Now that the Hummer -- the original Hummer H1 -- is distinctly out of flavor, the U.S. armed services are busy looking for its replacement. Having put out a request for proposals, one of the supposed leading candidates is this: a Joint Light Tactical Vehicle developed by Navistar and BAE Systems, Inc, a British defense industry firm. The two together already provide the H1's temporary replacement, the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle.
The Mad Max monstrosity has the same track as the H1, but that's about all they have in common. Built of many off-the-shelf components from Navistar's parts bin, the truck's modular build configuration makes an easier job of modifying it for different missions and repairing. It's shaped to disperse charges from roadside bombs, the armor is an inch thick, it has a flat floor to allow exit from either side of the vehicle, and it can escape a battle without a wheel and without engine cooling. Not bad. Follow the link to get the full specs on the military's potential new charge. But if they want something even more brutish, they could always go for this.
You may also remember that the producer of the original H1, AM General, is also working on its own candidate for the next Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, which we've yet to see.
[Source: Motor Trend]
James Garner recovering from mild stroke
VIDEO: God's ringtone is a V10-powered Audi R8
IIHS releases official results on the smart fortwo
Tragedy at LeMons: Send love and a little bit more
Officially Official: New Ferrari California exposed!
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Ford Shelby GT500 Mustang
Future Classic: 1984 Chrysler Minivans
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
First Drive: 2009 Volkswagen Jetta Sportwagen
Project Track Slut, Part One: Pick a weapon on the cheap
_thumbnail.jpg "Lamborghini Reventon unboxed in Las Vegas")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Mondo @ Mar 24th 2008 2:42PM
Anything that can better protect our troops should be well received.
Injun Joe @ Mar 24th 2008 2:50PM
Amen, to that, Mondo!
NYChic @ Mar 24th 2008 2:51PM
Can't wait until the civilian version is available!
And for those of you too daft to get it, yes, I am completely kidding.
Mr. Oak @ Mar 24th 2008 2:58PM
I'm not though. Perfect vehicle for drive-bys.
f3rg @ Mar 24th 2008 3:00PM
Yes, I'll take mine with 24" "rims" (I won't be needing spokes or tires), a full leather interior and lots of chrome, please.
Toy Yoda @ Mar 24th 2008 3:50PM
Drive Bys? As in drive by shootings? hehe.. funny.
Dan @ Mar 24th 2008 2:59PM
it'll look great once they get some chrome rims on it
dan spalinger @ Mar 24th 2008 3:02PM
Maybe I missed it...but where does it say it was tested in Baja??
71cuda @ Mar 24th 2008 3:15PM
The phrase "at photoshoot" was left out.
Guenther @ Mar 24th 2008 3:08PM
That thing looks like it employs NONE of the finesse that went into the HMMWV. Looks terribly heavy, but if the future is urban combat, then this might be the answer.
Owain Ozymandias Buck @ Mar 24th 2008 3:27PM
Finesse? Are you serious? YOU drive one of those slow, heavy, rattly things over a few hundred miles of crap roads and rocky desert and then tell me how much "finesse" a HMMWV has. I've put many miles on the things--Don't believe the hype!
Guenther @ Mar 24th 2008 3:59PM
Little things like being under 11' high, or tires that a person could change (would I stand around in Baghdad and change the tire on a US anything? no). Were HMMWVs nice? of course not. What I'm getting at is that the vehicle being replaced had some really cool engineering bits that no only proved themselves well, but have since been copied by several other makers of light tactical trucks.
R @ Mar 24th 2008 4:27PM
Well, the fact that the replacement will be able to drive with only 3 wheels should help. It'll also have a slew of other engineering upgrades, at least in the prelim.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Light_Tactical_Vehicle
The HMMWV was simply not designed for what it's being used for.
BGJ @ Mar 24th 2008 3:11PM
"it has a flat floor to allow exit from either side of the vehicle"
Not sure what the floor has to do with using the doors on either side of the vehicle.
I haven't read the Motor Trend article, but perhaps it meant to say something about exiting downward through the floor?
dan spalinger @ Mar 24th 2008 3:20PM
Have you actually TRIED to exit an H1?? Perhaps you should try...then go and throw 100 lbs. of gear on and try it again...then take some hostile fire and try again....the H1's axle creates a HUGE hump right down the middle of the vehicle making it very difficult to get from one side of the vehicle to the other in trying to exit....
71cuda @ Mar 24th 2008 3:29PM
My guess is that the body is high enough to eliminate the driveshaft/axle humps. It would make for easier exit in the back and especially front from either side. Nice if the doors on one side are unable to open, and you have to exit quickly.
BGJ @ Mar 24th 2008 8:42PM
@dan -
If I had actually been in one then I would have known that. I would not have to carry 100lbs or take hostile fire to figure it out. Not sure what your point is. The OP did not make it clear exactly what "flat floor" meant.
Exiting downward would have some advantages, no? Don't some APC's have this feature?
spacegravity4me @ Mar 24th 2008 3:55PM
reminds me slightly of the warthog.
Zeus.:God @ Mar 25th 2008 10:49AM
Uh... I don't see how it possibly could.
Alex @ Mar 24th 2008 3:57PM
correct me if i am wrong, but that "something even more brutish" you link, is the current MRAP.