ZIL 135: This Is Peak Soviet Engineering

[@VisioRacer]

Hey guys, you love these videos. Would you be interesting to see them in advance on Patreon? www.patreon.com/visioracer

[@alisonhilll4317]

The Russians 1st satellite in space, 1st animal , 1st man , 1st woman , 1st space station ect lol you are brainwashed by zionist media.

[@gusgone4527]

Not a chance! Even if your use of English is somewhat amusing.

[@AztecusZZZ]

Ты молодец, но у тебя ошибки с произношением русских названий и фамилий.

[@robertopinna220]

Shitty engineering, something that differentiate from the Germans big time

[@ROBTOP_Top-z4]

Автор, привет тебе из далекой России✌️👍. Посмотри российский канал " спас- трак". Парни занимаются эвакуацией техники на очень интересной машине👍. Миру мир✌️👍

[@InteloPL]

Adds an engine - still manages to reduce weight. That's the power of engineering.

[@ImperativeGames]

Remember it needed engines that could power 20t vehicle trough any terrain (and deep snow). You could have created superengine that would be insanely complex and costly (especially for USSR in the 50s and 60s)... or you could simply use 2 ordinary engines.

[@Diego-zz1df]

Had they added a few more, the thing could've been an airship.

[@ТумановАлексей-л7л]

Chrysler multibank exited chat

[@ПавелКузнецов-ф3т]

2 ЗИЛ-375 engiens weight almost the same as one tank В-55 engine (1008 kg vs 960 kg)

[@ТумановАлексей-л7л]

@@ПавелКузнецов-ф3т what about costs and maintenance?

[@jakemocci3953]

I love when I can look at a vehicle and just tell it was built by Russians, their engineering is always so unique.

[@robob4465]

They really like their round,bubbly hulls

[@Addo666]

Bruh take a look at ya shoe boxes of a tank

[@mr-redify]

@@robob4465 also evident on Soviet space crafts

[@powerthirst1478]

@@Addo666 The good ones? they work lol

[@ANIMshit]

soviets, not russians.

[@dommerdom]

Saving the weight of a diff by adding a second engine and drive shaft is indeed peak Soviet engineering.

[@Conserpov]

@H K Learn at least something about engineering before making comments about engineering.

[@Conserpov]

@H K Two engines can be synced. There is nothing "impossible" in it, it just adds unnecessary complexity. "Unsynced" does not necessarily mean inefficient either. Hydraulic transmission dampens that, and again, can be easily synced.

[@YYX-u7g]

Да просто не было нормального двигателя, дизеля в то время 😂.

[@shenanigans4177]

​@HK-fz5rn You don't need to sync them. Just get them spinning in a close enough margin, which is not hard to do with 50s soviet tech. The high ratio gearbox will iron out any differential engine output. And whatever differential movement is exerted on the wheels those chunky tyres and the soft ground will take care of that.

[@robbypolter6689]

I had the little brother, ZIL 131 with an 8-cylinder V engine and 150 hp. The tank was filled with 72 or 76 octane petrol, always smelled a bit like cheap perfume, which came from the exhaust. The engine itself was hard to break, low revs but reasonable torque. the fact that it did not have a high compression ratio again had the advantage that it could be started with a crank. In frost or a weak battery, an advantage over the diesel. My driver even managed to reduce consumption to 69 liters per 100 kilometers. The absolute top speed was reached at 110 to 115 km/h. What I liked about the ZIL 131 was that the front axle could be switched on off-road with a switch. In principle, a simple but solid construction that served its purpose.

[@leemilica]

69l/100km? That is absolutely insane.

[@boocomban]

​@@leemilica well i would say normally it run 40 litres per 100km and if you go off road it would be vary from 60-80 litres/100km. It is 6.9l v8 gasoline engine anyway. Cheap, easy to repair but it is still a military truck, drink fuel like no tomorrow but it get you from point A to B

[@leemilica]

@@boocomban insanely cool but with the fuel prices these days id rather smack a 1.3 in it 😅

[@mr.trueno6022]

​@@leemilica Always need to keep in mind, that we're speaking about an old, big, unaerodymanic piece of soviet military equipment with a petrol engine with low compression and the possibility to run on low-octane fuel. Basically every single of these facts speaks against a good fuel economy. 😂 Also, if get a modern diesel through rough terrain, they will also gulp at least 30 litres. Which is a lot less than 69 litres, but still not a small amount.

[@robbypolter6689]

@@leemilica My driver, a master mechanic, and I spent two days tinkering. The distributor was completely disassembled, cleaned and sealed. Then new spark plugs, the air filter, cleaned with a vacuum cleaner. The carburetor was the biggest challenge, we were swearing. Then the test run, it ran so quietly and only when stationary, the engine could hardly be heard, only this soft, rich thumping of the eight-cylinder.

[@ochjoo77]

When you think: "who in their right mind would build a 8x8 without suspension and an engine per side with 135L/100km fuel consumption" and then they build 5000 of this... 🤯

[@teslashark]

There could be MORE for the future

[@firstletterofthealphabet7308]

@@teslashark These are 60s models that ceased production in the 90s when the Soviet Union collapsed. They’ve reengineered less insane replacements for the same tasks nowadays.

