Hi fellas,
Was the M38A1 Jeep used in Vietnam? Did the M151 replace the M38 & if so, were there many M38's used, if at all?
Were they more prolific with the Marine outfits or special forces? Or did the Army use them more?
Any good photo reference material would be helpful on this subject & stories of their use.
Thanks guys, in advance.
Joe.
Hosted by Darren Baker
M38A1 Jeep in Vietnam?
joegrafton
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 08:35 AM UTC
highway70
California, United States
Joined: November 27, 2004
KitMaker: 322 posts
Armorama: 267 posts
Joined: November 27, 2004
KitMaker: 322 posts
Armorama: 267 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 08:59 AM UTC
This site has several photos of M38A1 in Vietnam
http://www.m38a1.com/Resources/archives.htm
I saw several M38A1 at Cam Rahn Bay in 1970.
http://www.m38a1.com/Resources/archives.htm
I saw several M38A1 at Cam Rahn Bay in 1970.
joegrafton
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 09:04 AM UTC
Hi,
Thanks very much for the link. Did you ever use this type of jeep in Vietnam?
Joe.
Thanks very much for the link. Did you ever use this type of jeep in Vietnam?
Joe.
highway70
California, United States
Joined: November 27, 2004
KitMaker: 322 posts
Armorama: 267 posts
Joined: November 27, 2004
KitMaker: 322 posts
Armorama: 267 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 09:10 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Hi,
Thanks very much for the link. Did you ever use this type of jeep in Vietnam?
Joe.
No, My Trans Battalion had M151A1. The M38 looked huge when parkrd next to a M151
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 03:33 PM UTC
I'd have bet you the farm that there were none in Vietnam, and would have lost the farm! But if you date the photos, they're pretty early on. All the Jeeps I saw in use were M151's with one exception. That was a plain jane CJ5 Jeep painted grey and tagged with Navy logos on it.
SF teams often had a jeep if they were located on a road, or if by chance the compound was sorta flat. But only the B teams were actually issued them. You also saw them with 3/4 tons as well; even though they were never issued one. Interestingly, in the photos you saw a lot of canvas tops on them, but I cannot ever remember seeing one out on the road.
gary
SF teams often had a jeep if they were located on a road, or if by chance the compound was sorta flat. But only the B teams were actually issued them. You also saw them with 3/4 tons as well; even though they were never issued one. Interestingly, in the photos you saw a lot of canvas tops on them, but I cannot ever remember seeing one out on the road.
gary
Frenchy
Rhone, France
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 06:53 PM UTC
Frenchy
Rhone, France
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 08:17 PM UTC
Here's one used by the 88th Trans Co. :
Frenchy
Frenchy
sapper141
Alberta, Canada
Joined: August 16, 2005
KitMaker: 41 posts
Armorama: 32 posts
Joined: August 16, 2005
KitMaker: 41 posts
Armorama: 32 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 16, 2010 - 04:52 AM UTC
Hi guys
I believe M38a1's were mostly used by the Marines as well as their M422 mighty mites. They were in army stocks as well but the M151 seems to have been in larger supply.
hope this helps for a search direction
Seeya
I believe M38a1's were mostly used by the Marines as well as their M422 mighty mites. They were in army stocks as well but the M151 seems to have been in larger supply.
hope this helps for a search direction
Seeya
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 16, 2010 - 06:45 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Hi guys
I believe M38a1's were mostly used by the Marines as well as their M422 mighty mites. They were in army stocks as well but the M151 seems to have been in larger supply.
hope this helps for a search direction
Seeya
One thing you have to remember about a Jeep was that they were considered to be a death trap. No matter whatkind! They all had a tendency to do a roll over in really rough terrane, and the local land lord always felt that anybody riding in one was somewhat important (remember the axiom; "never stand out from the crowd"). MP's probably were out on the main roads in Jeeps more than everybody else combined (don't make the mistake of mounting a Browning fifty on one). So you mostly saw Jeeps being used near large military installations (never more than ten miles out). Also there were not as many Jeeps alloted to a batallion as many like to think. Our company had two at one time till one of them ended up upside down on top the occupants. It was replaced with a 3/4 ton truck. Those little Dodge 3/4 tons were used everywhere, and by everybody. Looking back at Vietnam in general, the Jeep that was needed was the Jeep CJ-6 with the short pickup bed on it.
