.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*******************************
The following seems a very special MAN-KAT. It appears to be "semi-integrated", and
orangework.de deserves further research -- see
http://www.orangework.de ,
http://www.orangework.de/man2.htm ,
http://www.orangework.de/grundriss4.htm , and
http://www.orangework.de/galerie_man_2_1.htm :
[video=vimeo;11468749]http://vimeo.com/11468749[/video]
Not bad for a pricetag of approximately 300 - 500,000 EU. Here's a Glacier-exploring MAN KAT:
[video=youtube;i7Ua_MFJHn4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7Ua_MFJHn4 [/video]
Tried to find more videos of arctic-exploration or mining-transportation vehicles based on a MAN-KAT chassis, but came up short. If anyone reading this knows of additional videos, please post!
And finally, here are two short clips of the Rosenbauer Panther ARFF, which is based on a MAN SX-45 chassis:
[video=youtube;qi4dfqH6baI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi4dfqH6baI [/video]
Earlier in the thread,
unirover seemed to suggest that the Panther ARFF was not truly off-road capable:
There are good reasons why the Panthers are only used on paved runways big enough to land a 747.
See
http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...orsion-Free-Frame/page9?p=1565667#post1565667 . The video on the right above should suggest otherwise.
However granted,
unlike most SX-45 variants, the Panther's body is extra-wide – 3.0 m to be exact – enabling it to carry its heavy load of fire-extinguishing liquid at high speed, without tipping over (the Panther is 3.65 m high). See
http://www.rosenbauer.com/en/rosenb...]=Land&cHash=e1988f4fad2559b383bf286864f9f875 and
http://www.rosenbauer.com/fileadmin...ospekte low/Prospekt_PANTHER_E_gesamt low.pdf . The Panther's width would certainly restrict usage of regular paved roads and bridges. But the Panther is only an
SX-45 variant. Most MAN HX and SX vehicles are logistics support trucks, transporting equipment and troops, and they respect the 2.55 m width limit; see the discussion that follows on the next page in this thread.
For a Rosenbauer Panther “Photo Gallery”, see pages 2 and 3 of this thread at
http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...xpedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page2 and
http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...xpedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page3 .
*****************************************
If anyone reading this comes across similarly relevant videos or images of MAN-KAT
"camperesque" conversions, in other words, MAN-KATs used as expedition motorhomes, but also MAN-KATs used as rally support vehicles, as Red Cross medical assistance vehicles, as Glacier exploration vehicles, etc. etc. , then by all means, please post them in this thread. Ditto for Tatra conversions. Although one suspects that Jago Pickering's Tatra 6x6 may be one of the few Tatra-based motorhomes in existence. However, there are certainly more Tatra-based rally support trucks out there, in addition to the Bowler Tatra 6x6.
So please feel free to post any and all such images and videos in this thread, especially the Tatra-based vehicles, because they are not so common, and are harder to track down. See for instance the page in the thread where I posted the Tatra 8x8 based Drehtrainer, and the 6x6 off-road firetrucks, at
http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...xpedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page8 . Examples of Tatra and MAN conversions will always be highly relevant to this thread, because both companies make vehicles that promise torsion-free frames, frames that are so stiff that they eliminate the need for a pivoting sub-frame.
*****************************************
On page 35 of the “
pivoting frames and mounting campers” thread,
egn provided some good, condensed accounts of the evolutionary relationship between the MAN SX, HX, MAN-KAT, and TGA series of chassis frames -- see
http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...ers/page35?highlight=pivoting+frames+mounting . They are worth reposting here:
As KAT 1 owner I can say that the frame isn't totally stiff. This is also the reason why the load platform of the military base is fixed by springs and not bolted or fixed by screws.
But it is stiff enough so that springs are good enough even in the worst off-road situations. But even then I put my cabin on a 4-point pivoting fixture with the distribution of the force over are large segment of the frame, in order to keep the expensive cabin away from any structural stress. This has worked perfectly during the last 7 years. Some people have fixed their pivoting fixture only at a few points and got damage at the L frame sitting on top if the closed master box frame. This shows that there are considerable forces at work.
The normal ladder frames used by MAN LE/TGS/TGA and others are very flexible in contrast. This has to be in combination with leaf springs to get acceptable offroad capabilities. This soft frames work fine in the typical use scenario of a few 1000 mls in construction environment during lifetime. But if you drive 10.000s of mls on bad roads with constant torsion caused by uneven road and swinging load on top, the risk that something breaks at the ladder frame is high. There have been several reports about frame damage of LE models after driving many miles on the bad roads in South America. Of course, it also depends on the load and speed you drive. Very often such camper trucks are constantly near their upper weight limit.
