of the clearances underneath and the vehicle height. This is because the portal axles ‘lift’ the entire vehicle, including the axles by the height of those portal axles. If the axles are ‘lifted (raised) 100 mm, then the ENTIRE vehicle has been raised by that same 100mm. That includes the roof height! The only way in which the roof height will not be raised if fitting portal axles, is if the roof height is modified (roof chop) to the exact same measurement as the portal axles.
You are assuming the suspension does not change. If you move the suspension mounts up in the chassis you regain that 100mm. The limiting factor is the clearance between the wheels and wheel arches. With bigger wheels the cab has to raise to maintain wheel arch clearance.
Leaving aside for the moment the illustration was obviously meant to make a point about ground clearance, not be an exact representation, a 'roof chop' is not the "only way" to retain the same overall vehicle height when adding portal axles. To use your example of the 100mm lift I can simply fit springs with 100mm less compressed height - easy to do since it results in the same arch to wheel clearance. No doubt this is the way the illustration solved the issue too (I didn't use a magnifying glass to check though, I must admit) - and as added bonuses the set of lower springs would be much cheaper than a 'roof chop' and makes for a lower roll centre too.
@@contributor7219: portal axles ‘lift’ the entire vehicle! The axles ARE ‘lifted’ at the ends of the axles by the fitting of the portal axles. The suspension does not require changing, THUS, the ENTIRE vehicle IS ‘raised’ by the height that the portal axles provide. So, EVERYTHING from the axle housings and differentials up, is raised equally by the height of the portal axles fitted. No need to change the suspension at all, but the vehicle HAS BEEN ‘lifted’! I am not ‘assuming’ anything, NO need to change the wheels or tyres, because the portals ‘raise’ the vehicle by ‘lifting’ the axles, in the same way that putting a jack under the axle and lifting the vehicle 100mm will create an extra 100mm of clearance beneath the axle, without changing the wheels or tyres. But, with portal axles, the vehicle is still mobile and drivable, whereas when on a jack, it is not able to be moved.
@@shredder4330 Ah, no. Like I said - lift the axles 100mm, fit 100mm shorter springs (or drop the spring seats 100mm as someone else pointed out) and the overall height of the vehicle remains exactly the same. Last time I checked 100 - 100 = 0. But hey, if that maths is a little complex for you, feel free to do you.
I'm afriad it's not true. This is an OM352, all made by Mercedes in Germany. There were some licenses to manufacture in South Africa and recently Tatra, but the ADF ones are German.
At the 3 minute mark is when you need something that the Unimog doesn't have and that is wheel speed, you need to spin those tyres fast to clear the tread. Lack of wheel speed makes Unimogs pretty poor performers in mud and sand.
Of course like any naturally masculine man, I want one, but for all the obvious impractical reasons I don't need one. The only time I really "needed" a Unimog was that day when the former love of my life expressed disappointment in me for not buying a "sensible" car. I bought a modified 1981 Hilux 4wd ute. It was awesome & is only more awesome now, I don't forsee that I will ever part with it, even though I have been building something even more outrageous. She said this in my ute on the way to pick up her gumtree bargain chook shed some 132kms away. So in response what I would of liked to have done the following weekend was show up in a Unimog with the Hilux in the back of it & taken her out for a pleasant evening @ the drive-ins :0)
@@L2SFBC :0) The key word there is "one", & ur use of "might" does not inspire confidence but I appreciate you positivity Robert :0) I don't doubt the math on them existing but they are rare & most guys are not good @ scoping out unicorns, I am certainly not. Back before the last great flood when I last dated I attracted all of the train wrecks.
The ride is only comfortable as the drivers seat is not OEM. All respect, the U1700 is a great military truck but uncomfortable to drive in summer, noisy, thirsty, OK if you had a green card to pay for the fuel. A 2 door Merc with sunroof as a company vehicle was great but not as a civilian vehicle.
Nope. A unimog definitely isn't the vehicle for me, and it won't be right for most people I would think. That's not say I wouldn't take a free one though either... Given the step from LandCruiser etc to Mog (or other truck platform), I reckon most people in that market are looking for a middle ground. Something with a lot more comfort than a mog, and with a bit more load and towing capacity than a LandCruiser. Its almost like there's a market segment finally getting filled by Dodge and Chevy.
