It's not called the Gavin. The only one who's calling it that is the madman Mike Sparks, known around here as dynmicpara.
Even if they completely redesign it, it'll still suffer from being an M113. Even the Norwegian upgrades (Widely held to be the best ones) are still considered to be quite far from ideal.
I don't see why some people here compare tanks with APCs. APCs aren't meant to actually fight,they are meant to transport infantry faster than legs do, with some degree of protection.Guns on them are an afterthought.
I took part in a drill once,our mech .inf. div. was attacked by tanks.The whole point was to safely keep the M113 out of sight and try to harass the tanks on foot,with LAW fire on their tracks and sniping any head that dared show.Only guerilla,only on foot.Anything else is suicide.
The M113 had the Chrysler 413ci gas engine in it when it was first introduced to the military.It replaced the M79 and I was on active duty in Germany in 1961 when that happened.Ron G
BlackBat42 would have you believe that the M113 armed with some kind of gun is the king of the battlefield and that missiles are BAD BAD BAD
Face it, the next armored force...or infantry force...that squares off against the US is going to go down in a rain of multi-purpose cluster munitions. This aluminum coffin (which can't even shrug off 14.5mm DShK rounds, forget a stacked IED/EFP or 30 year or more old RPG-7 round) won't even be carrying the company mess hall, much less entering *combat*.
Really, have you personally ridden in each one and had to deal with each one in a combat situation? Hmm, doubt it. It'd be nice if people could think for themselves for once and not believe the hundreds of lies they are told every day.
The M113 is actually a pretty amazing vehicle even though the Army uses mostly the LAV III. There are alot of places that the M113 can go that the heavier LAV III cannot.
We in the British Army have had some of our old 432 APC's upgraded from Mk2 to Mk3 and it is called the Bulldog. New engine, better suspension and we done away with the steering levers as well and you should see it go!!!!!
There is no M113 called a Gavin. Funny, you told me that you aren't Sparky. But all of your comments are EXACTLY like Sparky's. You use the exact same words and phrases and have precisely the same flash points. YOu wouldn't feel the need to agree with yourself in multiple accounts if you weren't such a whackjob. Too crazy for the Corps?! That's SCARY!
Um, no there isn't. The M113XX has never been called a gavin by any branch of the US military or any foreign country. That is a myth began by one person.
It was referred to as a "Gavin" in an official DoD letter written in 2004 by Joseph E. Scmitz, the Inspector General of the DoD at that time.
You can't get any more official than that.
A photocopy of this letter, along with close-ups of where he writes "Gavin M113" and his signature, are displayed in my video, "M113 Gavin Myths Part 6".
The lack of knowledge here by the aluminum whiners ignores the fact that the HULL IS THE STARTING POINT FOR THE ARMOR PROTECTION YOU CREATE FOR THE M113 GAVIN. M113s are WHAT YOU MAKE THEM INTO, AND THIS RPG AND LAND MINE RESISTANCE CAN BE DONE WHILE KEEPING GAVINS UNDER 20 TONS to remain CLOSED TERRAIN and air MOBILE---unlike any wheeled truck or medium to heavy tank.
Stop shouting, it's very annoying. Also, since everyone knows how incompetent/crazy you are, please allow comments on your videos so we can tear them apart. I would love to see those floodgates opened.
The lack of knowledge here by Dynmicpara ignores the fact that he IS STARTING THE DAY WITHOUT TEH PROTECTION OF ANTIPSYCHOTICS. M113s GIVEDYNMICPARA AN ERECTION unlike any wheeled truck or medium to heavy tank. HE IS A LIAR AND A THIEF!
Bull-fucking-shit. Even the bog-standard MTVL exceeds maximum weight for airdrops by 4000 pounds. Any applique kit will weigh it down to the point where it has a worse weight to surface ratio than a heavy tank. Have fun getting stuck.
Again many who post here are ignorant. IN CLOSED TERRAIN YOUR ONLY CHOICE IS LIGHT TRACKS. Anything heavier and you are stuck. Anything over 20 tons and you can forget closed terrain mobility. This is where sub-national enemies hide. Do you want to defeat them or lose M16 vs. AK47?
