Ok, I've managed to fill my big coin jar without my girlfriend knowing it and I want to buy a set of 4 or 5 combat rims for my M. I've seen them in pics and at shows, but never held one in my grimey hands. With a rash of MV shows and swap meets coming up I'm going to keep my eyes open and hopefully find a set, or at least a partial set. From what I understand it's important to check the condition of the bolts and the area of the rims around the bolts for corrosion. Is there anything else I need to be looking for other than the obvious stuff like out of true, bent, etc?
Now for the fun part. I see a few of the well known vendors list them in their inventory in the neighborhood of $150 each. What I'm wanting to understand is....is that a good price? Seems a bit steep, but it appears supply has not kept up with demand, so to speak. I'm just looking for a price range that I should expect to see at the meets. I'm not spending more than $150 a rim because my coin jar just isn't that big, not to mention the beatin' I'd get from the Ms when she eventually finds out how much I spent. I guess I talk in my sleep or something because she somehow always finds out.
I know many are not comfortable talking price when it comes to MV parts, and the old addage certainly applies in that "they're worth what someone is willing to pay", but all that aside, what's a decent realistic price to pay for them? If you'd rather just PM me with your comments I understand......you big chicken! Just kidding....I do understand and won't mention any names. Unless the Ms finds out....then I'm sending her straight to your place!!
I got mine for $75 each and they only needed a little TLC. I've seen many for under $100 but your going to have to inspect them to make sure they are within your realm of repair.
Send your Ms over, my Ms will explain how things work out in the bunker / man cave.
Bert
1952 M37 W/W Rebuild @ 59% complete
Engine rebuild @ 95% complete
1985 M1009, 1990 M101A2, 2008 M116A3 Pioneer tool trailer
MVPA # 24265
NRA Life Member
NRA Cert. Personal Protection Pistol Instructor
NRA Cert. RSO
Class III RSO/KCR
I can't really help you with current prices, since I got mine decades ago when people just thought of them as scrap (the spring retainer rims were the hot ticket). However, with that said, remember that you will have to have them dipped or sand blasted to know the true condition. They are WW II items (over 70 years old) so now they are uber cool and therefore expensive. Be careful, only buy them AFTER you know they are usable (I had to discard two that were just too rusted out).
Good Luck in your search. I might recommend John at Midwest Military as a source. He is reputable and will not sell you unserviceable wheels. You may have to wait, but it is worth it.
I am in WA and I have a set of 5 and a centered rear axle complete with 9 5/8 diff and drums all for 500. 4 of the rims still have tires on them. They are located in Bremerton WA
I guess I may be the bubble popper; but seeing is believing from my perspective.
If I had to run combat rims on my M37, I wouldn't give a dollar for a train load. They are hard to balance, not legal for on highway use in many if not all states, a lot more trouble to maintain and change tires, and any number of other common issues to include not being correct for M37's if you are going to shows where judging will be a part of the action.
I'm quite sure none of the above is what you wanted to hear; so fire away if you disagree, it will be fine. I'm just being honest. Many times in years past I've done things on vehicles because of various reasons from I thought it looked cool to I had it in my mind this just had to work better. I've learned a lot in years of working on and building these trucks, and at age 61, I've also learned to try to think of all aspects before proceeding to doing; only to realize later that what I thought would be great wasn't great at all or that there was a better solution.
My Dad used to delight in telling me I would pay for my education as he had already been there, done that, had a hat and t-shirt; many times I did things only to learn the hard way. Now I realize I could have done things smarter. Just my past experiences. I guess you know by now; I'm no fan of combat rims for common use. We do rebuild and install them on collector vehicles of the correct era that will be shown, etc.
Charles, as usual, you are correct in all you say. I have them because I think they look "cool". We still had some kicking around when when I was in the military ('68 to '71) when these trucks were being phased out. All my combat rims are '42 / '43 (I've got 16 plus 4 "dual wheel rims" for the M-37 / M-42). My truck sees less than a 1000 miles a year these days and seldom goes more than a 100 miles round trip at a time (they have closed most of the 4WD roads in Western Washington so no more trips to the woods) and that is almost all to and from shows.
So, you are correct, they are not "stock" they are very, very old technology and they are probably horrible at high speed (anything approaching 60 MPH). But, my truck only goes about 45 or 50 MPH tops, doesn't carry any loads, and is pretty much stone cold stock. I don't have any problems with my tires and wheels; but then I don't put them under tremendous stress either.
