(first posted 2/16/2012) How can I resist not putting this up, posted at the Cohort by Andrew Turnbull? I’ve been trying to figure out just what my profoundly deep-rooted connection I have with vehicles that have central tube chassis, swing axles, and all-wheel drive to boot. Is it something about being Austrian, like Hans Ledwinka and Ferdinand Porsche, the two biggest champions of these features? Or just their elemental goodness and functionality? One thing’s for certain: the Pinzgauer and its ilk represent almost the polar opposite approach of the American Jeep. Which is better? Depends on what you want to accomplish.
Unless I’m wrong, Rumpler first put driven swing axles on the driven axle of his Tropfenwagen. Ledwinka conceived of and built the first tubular backbone chassis, and added the swing axles at Tatra. And Porsche added four-wheel drive to the VW chassis, although the front suspension retained its non-swing-axle design. The Tatra T26 (above) was one of the first attempts maximize traction by employing dual rear swing-axles.
The legendary Tatra T111 6×6 truck, powered by an air cooled V12, added a driven front swing axle, and as a consequence became a formidable tool in WW2. It was so successful that production didn’t cease until 1962, and then was replaced by a stream of other Tatra trucks that to today continue to use the same basic tubular backbone, swing axle chassis.
After WW2, the Austrian Army was outfitted with surplus American Jeeps. But by the mid fifties, it was looking for a replacement, one particularly suited to the very rugged Alpine areas. Erich Ledwinka, Han Ledwinka’s son, was contracted to help develop what became the Steyer-Puch Haflinger, the predecessor to the Pinzgauer.
The Haflinger was considerably smaller, powered by Steyr-Puch’s own 643 cc air-cooled boxer twin, the same basic engine used in S-P’s version of the Fiat 500. But with its “portal” wheel hubs, locking differentials, unbeatable approach and departure angles, low center of gravity, and the right gearing, the Haflinger was unparalleled in its ability to simulate a mountain goat. I had the pleasure to ride in one up to a remote Alm hut, and it was a memorable experience indeed. It was slow; but who’s in a hurry, when the scenery is so spectacular? Haflinger production spanned from 1959 to 1975.
In 1969, the more substantially-sized Pinzgauer arrived, building on all the basic design features of the Haflinger. The biggest difference in addition to its size was a new aircooled 2.5 L four, and the availability of a 6×6 model, which has become one of the legends of the off-road world.
Essentially a smaller-scale version of the big Tatra 6×6 trucks, optimized for the most difficult situations conceivable.
The Pinzgauer is still being built, in a further-developed second generation, and now by the large British aero-defense contractor BAE.
Fascinating weapons these. The New zealand Army bought a fleet of Pinzgauer 6×6 trucks to replace their LandRovers but unreliability has plagued them since, they have awesome off road ability and the SAS having been lumbered with the useless Hummers in Afganistan probably regrets not taking their Pinzgauers with them. Jeeps are probably better in traffic but off road they arent even in the hunt
I hesitate to correct a native German speaker, but isn’t it “Steyr” rather than “Steyer”?
I owned one of their vehicles when I was in high school. (A ten-speed bicycle.)
You should; embarrassing.
Steyr-Puch is located in the state of Steiermark (Styria) , and that spelling tripped me up. It’s more natural to write Steyer. It’s not a pronunciation issue; Steyer, Steyr and Steier are pronounced the same, and could easily be interchanged. It’s like Niedermeyer, Nidermeier, Niedermayer, Niedermyer, etc….all correct, depending on which who’s name your invoking. But I should have known better.
Just uploaded a picture of one to the Cohort pool that I saw a year ago. From memory the couple had only owned it for a short time then, I think it may have come from the states.
Ah, now you’re talking Paul :), dream machines for me. Very similar in appearance to the Volvo C303/304 eh? The later Pinzgauer models (716 and 718) have a VW tdi, (I6).
Obligatory Vanagon content – Vanagon syncro’s were partially built at Hannover then shipped to Graz where Steyr-Puch did the 4wd stuff.
alistair
I thought it was the initially, so I definitely agree.
