[Milsurplus] OT: "Surplus Stupidity" Is Alive and Well.

[Bob Camp]

Hi

They brought a *lot* of Hummers back. Living where I do, the truckloads rumble by me on the highway from time to time. They refurbish many of them just down the road. Most of what was left was a bit larger than a Hummer and a lot less practical for “normal” use. Yes, I’d love to have ten of any of them and the room / time / funds / tools / help  to make one functional one out of the group. To your point - you might have a tough time getting them past the safety inspection once you were done. 

Bob

On Mar 20, 2014, at 10:19 PM, Peter Gottlieb <nerd at verizon.net> wrote:

> Those military hummers have another issue in that they're prone to rollovers on the highway.  I heard the high accident rate is what prompted them to cease sales of surplus ones in the USA.  Maybe they should have just gone back to Jeeps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 3/20/2014 4:09 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
>> Hi
>> 
>> The other reported issue from those who *did* take one or more of them - pretty much beat to death. They spent a lot of time being driven over very rough terrain by people who were more concerned with staying alive than preserving the shock absorbers.
>> 
>> They are no different than the car in your garage. Buy it as a bundle of parts and they cost a *lot* more than a brand new one right off the lot. Once enough stuff needs replacing, they don’t have much value to somebody who indents to use them for their designed purpose.
>> 
>> Bob
>> 
>> On Mar 20, 2014, at 9:04 AM, don davis <dxguy at earthlink.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> 2 mpg and very expensive to maintain, and different from their normal equip?
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
>>> [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of
>>> mstangelo at comcast.net
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 5:51 AM
>>> To: David Stinson
>>> Cc: mrca at mailman.qth.net; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] OT: "Surplus Stupidity" Is Alive and Well.
>>> 
>>> The US tried to see them to friendly country but there were few takers. Does
>>> anyone know the rationale why the countires didn't want them?
>>> 
>>> Mike N2MS
>>> 
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Milsurplus mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>> 
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>> 
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html