They would never work if I was going to put in a diesel engine, new transmission and transfer case, high gear front and rear ends, disc brakes, power steering and build 70 to 80 MPH freeway flyer; but I have not. I have a period piece with the wrong wheels. Oh well.
I agree they are a little harder ot balance but IMO they are the far superior design to any split rim. split rims can kill people and if you get a flat offroad they fall apart. Combat rims obviously dont have those issues. stronger and way more reliable. I always run 5.83 gears so 55 is about top speed and have truck shops balance my tires and have no issues. My experience has been the tires themselves cause more balancing issues than the rims.
Kaegi wrote:I agree they are a little harder ot balance but IMO they are the far superior design to any split rim. split rims can kill people and if you get a flat offroad they fall apart. Combat rims obviously dont have those issues. stronger and way more reliable. I always run 5.83 gears so 55 is about top speed and have truck shops balance my tires and have no issues. My experience has been the tires themselves cause more balancing issues than the rims.
Most anything is superior to the old split rims; however those were never used on any M37. The split lock ring design used on M37's are superior to combat rims, and are legal in all 50 states for use on highway, unlike combat rims.
Can you post your source on how the combat rims are illegal for use on highways in all 50 States. Seen a lot of guys driving WWII Dodges on the Alcan and the Lincoln Highway project that had combat rims on their trucks are you saying these guys were and are breaking the law driving with those rims?
Can you post your source on how the combat rims are illegal for use on highways in all 50 States. Seen a lot of guys driving WWII Dodges on the Alcan and the Lincoln Highway project that had combat rims on their trucks are you saying these guys were and are breaking the law driving with those rims?
Truck tire installers which have the government OSHA mandated information posted in their business as required by law has the info posted as to what types of rims are legal and which ones are not. Many businesses are unaware or just don't go to the trouble to acquire and post this info; but that won't be an excuse if and when the inspector comes by on a walk through. Bead lock rims in general are not legal for on highway use as far as the general public is concerned in most states; maybe all since it is a federal DOT thing. The military is an exception, I have some bead locks here that are stamped "for military use only." With that said, the fact is the military is basically excused from the deal. If we put these stamped rims on a truck that we build for civilian use, yes we are liable. These are a much heavier built rim than Dodge combat rims, thus would be much more reliable. Granted most law enforcement officers likely don't have a clue, and the law may not be enforced at all levels. The convoys of older vehicles would likely be excused or (officials would look the other way) because of the special prearranged low speed convoy trips such as you mentioned. As far as US DOT guidelines, it is what it is. They don't recognize bead locks as safe for on highway travel. We have seen some studs break at highway speeds; obviously they are not as strong as one might tend to believe they might be. At slow speeds, they are a lot safer. To install on a truck that will be driven at 45-50 MPH like a typical M37 would be, they aren't safe at all. To do that because one thinks they look beefy and strong, well they just aren't, and can get you in a heap of trouble quickly.
there is no way the comabat rims are specifically NOT DOT. no rims have any mention in the 40s about DOT approval. I agree to disagree with Charles outloook on this matter. combat rims are the obvious superior design in every way. I have run them since 1985 and at least a dozen rigs with zero issues. Adn I am not nice to my dodge 4x4s. I think Charles just likes everything Mseries.
Doesn't matter at all whether you or anyone else agrees with me; it isn't an agree/disagree issue at all. I'm just sharing current facts; as far as I'm concerned, by all means feel free to do as you choose. If you think I'm incorrect on any info I've offered; you can check out the guidelines for yourself if you research the charts that I mentioned. They are likely on line somewhere, I don't know where as we don't have them on our bulletin boards because we aren't a tire dealer/installer. The rims we have that are stamped "military use only" are newer than the 40's vintage, and were built after the guidelines became effective. Just because older rims that were built before the current guidelines were in effect aren't stamped won't buy you a ticket that they are legal for on highway use today.
You think I like everything stock M Series; think what you like, you should see some of the upgrades and changes we have done to trucks over the years. I expect your opinion of what "you think" about us might be radically changed if you saw what we do here. Come on by and check us out some time.
I am aware of all the sweet rigs you guys have built and would love to come visit someday. but when they designed the WC 3/4 ton 4x4 with combat rims they were designed with legal highway use in mind. That is why they have USDOT approved lighting. Combat Rims are very tough things. State cannot ticket you for something the Fed says is street legal. just like they cant technically require seat belts be added to vehicles built prior to 1967. if it came from the factory with combat rims and 1 tail light no state can legally ticket you. Fed rules always trump state. I know I have won on that premise regarding lighting.
