The case for highly customized older domestics for world travel

[Cat Jockey]

Again that last post was long enough and I am not trying to be offensive with a point by point, but you bring up very good points, many of which I have thought about or am thinking through, so it is more my wanting to share my thoughts/solutions about the valid issues you raise for further critique from you, who I assume from your avatar to have real world experience, and others on the forum.

uel consumption is also an issue; heavier/bigger/stronger will automatically mean more gluglug Whatever; you're rich because you were able to afford all those upgrades so the cost of fuel isn't an issue; ah but you can't carry as much because you've lost loading capacity.

Diesel. Best way to combat fuel efficiency. Ideally I increase capacity, but it depends upon where weight is added as to whether or not it cuts into your carrying cap. No offense rich guys, but I am NOT in your club. What I am is single with no kids and pushing 40. That gives me a lot of financial irresponsibility latitude. I retired form rafting/snowcating a couple years ago and managed to take advantage of a window of opportunity and establish a short term business which is not viable beyond another year or two. I can make enough to build a true custom expo rig with a frame off beginning in about 6 months, but that is it. No more. Which gives me two years to get another business established that I can perform 20 hours/week telecommuting to bring in a meager 30,000 - 40,000 year for repairs and fuel, food, etc. Financially stupid thing to do, but this will be my house for several years and it is not finance that motivates me - inner peace is more my objective.

Not that I presume anyone to care about my personal life, but you brought up a great point that ties into it later on here:

This bit is going to annoy more than one: most of the reasons for not “going” are self inflicted; think about it as objectively as you can without getting angry.

Indeed. I actually listed my rig here for sale a couple of years ago:
http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=28575
as I thought it might be a couple years before funds were available. Then, not too long ago, I needed to sell it. Fortunately I didn't try too hard and things turned around for the best.

Point is, my plan A is pretty solid as far as coming to fruition, but if it falls through and I can't properly build a solid rig, I'm goin' in whatever has wheel and well start.

Which brings us back to reliability, IMHO it's somewhat arrogant to say “it won't break”

Agreed. I understand that is the impression I am conveying, but I did qualify a bit in my first post:

Parts and service WILL NOT be a problem as they will not be neccesary. Yes anything can happen, but the point is that I would be much more worried about dying in car crash or getting robbed in a foreign country than a properly built Ford 9" disintegrating in the middle of Africa and leaving me stranded.

Specifically addressing a properly built Ford 9", well, that rear end can handle several hundred horse power just fine. Yes it could fail. But the odds of me dying in car crash in a foreign country I rank as significantly higher. Arrogant? Not trying to be. I am trying to predict the probability of specific component failure. In that case, the use of a Ford 9" under a standard F-Series or even Class 3.

In this case, my prediction, my forecast for the unknowable future, is of all the things that break on a rig sitting on top of a Ford 9", the Ford 9" will be among the last.

I need to worry more about driving safely while traveling then what I am going to do if my Ford 9" fails.

There are so many factors both from the driver's style/behaviour and from the environment in which you find yourself that it's impossible to foresee EVERY problem and compensate for it.

Although I lack overlanding experience, I have driven pretty much everything places most people would not want to be in the passenger seat, from tracks to wheels. Being an equipment operator winter and summer and a ski hill satisfied my need for thrill and excitement to be sure. Again, not arrogant, but I am a skilled operator of vehicles in the worst enviornments and that, although again a very valid point that every one needs to think about, I do not think applies to me.

And trust me. I have found all kinds of ways to break those vehicles I operated in severe environments. And if I missed a way, one of my fellow operators found it. I essentially worked at a tax write off and pushing vehicles to the max so new ones could be purchased every few years was above tolerated - it was how the department head made us work. Within reason of course, but nothing was babied and everything was pushed to its limits.

De-tuning a Baja racer was a theoretical way of making sure the components were no longer being worked at their max. It doesn't appear to have worked.

Too each there own, but had Dan asked me, I would have advised adamently against the direction of his build. That truck belongs on a trailer behind an RV on its way to Baja. It is not because he built it that it failed. It is how he built it.

Ya wanna build a racer or a detuned racer? Bring a support vehicle. The maintenace interval on racing or detuned racing gear is not long. Again - Performance, Reliability and Longevity. Pick two of the three - you don't get them all.