I would love to have one of those Haflingers on my little place in the boonies. I can’t really see the need for some of the other toys I have if you would please give me that. Please!!!!!!!
To make an actual comment, these would be awesome for off-roading, with the proviso that your off-roading venue of choice is not too far from home. It is interesting to note that Tatra trucks still use the same basic layout, as seen earlier this year on the Dakar.
I like reading about Germanic offroad vehicles, because to my pathetically monolingual ears, they SOUND unstoppable. Haflinger! Pinzgauer! Achtung! 🙂
I assume you know that Haflinger and Pinzgauer are names for two breeds of very rugged draft horses?
Thanks for the write-up! I’ve always found the Pinzgauer and Haflinger to be fascinating vehicles. I’d love having a chance to drive one at least once.
I’ve always wanted a Haflinger or Pinzgauer, but OMG the prices on this side of the pond! And even if I could scrape together the money I really don’t have any real use for one.
Back in 1979, Steyr-Puch gave Car & Driver a Pinzgauer to evaluate…David E. Davis did one of his highly-personal first impressions, including a good solid cussing of Customs for not releasing the truck for two weeks on paperwork. I was impressed with the hardware but wondered who the hell would lay out the green to BUY it, in those depressed years. Later, of course, it would have been a natural…but later, it wasn’t in evidence anywhere.
Now, today…again, who the HELL would spend the hundreds of thousands for such a rig? A few guys who’ve worn out their Hummer H1s. Nobody else. Conspicuous consumption as a pastime is on hold…
There are at least two of them in driveways of valuable homes on Coronado. One of them is a 6×6. I think they’re primarily used for cruising the neighborhood.
I remember that article, from one of the best eras of Car and Driver. It’s funny how classy they made it look, with its RV-inspired paint job and careful interior shots. They’re actually more Step-Van than Land Cruiser in accommodations.
They had some fascinating specs, with their aircooled, dual oil scavenged, twin carb, inline four cylinder engine. I think the engine was mounted horizontally, which is unusual for an inline unit. The next light military vehicle Steyr-Puch developed was the G-wagon, and they ditched the swing portage axles and went with solid ones and water cooled engines, like American Bantam had done 35 years earlier in developing what became the Jeep.
This wasn’t actually Steyr-Puch’s last shot at a light military vehicle. After the Pinzgauer, they developed the Gelandewagen in time to reach production in 1979. It was a German Jeep, and eventually came to the US as the Rodeo Drive Mercedes-Benz G 500. Compared to the Pinzgauer, gone were the portage axles, the set back air cooled engine, and the van like body. They were replaced with Jeep-like solid axles, Jeep-like water cooled passenger car engines, and a Jeep-like layout. Here’s a photo of the military 460 model: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Puch_G_Bundesheer.jpg
Well, the G-Wagen is a whole different story. But MB instigated that one, although SP did a lot of the actual development work and the final production: (wiki): 1972 Development starts, focusing on off road abilities and maximum safety and comfort; with a cooperative agreement between Daimler-Benz and Steyr-Daimler-Puch in Graz, Austria. Mercedes-Benz engineers in Stuttgart are in charge of design and testing, while the team in Graz develops the production plans.
The same article in Wikipedia also says, “The G-Wagen was developed by Steyr-Daimler-Puch and first offered for sale in 1979 and redesigned in 1990/1991.” I remember articles from the time of introduction that included interviews with Puch people who explained their design choices and how they’d learned from the Pinzgauer and Range Rover that complexity wasn’t needed.
I misidentified the military model above. It was called the 461.
It’s at least a semantic issue: what does “develop” mean? What is clear and well known is that there wouldn’t have been a G-Class without the partnership with MB. No way would SP have initiated this on their own, or be able to carry it to fruition, or sell it in the numbers needed.
I wasn’t there when they set up the partnership. And there’s no doubt that Puch did much/most of the actual development. But MB had more than a bit of experience in this field too, with their Unimog.
It’s a bit like the current Toyota 86/Subaru BRZ: the Subaru engineers claim they did almost all of the actual development, although Toyota is getting most of the credit. But then without Toyota, it would never have happened. Same way with the G-wagen.