[@chumanyou]

Есть документальный фильм где испытывались различные шасси и такая конструкция была выбрана неспроста из-за её высокой проходимости.

[@semi-useful5178]

The Soviet Union!

[@t.s.1565]

Well soviets had plenty of fuel, so it's no something they would worry about. Whereas abrams consumes 900 liters and that's almost double of what compareble tanks consume.

[@SR_superior_1000]

"There is no such thing as 'Fuel Economy' in our dictionary" -A great Soviet machine designer

[@SovietBear91]

Maybe if they had it, they could produce toilet paper and wouldn´t lost to Pepsi and McDonalds

[@kaboonali5466]

@@SovietBear91 maybe that’s why they have whiter teeth and aren’t fat like the Americans and British.

[@ОлекЛис]

Abrams tank 900 liters per 100 km, three times the consumption of any other tank in existence. In the dictionary of the great American machine builders, the expression fuel economy also seems to be missing.😁

[@EdyAlbertoMSGT3]

@@ОлекЛис "bu-bu-but muh logistic strenght" -Abrams fanboys

[@ОлекЛис]

@@SovietBear91 You confused them with someone else. They are only winning so far.

[@mawwalmazie]

Like many versatile and reliable military engines, they always stayed away from good fuel economy.

[@VeryProPlayerYesSir1122]

well russia has a lot of fuel.

[@LeMeowAu]

​@haomavarga and you sure as shit cant build a pipe to the front

[@gustavevilleneuvedehoff-un5459]

It's military - fck fuel economy! Well, fck anything, just hit the target! )))

[@go40watt]

before, fuel was not saved and Euro-5 standards did not exist

[@mawwalmazie]

@@go40watt the military won’t care about emissions at all even to this day, you’ll see Humvees still running around with that damned 6.5 Litre Diesel V8

[@tomlobos2871]

its a special kind of industrial design. cabin shapes alone are worth an artbook if you ask me.

[@abyssstrider2547]

Honestly, idk why aren't trucks and the like made using industrial design nowadays, they kinda look and feel like cars when compared to old trucks from the 60's and 70's which look like machines made to do rough work with steel plates and everything.

[@tomlobos2871]

@@abyssstrider2547 it is both industrial design wich i think changed towards impressing with the product. more work put into details rather than creating a simple and bold design you dont bother improving once its finished. like back then. something the west did earlier than the east wich had less freedoms in design besides making it look rugged.

[@abyssstrider2547]

@@tomlobos2871 I see.

[@tony9146]

Solving the differential issue by installing TWO engines with each having their own transmission was a stroke of genius. It may not have been fuel efficient but it got the job done.

[@ImperativeGames]

It would also be hard for Soviet industry to produce some superengine but not 2 ordinary ones.

[@SkyieN]

"You see comrade, you can't break the suspension if you have no suspension in the first place!"

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

This makes me want to play Mudrunner again.

[@claytonator343]

Same

[@v4skunk739]

Still gets DLC every few months.

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

@@v4skunk739 really??

[@tc83s]

No, MudRunner isn’t, but SnowRunner is. MudRunner stopped getting DLCs right before Snowrunner launched iirc.

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

@@tc83s I just looked up Snowrunner vehicles and it's so confusing that the Western vehicles have real names and models but the Soviet and Russian ones are all fictionalized. Some are also too modern for my taste like the brand new Land Rover Defender, why?

[@moshoodbakare1210]

The Soviets were really good at coming up with weird and unique ideas. You can tell their products, from their jets, down to ships and vehicles, from just the looks.

[@cybervigilante]

Russia jets can take off from dirt runways.

[@EastGermany-pc2lw]

and people still say socialism wasn't innovative. At the very least acknowledge their achievements like god damn

[@ms.annthrope415]

They can make military weapons but can't stock a store worh bread or meat. That's socialism/communism for you. Of course, their weapons may nor may not work very well either.

[@vtr0104]

Russian engineers are probably the only ones that could see how adding another engine and drive-train was actually a simplification of an existing design. Brilliant stuff :|

[@kristianhartlevjohansen3541]

This is also about spares availability … 2x”normal” drivetrain = 1 set of spares + tools

[@Krasnoye158]

Except that the engine is reliable and you can do away with a complex gearbox and a bigger engine… which might be extremely complicated

[@thetableflip]

Repairability was crucial for a military vehicle. Engine broke down? Just pull the exact same one from that truck over ther and swap it in, comrade.

[@васяпупкин-г3о7д]

Soviet. Not only russian.

[@gregoryfilin8040]

​@@васяпупкин-г3о7д 60% Russian, 10% Ukrainian, and 30% other 12 nations.

[@antd-jy9ds]

Many might ask, "why not use a different diesel instead of the gas engines?". To that I say, have you ever tried to start a cold diesel in -30 degree weather (without a block heater)? I am also a bit partial to the gasoline engines because I just think they sound a bit better too. In any case, thanks Visio for giving us insight into a vehicle I do not think I would otherwise know much about. Keep up the great work!

