M100 Military Trailer
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: M100 Military Trailer
William Oliveri wrote:
> I like the body style of the M416 better anyway (angled fenders over rounded
> ones) so I'll keep looking.
I think the M100s are worth more, or at least more sought after.
> Anyway, What's the consensus regarding pulling a trailer behind a jeep. I
> have the image in my mind and thinking of using it for pulling camping gear
> and supplies. Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
> well?
That is what they were designed for.
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940
Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.
http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
> I like the body style of the M416 better anyway (angled fenders over rounded
> ones) so I'll keep looking.
I think the M100s are worth more, or at least more sought after.
> Anyway, What's the consensus regarding pulling a trailer behind a jeep. I
> have the image in my mind and thinking of using it for pulling camping gear
> and supplies. Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
> well?
That is what they were designed for.
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940
Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.
http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: M100 Military Trailer
William Oliveri wrote:
> I like the body style of the M416 better anyway (angled fenders over rounded
> ones) so I'll keep looking.
I think the M100s are worth more, or at least more sought after.
> Anyway, What's the consensus regarding pulling a trailer behind a jeep. I
> have the image in my mind and thinking of using it for pulling camping gear
> and supplies. Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
> well?
That is what they were designed for.
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940
Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.
http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
> I like the body style of the M416 better anyway (angled fenders over rounded
> ones) so I'll keep looking.
I think the M100s are worth more, or at least more sought after.
> Anyway, What's the consensus regarding pulling a trailer behind a jeep. I
> have the image in my mind and thinking of using it for pulling camping gear
> and supplies. Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
> well?
That is what they were designed for.
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940
Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.
http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: M100 Military Trailer
William Oliveri wrote:
> I like the body style of the M416 better anyway (angled fenders over rounded
> ones) so I'll keep looking.
I think the M100s are worth more, or at least more sought after.
> Anyway, What's the consensus regarding pulling a trailer behind a jeep. I
> have the image in my mind and thinking of using it for pulling camping gear
> and supplies. Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
> well?
That is what they were designed for.
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940
Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.
http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
> I like the body style of the M416 better anyway (angled fenders over rounded
> ones) so I'll keep looking.
I think the M100s are worth more, or at least more sought after.
> Anyway, What's the consensus regarding pulling a trailer behind a jeep. I
> have the image in my mind and thinking of using it for pulling camping gear
> and supplies. Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
> well?
That is what they were designed for.
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940
Etymology: probably from g. p. (abbreviation of general purpose)
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.
http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: M100 Military Trailer
>Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
>well?
I have a 1946 Bantam BT3C trailer (post-war civilian version of the WWII 1/4
ton jeep trailer, which was the precurser to the Korean War era M100). Been
towing it behind various jeeps since 1966.
CJ-7s pull these trailers just fine.
MT, BT3, BT3C and M100 trailers are becoming quite rare. I have been offered
more than $2,000 for my BT3C, but it is rust free, in great condition with one
of the lowest known serial numbers of the remaining BT3-Cs. Not bad for a
trailer that sold for less than $200 new.
The Vietnam era M-416 trailers are easier to find. They also have a wider
track which more closely matches the track of the CJ-7. However, they need to
be modified to accept the CJ 5 on 5 1/2 lug pattern so you can run the same
wheels all around. (The M416 was designed to be towed by the old Mutt and
Mighty Mite military vehicles, which have an entirely different wheel pattern
than Jeeps.)
Robert Bills
KG6LMV
Orange County CA
http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
http://www.RobertBills.com
>well?
I have a 1946 Bantam BT3C trailer (post-war civilian version of the WWII 1/4
ton jeep trailer, which was the precurser to the Korean War era M100). Been
towing it behind various jeeps since 1966.
CJ-7s pull these trailers just fine.
MT, BT3, BT3C and M100 trailers are becoming quite rare. I have been offered
more than $2,000 for my BT3C, but it is rust free, in great condition with one
of the lowest known serial numbers of the remaining BT3-Cs. Not bad for a
trailer that sold for less than $200 new.
The Vietnam era M-416 trailers are easier to find. They also have a wider
track which more closely matches the track of the CJ-7. However, they need to
be modified to accept the CJ 5 on 5 1/2 lug pattern so you can run the same
wheels all around. (The M416 was designed to be towed by the old Mutt and
Mighty Mite military vehicles, which have an entirely different wheel pattern
than Jeeps.)
Robert Bills
KG6LMV
Orange County CA
http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
http://www.RobertBills.com
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: M100 Military Trailer
>Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
>well?