Again many who post here are ignorant. IN CLOSED TERRAIN YOUR ONLY CHOICE IS LIGHT TRACKS. Anything heavier and you are stuck. Anything over 20 tons and you can forget closed terrain mobility. This is where sub-national enemies hide. Do you want to defeat them or lose M16 vs. AK47?
APC are great troop movement until you have a bad hang over darn there terrible :) Maybe new technology could bring this old work horse back with better mine detections.Oh why Oh why is here no money going to that purpose ? Well of to upload Canada day greeting from Afghanistan.
Dudes every thing is a death trap. the M113s are fricken old but they proved everybody in Vietnam that, the apc was the best to be in. also in Deasert storm it performed well. now in Iraq they are putting it along side the bradly. I DON,T CARE IF NOBODY AGREES WITH ME WHEN I SAY THEY THAT THE APCs IS AS IMPORTANT AS THE M1A2 ABRAMS TANK.AND Humvees and Stykers are part of the THE IRON HAMMER OF THE US MILITARY. Are perfect in rapid attacks and are faster than tanks
if there's more security for our troops... why not? give 'em the M113. but i think the old M113s could be death traps, too. so first: upgrade them, before shipping out.
A fast gavins. Awesome lol.
peepeevagi 6 months ago
How about more plates at the machine guns to proteck our solders...Engineer who made M-113 where is your brain?
CharlieDoan 7 months ago
The Turks totally redesigned the Gavin. It's virtually a new vehicle. Did the Canadians follow their principles?
katey1dog 10 months ago
@katey1dog
It's not called the Gavin. The only one who's calling it that is the madman Mike Sparks, known around here as dynmicpara.
Even if they completely redesign it, it'll still suffer from being an M113. Even the Norwegian upgrades (Widely held to be the best ones) are still considered to be quite far from ideal.
chrthiel 9 months ago
leopard 2 and puma > all
ChengAkaBIGBANG 1 year ago
I don't see why some people here compare tanks with APCs. APCs aren't meant to actually fight,they are meant to transport infantry faster than legs do, with some degree of protection.Guns on them are an afterthought.
I took part in a drill once,our mech .inf. div. was attacked by tanks.The whole point was to safely keep the M113 out of sight and try to harass the tanks on foot,with LAW fire on their tracks and sniping any head that dared show.Only guerilla,only on foot.Anything else is suicide.
pathanb 1 year ago 3
I was a M113 operator while in the US Army in the early 80s. Fun vehicle. I would like to play with the newer versions!
shanegalang2 1 year ago
The M113 had the Chrysler 413ci gas engine in it when it was first introduced to the military.It replaced the M79 and I was on active duty in Germany in 1961 when that happened.Ron G
rg1430914 1 year ago
Have they made any innovations to prevent broken backs/legs from IED blasts under the vehicle?
Ralroost 1 year ago
@Ralroost No! ...but how owuld that actually be done? Mine incidents are hard to overcome!
petethebastard 1 year ago
love this vehicle, fun to drive, can cross most things and is super easy to maintaine and fix when broken
Glaskruset 2 years ago 2
yep thats what u get with over 50 years of proving its awsomeness
colj001 2 years ago
BlackBat42 would have you believe that the M113 armed with some kind of gun is the king of the battlefield and that missiles are BAD BAD BAD
Face it, the next armored force...or infantry force...that squares off against the US is going to go down in a rain of multi-purpose cluster munitions. This aluminum coffin (which can't even shrug off 14.5mm DShK rounds, forget a stacked IED/EFP or 30 year or more old RPG-7 round) won't even be carrying the company mess hall, much less entering *combat*.
thedungeondelver 2 years ago
Really, have you personally ridden in each one and had to deal with each one in a combat situation? Hmm, doubt it. It'd be nice if people could think for themselves for once and not believe the hundreds of lies they are told every day.