Car companies spend a lot of time and money analysing what will break, what are the circumstances and consequences and whether to do something about it. Inevitably, for one group of end users or type of use, they'll get it wrong.
So the following model will compensate for that. The more modern you go the better the car companies have been able to calculate and develop the whole ensemble as an integrated unit. This is to your advantage right up to the era just before electronics were introduced into the component where you personally don't want them (probably the engine).
My observation of fora like this one is that those who spend all this time thinking of the modifications and “improvements” are almost always those who are prevented from getting out there and doing it, for whatever reason.

This is actually one of my larger pillars to my case. The intent of auto engineers. Automanufacturing is a trifecta of Engineers, large scale business models and their admintrators and bean counters. They do not put out the best engineered piece of equipment. They put out a piece of equipment that flirts the line of failure as to do otherwise is either cost prohibitive or not feasible to implement on a large scale production scheme.

I guarantee you that you can ask any engineer involved in the development of a new model, and they will tell you they had better ways to do certain things, smarter engineering, etc., but it was cost prohibitive, so they had to redesign, resulting in an inferior design. Add all of the bureaucratic restraints and an automotive engineer doesn't get to build his/her dream car.

They are building a car designed to make a corporation profit. That is their number one and overriding design constraint. Nothing wrong with profit motive, morally, being the overriding factor in their engineering, but it does mean that I can get a rig designed specifically for my task that will do the job better and more reliably.

I have seen pictures of these newer frames from automotive engineers that have put the best, most reliable thing out on the market for overlanding. They are pics of frames that are broken due to not being properly engineered to handle the rigors of overland travel.

Further, we do not have access to the automotive industries top engineers and engineering - they keep that technology in house for their racing teams.

Here's what I suggest:
Buy a proven platform as recent as you possibly can (pre-electronic engine of course) for cab comfort and integral solidity reasons. Preferably diesel, but even that's a personal choice. Learn about its weak points on the internet, from TRAVELLERS. Upgrade or simply renew only those points. Rip out the cab or safety electronics you feel uncomfortable with (ABS? Radio? GPS?)
GO!
That will cost so much less!
So you have a fixed departure date; instead of spending the money customising the truck while you're waiting have a holiday or two, or put it to one side for that inevitable DHL courier. Or save it to treat yourselves to a decent hotel when you feel that She's at cracking point with this RTW trip.
If you want great big tyres get a truck that was originally designed to run them (etc. etc.) Mine is stock with parabolic springs, lockers all round and 365/85r20 with an 8 tonne payload capacity. Commercial vehicles are designed to do hundredS of thousandS of miles without problems; cars are designed for A hundred thousand. They generally cost less second hand and you don't really have to worry about overloading. The only place I wouldn't follow a LR in my truck is into narrow streets, but then I hate towns, cities and even villages, so that's ok.
Of course this is only what I would suggest, don't get angry with me for expressing my point of view please (I now feel obliged to put this after every post here, because I've expressed an opinion that goes against the OP)
Looking forward to more on this discussion.

Definitely sound advice. Thanks for your thoughts, you bring very valid points and speak from experience - I appreciate that.

 

[LukeH]