I have a 1946 Bantam BT3C trailer (post-war civilian version of the WWII 1/4
ton jeep trailer, which was the precurser to the Korean War era M100). Been
towing it behind various jeeps since 1966.
CJ-7s pull these trailers just fine.
MT, BT3, BT3C and M100 trailers are becoming quite rare. I have been offered
more than $2,000 for my BT3C, but it is rust free, in great condition with one
of the lowest known serial numbers of the remaining BT3-Cs. Not bad for a
trailer that sold for less than $200 new.
The Vietnam era M-416 trailers are easier to find. They also have a wider
track which more closely matches the track of the CJ-7. However, they need to
be modified to accept the CJ 5 on 5 1/2 lug pattern so you can run the same
wheels all around. (The M416 was designed to be towed by the old Mutt and
Mighty Mite military vehicles, which have an entirely different wheel pattern
than Jeeps.)
Robert Bills
KG6LMV
Orange County CA
http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
http://www.RobertBills.com
>well?
I have a 1946 Bantam BT3C trailer (post-war civilian version of the WWII 1/4
ton jeep trailer, which was the precurser to the Korean War era M100). Been
towing it behind various jeeps since 1966.
CJ-7s pull these trailers just fine.
MT, BT3, BT3C and M100 trailers are becoming quite rare. I have been offered
more than $2,000 for my BT3C, but it is rust free, in great condition with one
of the lowest known serial numbers of the remaining BT3-Cs. Not bad for a
trailer that sold for less than $200 new.
The Vietnam era M-416 trailers are easier to find. They also have a wider
track which more closely matches the track of the CJ-7. However, they need to
be modified to accept the CJ 5 on 5 1/2 lug pattern so you can run the same
wheels all around. (The M416 was designed to be towed by the old Mutt and
Mighty Mite military vehicles, which have an entirely different wheel pattern
than Jeeps.)
Robert Bills
KG6LMV
Orange County CA
http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
http://www.RobertBills.com
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: M100 Military Trailer
>Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
>well?
I have a 1946 Bantam BT3C trailer (post-war civilian version of the WWII 1/4
ton jeep trailer, which was the precurser to the Korean War era M100). Been
towing it behind various jeeps since 1966.
CJ-7s pull these trailers just fine.
MT, BT3, BT3C and M100 trailers are becoming quite rare. I have been offered
more than $2,000 for my BT3C, but it is rust free, in great condition with one
of the lowest known serial numbers of the remaining BT3-Cs. Not bad for a
trailer that sold for less than $200 new.
The Vietnam era M-416 trailers are easier to find. They also have a wider
track which more closely matches the track of the CJ-7. However, they need to
be modified to accept the CJ 5 on 5 1/2 lug pattern so you can run the same
wheels all around. (The M416 was designed to be towed by the old Mutt and
Mighty Mite military vehicles, which have an entirely different wheel pattern
than Jeeps.)
Robert Bills
KG6LMV
Orange County CA
http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
http://www.RobertBills.com
>well?
I have a 1946 Bantam BT3C trailer (post-war civilian version of the WWII 1/4
ton jeep trailer, which was the precurser to the Korean War era M100). Been
towing it behind various jeeps since 1966.
CJ-7s pull these trailers just fine.
MT, BT3, BT3C and M100 trailers are becoming quite rare. I have been offered
more than $2,000 for my BT3C, but it is rust free, in great condition with one
of the lowest known serial numbers of the remaining BT3-Cs. Not bad for a
trailer that sold for less than $200 new.
The Vietnam era M-416 trailers are easier to find. They also have a wider
track which more closely matches the track of the CJ-7. However, they need to
be modified to accept the CJ 5 on 5 1/2 lug pattern so you can run the same
wheels all around. (The M416 was designed to be towed by the old Mutt and
Mighty Mite military vehicles, which have an entirely different wheel pattern
than Jeeps.)
Robert Bills
KG6LMV
Orange County CA
http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
http://www.RobertBills.com
#17
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: M100 Military Trailer
There's also the M-101 which is the Canidian version of the M-416. These
are quite new:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2451588942
and in great shape.
So why do you want to have the same size wheels as on your Jeep? Does that
mean if I'm running 33" tires on my CJ I'd also want the same on the
trailer?
Thanks,
Bill
"Robert Bills" <rdbillsjr@aol.comxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:20040107093106.10770.00001410@mb-m24.aol.com...
> >Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
> >well?
>
> I have a 1946 Bantam BT3C trailer (post-war civilian version of the WWII
1/4
> ton jeep trailer, which was the precurser to the Korean War era M100).
Been
> towing it behind various jeeps since 1966.
>
> CJ-7s pull these trailers just fine.
