CDN M101 Trailer

[Duane Leiker]

Guys,
I have been finding conflicting information about the CDN M101 trailer. One chart I found indicates the payload as 1300lbs. Another was 500lbs..

What is the actual payload of the CDN M101 trailer please?

[chris vickery]

Which Canadian M101 trailer?
The early vintage M101 were 3/4 ton, later the 1/4 ton trailers also used the same nomenclature "M101"...
Makes sense doesn't it?

[Duane Leiker]

Wow, now I'm really porked. I asked because of the table below.

[Ed Storey]

It appears that the chart is comparing ¼ ton Trailers, so it is missing the M100CDN and the M101 should be M101CDN2.

[Duane Leiker]

Being 1/4 ton trailers, is the payload capacity correct at 1300lbs. for the CDN M101?
I need to know because I'm planning a cross-country trip (Washington, DC to San Diego, Ca.) and looking for a good trailer.
If the 1/4 ton CDN M101 trailer DOES have 1300lb. payload, I will be looking for that model for the trip. It will be towed by an M170 Ambulance.

[Ed Storey]

It is difficult to figure out what trailer you are talking about when you continuously use incorrect terminology. Canadian ¼ ton Trailers were manufactured in two types M100CDN and M101CDN2, and I just told you that information in a previous post - perhaps if you start using this terminology instead of constantly saying 'M101' it would have be easier to determine what trailer you were actually talking about.

The data plate on the trailer clearly lists it as a Canadian M101CDN2, so there is no excuse for using the incorrect name.

The listed payload in C-30-825-000/MS-000 for a M101CDN2 Trailer is 227 kg (500 lbs) - if this is the trailer type being discussed...

[chris vickery]

Ed, the M101CDN2 is also referred to as the "Iltis" trailer, correct?
I know the term "M101" gets thrown around loosely when referring to Canadian trailers, be it 1/4T or 3/4T models...
Perhaps some pictures may assist

[Ed Storey]

Chris:

The Iltis towed both the M100CDN and the M101CDN2, so calling the M101CDN2 an 'Iltis Trailer' is just as misleading. Why not use the proper terminology, then there is no mistake as to what is being discussed.

I can understand the confusion between the various M101s used by DND and if someone wants to start a thread on the confusing naming protocols adapted in the 1990s for some trailer models then go for it.

Sure, what we need are more photographs posted, I am right on it....

[chris vickery]

Apologies Ed for using the term "Iltis" trailer, I am merely pointing out the fact that terminologies for all these trailers is used loosely.
I think most people know what a M100 trailer is....
For us "civvies", military jargon and nomenclature is often lost when discussing various materiel.
As to Duane's query, any trailer stipulated as a 1/4T has a payload of 500lbs.
For the M170, a 1/4T trailer is plenty to haul down the highway.

[Phil Waterman]

Originally Posted by Duane Leiker

Being 1/4 ton trailers, is the payload capacity correct at 1300lbs. for the CDN M101?
I need to know because I'm planning a cross-country trip (Washington, DC to San Diego, Ca.) and looking for a good trailer.
If the 1/4 ton CDN M101 trailer DOES have 1300lb. payload, I will be looking for that model for the trip. It will be towed by an M170 Ambulance.

Hi Duane

With the MVPA Convoy Starting September 19th just wondered if you were taking part?

Cheers Phil

[rob love]

The payload on the earlier 1/4 ton trailers was very ilmited due to the use of truck springs (Jeep) used on the trailer instead of proper trailer springs. Truck springs will not hold a load like the way properly designed trailer springs will. The M101Cdn2 (Iltis trailer) has trailer springs, so in that regard are superior to the earlier trailers which used truck components, likely for commonality. The commonality would reduce the numebr of spare parts required to be carried in the supply system.

The trailer ratings are cross country. They ussualy can be increased 50% to 100% for highway travel. I would suggest that in the case of the M101Cdn2, the real limiting factor for the trailer is the smallish size. The springs are, if memory serves, rated for 3,000 pounds, the michelin tires will handle 8,000 pounds. The hitch would likely be good for 30,000.

Perhaps the weak point is those little tiny wheel bearings, which are often neglected. They need regular (annual) repacking.

Of course, as with any trailer, you have to ensure sufficient toungue weight, or you will observe the trailer bouncing back and forth in the next lanes in your rear view mirror.

[rob love]

Hey Stuart, it looks like we agree on something Iltis related for once. The M101Cdn2 is an exceptionallywell built little trailer. The earlier pattern 1/4 ton trailers were heavy enough, the the M101Cdn2 takes robust to a new level. Solid steel handles, 1/8 plate re-inforcing on the corners, and interior tie downs, some real though went in to them. The bearings would be heavy enough if you were just talking 500 pounds load and repacking them annually, but in the real world we overload the trailer and repack at a far less frequent interval.

The original Iltis tires were also used later on the CT50D aircraft mules in CF service. The tires had great weight capacity and did not collect FOD like a normal tire. But lets face it, any 25 year old tire is not going to give you the performace you might like, especially at high speed.

I use my M101Cdn2 to transport firearms and stuff to the Calgary gun show each year. I would not want to even guess how much weight I have in there, but I can assure you it is well over the 500 pounds. We drop it in the show and set it up as a table bu throwing a table cloth over it. When the show is over, we load it up and push it out, thus beating the traffic of hundreds of vendors coming in 20 or so at a time. But as mentioned, the wheel bearings are a continual problem. I have not had a failure yet, but sure have come close a couple times.

[Duane Leiker]

Actually, I'm planning on the 2019 cross country trip already. Just want to know various trailers/equipment I may need. Appreciate the info guys. Thanks you.

[maple_leaf_eh]

In full agreement with Rob that the trailer issued for the Iltis is a much better design than almost any other recent CF trailer.

I would add that the issue Iltis tire, which would have been used on the appropriate trailer, is quite narrow. Stuart and I corresponded a while ago, and settled on a modern Wrangler all-season tire that is a reasonably close facsimile.

Having driven long distances in M38A1s (when I wore smaller diameter clothing), I would suggest repacking the seat cushion would be a high priority before undertaking any long road moves. The seat is not adjustable, as issued. The steering wheel is fixed, as are the pedals. So any ergonomic comforts have to be within the spirit of the rules, or you'll be crippled by Day 3. Since most drivers raised after WW2 are taller and I have to hunch somewhat to see under the top bar of most 1/4 Truck windshields, so thinning the cushion would be something else to consider.

[rob love]

Originally Posted by maple_leaf_eh

Having driven long distances in M38A1s (when I wore smaller diameter clothing), I would suggest repacking the seat cushion would be a high priority before undertaking any long road moves. The seat is not adjustable, as issued. The steering wheel is fixed, as are the pedals. So any ergonomic comforts have to be within the spirit of the rules, or you'll be crippled by Day 3. Since most drivers raised after WW2 are taller and I have to hunch somewhat to see under the top bar of most 1/4 Truck windshields, so thinning the cushion would be something else to consider.

Blasphemy. Horsehair cushions or nothing. What next...V6?