Gosh we are doing well with long posts.
Thank you for taking the time to look through and answer my points on an individual basis.
No I take no offence whatsoever; if I can help you think about things you might not have come up with then all the better.
It’s very clear you’ve thought long and hard about the pros and cons of this, that or the other platform choice. Your freedom to fettle in the US is enviable; in the EU that’s all tied up in administration and laws. Some would say for your own safety, others (I) would say to get your euros circulating by paying the dealers etc. instead of saving your money and doing it yourself.
Your arguments are solid, your experience will help you design and built a solid (and perhaps heavy), reliable vehicle that you’re comfortable with (that’s the most important bit), proud of and that’ll happily take you wherever you want.
It looks like we agree entirely on the upshot of your initial post “is global network support really an issue these days?” I believe as you do, that it isn’t.
Unfortunately, very unfortunately, your analysis of the car industry is absolutely spot on. I’ve served time in the car industry here in Europe, I’m a consultant mechanical engineer, I get called in when the in-house guys can’t do it, fix it or understand it. So I get to see a lot of compromised designs, exactly as you describe. Thankfully I’m out of that and have passed through the heavy goods vehicle industry, hydro electric to end up helping out satellite designers.
I digress, sort of.
However this bean counting philosophy is fortunately left to one side when the customer base is mainly made up of commercial fleet operators. It is an unfortunate fact that even in America, the individual has no real power; car companies are prepared to economise, fix breakages as they happen (often on the quiet) and with the money saved they pay for big ad campaigns that are powerful enough to counter any bad reputation a car may develop. A broken down car only costs the price of the repair.
Commercial operators are a different animal; a loaded lorry broken down on the side of the road costs thousands per hour just sitting there! With fresh/frozen produce there’s a danger of losing the whole payload.
Goods vehicle manufacturers know this and don’t compromise nearly as much. They know that a single fleet operator will buy dozens of vehicles, it’s important to demonstrate reliability above all other factors. Otherwise he’ll go elsewhere.
And somewhere in between these two extremes are the larger 4x4 pick up (and old 20+ SUV) trucks; sort of working vehicle, sort of car. Nobody knows how much to focus on solidity and or lightness/economy. Even your Ford E falls into that category, a sort of grey zone where weight is still an issue.
As I understand that’s the size category you’re looking at. After much deliberation I came to the conclusion that I would always be at the upper limit of the vehicle’s capacity in that category; one of the most limiting factors being the tyres and their load rating.
Amazingly my 14 tonne commercial on 20 inchers actually treads lighter than my previous 4 tonne 4x4 camper on a semi-commercial platform on 235/85/16, which was at the upper limit of its load rating.
That’s a point now that I come to mention it: we agree on parts availability, what about tyres?
Instinctively (and perhaps without justification? Opinions?) I want to keep to a tyre size that is more frequently available or as close as possible in the countries I visit. Shredding a tyre is probably more likely than any other breakage, I would want to bail myself out with what’s available locally (mounted as a spare or not even mounted, but with me) until I get to a major centre where I can get the right size. Some of the larger 15” and 16” American sizes are considered “exotic” even here in Europe and cost a fortune. I dread to imagine further afield; what’s more, countries often levy heavily on products that are “also” produced in their country; tyres often suffer from that. You could find your black donuts trapped in customs.
I can run from 13x20 to 16x 20 and all the metric sizes within that range without upsetting my differential; that gives me quite a lot of choice for a temporary fix (if I’ve destroyed my two spares that is).
Another point that I discovered to my discomfort: African corrugations are hell on 16” wheels where the 20” just float over them.
I was about to suggest you just get a U1300 beater and remotor it to your tastes, because the transmission is really tough, and they can be had so cheap. (10000E gets you a solid base with a couple of oil leaks and an engine de-tuned to stop german soldiers going too fast)
But you’re the wrong side of the pond for that; the mogs over there fetch silly money for old sheds.
At the risk of sounding boring, look into throwing a TC and front drive axle under a larger commercial (larger than your Ford). It’s clear you’re not afraid of getting in there. For reliability reasons, heavy truck manufacturers put off introducing electronics into their engines for longer than car builders, you could get more recent, and you could save on your chassis fabrication because the chassis will be much more solid than you need.
Then again, the lack of decent heavy platforms that could be transformed into expedition vehicles has often been lamented on this forum; I guess Europe is slightly better served there.
What a shame we live so far away; I reckon that if we met up for a drink we’d manage to design the ultimate overlander on an envelope, solve the economic crisis and put the world to rights all in an evening. What a pleasure it is discussing with you.

 

[southpier]

Probably the best advice I have seen on this website. Not to be insulting, but some people seem to put more effort into building there vehicle than using it.

i wouldn't think your opinion is insulting. hobbies always offer different opportunities, and those who participate in different phases.

 

[1leglance]

I really like the idea of commercial vs recreational platforms when it comes to overlanding with more than 2 people or more than min comfort.

I would lay to point the number of US school buses that are living a long long life south of our border (all the way to the end of Argentina).
In my travels I have seen US school buses that were 50 yrs old still going strong, of course with new engines, paint and such but the frame and I am sure axles where original I bet.

Or go with a bobbed duece (military) or one of the Kenworth 6x6's that are about to go on sale on gov liq auction, chop off the rear most axle and you have a great 2 person setup that will only be limited in small towns.