gary
animal
Joined: December 15, 2002
KitMaker: 4,503 posts
Armorama: 3,159 posts
KitMaker: 4,503 posts
Armorama: 3,159 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 16, 2010 - 01:21 PM UTC
I drove an M 38A1 in my unit (the 86th Sig Bn) in mid 1967. We lost the three we had by Dec 1967. We had to give them the tthe ARVN units. Our Commander was real ticked when the order came down.
joegrafton
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Monday, May 17, 2010 - 03:03 AM UTC
Hi guys,
Thanks for all this info you're providing. It really is great reading. The photo of the M38A1 with the 88th transport battalion is interesting. Is that "Pandoras Box" Guntruck in the background? Any idea of the date of this one?
Joe.
Thanks for all this info you're providing. It really is great reading. The photo of the M38A1 with the 88th transport battalion is interesting. Is that "Pandoras Box" Guntruck in the background? Any idea of the date of this one?
Joe.
Frenchy
Rhone, France
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Posted: Monday, May 17, 2010 - 04:11 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Is that "Pandoras Box" Guntruck in the background? Any idea of the date of this one?
Hi Joe
I'm quite sure it's "Pandemonium". Originally assigned to the 88th Trans Co, then to the 2nd Trans Co in 1971. There are 3 pics in James Lyle's "The Hard Ride" book (vol.1) : one is not dated, another one is dated 1970 and the last one 1971. It's the one below :
It seems the pictured M38A1 has been fitted with M151 wheels (with 2 different tires on the front).
Frenchy
joegrafton
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Monday, May 17, 2010 - 07:03 AM UTC
Hi Frenchy,
Thanks for putting me straight on that, mate! As usual, a mine of information.
You know, I've read that book, "The Hard Ride", so I should know about all this already. Seems that I have a head like a sieve!
There were quite a few famous Guntrucks in the 88th Trans. wasn't there?
Joe.
Thanks for putting me straight on that, mate! As usual, a mine of information.
You know, I've read that book, "The Hard Ride", so I should know about all this already. Seems that I have a head like a sieve!
There were quite a few famous Guntrucks in the 88th Trans. wasn't there?
Joe.
Removed by original poster on 05/17/10 - 18:10:20 (GMT).
zapper
Skåne, Sweden
Joined: October 18, 2005
KitMaker: 745 posts
Armorama: 734 posts
Joined: October 18, 2005
KitMaker: 745 posts
Armorama: 734 posts
Posted: Monday, May 17, 2010 - 07:13 AM UTC
Quoted Text
It seems the pictured M38A1 has been fitted with M151 wheels (with 2 different tires on the front).
And civilian style head lights (CJ-5?) and turn signals.
Cheers,
/E
joegrafton
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Monday, May 17, 2010 - 07:21 AM UTC
Hi Erik,
How are you? Long time no hear!
Now that is an interesting observation you've made there, Erik.
Are we now suggesting that this M38A1 is actually a civilian type CJ-5?
Joe.
How are you? Long time no hear!
Now that is an interesting observation you've made there, Erik.
Are we now suggesting that this M38A1 is actually a civilian type CJ-5?
Joe.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Monday, May 17, 2010 - 07:40 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Hi Erik,
How are you? Long time no hear!
Now that is an interesting observation you've made there, Erik.
Are we now suggesting that this M38A1 is actually a civilian type CJ-5?
Joe.
a CJ-5 Jeep and an M38 Jeep are different animals. The CJ-5 is about 20% bigger, but they do bare similar cosmetics. The frame and suspension is similar in design, but of course a little bigger.