>
> MT, BT3, BT3C and M100 trailers are becoming quite rare. I have been
offered
> more than $2,000 for my BT3C, but it is rust free, in great condition with
one
> of the lowest known serial numbers of the remaining BT3-Cs. Not bad for a
> trailer that sold for less than $200 new.
>
> The Vietnam era M-416 trailers are easier to find. They also have a wider
> track which more closely matches the track of the CJ-7. However, they
need to
> be modified to accept the CJ 5 on 5 1/2 lug pattern so you can run the
same
> wheels all around. (The M416 was designed to be towed by the old Mutt
and
> Mighty Mite military vehicles, which have an entirely different wheel
pattern
> than Jeeps.)
>
> Robert Bills
> KG6LMV
> Orange County CA
>
> http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
> http://www.RobertBills.com
are quite new:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2451588942
and in great shape.
So why do you want to have the same size wheels as on your Jeep? Does that
mean if I'm running 33" tires on my CJ I'd also want the same on the
trailer?
Thanks,
Bill
"Robert Bills" <rdbillsjr@aol.comxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:20040107093106.10770.00001410@mb-m24.aol.com...
> >Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
> >well?
>
> I have a 1946 Bantam BT3C trailer (post-war civilian version of the WWII
1/4
> ton jeep trailer, which was the precurser to the Korean War era M100).
Been
> towing it behind various jeeps since 1966.
>
> CJ-7s pull these trailers just fine.
>
> MT, BT3, BT3C and M100 trailers are becoming quite rare. I have been
offered
> more than $2,000 for my BT3C, but it is rust free, in great condition with
one
> of the lowest known serial numbers of the remaining BT3-Cs. Not bad for a
> trailer that sold for less than $200 new.
>
> The Vietnam era M-416 trailers are easier to find. They also have a wider
> track which more closely matches the track of the CJ-7. However, they
need to
> be modified to accept the CJ 5 on 5 1/2 lug pattern so you can run the
same
> wheels all around. (The M416 was designed to be towed by the old Mutt
and
> Mighty Mite military vehicles, which have an entirely different wheel
pattern
> than Jeeps.)
>
> Robert Bills
> KG6LMV
> Orange County CA
>
> http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
> http://www.RobertBills.com
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: M100 Military Trailer
There's also the M-101 which is the Canidian version of the M-416. These
are quite new:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2451588942
and in great shape.
So why do you want to have the same size wheels as on your Jeep? Does that
mean if I'm running 33" tires on my CJ I'd also want the same on the
trailer?
Thanks,
Bill
"Robert Bills" <rdbillsjr@aol.comxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:20040107093106.10770.00001410@mb-m24.aol.com...
> >Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
> >well?
>
> I have a 1946 Bantam BT3C trailer (post-war civilian version of the WWII
1/4
> ton jeep trailer, which was the precurser to the Korean War era M100).
Been
> towing it behind various jeeps since 1966.
>
> CJ-7s pull these trailers just fine.
>
> MT, BT3, BT3C and M100 trailers are becoming quite rare. I have been
offered
> more than $2,000 for my BT3C, but it is rust free, in great condition with
one
> of the lowest known serial numbers of the remaining BT3-Cs. Not bad for a
> trailer that sold for less than $200 new.
>
> The Vietnam era M-416 trailers are easier to find. They also have a wider
> track which more closely matches the track of the CJ-7. However, they
need to
> be modified to accept the CJ 5 on 5 1/2 lug pattern so you can run the
same
> wheels all around. (The M416 was designed to be towed by the old Mutt
and
> Mighty Mite military vehicles, which have an entirely different wheel
pattern
> than Jeeps.)
>
> Robert Bills
> KG6LMV
> Orange County CA
>
> http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
> http://www.RobertBills.com
are quite new:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2451588942
and in great shape.
So why do you want to have the same size wheels as on your Jeep? Does that
mean if I'm running 33" tires on my CJ I'd also want the same on the
trailer?
Thanks,
Bill
"Robert Bills" <rdbillsjr@aol.comxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:20040107093106.10770.00001410@mb-m24.aol.com...
> >Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
> >well?
>
> I have a 1946 Bantam BT3C trailer (post-war civilian version of the WWII
1/4
> ton jeep trailer, which was the precurser to the Korean War era M100).
Been
> towing it behind various jeeps since 1966.
>
> CJ-7s pull these trailers just fine.
>
> MT, BT3, BT3C and M100 trailers are becoming quite rare. I have been
offered
> more than $2,000 for my BT3C, but it is rust free, in great condition with
one
> of the lowest known serial numbers of the remaining BT3-Cs. Not bad for a
> trailer that sold for less than $200 new.
