Talk:BAE Caiman

LMTV vs MTV

Is there any evidence that the Cat1 Caiman is LMTV-based or is this pure speculation? I don't think the LMTV has the payload - even the Cat1 vehicle weighs 14t. I'm also not convinced that Armor Holdings' claim that the Caiman is lighter than the other MRAPs is entirely accurate. At 14t, the Cat1 vehicle might be but the 24t Cat2 Caiman is almost certainly heavier than some of the others - I remember seeing figures in the region of 35-40,000 lbs I just don't remember where or about which MRAP. Dino246 06:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Pretty much just speculation. But its only the drivetrain that is totally shared, no idea about the chassis. As far as weight goes... I don't know, I just cited the source. Tmaull 22:12, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

That part of the article seems to have been written back when Armor Holdings first announced it. As for the weight, BAE doesn't seem to be releasing much information on it. BAE's intention seems to be to focus more on the RG-33 than the Caiman so we're not hearing much about the Caiman. They aren't releasing many details. Even when the Caiman won the MRAP II competition (Caiman was submitted by BAE's newly acquired Stewart & Stevenson division which BAE's OMC division submitted the RG-31), BAE convinced them to make MRAP II's with Caiman only on Cat I and RG-33's on Cat II (although a RG-33 wasn't submitted for MRAP II testing) should they make MRAP IIs.

Armor Holdings did claim that Caiman was much lighter than comparable sized MRAPs though. Apparently it uses Tensylon ® Composite Armor to achieve a lower weight.[1] Considering Armor Holdings also owned O'Gara-Hess & Eisenhardt at the time, I wouldn't doubt some very efficient use of armor on the Caiman. However, BAE sold off O'Gara-Hess & Eisenhardt after the acquisition of Armor Holdings and who knows what rights to which technologies they still retained. IraqVet225 (talk) 22:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on BAE Caiman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080205114628/http://www.marines.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf/0/392158BE6C6E5AE9852573170073B9C4?opendocument to http://www.marines.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf/0/392158BE6C6E5AE9852573170073B9C4?opendocument
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160513110800/http://egypt.usembassy.gov/pr051216.html to http://egypt.usembassy.gov/pr051216.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://defence-blog.com/army/uae-donates-used-m1248-caiman-mine-resistant-vehicles-to-lybia.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:38, 13 July 2017 (UTC)