Just a note to add into this conversation about the M38 Jeep. I found a picture of Bob Hope sitting in one on the way to do his annual Christmas show for the 101st at Freedom Hill in 1969. The photo looks right, and the girls were not the same ones I saw in December 1968 (or didn't get to see in 1967)
Got another "48" yesterday, and it looks like it's gonna be "Suzey Que". When I do this one you'll see me hanging on for dear life with a comppletely drunk crew driving the beast! Can you sing the song? Ah for the good life!
Charlie don't need no Jeeps to get around in as he has an M103 water buffalo
gary
joegrafton
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Monday, May 17, 2010 - 07:52 AM UTC
So, the photo above depicts an M38A1 fitted with CJ-5 spare parts, right?
Joe.
Joe.
zapper
Skåne, Sweden
Joined: October 18, 2005
KitMaker: 745 posts
Armorama: 734 posts
Joined: October 18, 2005
KitMaker: 745 posts
Armorama: 734 posts
Posted: Monday, May 17, 2010 - 09:17 AM UTC
Hi Joe,
@I'm fine thanks. I hope you are well too.
@Gary: Just have to let you know that I appreciate the time you take to share your experience in this and other threads (and Joe for keeping them running ;- ). I've been reading most of it but am a bit lazy to show my appreciation. Better late than never... Thanks!
I have to admit that I always thought the M38A1 and the CJ-5 were the same size with just chassi and detail differences.
Anyway. From my perspective there's a number of strange details on the vehicle in the photo. I've researched the M38A1 from time to tome but am far from an expert. I've probably missed one or two things regarding M38A1 development?
Here's a few thing that doesn't "fit".
The windshield wipers seem mounted on the bottom. From what I know this was done on CJ-5s produced after 68-69. Perhaps a late feture on the M38A1 as well?
It lacks the hole in the left side for side mounted spare wheel(?). The hole should not be present on a CJ-5, but perhaps it was removed on some M38A1-series as well?
It lacks the lifting hooks on the bumper.
It seem to lack the battery box lid on the right side in front of the windshield.
Bumper have a small hole in the middle and two slits.
(and then the civilian head lights and turn signal)
So, my guess is now for an M606A2 or A3 (milytary export version of the CJ-5):
The above vehicle still have the wipers on top of the windshield and seem to have the battery box cover but those details were perhaps changed later.
What do you think guys?
/E
@I'm fine thanks. I hope you are well too.
@Gary: Just have to let you know that I appreciate the time you take to share your experience in this and other threads (and Joe for keeping them running ;- ). I've been reading most of it but am a bit lazy to show my appreciation. Better late than never... Thanks!
I have to admit that I always thought the M38A1 and the CJ-5 were the same size with just chassi and detail differences.
Anyway. From my perspective there's a number of strange details on the vehicle in the photo. I've researched the M38A1 from time to tome but am far from an expert. I've probably missed one or two things regarding M38A1 development?
Here's a few thing that doesn't "fit".
The windshield wipers seem mounted on the bottom. From what I know this was done on CJ-5s produced after 68-69. Perhaps a late feture on the M38A1 as well?
It lacks the hole in the left side for side mounted spare wheel(?). The hole should not be present on a CJ-5, but perhaps it was removed on some M38A1-series as well?
It lacks the lifting hooks on the bumper.
It seem to lack the battery box lid on the right side in front of the windshield.
Bumper have a small hole in the middle and two slits.
(and then the civilian head lights and turn signal)
So, my guess is now for an M606A2 or A3 (milytary export version of the CJ-5):
The above vehicle still have the wipers on top of the windshield and seem to have the battery box cover but those details were perhaps changed later.
What do you think guys?
/E
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Monday, May 17, 2010 - 09:29 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Hi Joe,
@I'm fine thanks. I hope you are well too.