Kaegi wrote:I am aware of all the sweet rigs you guys have built and would love to come visit someday. but when they designed the WC 3/4 ton 4x4 with combat rims they were designed with legal highway use in mind. That is why they have USDOT approved lighting. Combat Rims are very tough things. State cannot ticket you for something the Fed says is street legal. just like they cant technically require seat belts be added to vehicles built prior to 1967. if it came from the factory with combat rims and 1 tail light no state can legally ticket you. Fed rules always trump state. I know I have won on that premise regarding lighting.
You seem to be lost somewhere in the past. I'd like to do that too sometimes, but what I might like doesn't change anything. What you would like won't either.
Issues that were USDOT approved in the 1940's may or may not meet USDOT approval today. I dare say most have changed numerous times in 60+ years. The lighting on vehicles in the 1940's will not meet today's guidelines either. You aren't fooling anyone except yourself if that is what you think. The rim thing is an OSHA issue as well as no longer being approved by federal DMV guidelines; OSHA didn't exist in the 40's; thus there was no guidelines of that type at that time. While you may have won a challenge concerning the lighting as far as evading a citation; I'd offer some wise insight for you. If you are involved in an accident that is ruled to be related to poor or improper lighting on your truck; you'll quickly find out what insurance company attorney's will do with any legalities you are claiming from the 1940's. Good luck when you tell a judge you are legally grandfathered because your truck is a 1940's model. Costly education will be coming your way.
A good rule of thumb is this; facts float your boat, anything else may sink it for you. You will be well served to find out what the actual facts are as they relate to 2013 instead of thinking you are covered by what was ok in 1944. Lighting upgrades on all M Series trucks came back in the early 1960's; wonder why that happened? You reckon it may have been because the 1940's equipment was no longer adequate or approved as being legal for on road vehicles?
Kaegi wrote:I am aware of all the sweet rigs you guys have built and would love to come visit someday. but when they designed the WC 3/4 ton 4x4 with combat rims they were designed with legal highway use in mind. That is why they have USDOT approved lighting. Combat Rims are very tough things. State cannot ticket you for something the Fed says is street legal. just like they cant technically require seat belts be added to vehicles built prior to 1967. if it came from the factory with combat rims and 1 tail light no state can legally ticket you. Fed rules always trump state. I know I have won on that premise regarding lighting.
You seem to be lost somewhere in the past. I'd like to do that too sometimes, but what I might like doesn't change anything. What you would like won't either.
Issues that were USDOT approved in the 1940's may or may not meet USDOT approval today. I dare say most have changed numerous times in 60+ years. The lighting on vehicles in the 1940's will not meet today's guidelines either. You aren't fooling anyone except yourself if that is what you think. The rim thing is an OSHA issue as well as no longer being approved by federal DMV guidelines; OSHA didn't exist in the 40's; thus there was no guidelines of that type at that time. While you may have won a challenge concerning the lighting as far as evading a citation; I'd offer some wise insight for you. If you are involved in an accident that is ruled to be related to poor or improper lighting on your truck; you'll quickly find out what insurance company attorney's will do with any legalities you are claiming from the 1940's. Good luck when you tell a judge you are legally grandfathered because your truck is a 1940's model. Costly education will be coming your way.
A good rule of thumb is this; facts float your boat, anything else may sink it for you. You will be well served to find out what the actual facts are as they relate to 2013 instead of thinking you are covered by what was ok in 1944. Lighting upgrades on all M Series trucks came back in the early 1960's; wonder why that happened? You reckon it may have been because the 1940's equipment was no longer adequate or approved as being legal for on road vehicles?
the reason Mseries had to be modified is becuase when they were sold to the public 2 tail lights and were required by federal law. the 2 tail light law I believe started in 1949 or so and pre dates the manufacture date of any Mseries. So according to Federal Law any vehicle built for highway use in the USA after 49 is required to have 2 tail lights. in WW2 when the WCs were built cars were NOT required to have 2 tail lights and no one can force modifications if the Federal law considered it acceptable at the time of production. I have been in and out of the classic car and truck business for decades and this is common knowledge in the industry. I have been to court once and had many discussion with state patrol and other law enforcemtn on this issue and I am very clear about it. its like seat belts. I recommend them but if your vehicle is built before 1967 and doesnt have any you are not required to install them. if you do intstall them you can be ticketed for not wearing them though.
Home 