[@antoniovillanueva308]

Back in the dark ages, I worked on old Caterpillar diesel dozers. They used a small gasoline "pony motor" that would warm up the cooling and fuel systems and then serve as a starter. These had been used in the Korean war in some very cold places. It worked well enough.

[@Kesssuli]

@SpaceAce100 Military stuff tends be a diesel powered because will give you a better range and economy which is very important for armies. But cost is that they needs more attention when weather gets extreme levels. That might not be a huge problem in countries where snow is rare sight but like in Finland, Sweden, Norway and Russia that is real deal. When i had my basic training time from january to march temperatures rarely got warmer than -20C. From some reason every time we had any outdoor activities in that time period it was usually -30C or worse. And it was one saturday morning in weapons training course when we woke up from tents and it was -42C at outside. Trucks had to be started once in hour and kept running in least 10-15 minutes to kept them warm. If not doing that there was nice risk that we didnt had functional trucks. One buddy still have scar on his cheek because he werent carefull and light rpg froze to his cheek and before instructor had change to give some coffee to melt it he just ripped it off and quite long piece of his cheek skin went along with that tube.

[@ronaldderooij1774]

In NATO armies, everything uses diesel, but must also function on kerosene. I don't know how that was in the Soviet Union, though.

[@Kesssuli]

@@ronaldderooij1774 If engine is designed to run on diesel then it should be able to take kerosene as alternative.

[@ronaldderooij1774]

@@Kesssuli not the modern ones...

[@noblecommando4269]

You say that 180 horsepower and 343 pound feet of torque are low numbers but that's pretty impressive for the 1950s

[@michaelguerin56]

Thank you. Nice to see a video on these impressive vehicles. Excellent selection of footage. Good job by you and your collaborators.

[@noheroespublishing1907]

I am always amazed, and constantly annoyed by critics, at how the USSR was able to innovate under difficult circumstances and produce some of the most unique and versatile inventions despite their difficulties; they're a testament to ingenuity.

[@LeeLee-kk1qu]

Don't forget they were beating the US in nearly every single space race metric, with far less funding.

[@ME262MKI]

"Innovate"... *KEK!*

[@xogeneral1512]

@@ME262MKI Kek lmao 420 blaze it yaaaaaaaaaaa

[@arthas640]

It's not that amazing. When they were isolated after WW1 they relied heavily on importing tech since their native designs sucked, which a huge reason why Stalin would eventually collaborate with Hitler on tank and aircraft development. During WW2 they relied heavily on Allied tech and copied and reverse engineered both German and Allied tech, infamously including the B-17 and B-29 bombers which would help inspire Soviet designs for the following decades when nuclear bombers were the mainstay for nuclear deterrence. They also worked with the US during WW2 and toured places like Detroit and Ford plants copying American production methods, imported and reverse engineered American trucks and other vehicles. After WW2 the Soviets gained control of both Czechoslovakia and Germany, both regions that had top notch engineers and they used those newly conquered regions to help their native designs greatly, similar to the US Operation Paperclip, but unlike the US the Soviets had great need for that tech since they lagged behind the western powers. During the Cold War they'd often use spies to copy and steal foreign technology similar to what China does today, the Soviets did innovate in some areas but they lagged well behind the west in many other areas and relied on things like copying IBM and Toshiba computers to advance their own, outdated and inefficient computers, as well as tons of NATO military equipment through operations like Line X. A big reason why Soviet designs sometimes looked so shocking and iconic was because they werent able to copy some other design and needed to come up with something on their own but since the Soviet education system was pretty harsh on innovation and stressed more rote learning and compliance to authority and sticking to proven methods. The Soviets actually _should_ have been far more advanced then they were. The USSR and satellite states were the 2nd largest economy in the world, after WW2 they'd gained access to some of the best scientists around, they had insane amounts of resources including a near monopoly on some minerals like titanium as well as massive deposits of things like uranium, natural gas, and oil, and they also had a _massive_ population as well. They had every advantage to reach parity with the US but it was their poor political and economic system that doomed them to mediocrity and you can see that in many of their failed programs where they'd often punish their own people for little to no reason. Often if an expert found a flaw they could actually get punished rather than the leaders taking their criticism and fixing the issue. A good example of this was Sergei Korolev who was a great scientist that died due to injuries he sustained in a gulag and from being tortured, all on false charges that were later reversed. The Soviets suffered greatly from tall poppy syndrome.