@Gary: Just have to let you know that I appreciate the time you take to share your experience in this and other threads (and Joe for keeping them running ;- ). I've been reading most of it but am a bit lazy to show my appreciation. Better late than never... Thanks!
I have to admit that I always thought the M38A1 and the CJ-5 were the same size with just chassi and detail differences.
Anyway. From my perspective there's a number of strange details on the vehicle in the photo. I've researched the M38A1 from time to tome but am far from an expert. I've probably missed one or two things regarding M38A1 development?
Here's a few thing that doesn't "fit".
The windshield wipers seem mounted on the bottom. From what I know this was done on CJ-5s produced after 68-69. Perhaps a late feture on the M38A1 as well?
It lacks the hole in the left side for side mounted spare wheel(?). The hole should not be present on a CJ-5, but perhaps it was removed on some M38A1-series as well?
It lacks the lifting hooks on the bumper.
It seem to lack the battery box lid on the right side in front of the windshield.
Bumper have a small hole in the middle and two slits.
(and then the civilian head lights and turn signal)
So, my guess is now for an M606A2 or A3 (milytary export version of the CJ-5):
The above vehicle still have the wipers on top of the windshield and seem to have the battery box cover but those details were perhaps changed later.
What do you think guys?
/E
I owned a CJ-5 for a short time, and can see a few differences right away. Yet the one in your photo is closer to a CJ-5 that most of the military ones I've seen. Right off the bat I think the CJ is a little wider than the M38 (only been about 30 years now since I last saw it). I'd have to look at a CJ-5 again just to be shure. I think the M38 was better than the m151 if that matters much.
gary
joegrafton
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Monday, May 17, 2010 - 11:10 AM UTC
Hi Erik,
Thanks first of all for the appreciation. I'm glad that others get lots out of these threads like I do & it's a pleasure having you join us. Thankyou also for your latest addition. Now you've thrown the cat among the pigeons! So what version are we actually looking at in the above photo? Anybody?
Gary, why do you think the M38 is better than the M151?
Joe.
Thanks first of all for the appreciation. I'm glad that others get lots out of these threads like I do & it's a pleasure having you join us. Thankyou also for your latest addition. Now you've thrown the cat among the pigeons! So what version are we actually looking at in the above photo? Anybody?
Gary, why do you think the M38 is better than the M151?
Joe.
highway70
California, United States
Joined: November 27, 2004
KitMaker: 322 posts
Armorama: 267 posts
Joined: November 27, 2004
KitMaker: 322 posts
Armorama: 267 posts
Posted: Monday, May 17, 2010 - 12:59 PM UTC
[quote
a CJ-5 Jeep and an M38 Jeep are different animals. The CJ-5 is about 20% bigger, but they do bare similar cosmetics. The frame and suspension is similar in design, but of course a little bigger.
gary[/quote]
I found the following Spec info on the internet: Don't know if it is correct It came from 3 different sites.
M38A1 wb 81". L 138-5/8" W 60-7/8" max H 74-3/4" min H 56-1/2"
CJ5 wb 81.1" L 138.6" W 61.0" H 68.5"
CJ7 wb 93.4" L 153.2" W 65.3" H 71.9" (soft top)
It appears the CJ5 and M38A1 are the same size
----------------------------------------------------
MB/GPW wb 80" L 132.25" W 62" H 69.75 " (tpop Up) 52" (top down)
M151 wb ? L 133" W 64" H 71"
a CJ-5 Jeep and an M38 Jeep are different animals. The CJ-5 is about 20% bigger, but they do bare similar cosmetics. The frame and suspension is similar in design, but of course a little bigger.
gary[/quote]
I found the following Spec info on the internet: Don't know if it is correct It came from 3 different sites.
