Talk:M35 series 2½-ton 6×6 cargo truck

Downrated to Start for lack of citations Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:37, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

List of military users?

Would it make sense to create a separate wikiarticle, listing the military users of this truck family? I know for sure that the Argentine Army was (and probably still is) user of it, where it was commonly known as "REO". Regards, DPdH (talk) 01:06, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

This has bothered me for quite some time. Under "Operational History" It is stated that "The M35 truck was not used by the United States Marine Corps....". I was in the United States Marine Corp and I can't count the number of times I personally rode in the back of an M35. I realize it's anecdotal, but life experience can't be wrong. It just is. W.A.Wessells (talk) 13:22, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Misssing Criteria

The truck was a cargo carrier, but how many men could it seat in back? 12,16 or 20? 68.7.39.127 (talk) 16:15, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Still in production?

infobox says: "Produced 1950–present" I wouldn't think that's correct. When did they stop making them? MartinezMD (talk) 02:21, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

6x6

In the U.S. vehicles are sometimes described by “wheels” rather than axles, with two wheels per axle. Dual rear tires are mounted closely parallel to each other on a common hub, and do not move in relation to each other, acting as single wheels, and are more of a tire option than a mechanical difference. Both the M34 and M35 have six “wheels”, even though the M35 has 10 tires. The "6x6" number is “number of wheels X of number wheels powered”, “6X6” means all three axles are powered.Sammy D III (talk) 18:23, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

G.I. slang

The M35 2½-ton cargo truck was often referred to as a "deuce and a half" by U.S. Army personnel; and as a "six by six" by U.S. Navy, U.S. Coast Guard and U.S Marine Corps personnel. Tjlynnjr (talk) 21:54, 11 March 2014 (UTC) .

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on M35 series 2½-ton 6x6 cargo truck. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090506120537/http://www.fuerzasmilitares.org/armamento/ejc_blindado_m35/ejc_blindado_M-35.html to http://www.fuerzasmilitares.org/armamento/ejc_blindado_m35/ejc_blindado_M-35.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:02, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Errors in types of fuel for multi-fuel motor

To my knowledge, those particular engines did NOT allow "jet fuel" to be run in those engines. They even had a plaque bolted to the dash warning you not to use aviation grade fuel. You could also possibly add that mixing fuels was permissible, which is also something labeled on those trucks. My source is a 1971 M35. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.97.27.35 (talk) 19:15, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

This is the army and air force technical manual. It specifically lists aviation fuels - JP7, JP8, Jet A, and Jet A-1. The manual can be downloaded for better search function. Much like any diesel engine, the lighter fuels don't have much lubricating properties, but they are more reliable as the temperature drops, e.g. at -76 F you can use Avgas but diesel would likely gel. The manual states to mix the fuel with 10-30% diesel if the engine is running rough.

https://www.nsndepot.com/Files/library/TM/M35/TM-9-2320-209-10-1/TM-9-2320-209-10-1.pdf

Hope that helps. MartinezMD (talk) 20:52, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Right you are about no avgas or jet fuel. In my unit (2/325) use of anything but diesel incurred the wrath of the motor sergeant. Stout Iron (talk) 13:54, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Armament

Ring mounts could be fitted over the cab for mounting M2 BMG. Infantry battalions in the 82 Abn each had 6 M35s, 4 assigned to mess halls. Use of the ring mounts was discouraged because 1. 50 cal was difficult to get. (Every round we ever got was left over from WWII.) 2. Firing from the ring mount loosened a lot in the truck necessitating re-tightening by the motor pool. 3. The first time we mounted ours was a bitch. Had to clean off the cosmoline and figure out the process. 4. Mess personnel hated having to do anything outside of duty hours. This Lieutenant and the S-4 NCOIC overcame the obstacles and did it. Results were amazing! No weapon is more fun to fire than a ma deuce. Ever after even the cooks were asking when they could do it again. Was in 1971 with 2/325. Stout Iron (talk) 14:19, 30 August 2022 (UTC)