[@arthas640]

@@captainkong I always found it kind of crazy how little Russia has changed in some ways. Their secret police and intelligence system today is very similar to their Soviet era which in turn was copied from the Tsarist era Oprichniki and Okhrana. Russia and China always kind of remind me of the Covenant in Halo. In Halo lore the Covenant, mainly the Prophets and Elites, discovered ancient Forerunner technology and reverse engineered it to greatly advance their technology. Since that was much easier and much faster than developing things on their own they focused more and more on finding new Forerunner ruins to pilfer tech from. The issue was they quickly lost their ability to innovate and that bit them in the ass when they came across humanity who had innovated all of their own technology and could much more easily adapt to new situations or develop new tactics or tech. I think Russia/USSR were more innovative than China though. China is beginning to innovate a bit but their history is filled with copying off other peoples work. Their nuclear weapons program was and is used in their propaganda as some great example of Chinese ingenuity but the scientists who worked on the program had studied abroad, used a ton of open source information, gotten Soviet aid, and used some tech from the Manhattan project to complete their bomb. I believe that theres a major issue with copying others tech too much since it ends up stifling innovation and it plagued the Soviets and continues to plague the Chinese today, even down to simple things like the fact that China relied on foreign firms to manufacture the ballpoint for pens until very recently, something the Americans had invented in the late 1800s and been mass producing since before WW2. I think that problem was a contributing factor to the Soviets demise: they kept trying to copy the West to catch up, it worked fine when they had some scientists from conquered territories to help innovate but once they were gone the Soviets had to rely more and more on copying rather than innovating and they just steadily fell further and further behind.

[@chrisb8046]

"Too complicated!" "OK, let's add an engine and transmission, then delete the suspension." "Genius!"

[@Victor-056]

Well by removing the suspension, they didn't have to add that many flexible parts to the Transmission system that would have increased the complexity.

[@ME262MKI]

​@@Victor-056 of course, that a good idea, since these vehicles aren't intended to be crewed by humans... 🤪👈

[@Victor-056]

@@ME262MKI You forgot the second reason why they did that, to have the tire system _act_ as the suspension. They only used suspension again because it turned out Suspension actually _reduces_ wear and tear on the vehicle. You'd know this if you actually WATCHED THE VIDEO.

[@ME262MKI]

@@Victor-056 don't try to excuse the failure of this thing, it's pretty clear by the footage inside *THIS VIDEO* that still is uncomfortable since this thing is still too rigid despite the bouncy wheels and many of them are without any heavy load over

[@Victor-056]

@@ME262MKI Because if you are Willfully IGNORANT, it means you actually Work Hard to be STUPID, meaning all you do is Drag EVERYONE down with your Braindead Rethoric!

[@jackass6257]

Soviet engineering is a picky thing, but you know that when it works, it truely works

[@Tacticalsnails]

Its like a no intelligence but high luck

[@reneegudjon3204]

​@@Tacticalsnails No intelligence? You think so? So what made all the intercontinental rockets and the vehicles to carry them onto the sites?

[@darchandarchan7036]

pretty safe to say that almost half of the cosmic technologies were made by soviets. Many modern launches being made with russian rockets, developed way back in USSR. Bad reputation may come from things that were designed to be cheap and mass produced, and often, even they have some interesting engineering behind them. Sometimes products need couple generations to be polished and for some mistakes being fixed, but government would decide otherwise. So if something was poorly made in ussr, there’s almost always a reason they could, but didn’t make it better

[@MrTheHillfolk]

Welp,it's either gonna work, or it's not.

[@Shitbird3249]

@@MrTheHillfolk and you’re way more right than Mr it must be luck

[@SchmaymoDamo]

Fuel economy? What's that?? 😂

[@judgejimbobrowntown3214]

Russians don’t worry about fuel h he’ll they cought there own oil fields on fire so hitler didn’t get it in wwii an they still where fine with the abundance of fuel

[@chesspiece81]

(In FPSRussia accent) In Mother Russia we don't worry about such things. If we need to get somewhere in the middle of nowhere we just design the vehicle and don't worry that another similar vehicle is the only thing that could bring more fuel.

[@fidelcatsro6948]

fuel economy?? naaah thats just some cats talking..

[@bccp32]

By doubling the number of engines you double the fuel economy comrades!

[@nicholasgill8066]

No suspension np🤝🏽

[@quazar5017]

"Fixed wheel geometry, no differentials and two 8 cylinders." "WHAT?" "I SAID FIXED WHEEL GEOMETRY, NO DIFFERENTIALS AND TWO 8 CYLINDERS"

[@MageBlackstone]

The peak was a space shuttle that went into orbit by itself. And came back. Landed. In one piece. Now, that is a peak of engineering.

[@JebacPresretac101]

Buran, the Soviet one.

[@lemonov3031]

That's why they decommissioned this shit and spent 10 years relying on a Soviet design to go to the ISS? Americans truly are.... something

[@tomjackson1923]

The Alvis Stalwart used a similar style of all wheel drive system, with the propshafts running to individual bevel gearboxes. That was known to have issues with "wind-up" when driving on hard surfaces.

[@shadowred1980]

A guy is rebuilding one on the pistonheads forum. If you have a search should find it.

[@markeastridge9649]

@@shadowred1980thank you very much.

[@iprince7934]

As a car and truck guy, its kinda suprising that they made one of the greatest millitary vehicles,wihout suspension and could go anywhere it desired

[@changsangma1915]

Soviets were masters of creating the most strange & innovative mechanical monsters back in those era. Their military trucks looked like something from futuristic sci fi although it is the other way around LoL

[@meconis9671]

The most strange, innovative, expensive, inefficient, and don't working.