Then one could also say that Mercedes learned from the Unimog that portage axles and complexity were no substitute for Jeep-like fundamentals.
With their know-how in four-wheel drive-systems, Steyr-Daimler-Puch essentially functions as third party consultants to the rest of the industry. Like Ferguson and their FF system. Or how Porsche or Lotus functions as technology consultants for other companies. All auto makers can not afford to have all expertise in house. Especially when it comes to niche-vehicles, it can be a good thing to turn to outside companies.
The Bundeswehr was looking to put a large order of four-wheel drive vehicles. Several companies built prototypes on spec, and Mercedes won that contest. To develop the car, they turned to SDP for know-how. As Mercedes themselves didn’t have neither the expertise nor the production facilities for that kind of order.
Large automakers simply aren’t scaled for production in the tens of thousands, they are scaled for production in the hundreds of thousands or millions of cars. Boutique makers that make handmade cars are scaled for production in the hundreds. Between the hundreds and the hundreds of thousands, there are the “unknown” players like Steyr (Now Magna) in Austria and Valmet in Finland, and so on.
So, it’s a win-win. Mercedes can outsource both the r&d and production, Steyr can have something both to develop and build. Mercedes wins the prestigious honour of having brought home a large government contract, Steyr can brag they are contracted to build the prestigious Mercedes. Everybody wins….
No greater dream exists for me than to own a newer Pinz with the turbo diesel and ambulance body. I can’t even read this whole article, it will make me want, want, want…..
I remember seeing one up close and in person. It looked like it was either an army personnel carrier, or a personal RV for camping. Unfortunately, I didn’t get to talk to the owner of the vehicle. So I have no way of knowing.
I am somewhat familiar with the vehicle in the very top picture. Back in the early ’80s I was involved with a group of adventurers who had one. Just one of them owned the vehicle. This was an amazing vehicle, not just for it’s time, but it’s even ahead of 4 wheel drive technology today by a long way (I remember David E. Davis’ comments, I believe they included a reference to a stock Plymouth Trailduster with chromed Appliance wheels) It could go just about anywhere. It’s secret was it’s advanced design drive system. I don’t care how high you lift your F-150, you still have the axles and driveshafts down low, where they are going to get hung up (and probably broken) by even smaller rocks. The Pinzgauer may not look that tall, but there are no low slung parts to catch on something.
I have never known how to pronounce any of those words. I have owned a Puch moped, and also a Puch “twingle” motorcycle.
Great article here .
-Nate
Remarkable vehicles! I’ve only ever seen one here in the US. Not originally sold here if I’m not mistaken so it had to be a private import. But they seem like the definition of unstoppable!
There’s a Pinzgauer owner at my workplace, but I haven’t chased him down to talk.
Didn’t know about the Tatra T111. Wiki says its total (including wartime) production was 34K, which along with the Krupp Protze’s 7K and Opel Blitz’s 130K (and the latter wasn’t even a military design), still adds up to a fraction of N. American truck production of over a million (e.g. CCKW, CMP, US6, Whites, Diamonds, Dodges, Chevies, etc.).
Were there any other Wehrmacht trucks I missed, or was the imbalance really this bad? No wonder they needed horsecarts. And even with horses, the Russians had an advantage with Asiatic breeds in E. Front conditions.
The Wehrmacht was caught with its pants down in so far as its trucks were concerned; they never had enough, some of the supposedly standardized types were overly complicated and unreliable and so on. Hence the need to commandeer so many civilian and captured vehicles – you can imagine the maintenance nightmare… They realized they had a problem and towards the end of the war developed simpler types which would have been as reliable as the US-made trucks but by then it was too late.
I missed this in 2012 Sure glad you reran it. Really fun vehicles. I have seen at least two in Houston but have not been able to speak to the owners/drivers. I’ll bet they are great fun on deer leases and the like.
The Hawaii Forest & Trail tour company on the Big Island uses these trucks on their tours. They are fun to ride in, and are able to take you anywhere you want to go.