M38A1 wb 81". L 138-5/8" W 60-7/8" max H 74-3/4" min H 56-1/2"
CJ5 wb 81.1" L 138.6" W 61.0" H 68.5"
CJ7 wb 93.4" L 153.2" W 65.3" H 71.9" (soft top)
It appears the CJ5 and M38A1 are the same size
----------------------------------------------------
MB/GPW wb 80" L 132.25" W 62" H 69.75 " (tpop Up) 52" (top down)
M151 wb ? L 133" W 64" H 71"
HeavyArty
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Monday, May 17, 2010 - 02:05 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text
a CJ-5 Jeep and an M38 Jeep are different animals. The CJ-5 is about 20% bigger, but they do bare similar cosmetics. The frame and suspension is similar in design, but of course a little bigger.
gary
I found the following Spec info on the internet: Don't know if it is correct It came from 3 different sites.
M38A1 wb 81". L 138-5/8" W 60-7/8" max H 74-3/4" min H 56-1/2"
CJ5 wb 81.1" L 138.6" W 61.0" H 68.5"
CJ7 wb 93.4" L 153.2" W 65.3" H 71.9" (soft top)
It appears the CJ5 and M38A1 are the same size
----------------------------------------------------
MB/GPW wb 80" L 132.25" W 62" H 69.75 " (tpop Up) 52" (top down)
M151 wb ? L 133" W 64" H 71"
Yes, the M38A1 and the CJ-5 are the same basic vehicle. The M38A1 is a militarized CJ-5. It was an intrim vehicle that was pressed into service during the Korean war to fill the gap of needed Jeeps since the Army had sold off a lot of Jeeps as surplus after WWII.
The differences were minor:
The M-38A1 differed from the CJ-5 in that it had a stronger frame and suspension, reversed front spring shackles, standardized GI instruments, and a 24-volt electrical system. A provision for a machine gun mounting post was installed on the floor of the body tub.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Monday, May 17, 2010 - 04:34 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Hi Erik,
Thanks first of all for the appreciation. I'm glad that others get lots out of these threads like I do & it's a pleasure having you join us. Thankyou also for your latest addition. Now you've thrown the cat among the pigeons! So what version are we actually looking at in the above photo? Anybody?
Gary, why do you think the M38 is better than the M151?
Joe.
a lot of M151's rolled upside down due to the rear suspension collapsing when they'd get crossed up in deep ruts in a dirt road. Often resulting in broken bones. The M38 has a solid axel in front and back making it much more resistent to this accidental crash. I see guys now using HUMVEES, and I get a little leary about it, but with a much wider width and more weight as well I guess it dosn't happen. I also think that something like the old CJ-6 would have better served the purpose for everybody in the end. Better yet would have been to beef up the drive train in the Dodge 3/4 ton and give it a small deisel engine
gary
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Monday, May 17, 2010 - 04:41 PM UTC
Quoted Text
[quote
a CJ-5 Jeep and an M38 Jeep are different animals. The CJ-5 is about 20% bigger, but they do bare similar cosmetics. The frame and suspension is similar in design, but of course a little bigger.
gary
I found the following Spec info on the internet: Don't know if it is correct It came from 3 different sites.
M38A1 wb 81". L 138-5/8" W 60-7/8" max H 74-3/4" min H 56-1/2"
CJ5 wb 81.1" L 138.6" W 61.0" H 68.5"
CJ7 wb 93.4" L 153.2" W 65.3" H 71.9" (soft top)
It appears the CJ5 and M38A1 are the same size
----------------------------------------------------
MB/GPW wb 80" L 132.25" W 62" H 69.75 " (tpop Up) 52" (top down)
M151 wb ? L 133" W 64" H 71"[/quote]
sounds like your dead on, and I am dead wrong! Guess the coors on the CJ-5 just makes it look longer and wider. I know it feels that way when you set inside an M38! Also I don't remember the gas tank being in the same location. Mine had a six cylinder engine (actually one made by Buick!) I also think the front and rear axles are different in a CJ-5 after looking at the M38. There's one parked near the Ontos, and next time I'm down there I'll take a good look under it. But rest assured it's gonna be awhile as it's been raining for three days now, with no end in sight!
gary