>
> The Vietnam era M-416 trailers are easier to find. They also have a wider
> track which more closely matches the track of the CJ-7. However, they
need to
> be modified to accept the CJ 5 on 5 1/2 lug pattern so you can run the
same
> wheels all around. (The M416 was designed to be towed by the old Mutt
and
> Mighty Mite military vehicles, which have an entirely different wheel
pattern
> than Jeeps.)
>
> Robert Bills
> KG6LMV
> Orange County CA
>
> http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
> http://www.RobertBills.com
#19
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: M100 Military Trailer
There's also the M-101 which is the Canidian version of the M-416. These
are quite new:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2451588942
and in great shape.
So why do you want to have the same size wheels as on your Jeep? Does that
mean if I'm running 33" tires on my CJ I'd also want the same on the
trailer?
Thanks,
Bill
"Robert Bills" <rdbillsjr@aol.comxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:20040107093106.10770.00001410@mb-m24.aol.com...
> >Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
> >well?
>
> I have a 1946 Bantam BT3C trailer (post-war civilian version of the WWII
1/4
> ton jeep trailer, which was the precurser to the Korean War era M100).
Been
> towing it behind various jeeps since 1966.
>
> CJ-7s pull these trailers just fine.
>
> MT, BT3, BT3C and M100 trailers are becoming quite rare. I have been
offered
> more than $2,000 for my BT3C, but it is rust free, in great condition with
one
> of the lowest known serial numbers of the remaining BT3-Cs. Not bad for a
> trailer that sold for less than $200 new.
>
> The Vietnam era M-416 trailers are easier to find. They also have a wider
> track which more closely matches the track of the CJ-7. However, they
need to
> be modified to accept the CJ 5 on 5 1/2 lug pattern so you can run the
same
> wheels all around. (The M416 was designed to be towed by the old Mutt
and
> Mighty Mite military vehicles, which have an entirely different wheel
pattern
> than Jeeps.)
>
> Robert Bills
> KG6LMV
> Orange County CA
>
> http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
> http://www.RobertBills.com
are quite new:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2451588942
and in great shape.
So why do you want to have the same size wheels as on your Jeep? Does that
mean if I'm running 33" tires on my CJ I'd also want the same on the
trailer?
Thanks,
Bill
"Robert Bills" <rdbillsjr@aol.comxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:20040107093106.10770.00001410@mb-m24.aol.com...
> >Do CJ7s (I6, 258) pull trailers such as the M100 or M416
> >well?
>
> I have a 1946 Bantam BT3C trailer (post-war civilian version of the WWII
1/4
> ton jeep trailer, which was the precurser to the Korean War era M100).
Been
> towing it behind various jeeps since 1966.
>
> CJ-7s pull these trailers just fine.
>
> MT, BT3, BT3C and M100 trailers are becoming quite rare. I have been
offered
> more than $2,000 for my BT3C, but it is rust free, in great condition with
one
> of the lowest known serial numbers of the remaining BT3-Cs. Not bad for a
> trailer that sold for less than $200 new.
>
> The Vietnam era M-416 trailers are easier to find. They also have a wider
> track which more closely matches the track of the CJ-7. However, they
need to
> be modified to accept the CJ 5 on 5 1/2 lug pattern so you can run the
same
> wheels all around. (The M416 was designed to be towed by the old Mutt
and
> Mighty Mite military vehicles, which have an entirely different wheel
pattern
> than Jeeps.)
>
> Robert Bills
> KG6LMV
> Orange County CA
>
> http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
> http://www.RobertBills.com
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: M100 Military Trailer
>So why do you want to have the same size wheels as on your Jeep? Does that
>mean if I'm running 33" tires on my CJ I'd also want the same on the
>trailer?
You want all the tires to be interchangable. 33's will fit an M416 with minor
suspension mods.
If the wheels and tires don't match the jeep you will need two different sized
spares. Mounting a spare on a small trailer can be a challenge. (i.e., its
just as easy to make all the wheels/tires match and carry one spare on your
jeep)
Robert Bills
KG6LMV
Orange County CA
http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
http://www.RobertBills.com
>mean if I'm running 33" tires on my CJ I'd also want the same on the
>trailer?
You want all the tires to be interchangable. 33's will fit an M416 with minor
suspension mods.
If the wheels and tires don't match the jeep you will need two different sized
spares. Mounting a spare on a small trailer can be a challenge. (i.e., its
just as easy to make all the wheels/tires match and carry one spare on your
jeep)
Robert Bills
KG6LMV
Orange County CA
http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
http://www.RobertBills.com