_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV: Vietnam
All things Vietnam
Hosted by Darren Baker
M151A2 in Vietnam?
j76lr
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: September 22, 2006
KitMaker: 1,081 posts
Armorama: 1,066 posts
Posted: Saturday, September 17, 2016 - 07:25 PM UTC

Quoted Text

MUTT was an acronym like HMMV for the Hummer. I always referred to 151's as jeeps and never heard anyone refer to them as anything else.



your right I served in VN and we only called them jeeps ! the 3/4 ton truck was called a weapons carrier ! trucks were deuce and a half's . m113 were APCs or Tracks, v100s were apcs or rubber duckies ! we never referred to anything by their numbers even m16 were weapons, m79 were bloopers ,m1911 were .45s and so on .
casailor
Joined: June 22, 2007
KitMaker: 165 posts
Armorama: 97 posts
Posted: Saturday, September 17, 2016 - 08:09 PM UTC
I drove both A1s and A2s and found both to be stone reliable. Either would go anywhere you could expect a wheeled vehicle to go. The A1s did have stability problems on the road due to the rear swing axles, but that problem never seemed to happen off road.
Kevlar06
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: March 15, 2009
KitMaker: 3,670 posts
Armorama: 2,052 posts
Posted: Saturday, September 17, 2016 - 11:06 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

The M151, Turuck, Utility 1/4 ton 4x4 was referred to as a military utility tactical truck in common lingo in the service.... See the first sentence in this pub




The problem was that Willys Overland trademarked the word jeep after World War Two, despite the fast that they were also built by Ford, and despite the fact that jeep was a common slang term (companies can actually lose their trademark if it becomes a slang term for a class of products, which is why Caterpillar and Kleenex run ads in writers' journals reminding authors not to use those terms unless they mean a specific product). The M151 was a Ford design (though most ended up being built by other companies), and it couldn't legally be called a Jeep, so somebody at Ford or the Pentagon came up with MUTT. Nevertheless, throughout the years they were in service, troops always called them jeeps, to the chagrin of Ford and Jeep Corporation.



I had 62 M151A2s in my Smoke Generator company in 1982-84. Each had an M60 pedestal mount, and many were modified to carry a Smoke Generator in place of the back seat over a 2 1/2 ton truck fuel tank. We never referred to them as anything other than a "quarter ton". No one would have quickly understood the term "Mutt", and a "Jeep" was either something our fathers had in WWII or Korea, or something civilians drove. Everyone knew what a "quarter ton" was though, just like a "deuce and a half" or a "five ton".
VR Russ
GeraldOwens
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 02:54 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


Quoted Text

The M151, Turuck, Utility 1/4 ton 4x4 was referred to as a military utility tactical truck in common lingo in the service.... See the first sentence in this pub




The problem was that Willys Overland trademarked the word jeep after World War Two, despite the fast that they were also built by Ford, and despite the fact that jeep was a common slang term (companies can actually lose their trademark if it becomes a slang term for a class of products, which is why Caterpillar and Kleenex run ads in writers' journals reminding authors not to use those terms unless they mean a specific product). The M151 was a Ford design (though most ended up being built by other companies), and it couldn't legally be called a Jeep, so somebody at Ford or the Pentagon came up with MUTT. Nevertheless, throughout the years they were in service, troops always called them jeeps, to the chagrin of Ford and Jeep Corporation.



I had 62 M151A2s in my Smoke Generator company in 1982-84. Each had an M60 pedestal mount, and many were modified to carry a Smoke Generator in place of the back seat over a 2 1/2 ton truck fuel tank. We never referred to them as anything other than a "quarter ton". No one would have quickly understood the term "Mutt", and a "Jeep" was either something our fathers had in WWII or Korea, or something civilians drove. Everyone knew what a "quarter ton" was though, just like a "deuce and a half" or a "five ton".
VR Russ


