Thread: 6WD Chassis Drawings

Originally Posted by Slunnie

I recall seeing one on the travel ramp at an expo, mil spec. It really surprised me at how far it didn't get up the ramp, barely up it at all. That said, it's probably sprung to carry 2t.

My comment were on the radio controlled model in the video!

The Aust mil 6x6 defender are leaf sprung rear so will reduce articulation when compared to a coil sprung vehicle. On the issue of a coil sprung 6x6 (or even the leaf sprung ones) on a ramp, the physics of the departure angle will prevent a good score. On a 110 as it climbs up the ramp the rear of the chassis will approach the ground before the rear wheel loses contact, however on the 6x6 the rear axle will suspend the middle axle very early guaranteeing a poor score.

I have a disassembled coil sprung Defender 6x6 undergoing modification.

Originally Posted by rick130

Powerband, is there any chance of those sales brochures being scanned larger please ?

They are opening up as tiny little pictures ATM, too small to read.

email me your postal address

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

My comment were on the radio controlled model in the video!

The Aust mil 6x6 defender are leaf sprung rear so will reduce articulation when compared to a coil sprung vehicle. On the issue of a coil sprung 6x6 (or even the leaf sprung ones) on a ramp, the physics of the departure angle will prevent a good score. On a 110 as it climbs up the ramp the rear of the chassis will approach the ground before the rear wheel loses contact, however on the 6x6 the rear axle will suspend the middle axle very early guaranteeing a poor score.

not entirely true Diana, it is the whole rear link design and whether its load sharing or not as well. Bill has talked about this a few times. The Aus 6x6 are good rigs for what they do, but could have been much better

Originally Posted by TimNZ

Not a chassis drawing, but a 6x6 Series video with very impressive articulation, (in my opinion anyway):

Bill Van Snorkle's 6x6 Land Rover Series - YouTube!

I love how it maintains all wheel on the ground and almost ever point of articulation.

Easo

Originally Posted by Slunnie

I recall seeing one on the travel ramp at an expo, mil spec. It really surprised me at how far it didn't get up the ramp, barely up it at all. That said, it's probably sprung to carry 2t.

The Army 6x6 is not made to flex, they are to carry huge loads.

2t is way under what they carry from memory some have weighed in at 8t.

Blknight.aus, does the RAAF have GMV's

Originally Posted by lambrover

The Army 6x6 is not made to flex, they are to carry huge loads.

2t is way under what they carry from memory some have weighed in at 8t.

Blknight.aus, does the RAAF have GMV's

I had a 6x6 civillian defender some years ago and the gvm was 5.5 tonne . Couldnt drive it in NSW on a car license .

Originally Posted by uninformed

not entirely true Diana, it is the whole rear link design and whether its load sharing or not as well. Bill has talked about this a few times. The Aus 6x6 are good rigs for what they do, but could have been much better

The problem for the production 6X6 LR is they aren't designed for articulation but for general load carrying capacity cross country and are restricted by the disadvantages of either differential through drives or the limitations of prop shaft extension and pinion angle of the rear axle.

It is possible to build excellent articulation on special build 6x6 as Bill has shown, but to date no one has gone into production of such a design. So at present the production 6X6 will always perform poorly on ramp tests.

because it is a 6X6 you cant drive without a HR lience.in australia.
i was told that an ambulance was well over 5 ton empty.the vehicle was a transport with all wheel drive-the tyres are a giveaway.
most of the civy 6X6 I built whent to local councilsso silly off road ability wasnt an issue.

in the factory we took the white crew cab to liverpool RTA to get a drivers lience.
the instructor didnt like me--i reversed in to a driveway to do a 13 point turn.the second go was a stuff up and we went the wrong day.

some cancelled the deal because the vehicles had no complience when we drove them so they didnt require RTA aproval.I dont think you get away with that now.

the other day I did a service on a landcruiser fire striker.the driver told me it had been used this year in 4X4.they had driven up into the barrington tops to rescue a young woman in a falcon wagon that got stuck turning around in a sediment drain.I had to adjust the bonnet as it wouldnt open and make other repairs.off road ability is subjective.