Last I heard the company had a half dozen of these vehicles.
Fascinating, Paul. While I’m a big fan of Tatra cars, I had no idea the T111 used a backbone frame and three swing axles. It must be the only World War II era truck of that size designed that way. Probably of ANY era, for that matter!
They still build them that way. With DAF cabs and engines these days.
(Photo courtesy of Tatra)
Haflinger as beach runabout for me.
One other contribution that Steyr-Puch made to the 4WD world: the original Fiat Panda 4×4 – specifically, the selectable transaxle that sent drive to the rear wheels, and the rear suspension (leaf springs, solid axle) that was different to the regular FWD Panda.
I had one of these in exactly the trim and colours shown below. For a vehicle with 993cc and no low range, it was very capable in the dirt for what it was. Would happily own another one.
Sweet. Steyr-Puch also worked for Volkswagen, the Golf Country was one of the end results.
I really want one of these.
THAT looks like fun.
Always liked the Golf Country. As far as I know, they were never built in RHD so we never got them, but did occasionally see a few that were over on holiday from Germany and wished that they’d offered them in Ireland.
Did they also have the Steyr-Puch badges that the Panda 4×4 got? Always thought those were one of the best (simple) logos ever added onto a vehicle.
I don’t think so. I also looked at some photos of the rear-left side, but no Steyr-Puch badge there either.
Automobiles Dangel from France also has a neat badge. Founded in 1980, they do 4×4 conversions of Peugeots, Citroëns and Fiats.
Here’s the configurator on Dangel’s website: http://www.dangel.com/en/configurator
Funny you should mention Dangel – I’ve been considering bringing a 505 Dangel into the US now that the later ones fall under the 25-year import rule.
As an aside: some time ago, I ran across this video of the Fiat Ducato with Dangel’s 4×4 system installed. What’s interesting isn’t so much that it’s a Ducato 4×4, but rather that it may actually be a Ram Promaster. What makes me think this is that the grille and all of the badges are blanked-out with cardboard – but some of the positions that are blanked-out correspond to ones that are only used on the Ram, not the Fiat, Citroen, or Peugeot version. The most evident one is directly above the front wheelarches.
A 505 Dangel, really nice ! A big Peugeot wagon 4×4. Does that make it an SUV, a crossover (CUV) or a 4WD wagon ??
The concept for the Pinzgauer goes back even farther, the the early 1930’s in Germany. In return for supporting Hitler, the German Army got a blank cheque to develop anything it wanted. Being German, they developed a technological marvel with all independent suspension and all-wheel steering called the “Einheits,” or “unity” scheme, as the plan (in the army’s view, anyway) was to have standard vehicles across the entire Wehrmacht. And still being German, they didn’t actually bother to ask around and see if anyone could actually build them in the kind of numbers they needed, and of course, they couldn’t, this largely being the story of German procurement in the Nazi era. They could have developed something like the immensely popular British Dingo or even the American Jeep, but nooooooooo, the Germans had to take the technical route, and if they couldn’t actually produce it any kind of volume, well, the will had not triumphed.
The point here is the superiority of fully independent suspension for off-roading was well known even then. The Dingo was a simply superb vehicle and used the H drive system and off the shelf components. Not the Einheits.
… And unreliable too. That’s why they moved to simpler vehicles like the Steyr 1500A (the Pinzgauer’s great uncle, I suppose) but by then the time ran out.
There is a Pinzgauer in our town. Its license plate sums up the polar opposition of the Austrian vs. the American schools of off road design: H2THIS
Ironically it took a Steier to popularize the civilian Hummer: Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Being a fan of 4x4s in general, and especially of bare bones hard as nails offroad vehicles AND forward control ones…I love these things! What I wouldn’t give to own one. Whats funny is these have a footprint about the size of a CJ-7 from everything Ive read on them. To look at the configuration, youd assume its about the size of a medium duty truck such as an Isuzu NPR.
I live in Austria so if I were into that sort of thing (off-roading) I could find one, ex-Austrian army, but even here they are not cheap… The Puch G would make more sense but those are no budget 4X4 either…