OnThe23rd 2 years ago
The M113 is actually a pretty amazing vehicle even though the Army uses mostly the LAV III. There are alot of places that the M113 can go that the heavier LAV III cannot.
pspboy7 2 years ago 2
We in the British Army have had some of our old 432 APC's upgraded from Mk2 to Mk3 and it is called the Bulldog. New engine, better suspension and we done away with the steering levers as well and you should see it go!!!!!
ivor1689 3 years ago
They still use the funny Detroit 2 stroke ? I didnt know they still make them.. In the Army, they dont care about Tier 3 emissions ;)
RenzeZielman 3 years ago
There is no M113 called a Gavin. Funny, you told me that you aren't Sparky. But all of your comments are EXACTLY like Sparky's. You use the exact same words and phrases and have precisely the same flash points. YOu wouldn't feel the need to agree with yourself in multiple accounts if you weren't such a whackjob. Too crazy for the Corps?! That's SCARY!
barbaralovesblack 3 years ago
I love the RWS mounted on a STF-PINTAL support, waooo, uninterrupted fire power. Add to that a pivoting capability....awesome!!!
Swiftwarrior1 3 years ago
113A1 saved my life many times in Nam..I love it. so shut the hell up....
cymbali 3 years ago 4
Your the second 'Nam vet I've heard that loves the M-113, cool....
YF681 3 years ago
The m113a3 we are using now are even more survivable than the a1's back in Nam.
They have more powerful engines, better suspensions, more internal volume, protective spall liners, and external fuel tanks.
Easier to drive too.
slipfirep40 2 years ago 3
Thank you for refining your comment please note Canada defense do not spend 10% of the USA.
Cannot expect the best and latest.
And on a foot note it seem our equipment now are in real need or replacing in this economy I think be hard to be done :(
dndtalk 2 years ago
the canadians got the m113a3 just now? america got ours in 1989!
the ones i used overseas looked soooooooo crappy compared to those brand new canadian ones.
discodench 3 years ago
hahaha i have noticed the same at the greek m113 we were repairing at technical force...
IgorGiganskiANtiatom 3 years ago
That's no surprise, huh?
barbaralovesblack 3 years ago
i don't know why i like this tank.. i really like it!
alyou 4 years ago
I was wondering aboot that.
zzsql 4 years ago
mattthompsett or another dynmicpara?
There is no M113 called a Gavin. It is a lunatics calling. There are, however, Queen Mary's (M577's).
IO1415 4 years ago
Gavins are a figment of someone's morbid fantasy world. There is no M113 called a Gavin. There are Queen Mary's though.
IO1415 4 years ago
Oh yes there is mate...The M113A1, is informally known as the Gavin, is a lightly armoured full tracked air transportable personnel carrier
mattthompsett 4 years ago
Um, no there isn't. The M113XX has never been called a gavin by any branch of the US military or any foreign country. That is a myth began by one person.
tankguy 4 years ago 4
The manufacturer does not call the M113 the Gavin.
The soldiers who ride to war in them dont call them the M113 Gavin.
The U.S. military does not call the M113 the Gavin
No military anywhere calls it the M113 Gavin.
Live with it.
Magni56 3 years ago 2
Then feel free to call it whatever you want.
The a-10 is officially known as the thunderbolt II. But as I'm sure you know that everyone and there mother calls it the Warthog.
slipfirep40 2 years ago
Yes, the A10 is known as the Warthog. By its pilots.
The M113 isn't called "Gavin" by anybody except a few loons on the internet.
thedungeondelver 2 years ago
No such thing as a Gavin. LOL
ReccebyDeath 4 years ago 4
Yes there is mate...The M113A1, is informally known as the Gavin, is a lightly armoured full tracked air transportable personnel carrier
mattthompsett 4 years ago
No, it's not, Mikey.
barbaralovesblack 3 years ago
ReccebyDeath,
It was referred to as a "Gavin" in an official DoD letter written in 2004 by Joseph E. Scmitz, the Inspector General of the DoD at that time.
You can't get any more official than that.
A photocopy of this letter, along with close-ups of where he writes "Gavin M113" and his signature, are displayed in my video, "M113 Gavin Myths Part 6".
BlacktailFA 3 years ago
The lack of knowledge here by the aluminum whiners ignores the fact that the HULL IS THE STARTING POINT FOR THE ARMOR PROTECTION YOU CREATE FOR THE M113 GAVIN. M113s are WHAT YOU MAKE THEM INTO, AND THIS RPG AND LAND MINE RESISTANCE CAN BE DONE WHILE KEEPING GAVINS UNDER 20 TONS to remain CLOSED TERRAIN and air MOBILE---unlike any wheeled truck or medium to heavy tank.
dynmicpara 4 years ago
There is no such thing as the M113 Gavin. It's just called M113. It has NEVER been named "Gavin".