Or stick with the VW bus that is the universal traveler and repair as needed

But whatever you do keep the build cheap and quick and please just go.....now, soon, quickly or life has a way of making you stay just a bit longer....longer....longer...forever

 

[Cat Jockey]

Another well thought response Luke. Admittedly, what I am suggesting needs pretty solid commitment and there is absolutely a chance that my new fangled Rube Goldberg contraption will leave me stranded in the middle of nowhere kicking the tires in frustration because it broke down again. It needs serious thought without omission of many critical and small details and any thinking that is outsourced needs to be competent.

If I could get a decent Unimog with a good amount of life left on it for $10,000-$15,000, that would be very, very tempting. There really aren't any platforms available in that price range over here, unless I have missed one. That is definitely what started the ball rolling in my head of a ground up build based off of an older VIN.

What I am suggesting is definitely not for everybody, or maybe even most. One big downfall of going full custom that hasn't bee mentioned yet is you are going to take a financial loss. It is a whole bunch of money you will never get back out of it if you sell it as well as being more difficult to sell.

Thanks again. Much useful information you provided for anyone going through their base vehicle selection process.

Take care.

 

[spacer]

Oy. Long posts, but an interesting enough topic that I'll have to come back and read some more as I get the time.

Race-Proven parts are great, but folks who race with 'em also have maintenance crews along for good reason. I'd beef up what weak points you find (oh, say... like the 10 bolt rear in my old Silverado) and leave the stuff that works well.
As for fuel consumption... yeah, that 500 horse monster v8 is all sorts of fun, but there are less-thirsty options in US domestic vehicles (yeah, we aren't *all* like the stereotypical TV Amurrikans) from smaller mills to going with diesel.

I used to take my old '74 K10 all over my part of NM, and beat the heck out of it (I was in my late teens). Poor old truck took a beating and kept on chugging along. I even puttered my way from NM to AL when I moved there in the mid '90s, and drove it as my DD for 4 more years before "upgrading" to a newer van.

Find a truck you like, beef up what needs beefin' up, have fun with it around home, and then go have fun with it somewhere else. Even if it breaks, so long as you're having fun... well, that's all that really matters, right?
Otherwise, it's just a job.

 

[Cat Jockey]

Or go with a bobbed duece (military) or one of the Kenworth 6x6's that are about to go on sale on gov liq auction, chop off the rear most axle and you have a great 2 person setup that will only be limited in small towns.

My ideal size is somewhere between the M35A2 and my current E-350 chassis. 6X6. We had one of those at a ski area I worked at. They are brutes. Big brutes. And obviously proven for offroad reliability. I have thought pretty hard about one, and since the check writing is 6 months away I am still considering one. They weigh about 16,000 lbs empty I think. Big, but I plan on staying put in certain locations for 2-4 weeks at a time, maybe longer, so bigger is defintiely better for that.

I am still thinking very heavy about a custom 6x6. 6X6 with rear steering for use while stuck in mud/sand and for better turning at low speed operated via hydraulic lever (turn front wheels with steering wheel and rear with lever operating a hydraulic valve or a switch operating a hydraulic solenoid, self centering function and then a bypass that shuts down controlling electronics when the vehicle hits a certain speed, etc.). Sounds like a recipe for disaster, eh? It is actually a very simple and very reliable system to incorporate, easy to incorporate electronics, including a PLC you can program and reprogram - using 2.5 ton Rockwell axles from a deuce and a half. So, if not a M35A2, I am probably going to scavange some parts off of one - like three 2.5 ton steering axles. And a 6x6 rear steer system, if reliable, opens up the gates to many, many 4wd roads throughout the world as well as smaller paved ones, providing you can compensate in other ways for the added weight. Needs to be engineered properly, but can be done very reliably.

Not much more I can say before I break out a torch, hammer and checkbook and start posting build pics, but any discussion about what is 'best' for a platform is definitely a personal decision. On top of that, influencing that decision is what each persons expects to achieve with their experience. For me, it starts with a shakedown cruise on the local 4wd backroads of Colorado to check vehicle performance (with & without cabin) and suitability for being in the middle of nowhere in one spot for 2-4 weeks to make sure the living/working quarters function as planned. Then, if nothing breaks at that point, drive through all lower 48, going into eastern Canada and then to Alaska.