[@fal121]

Like yourself

[@changsangma1915]

@@meconis9671 .....sorry i don't purchase opinions and counter feelings, go somewhere you can sell that lmao

[@changsangma1915]

@@fal121 ....like myself? What, Like I'm innovative? Of what? Attacking lifeless trolls who comes in with empty skulls?! LoL

[@robertoroberto9798]

@@changsangma1915 But it’s true, most of these vehicles are strange, yet innovative, but also inefficient. The only point I disagree with is not working.

[@johnelliott7375]

You always come up with the best thing to discuss and enjoy.

[@nomayor1]

This wasn't the peak of Soviet engineering. The peak of Soviet engineering probably was the space mission to save the Salyut 7 space station in 1985, decades before the US considered a "success" to replace a couple of modules on the Hubble telescope.

[@terencemalik6415]

That. And peak Dzhanibekov's driving space vehicle skills...

[@andriandrason1318]

Not like the US went to the moon, decades before that? in like 1969 🤦

[@nomayor1]

@@andriandrason1318 Sure they did. That's why they haven't, nor can, go back ever again.

[@kraigisboss]

@@nomayor1 Because there is no point in more manned missions. The moon doesn't have much on its surface in terms of resources and the technology to transport equipment to and from in large quantities to build let's say a mining base isn't remotely there. The most valuable thing on the moon is helium 3 isotopes which in theory could be used for nuclear power but that's about it once again I must stress this moving large about of material over a vast distance like that isn't feasible even today.

[@hackmind]

Also the unique feat of putting Salyut 7 in a high orbit and after that dock on the nascent Mir space station. No other nation has made a travel between spaceships.

[@andrejmucic5003]

Thanks!

[@VisioRacer]

Thanks!

[@jdmbeats]

Intriguing. As an American, I've always admired these old Soviet military vehicles. They have a very unique look, and you can tell they're built to last. 👍

[@FrankoIsLucki]

Ay this is also in snow runner. So cool they made it irl also

[@Questionablethingy]

"no suspension truck" "what that cant be" "made by soviet engineer" "understandable have a nice day"

[@AhnafS2000]

Came back to your channel after a long time. I remember this channel in its early days. Your video's qualities have skyrocketed! excellent work and i hope you keep it up :)

[@koso0423]

Amazing video! I’m impressed that there’s so much material and footage of the vehicle!

[@epicseadragon1692]

Nice Video as always! I'm always fascinated by those old trucks!

[@AlekreSD]

Soviet engineering is uderrated. Such a simple, crude and effective solutions.

[@ikaustralia]

Can anything top it in the World?

[@robertoroberto9798]

@@ikaustralia American or European inventions, and Japanese, mainly in regards to space probes and general quality of life.

[@ikaustralia]

@@robertoroberto9798 what inventions? What American? Pretty much everything invented in America has been done by German, Japanese, former USSR scientists.

[@seb_1504]

@@robertoroberto9798 American engineering results in excessive spending for a mediocre product in the end with a chance of it randomly catching fire. Japanese engineering is the best they proved it in their cars. German engineering used to be good but now it's overcomplicated incredibly expensive equipment with incredible amounts of problems still better than American garbage though.

[@robertoroberto9798]

@@seb_1504 The only American things you’ll find to be expensive but mediocre are the ones imported from China or a company who inflates the price to get the largest profit. I’d much rather get American products than Soviet or Russian products.

[@skartimus]

These soviet era trucks are so awesome. They have a form follows function industrial look that is just awesome. You get so hooked on them playing games like Spintires.

[@isakjohansson7134]

Imagine the screeching when turning that thing on dry asphalt😬

[@fidelcatsro6948]

music to my ears🐱👍🏿

[@aleksandrnestrato]

Who does screech? Amused driver? You seem to have watched inattentively, Isak. The 4th axle steers to the same angle as the first one. The point around which the whole truck turns is located between axles 2 and 3. This thing turns on asphalt with same screeching as any 6x4 or 6x6 (with one axle on the front and two axles in the rear).

[@isakjohansson7134]

@@aleksandrnestrato Almost, the the 2nd and 3rd axles are running at the same speed as the 1st and 4th so at least two of these axles will screech as you turn

[@aleksandrnestrato]

@@isakjohansson7134 Yeah, that’s true. ‘T was my kinda mute question while watching this video: If the truck has no differentials, how does it turn? Front axle makes a wider circle than the rear one (in this case the middle ones), thus longer distance, thus faster rotation. 🤷🏻‍♂️ I assume it turns somewhat alike to an SUV with both axles hard engaged. E.g. Jeep Wrangler with its part-time AWD with no center diff.

[@isakjohansson7134]

@@aleksandrnestrato Yeah something like that i suppose

[@sirjavionidas]

Awesome content, like always. Thank you!

[@dankgankster4100]

Soviet engineering is so fascinating. For civilians they engineer the most laughable and terrible cars. But when it comes to military engineering they always manage to surprise me with how clever they are at making machines do work in the extreme cold and just keep going

[@gustavevilleneuvedehoff-un5459]

Exactly. It almost looks like there is a state within a state - for strategic purposes there's one set of no-kidding engineers, and for yourselves folks you can engineer and produce whatever however. Though till the 70s the civil cars were kimda okayish.