Not to mention that the M113 is a tad bit outdated by now. Heck, why not bring in Tiger tanks and a few Sopwith Camels for airsupport.
Takekaze50 4 years ago 2
Update the mother and you'd still have a better design.
barbaralovesblack 3 years ago
Stop shouting, it's very annoying. Also, since everyone knows how incompetent/crazy you are, please allow comments on your videos so we can tear them apart. I would love to see those floodgates opened.
TheMuffinKing 4 years ago 3
That's why he gets BANNED all over the net.
barbaralovesblack 3 years ago
The lack of knowledge here by Dynmicpara ignores the fact that he IS STARTING THE DAY WITHOUT TEH PROTECTION OF ANTIPSYCHOTICS. M113s GIVEDYNMICPARA AN ERECTION unlike any wheeled truck or medium to heavy tank. HE IS A LIAR AND A THIEF!
M113Fan 4 years ago
Bull-fucking-shit. Even the bog-standard MTVL exceeds maximum weight for airdrops by 4000 pounds. Any applique kit will weigh it down to the point where it has a worse weight to surface ratio than a heavy tank. Have fun getting stuck.
Magni56 3 years ago
Again many who post here are ignorant. IN CLOSED TERRAIN YOUR ONLY CHOICE IS LIGHT TRACKS. Anything heavier and you are stuck. Anything over 20 tons and you can forget closed terrain mobility. This is where sub-national enemies hide. Do you want to defeat them or lose M16 vs. AK47?
dynmicpara 4 years ago
Again many who post here are ignorant. IN CLOSED TERRAIN YOUR ONLY CHOICE IS LIGHT TRACKS. Anything heavier and you are stuck. Anything over 20 tons and you can forget closed terrain mobility. This is where sub-national enemies hide. Do you want to defeat them or lose M16 vs. AK47?
dynmicpara 4 years ago 2
"Again many who post here are ignorant. IN CLOSED TERRAIN YOUR ONLY CHOICE IS LIGHT TRACKS."
If it allows tracks, it ain´t closed.
Seriously, there are so few patches of land that a lighter tank can traverse risk free compared to a heavy one, it doesn´t make a differrence.
Real closed terrain doesn´t allow any light tracks either. As shown in Vietnam, were even the M113s had to stick to the roads inside the jungle.
Magni56 3 years ago
Daaamn, Im driving the M113 in military (Swiss) without the Turbo. OMG I will drive this one :P:P:P
EnHoE 4 years ago 6
m113s are death traps. ALuminum burns to easily and is too soft. British FV432s are better, although the stryker is much cooler.
kcimb 4 years ago
And I thought canada wanted to go all wheeled. ha.
hunt247 4 years ago 8
APC are great troop movement until you have a bad hang over darn there terrible :) Maybe new technology could bring this old work horse back with better mine detections.Oh why Oh why is here no money going to that purpose ? Well of to upload Canada day greeting from Afghanistan.
dndtalk 4 years ago
Dudes every thing is a death trap. the M113s are fricken old but they proved everybody in Vietnam that, the apc was the best to be in. also in Deasert storm it performed well. now in Iraq they are putting it along side the bradly. I DON,T CARE IF NOBODY AGREES WITH ME WHEN I SAY THEY THAT THE APCs IS AS IMPORTANT AS THE M1A2 ABRAMS TANK.AND Humvees and Stykers are part of the THE IRON HAMMER OF THE US MILITARY. Are perfect in rapid attacks and are faster than tanks
Georgedudeman 4 years ago 12
check out my video of me driving one in cfb borden
SuperColossal33 4 years ago
if there's more security for our troops... why not? give 'em the M113. but i think the old M113s could be death traps, too. so first: upgrade them, before shipping out.
vanPoll 4 years ago
Stay off the roads--tracks rule.
Humvees and Strykers are death traps.
Kurt Olney
Sealight007 4 years ago 8
I agree it seem more money is spen on them and less on prevention of IED.
dndtalk 4 years ago