Agreed, I would looooooove a Mog if I had a property as this owner does, but otherwise...doesn't fit into my lifestyle. I can't see many private owners having a need for it, more a want.
I disagree with the high fuel consumption (I don’t have accurate figures as my fuel gauge doesn’t work & I don’t know what size my fuel tank is). But nevertheless, on a drive from Canberra to Darwin with a daily fuel top up we’ve figured it’s around 21L/100km. When we stopped at the Wellshot Hotel in Ilfracombe, everyone was asking “what is it” & “how much fuel does it use” - when I replied with 21/100, everyone of the guys there responded with “wow, that’s less than my Ute takes”. For context, that’s country side and their utes are work vehicles carrying stuff.
Clarifications, etc:
1. Do portals mean a taller vehicle? l2sfbc.com/does-a-portal-axle-system-mean-a-lift/
2. Part 1 of the Unimog drive
3. You may like this Tatra 8x8 ruclips.net/video/4EwI5YOdP4g/видео.html
4. And this Gaz Sadko ruclips.net/video/4SN3PlALNXY/видео.html
5. Unimog story l2sfbc.com/unimog/
Regarding "is the Unimog right for you" - the answer is almost universally no. And yet we ALL want one anyway!
Exactly
Can't argue with that!
@@L2SFBC and once you bought one, you’ll spend a lot more time in the shed……
@@andrefischer5025 Well, I do own quite a few Land Rovers.....
I drove a Unimog converted to High rail to run on railway tracks. It was a rail grinding operation, the Unimog was set up as a fire fighting rig to deal with the spot fires caused by grinding.
The Unimog was chosen because of its reverse speed ability. I can attest that it does go slightly faster in reverse.
Driving on the rail in reverse at 90klms per hour with your hands off the steering wheel (not used on rail) was just a tad unsettling at first. Yes it went faster in reverse!
My experience in a Mog is sitting on the bench seats in the back with 20 fellas, all smoking and telling dirty jokes until the driver stop and tells us to get out and we disappear into the bush on another job.
Great video and analysis. Spot on. Yes, they’re big and slow, but when Rangers, Jeeps, etc are operating at ~90% capacity and capability, Unimogs are at ~50%… hence increased longevity and lower stress on the vehicle when performing high stress tasks i.e dynamic off road maneuvering with a payload. Also, the Ranger, for example, is inherently engineered to be a high capability on road vehicle with limited off road capabilities, whereas the opposite is true for a Unimog. The Unimog is right for you if you want a vehicle specifically engineered and designed to be highly capable off road with limited on road capabilities.
Good point!
Robert, if you have time have a good look at the DAF YA328 Dutch army truck: its suspension and drive-train are incredible. These trucks (6 tonne tare, 3 tonne payload) thus the big number 9 on the yellow plate, these are now no longer made, probably due to the cost and complexity - but what a beast. There is one on the Sunshine coast, having been repaired.
Interesting video highlighting some of the features that would have enticed the Australian Army to purchase Unimogs. Way back in the 70's I had the TINY equivalent developed for the Austrian Army by the Styer Puch company - a Haflinger. I used it as a stockmans vehicle on the farm (sheep) - Incredible vehicle, the pair I had when sold had averaged 9mph from their lifetime use
I've driven one, amazing vehicles!
They were also popular (Haflinger) on the banana plantations in Coffs Harbour in NSW. The ability to climb steep muddy slopes on the plantations was impressive!!
Would love to have a Unimog!
I had forgotten the hand throttle had to be at the idle detent, plus IIRC, they had an exhaust brake with the button on the floor which was operated by your left heel. To shut it down it was press button and key off at the same time
Turn key off and then use hand throttle to kill engine. Reset hand throttle to idle position for next start.
Thanks so much for offering to buy one for me and getting Unidan to wave their magic wand over it with an open cheque book. I will send photos.😁
Hope you enjoy it :-)
Great video. Always wanted one, still not sure if 'right' for me, but still want one nevertheless!
You and me both!
