Advertising 1984 Chevrolet CUCV M-1009 Class: Cars, Off-road / SUV — Model origin: 
![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
Minor action vehicle or used in only a short scene
Comments about this vehicle| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2009-11-03 03:21 |
![[Image: 1059y.6903.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/0is41/1059y.6903.jpg) |
|
◊ 2009-11-03 03:23 |
I'd like to say it's a 1984-1986 Chevrolet CUCV M-1009, but could it be that they're just "fakes?" They certainly don't look like they run at all anyways. |
|
◊ 2009-11-03 03:29 |
They are "junk" models, no interior is the first clue. I think your right; I doubt they would even move under their own power. Its hard to tell if they are civilian or military. I would bet they are just old Blazers (and possibly Jimmy version too) taken from a scrap yard and painted that desert sand color. |
|
◊ 2009-11-03 03:31 |
The second, in background, is moment later blown up... |
|
◊ 2009-11-03 04:54 |
I'd list them as Chevrolet CUCV M-1009, and if you're sure they're fakes made from civilian K5 Blazers, maybe call it a Chevrolet CUCV M-1009 "Replica." |
|
◊ 2009-11-03 05:03 |
I don't think that's a good idea. I mean I wouldn't call them replicas, they're more like "stand ins" for the scene. I don't even think that whoever got these together knew what an M-1009 was. I'll just list it as a Chevrolet as they were more common. |
|
◊ 2009-11-03 14:40 |
Clearly intended to be CUCV. The one in the rear has the CUCV grille and front tow hooks. Complete lack of chrome trim on both. No reason to think they are not real CUCV. And a CUCV without front seats is still a CUCV. In fact the interior was completely civilian products so would not tell you anything anyway. All the other military vehicles are correct. Most likely an MV supplier arranged/provided the vehicles and surplus CUCVs to blow up are plentiful. See no reason this is not CUCV M-1009. |
|
◊ 2009-11-03 16:53 |
I mentioned no interior to point out that they are likely non operational. They likely do not even have their 6.2 liter diesel engines or transmissions. They appear to just be "shells" ... It should also be noted that the rear tail lamps has been sloppily painted over and the one in the rear does not have twin closed loop tow hooks. They are pin secured, which require the front mounting arms. It does not have the front mounting arms. |
|
◊ 2009-11-03 22:22 |
Indeed, Neptune and I weren't saying that it can't be a CUCV just because it has clearly been stripped and re-painted (obviously only for this scene). We just want to make it clear that it could also be the civilian model also and that the way the vehicle has been set up could be indicative of this. |
Add a comment Advertising Advertising