[@flabiger]

I think your comment perfectly encapsulates the difference between communism and capitalism. Communism doesn't necessarily mean the country can't innovate or produce technology, it, however, requires a directed effort on the part of the state in bringing resources to bear and with that the administrative burdens of government. Capitalism also doesn't necessarily mean a country will innovate but at the very least individuals have personal motivation to do so which allows for innovation on levels that a government couldn't imagine. (For instance, the Soviets were putting men into space before the Americans but didn't have one toilet paper factory until the late 60s.)

[@gustavevilleneuvedehoff-un5459]

@@flabiger they didn’t have toilet paper factories till 60s because 15 yrs earlier they had lost 28 million people and their country had been destroyed (by western capital if we are honest and look deep). And the Soviets cared for Space more only because it was one of the important steps to prevent that disaster from happening again. And they were actually right.

[@موسى_7]

​@@flabigerCapitalism only innovates in the most advanced countries. Under capitalism, most countries must import innovation, which only works when they are not pariahs.

[@sergeypopov801]

Actually no. Even the soviet civil cars were pretty cool for theyr years of production.

[@gaeldigard]

Great video. Well documented and not boring at all. It changes a lot. Great job.

[@VisioRacer]

Glad to hear that!

[@NotFarmerFlats]

You know it's peak Soviet engineering when the simple route was to put two engines

[@hopeyouhavinganiceday]

Nah, peak of nazi soviet engineering is tanks without turrets 🤣🤣🤣 glory to ukraine

[@byann7110]

​@@12226 true

[@gibusgaming5866]

​@@12226that sounded a bit personal mate

[@12226]

@@gibusgaming5866 ok gibus

[@ЮрийЛукин-х7о]

@@hopeyouhavinganiceday сала украине

[@MickeyMishra]

This would make such a cool off road motorhome! Imagine loading it up with Modern Diesel engines. Using Titanium or Carbon fiber to build this? For severe cold weather? A small turbine power plant with an electric drivetrain in the wheels. This thing would have been an unstoppable beast!

[@axelm4164]

This machine was an unstoppable beast as is.

[@hemaccabe4292]

Looks great, I want one as my daily driver.

[@gustavevilleneuvedehoff-un5459]

No traffic jams!!!

[@lozl]

Very interesting! Thats such a clever idea getting rid of all those diffs and probably makes it easier to do various off roading techniques

[@johnelliott7375]

Everything was peak Soviet machines or class "A", weapons or armor machine that goes anywhere. Great evening and enjoy your weekend.

[@Pindrop22]

“What’s as big as a house, burns 20 litres of fuel every hour, puts out a shitload of smoke and noise, and cuts an apple into three pieces? A Soviet machine made to cut apples into four pieces!"

[@Kaasbaas045]

Ha-ha, now gtfoh

[@Batmanderp38]

Snowrunner modders need to do some of these awesome looking trucks but seriously sobiet era military trucks are cool as heck

[@thegenericguy8309]

Lada Niva, Ural 375/4320, Gaz-66, and Zil-131 would all be very cool videos for someday

[@goranjosic]

Monster! Imagine if the Soviets made it work down to -40C° 🥺 - that means it can work at -70C° without any problems 😅 (if there was oxygen on mars this would be a fantastic vehicle for future research 😅)

[@str8ballinSA]

Lol

[@GasDrinker6455B]

If we one day manage to genetically engineer plants or certain bacteria to produce oxygen from carbon dioxide at an incredibly fast rate, then this could totally be a thing in a few centuries. Which there will still be at least a thousand of these still working by then.

[@ВасилийПупкин-г9у]

Regular cars can work in this temperature. In Yakutsk -50 is normal Winter temperarure, and people's drive a cars in this town.

[@kolyashinkarev7366]

​@@ВасилийПупкин-г9у they either store them at heated garages or just don't stop the engine, otherwise you won't start it till summer

[@geradkavanagh8240]

Still need oxygen to burn fossil fuel as far as my science knowledge goes. Mars may have a problem there.

[@lqr824]

Hey Visio, I've been watching your channel for years and just wanted to mention how much I love your unique subject matter.

[@VisioRacer]

Thank you!

[@johnterry9235]

German engineers: Oh yea! I forgot to put the suspension. Meanwhile Soviet engineers: Why put suspension? too expensive!

[@stevederp9801]

Something that you all need to understand is that a military vehicle and a civilian vehicle have entirely different design strategies. Most importantly the focus is on reliability, ease of production and durability. There purpose is to move weapons and the expectation is that they would have to make thousands of them if they had to go to war and that many of them would be destroyed. The Russians learned from the T-34 that making 10x as many tanks allowed them to overwhelm the superior German tanks. They took this concept and built their entire military around it. Similarly the Americans learned that air superiority and naval dominance won the war. So they focused on building the best navy and Air Force. Ironically the Americans focused on air and water while the Russians focused on land. Mirroring their geopolitical interests. America has a massive coastline on the pacific and Atlantic side. They need ships and airplanes to reach Hawaii which launched their involvement in world war 2. While Russia has a very small coastline with very little access to the worlds oceans. A massive amount of land to secure. This is also why Russia focuses on anti aircraft weapons, submarines and nuclear weapons. While America focuses on airplanes, ships and drones.