I get the feeling that you heard the leaf spring myth many, many times, the way you adressed it...😁
As for the Unimog: i have seen a few here in europe where people put a small metal shelter on the back, (the sort that gets used for remote radio stations and stuff. So small enough to fit on the back of a Unimog, and also with a door and sometimes even window, and weatherproof.)
then anchored it in different ways and use it for overlanding/offroad camping.
Yes it is often opined in Australia...
My uncle had a Unimog troop carrier we drove around in Alaska.
💪😎⭐🙏
Thank you for sharing this
Thing with the MOG is: You absolutely can get it with a low-range and even a working group. The gear ratios get quite hideous then, but it is excellent for work and some really spice offroad endeavors.
There are many Mogs. This one does not have low range, as such.
@@L2SFBC
That is correct, I merely wanted to make an addition to the presentation of yours.
Great video.
Glad you enjoyed it
Cracks me up when people say must have leaf springs to carry heavy loads. Obviously they have no experience with progressively rated coils, or even airbags as used in so many trucks and buses.
The Tyres used by the Army are a compromise - Highway/X Country. Tyre pressure mangement is vital to get the best out of the Highway/X Country tyre - If you want real X country capability - use the tractor tyre!!
Remember these trucks are built by MB TRac - Mercedes Tractor arm... The Mog is actually a tractor....
Hey, maybe in part 3 you could show how the twin reduction gears (some have a second reduction) work on the Unimog . And if they are actually useful off road on slippery conditions, or are they just for towing?
Sorry no Part 3
In the first traction demo on the wet grass I don't think the old tires were the key factor. Certainly it was A factor, but I suspect had you started out fully locked it would have made it up as opposed to first spinning/digging ruts then slowly upping the traction devices from 2wd to 4wd to 4wd locked. Of course I wasn't there and it's hard to tell details in video, and a heavy truck on soft surface is always a difficult thing. My thinking here is that a newer tire may have a softer/grippier compound and be more flexible, but on this surface I don't believe that would offer much advantage. On rock or other hard-packed surfaces I think the old tires would very much come into play.
Yes, not an exact comparison. However, the compound of a tyre has a huge effect on adhesive (molecular) grip, and micro-mechanical grip, and old tyres lose that ability. On large rocks it's macro-mechanical and older tyres are less disadvantaged.
Old mate trained army personnel in mogs and landrovers. And was a mechanic. He had a offroad workshop comp rigs you name it... asked him about mogs. Reply was how many people ex military have mogs?. Bugger all for a reason. All these blokes need to go anywhere is a 303 a swag a billy and a hilux ute.
9:50 GAZ Sadko for sure.
I believe that you were incorrect with your demonstration of the clearances underneath and the vehicle height.
This is because the portal axles ‘lift’ the entire vehicle, including the axles by the height of those portal axles. If the axles are ‘lifted (raised) 100 mm, then the ENTIRE vehicle has been raised by that same 100mm.
That includes the roof height!
The only way in which the roof height will not be raised if fitting portal axles, is if the roof height is modified (roof chop) to the exact same measurement as the portal axles.
You are assuming the suspension does not change. If you move the suspension mounts up in the chassis you regain that 100mm. The limiting factor is the clearance between the wheels and wheel arches. With bigger wheels the cab has to raise to maintain wheel arch clearance.
Leaving aside for the moment the illustration was obviously meant to make a point about ground clearance, not be an exact representation, a 'roof chop' is not the "only way" to retain the same overall vehicle height when adding portal axles. To use your example of the 100mm lift I can simply fit springs with 100mm less compressed height - easy to do since it results in the same arch to wheel clearance. No doubt this is the way the illustration solved the issue too (I didn't use a magnifying glass to check though, I must admit) - and as added bonuses the set of lower springs would be much cheaper than a 'roof chop' and makes for a lower roll centre too.
You're not the first to suggest this so here's a blog post.
l2sfbc.com/does-a-portal-axle-system-mean-a-lift/
@@contributor7219: portal axles ‘lift’ the entire vehicle!
The axles ARE ‘lifted’ at the ends of the axles by the fitting of the portal axles.
The suspension does not require changing, THUS, the ENTIRE vehicle IS ‘raised’ by the height that the portal axles provide.
So, EVERYTHING from the axle housings and differentials up, is raised equally by the height of the portal axles fitted. No need to change the suspension at all, but the vehicle HAS BEEN ‘lifted’!