The Tatra central frame tube of T813, T815, ... is even stiffer than the frames of MAN KAT and SX military trucks. But it is also much heavier.
The reason why the MAN stiff frame trucks are not used more widely is that they are military technology with low production count. No one would spend more than US$ 300.000 new for the base truck when the regular ones cost only 1/3. The military trucks are only affortable used when about 20-30 years old. Currently the KAT I 4x4 can be bought from Vebeg for much less than US$ 10.000, because they are more than 30 years old.
In the user manual of my KAT I 6x6 you can read the following description:
"The truck 7t mil gl is a transport vehicle that is able to follow tanks (chain or wheel)."
This is shown at every point of the construction. I have driven bad gravel roads in Russia with 50+ mph where other road vehicles drove only 10-20 mph. The spring suspension gives a very comfortable ride. In Schweden I once forgot to put the cap of the engine oil refill on top of the flat oil coolers of the engine. After driving about 5 miles on gravel road to a recreation area, I remembered that I have forgot something and found it still at the same place.
The KAT I is the first truck of the military truck series of that lead to the SX series.
- KAT I 4x4, 6x6, 8x8
- KAT II 8x8 build for the US Army
- KAT I A1 with Deutz 513 engine
- KAT I A1.1 with MAN engine and hydraulic suspension
- KAT I Multi
- SX-Series
There were also some Prototypes X-number in between, which were the base of many airport fire trucks build by Rosenbauer and Ziegler. To reduce development and production cost over time MAN put more and more parts from the civil production lines.
The HX is based mainly on civil components, except for the modular cab. Before the HX there was also a cheaper "light" KAT called KAT III LX with leaf springs build for some other countries.
For fast offroad driving in my opinion the stiff frame coil suspension combination will always be better then the bending frame leaf spring combination. But it also has disadvantages in some situations where the range of the suspension is not large enough. The load platform of a KAT is much higher than with other vehicles as there has to be enough room for the subended wheels. . This high center of gravity does allow only a limited side angle until it will tip over. This has been "fixed" in some way by introducing the hydraulic controlled suspension HEPLEX starting with A1.1 model.
As far as I know the SX has the same frame as the KAT and therefore isn't 100 % stiff, just as the KAT. But you don't need a pivoting suspension for a load, just some springs to fix any load.
I would even allow some flex with the Tatra, if the vehicle is going really offroad. When a frame is about 10 m long there will be always some flex that has to be compensated, apart from pure extension or contraction caused by temperature changes.
The SX is based on the KAT frame and is nearly torsion free, and the HX is based on the civil TGA frame....
The engine of the KAT/SX is located behind the crew cab and not below like the TGA. The reason for this that the military versions have to be able to be transported on railway and concurrently the fording depth has to be kept to at least 1.20m. So the engine has been placed behind the crew cabin. Another reason for this placement was that originally the KAT was designed to be able to swim. But after first successful tests with the first 3 prototypes this concept has been dropped because of cost.
![540052-1920x1200-[DesktopNexus.com].jpg](https://expeditionportal.com/forum/data/attachments/169/169481-0d118c79d408fe82884d47521375a907.jpg "540052-1920x1200-[DesktopNexus.com].jpg")
![538645-1920x1200-[DesktopNexus.com].jpg](https://expeditionportal.com/forum/data/attachments/169/169496-6a4f8ec52ba661d9590cb4367f057f92.jpg "538645-1920x1200-[DesktopNexus.com].jpg")
![540045-1920x1200-[DesktopNexus.com].jpg](https://expeditionportal.com/forum/data/attachments/169/169552-5be1a262edbec33228f6cbdb197af3ba.jpg "540045-1920x1200-[DesktopNexus.com].jpg")
![539968-1920x1200-[DesktopNexus.com].jpg](https://expeditionportal.com/forum/data/attachments/169/169555-32ff66c6f37eae241d0e1d504ecd14a1.jpg "539968-1920x1200-[DesktopNexus.com].jpg")
![540042-1920x1200-[DesktopNexus.com].jpg](https://expeditionportal.com/forum/data/attachments/169/169563-e7fe54edbe31f6c910f7023ae4d74f53.jpg "540042-1920x1200-[DesktopNexus.com].jpg")