[@SovietBear91]

That´s why they lost to Pepsi in 1991

[@lemonov3031]

Russian aircraft is still some of the best in the world. Plus, the mass production philosophy also plays it a lot of favors

[@getuliovargas5584]

Grachyov, the creator of ZIL-135, is a real motor vehicles genius. Unfortunately, genius often comes hand to hand with madness, and that madness did not always work good for Grachyov's creations.

[@kgp277]

Not sure why this was in my feed, but I'm glad it was. Super cool.

[@mangobanana7195]

Suspension isn't just for traction, it's also for the crew. Driving that vehicle for hours feeling every bump would tire out anyone riding it.

[@gustavevilleneuvedehoff-un5459]

You don't drive that vehicle for hours. Just to the launch pad ;)

[@MiracleManGaming]

How many of you agree it looks like a dream toy when we are a kid

[@eng3d]

Also Moon Patrol 😊

[@audriusbaranauskas6227]

"Initially the vehicle didn't have any suspension...". In the West you break the car, in Soviet Russia the car break you.

[@garage5125]

it was not that bad, the soft tires soaked it up pretty well, also when driving offroad, the terrain is also soft

[@dudemp4]

​@@garage5125 yeah some trikes also didn't have suspension because of their soft wheels

[@Tiagomottadmello]

Great vídeo 👍🏻👍🏻

[@sherbettt]

Good job with the provided English translations and Russian sources.

[@tomaltomal2702]

That was interesting. Good job.

[@Kiyoone]

Incredible how the old soviet people (the doctrine, the way of thinking) was far more advanced than ours. They thought of making things that lasts more than one person life time and more important: low budget and low cost to maintain

[@angelo_giachetti]

Great vid. Interesting.

[@achintyaaatreya]

The simplicity of these machines is remarkable. No turbos, SCR, DPF, GDI.......nothing. Imagine if they still made lorry engines which could be cranked by hand.

[@alexstromberg7696]

yeah and making 200 hp from a 8,9L engine

[@MytronixOfficial]

Imagine half your load capacity for a medium trip being spent on fuel. Let alone the costs. Having a Load Capacity of 9 metric tons with a Vmax of 65 kp/h while burning 120 litres of fuel per 100 km really isn't competitive performance.

[@kristoffer3000]

@@alexstromberg7696 Big engines aren't about horsepower, if they cared about that at all they'd actually get some more respectable numbers out of them, they were all about torque.

[@charliemaybe]

@@kristoffer3000 I mean even with the torque in mind, they were looking for a super cheap and reliable engine that is able to run on shitty fuel, the torque sucked for the displacement.

[@alexjohnward]

@@MytronixOfficial that depends entirely on the track, and fuel cost conditions.

[@armoredp]

Very interesting, wouldn't mind more truck content!

[@JohnnyAFG81]

Two engines, eight tirees and a bunch of transfer case. I swear Soviet engineers are on another level. How the hell did they only get 130hp from a V8? Must have been 69 octane gas.

[@fastinradfordable]

How did they fit it To even move, That’s like 20hp/wheel😂

[@dadgarage7966]

Mid-1970s Ford 460 c.i.V8s weren't much better.

[@dennisyoung4631]

I recall reading of *72 octane Russki Gas,* so there is that. An example of this would be the engine in the UAZ-469 using that fuel.

[@VES.]

everything they designed was with fullscalle war in mind. the engines used in the millitary had to accept ( and work properly) with 62 octane petrol. like the AK47 the USSR had to able to create stuff with simple tuling, unskilled labor and no factories. that is why i think the soviets would have won the cold war if it became hot. they simply can massproduce everything... if you see today war in ukraine, that prooves my point. All of nato is out of weapons and the Russians are still shooting.

[@twanheijkoop6753]

​@@VES. lol, NATO has only dumped their old supply and is getting new shiny stuff for themselves. Haven't seen Ukraine troops have to assault with a BB gun or shovels like some of the russkis

[@Technoid_Mutant]

I really liked this. Thank you from a fellow gearhead geek.

[@gary19222]

Horsepower is always stated on these older vehicles but I'm very curious to the torque they produced

[@alexhaze9709]

Bit last to answer but if you want to know torque (ft/lb) and have the HP figure and RMP the formula is: HPx5252 Divide by the RMP.

[@yodasbff3395]

Very interesting, thanks for the video 👍

[@John_Redcorn_]

Makes me want to update my SnowRunner and get back into it.

[@mikedl1105]

Cold war Soviet engineering was nuts

[@Wivienn]

Он прекрасен **вытирает слезу**

[@hansvonmeinstien3660]

I love those body designs and the tires.

[@WhitfieldProductionsTV]

man I want one lol. that's a killer truck

[@luclucas135]

Good one, Thanks !

[@randominternetguy]

Got anything on those crazy vehicles from Oshkosh Defense? I want more!

[@jonlee2553]

I love these so much.

[@williamchamberlain2263]

"Hard suspension makes hard men. Hard men make good profits for osteopaths."

[@djcjr1x1]

The early version with the evenly spaced wheels just looks bad ass!