I am not ‘assuming’ anything, NO need to change the wheels or tyres, because the portals ‘raise’ the vehicle by ‘lifting’ the axles, in the same way that putting a jack under the axle and lifting the vehicle 100mm will create an extra 100mm of clearance beneath the axle, without changing the wheels or tyres. But, with portal axles, the vehicle is still mobile and drivable, whereas when on a jack, it is not able to be moved.
@@shredder4330 Ah, no. Like I said - lift the axles 100mm, fit 100mm shorter springs (or drop the spring seats 100mm as someone else pointed out) and the overall height of the vehicle remains exactly the same. Last time I checked 100 - 100 = 0. But hey, if that maths is a little complex for you, feel free to do you.
Id of aired down the rig on the incline, that tire eing old isnt the only variable
From my amateur point of view, this uphill test might go better if the tires would be simply deflated.
It's a test, which doesn't mean completing the obstacle. By driving aired-up differences are more readily apparent.
I have been told, but cannot confirm, that the motor in this series of 'Mog is an Isuzu motor built under license.
I'm afriad it's not true. This is an OM352, all made by Mercedes in Germany. There were some licenses to manufacture in South Africa and recently Tatra, but the ADF ones are German.
But you might be thinking of the ADF Defenders which had a Isuzu motor in them...?
Agreed think that's the confusion.
Wet muddy grass. It is just like ice.
You do not see many coils on trucks and trailers because airbags are better.
Yep!
At the 3 minute mark is when you need something that the Unimog doesn't have and that is wheel speed, you need to spin those tyres fast to clear the tread.
Lack of wheel speed makes Unimogs pretty poor performers in mud and sand.
Of course like any naturally masculine man, I want one, but for all the obvious impractical reasons I don't need one.
The only time I really "needed" a Unimog was that day when the former love of my life expressed disappointment in me for not buying a "sensible" car. I bought a modified 1981 Hilux 4wd ute. It was awesome & is only more awesome now, I don't forsee that I will ever part with it, even though I have been building something even more outrageous.
She said this in my ute on the way to pick up her gumtree bargain chook shed some 132kms away.
So in response what I would of liked to have done the following weekend was show up in a Unimog with the Hilux in the back of it & taken her out for a pleasant evening @ the drive-ins :0)
Women might like Mogs too! I know of at least one that does!
@@L2SFBC :0) The key word there is "one", & ur use of "might" does not inspire confidence but I appreciate you positivity Robert :0)
I don't doubt the math on them existing but they are rare & most guys are not good @ scoping out unicorns, I am certainly not.
Back before the last great flood when I last dated I attracted all of the train wrecks.
The ride is only comfortable as the drivers seat is not OEM. All respect, the U1700 is a great military truck but uncomfortable to drive in summer, noisy, thirsty, OK if you had a green card to pay for the fuel. A 2 door Merc with sunroof as a company vehicle was great but not as a civilian vehicle.
It's relative to other trucks I've driven which have similar seats
Nope. A unimog definitely isn't the vehicle for me, and it won't be right for most people I would think.
That's not say I wouldn't take a free one though either...
Given the step from LandCruiser etc to Mog (or other truck platform), I reckon most people in that market are looking for a middle ground. Something with a lot more comfort than a mog, and with a bit more load and towing capacity than a LandCruiser.
Its almost like there's a market segment finally getting filled by Dodge and Chevy.
Agreed, I would looooooove a Mog if I had a property as this owner does, but otherwise...doesn't fit into my lifestyle. I can't see many private owners having a need for it, more a want.
I disagree with the high fuel consumption (I don’t have accurate figures as my fuel gauge doesn’t work & I don’t know what size my fuel tank is). But nevertheless, on a drive from Canberra to Darwin with a daily fuel top up we’ve figured it’s around 21L/100km.
When we stopped at the Wellshot Hotel in Ilfracombe, everyone was asking “what is it” & “how much fuel does it use” - when I replied with 21/100, everyone of the guys there responded with “wow, that’s less than my Ute takes”. For context, that’s country side and their utes are work vehicles carrying stuff.
Unless you have a business nobody needs a Mog.
Need or want?
@@L2SFBC Its a tool.
You spelled "object of desire" wrong