Interesting. So, all the Vietnam guys remember calling them "jeeps," but by the eighties, the term had died out. Sort of like the 3.5 inch rocket launcher. In Korea, it was still a "bazooka," but by Vietnam, it was just a "3.5 rocket launcher" (in those units that actually had any).
casailor
Joined: June 22, 2007
KitMaker: 165 posts
Armorama: 97 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 03:55 AM UTC
I can remember calling a lot of vehicles by their capacity. For instance the Jeep Pickup based 1 1/4 ton truck was called a five quarter a jeep was often a jeep or quarter ton, then deuce and a half or five ton. In fact about the only wheeled vehicle that I can recall NOT being referred to by weight was the M561 Gama Goat, they were always just Goats.
Kevlar06
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: March 15, 2009
KitMaker: 3,670 posts
Armorama: 2,052 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 05:01 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I can remember calling a lot of vehicles by their capacity. For instance the Jeep Pickup based 1 1/4 ton truck was called a five quarter a jeep was often a jeep or quarter ton, then deuce and a half or five ton. In fact about the only wheeled vehicle that I can recall NOT being referred to by weight was the M561 Gama Goat, they were always just Goats.



Yes. I remember the "Goat" well-- another piece of VOLAR army junk. We also had a few 5 quarter tons in the CAV in 1977, but they were on the way out, to be replaced by the CUCV in the 80s-- remember that one? fancy name for a militarized GMC P/U. My 1SG, Troop CDR, the S4,and S3 were all Vietnam vets-- never did I hear them call the 1/4 ton a "Jeep". When I had my Smoke Generator Company, my 1SG was a Vietnam Vet, as were many of the senior NCO's and commanders, but all I heard them say was "1/4 ton". I just can't recall anyone referring to the M151A1 or A2 as anything but a "1/4 ton". I suppose they did in passing on occasion, but "Jeep" was really a bygone term by the late 70s. The previous M38 though was always referred to as a "Jeep", but they were all gone by the time I came in the Army in 1975.
VR, Russ
Scarred
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: March 11, 2016
KitMaker: 1,792 posts
Armorama: 1,186 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 08:43 AM UTC
We had 1/4 tons in europe in the mid to late 80's and called them Jeeps. Our Goats were called jokes because when we went to sign one out the guys in the motorhole would laugh and point at deadline row and when we finally got HUMMWV's we immediately called them hummers for the obvious reasons. Of course we had CUCV's both dogs and chevys and of course the good ol K car. BTW my 13 year old F-150 is running like a demon and my bro's 6 year old dog is dead in his drive. Best selling truck for a reason.
thathaway3
Visit this Community
Michigan, United States
Joined: September 10, 2004
KitMaker: 1,610 posts
Armorama: 684 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - 06:28 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Best selling truck for a reason.



YUP! Like I said, I AM biased having worked for Ford in Truck Engineering for 30 years. But seriously, almost FORTY years in a ROW??? That's not smoke and mirrors!

I was in Germany from 72-77 and we used the terms "quarter ton" and "jeep" pretty much interchangeably. Although it was usually "a quarter ton" (in a generic or impersonal reference) and "my jeep" or the "old man's jeep" when it was a SPECIFIC vehicle belonging to someone. But MUTT??? Never.
KurtLaughlin
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - 08:08 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Actually, as spoons says, MUTT is a made-up name not used officially by the military at all. It is and has always been called a jeep or 1/4 ton.



In fact, Military Utility Tactical Truck (MUTT) was a real term and it was created by the military. There are a large number of contemporary official documents that use the term. The fact that regular soldiers may not have used the term in everyday duty does not mean the term is made-up. Recent technical manuals include a page like this:

1--8 NOMENCLATURE CROSS--REFERENCE LIST.
Nomenclature in this manual was chosen in accordance with the terms used for provisioning. A few tools and cab components are referred to by more common names. In many cases, the more common name is a shorter name for the same component.

OFFICIAL PROVISIONING NOMENCLATURE - MORE COMMON NAME
Ammunition - Ammo
Cab ammunition rack - Ammo rack
Cab assembly baskets - Stowage baskets
Caliber .50 Machine Gun - .50 cal.

and so on. As before, just because every soldier calls it "ammo" should not be taken as proof that "ammunition" isn't a real military term.