Point of that is that is a pretty good shake down cruise where I can easily access help in the event of a complete failure and it will cover a lot of miles and 6-12 months. If nothing breaks horrifically in that time, it would bolster my confidence to go any of the continents with it. And if all is well at that point, well, point it south and see what the other hemisphere is all about without any more than average concern of becoming stranded due to vehicle failure.

 

[jesusgatos]

Planning on adding rear-steer to mah deuce eventually, along with another drive-axle under the trailer. Are you planning on re-powering it? Are you going to strip it down to the frame and build a new body/box or reuse the existing cab? Might also want to look at the 900 series 5-tons. Especially if you would only be using the framerails, transfercase, and axles. Would add a little bit of weight (OK, a lot), but they use much more common 10-lug wheels and have air-brakes. Was planning on building something full-custom like this myself but decided to scale back my plans because I didn't want to spend the rest of my life building it.

 

[offroadcruiser]

Old vs new, interesting read

How about driving to South America, Uruguay from Toronto, Canada in 1971 with a well used 1957 bread truck, covered 15,000 miles in 3 months.

I know we drove much too fast but my brother wanted to get there for Xmas.

There were 6 of us, myself 23, my then girlfriend 20, my brother 30, his wife 24 and their 2 girls 5 and 8 years old.

The only mechanical problems we had were the following, broken front spring in Bolivia, broken rear spring in Argentina and a broken hose to the remote cartridge oil filter, we removed both lines from the block and plugged the holes, no oil filter after that.

Originally we had planned to replace all 4 leaf springs when we reached Mexico but the original springs worked very well so we did not bother but should have.

We replaced all the pins and bushings in the suspension before we left Canada and had the correct reamers with us so we only had to buy new springs. The bushings and pins we installed in Canada were still fine more than 10,000 rough miles later.

Before we left we also replaced the flathead 6 cyl Dodge with a 6 cyl Chevy engine that my brother had rebuilt himself with jobber parts (now would be called NAPA or Auto Zone) and had used in his cars for the last few years. The rest of the drivetrain was all original Dodge, we probably changed the oil in the tranny and the rear end and freed up the drum brakes. We made the engine to tranny adapter ourselves by slicing 1/2 inch off the back of the Dodge flathead engine block.

The only custom work was a 40 gallon fuel tank we welded up ourselves that took a hit from a car without denting plus a water tank we made from galvanized sheet metal.

The interior had beds, portapotti for the girls, fridge, stove and sink.

This was a heavy duty delivery truck with an aluminum body so even with the junk we were carrying it was not overloaded. Also we limited ourselves to 45 mph (70 kph) most of the time but the truck would and did go faster when we stepped on it. It had a 4 speed transmission but 1st was a granny gear and I assume that 4th was direct.

It had very skinny 20 inch tires that were hard to find so I bought a spare tire from a salvage yard here in Ontario and 2 more from another salvage yard in Utah. We had one flat at very high altitude in Peru and even though we were young we had a tough time swinging the big sledge to remove the split ring, almost felt like I was coughing blood. The second flat was in Argentina and we had a shop fix that one.

We did not explore off-road but drove away from the road every night into a field or some woods since we camped rough almost the whole trip.

In South Dakota we met a fellow traveler who had a strange mix of truck, trailer and his wife followed in an Opel car. When we asked him if he had chosen the best vehicles for his trip he said 'well you know, you drive what you got'. We have used that principle for all our vehicles ever since.

So I guess that puts me into the 'do not overbuild it camp' just drive it and fix it along the way. http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/images/smilies/smiley_drive.gif

Carl

 

[Cat Jockey]

Are you planning on re-powering it? Are you going to strip it down to the frame and build a new body/box or reuse the existing cab? Might also want to look at the 900 series 5-tons. Especially if you would only be using the framerails, transfercase, and axles.

That is a sweet setup you have. I especially like your hub steps - brilliant idea. Your steering wheel locking device is pretty cherry too. If I go the 6x6 rockwell route, I'm more inclined to build a new frame, and built so direct transfer of the suspension components is easy from the deuce frame to the new one, maybe remove a couple of leafs and add shocks, find the best powerplant as far as suitable power and reliability. As far as tranny/transfer case/drive shafts, again I can let proven reliability make my selection due to the design of the pinon shafts and minimal angles. I can choose a transfer case who's output shaft may be lower than the stock M35A2 because of those low angles without worry of introducing weird new strains. And then break out the torch and sawzall and make the 83 E-350 cab fit as far forward, building a dog house if need be, and then a home behind that.