[@johannrajan6357]

I think the maz543 with the v12 is even more peak engineering. Had four tires that turned with the amazing engineering feat.

[@knowledgeringsstalkers1795]

Your video is ultimately the satisfying video present on KZbin with ultimate research and diagrams with marked chronological order year's best video you totally deciphered the Soviet enginnering..... Best of luck for your efforts from India 🇮🇳 (the mother of democracy.........) Jai hind vande mataram

[@MsSmartFox]

My father was in service at on of this ZIL. He says that this 8x8 vehicle is very unreliable, in short it is a piece of crap

[@Zpicismrad]

what an absolute beast of a vehicle

[@jekabssomanskis]

More videos on stuff like this!

[@I_hunt_lolis]

This is something villains of Mad Max should drive...

[@Damien.D]

Don't know how you manage to have all the specs of these obscure machines....

[@BruceCarbonLakeriver]

KGB is pretty polite if you pay them :D #Joke ^^

[@MAPIPISON]

Me randomly driving in spintires💀😂

[@steffenrosmus9177]

The best defense of Russia: non existing roads and spring weather😂😂😂

[@gustavevilleneuvedehoff-un5459]

Not anymore. I bet now they have roads way better than in your country.

[@frog382]

This is a small truck compared to MAZ-537 that is also the cutest thing ever :P

[@surlyogre1476]

3:05 "...doubled the fuel _economy_? " I think doubled the fuel _consumption_ . Your English language skills are good, VisioRacer, and this is an easy mistake to make (many native speakers make similar mistakes), but you said almost the exact opposite of what I think you meant. If I am mistaken, I apologize. But I think I am right.

[@MUSTDOS]

He meant by eliminating differentials and simplifying the AWD since each side has its own engine instead of a giant monolith; the system has lower power overhead/loss and weight at the same time

[@jcdenton3062]

He said pretty much fine. It depends which unit you use. If truck used 20l per 100 km with one engine, now it would use 40 lit per 100 km then you doubled the fuel economy. But if your truck does 3 mpg or 5 km per liter then you doubled the fuel consumption

[@cs.marcell469]

Great video! If anyone wants to try a simmilar type of vehicle you can in Spintires if you have the Canyons DLC.

[@super_slav91]

TAM in Yugoslavia made a truck that can operate in -60, the USSR bought them.

[@gustavevilleneuvedehoff-un5459]

Does it ever snow in Belgrade? Wonder how they tested it.

[@super_slav91]

@@gustavevilleneuvedehoff-un5459 TAM is from Maribor, Slovenia hence the M, they had a freezer with the engine in it, demonstrated it to MAN engineers on an exchange. Tovarna avtomobilov Maribor TAM

[@gustavevilleneuvedehoff-un5459]

@@super_slav91 good to know, thanks! What's with the factory now - did it get acquired by some bigger car manufacfurer?

[@super_slav91]

​@@gustavevilleneuvedehoff-un5459 Got bought out by china some company called China Hi-Tech Group Corporation, like everything the fall of Yugoslavia and especially after joining the EU we lost everything.

[@liddz434]

Would love to see a modern re-imagining of this vehicle! Think of the power/economy/reliability and comfort you could inject into this thing, it'd be a world beater!

[@Legotecho2]

Peak of Soviet engineering? I think Mig31, Yak 141 VTOL and Buran space shuttle might disagree 😅

[@АндрейИванов-б4о6т]

Западному миру ещё предстоит открыть для себя Советскую цивилизацию.

[@vvevvevvvv]

​@@АндрейИванов-б4о6т слава богу это советское говно мало кому интересно

[@dsms5979]

Станция "Мир"

[@ТатьянаКорикова-л7к]

БАНДЕРОВСКИЙ БРОЙЛЕР.

[@Legotecho2]

@@ТатьянаКорикова-л7к Татьяна, у вас всё хорошо? Или вы заблудились?

[@ricardoricardoricardoricardo]

Sometimes creativity is going simple.

[@Keckegenkai]

mudrunner vibes strong in this one

[@jakesyn5]

If your country is a major supplier of crude oil then efficiency is almost a non important factor

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

No it's still an issue, as you still have to get that fuel to wherever your vehicles are.

[@Vlamyncksken]

doesn't mean the fuel can just be scooped out of a ditch. Fuel efficiency means less logistical babysitting

[@jcdenton3062]

any your turck must get somewhere without of fear to run out of fuel in the middle of Siberia

[@sleepyjoe7843]

@@matthiuskoenig3378 Well, never seen Russians attacking a country from thausands of miles from their border. and overseas like you know who.. So it's not a problem for them.

[@Doge5600]

0:34 Ha, I know that feeling when an old diesel starts to stall and you have to rev the piss outve it a couple times to make it idle right. Ah the old S1754 with that 9 liter never ceases to amaze me on how it still runs.

[@russkatherealoriginal6904]

Speedrun looking for a comment that has a vague relation to Russo-Ukraine war.

[@HeadsetHatGuy]

fr

[@Ming1975]

I've always fantasise of having an affordable home on wheels and that's why i find these designs so interesting.