KL
casailor
Joined: June 22, 2007
KitMaker: 165 posts
Armorama: 97 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - 09:16 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

I can remember calling a lot of vehicles by their capacity. For instance the Jeep Pickup based 1 1/4 ton truck was called a five quarter a jeep was often a jeep or quarter ton, then deuce and a half or five ton. In fact about the only wheeled vehicle that I can recall NOT being referred to by weight was the M561 Gama Goat, they were always just Goats.



Yes. I remember the "Goat" well-- another piece of VOLAR army junk. We also had a few 5 quarter tons in the CAV in 1977, but they were on the way out, to be replaced by the CUCV in the 80s-- remember that one? fancy name for a militarized GMC P/U. My 1SG, Troop CDR, the S4,and S3 were all Vietnam vets-- never did I hear them call the 1/4 ton a "Jeep". When I had my Smoke Generator Company, my 1SG was a Vietnam Vet, as were many of the senior NCO's and commanders, but all I heard them say was "1/4 ton". I just can't recall anyone referring to the M151A1 or A2 as anything but a "1/4 ton". I suppose they did in passing on occasion, but "Jeep" was really a bygone term by the late 70s. The previous M38 though was always referred to as a "Jeep", but they were all gone by the time I came in the Army in 1975.
VR, Russ


The Goat was a perfect example of how the Army could screw up a decent design. They were originally designed with standard inboard brakes and a Chevy 454 engine. The Army changed them to outboard brakes which were a nightmare to work on and half of a two stroke engine from a M-113. That made Goats noisy and underpowered. However, they still could go just about anywhere.
Kevlar06
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: March 15, 2009
KitMaker: 3,670 posts
Armorama: 2,052 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - 10:37 AM UTC
[/quote]... That made Goats noisy and underpowered. However, they still could go just about anywhere.[/quote]

They were certainly noisy and underpowered, but brakes weren't the main problem for us-- transmission linkages and U joints were a constant problem. And I agree the designers of the "Goat" were to blame-- the vehicle's long articulated body did little for the limited cargo bay capacity. I travelled all over Germany looking for a transmission/driveline U joint for one that we had on deadline over six months, just so we could get it operational to turn it in because they were dropped form our TO&E. Finally found one at a cannibalization point in Pirmasans.
VR Russ

thathaway3
Visit this Community
Michigan, United States
Joined: September 10, 2004
KitMaker: 1,610 posts
Armorama: 684 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - 07:07 PM UTC

Quoted Text

just so we could get it operational to turn it in because they were dropped form our TO&E. VR Russ




Boy does THAT ring true! I was a Battalion XO in a Field Artillery BN that was inactivated, and of course by regs, we had to make everything "operational" before it could be turned in. We knew that much of the equipment was obsolete and there was absolutely no possibility of it being stored or reissued to another unit. I know for a fact that SOME of that equipment (including ALL of our M16A1s) were immediately taken to a disposal site and scrapped! Talk about waste!!!
j76lr
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: September 22, 2006
KitMaker: 1,081 posts
Armorama: 1,066 posts
Posted: Saturday, October 01, 2016 - 07:11 PM UTC
I was in from 68 to 72 and they were just jeeps ! in V N and the "world" !!
gcdavidson
Visit this Community
Ontario, Canada
Joined: August 05, 2003
KitMaker: 1,698 posts
Armorama: 1,563 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 - 08:30 AM UTC
Canadian Army had some in Vietnam as part of ICCS circa 1973.
C_JACQUEMONT
Visit this Community
Loire-Atlantique, France
Joined: October 09, 2004
KitMaker: 2,433 posts
Armorama: 2,325 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 - 04:59 PM UTC
Wow!

Are there other pics of those?

Cheers,

Christophe
HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 - 05:26 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Canadian Army had some in Vietnam as part of ICCS circa 1973.




That is an M151A1, not an M151A2. You can tell by the old style (non-NATO) rear lights and small front turn signal lights on the flat front fenders. It also has straight lines on the rear wheel openings where A2s had a squared off rear wheel opening to accommodate a tie-down ring. Lastly, it has the two-piece windshield of an A1.

M151A1 vs M151A2 comparison



M151A1


M151A2

 _GOTOTOP