As far as the ambo body, I plan on taking it completely apart. It needs to be bigger and incorporate a pop -up as there is only 63" stand up height. Most of the aluminum skin on the outside I'll recycle and then utliize whater aluminun structural componets I may need. I like the panels that people are using and aluminum is heavy.

Your multi-feul option is untouchable though. Scratch that concern off the list for world travel. If it is liquid and you can light it on fire, that'll make the deuce and a half go. You rig definitely speaks volumes for the potential of a Deuce and a Half and a driven tailer would be sweet. Good thinking on the 900 series parts too.

For any others that might be reading, my fascination with the 2.5 Ton Rockwell axles is twofold. The first being their ability to be used for rear steering applications as well, and more importantly, they are rated for a 2.5 Ton payload OFFROAD. Real, military type offroad. Take the weight of the truck plus the 2.5 ton payload and you are looking at an axle and suspension system that can be turned in to rear steer AND has proven itself to handle 20,000 lbs. in real world offroad conditions.

 

[Cat Jockey]

I sure love my Ford F700 4x4 (Casa Azul), here is a thread about my 2.5 year & stupid $$$ "extreme makeover"...

I have seen your thread. You definitely have a custom rig. I dig it.

I just finished more or less what your are talking about, and I've got to say...I'll never do that again!

But i'm glad i did!

I am trying to anticipate that sentiment. To combat it, I am investing many hours per week and will for the next few months in research, planning, AutoCAD modeling, etc. as well as knowing that once those decisions are finalized and work begins, say goodbye to at least 1.5 years. I also know that testing will need to be done on everything as the build goes along.

But, I can't wait.

 

[Cat Jockey]

One question for you jesusgatos. I have looked over the last few months, but I cannot find info on the net concerning the dimension between the rear axle centers. I can find overall wheelbase, but finding the distance between the two rear axles eludes me.

Anything of the top of your head concerning a number or a website that might have that info (I read your thread but didn't click on any external links yet).

Thanks.

 

[jesusgatos]

Thanks.

Take a look at a deuce before putting too much thought into this. You'll probably end up wanting to use the framerails and the transfer-case. At least, that's what I would do. Keep the axles, driveshafts, transfer-case and framerails. You'd have a great rolling chassis to build-on. Put whatever body on it you want. Nice straight framerails should make that pretty easy.

Built this vehicle primarily for domestic travel, and might likely have built something else if I was ever planning on venturing much further than South America. Multifuel is awesome, but parts availability isn't as good as with some other, more common vehicles.

Pretty sure that steering 2.5-ton rockwell axles are rated for somewhere around 7000lbs (total weight). You'll want to do something about the brakes if you use these axles. I'm going convert to Hydramax brakes on this vehicle.

 

[jesusgatos]

axle-to-axle distance

It's dark right now, but looks like it's right about 48"? Try searching steelsoldiers. I'm sure I've seen that measurement posted, and I think it was in reference to tire size. There was a discussion about using 5-ton links a while ago, which I guess are longer than the deuce links.

 

[Cat Jockey]

48" is close enough. 7000 lbs.? Well 3 of those will work. I would prefer to be in the 16,000-18,000 max range anyway. Drums gotta go for no other reason then weight.

I like the frame idea as well, and have given that some thought. Find one with a blown engine, etc. I would have to modify the frame though. Shorten it a bit and then I also want to shorten the wheel base. I am looking for a bit narrower and shorter than a full size deuce frame, so that is a great idea, narrower than stock rear axles, rolling chassis. In the end, if I go the 2.5T route, I would want to grab as much undercarriage as possible and wouldn't mind the stock transfer case either and then take a look and see how much trouble to shorten both the frame and the wheel base on a deuce is. One benefit to a new frame can be easier incorporation of a 4 point pivot cabin mount and things like integrating Overlanding features into the frame consrtuction (big dual tanks, fresh water tank, plumbing, etc. We'll see ...