In 2019, GM Defense – a subsidiary of General Motors established in 2017 – was awarded $1 million by the U.S. Army to develop prototypes of an Infantry Squad Vehicle (ISV) for testing, evaluation and down selection for the production contract. Today, the U.S. Army announced that GM Defense has been awarded with the production contract to build, field and sustain the new ISV, which is derived from the award-winning Chevrolet Colorado ZR2 midsize pickup truck.
Designed to provide rapid ground mobility, the ISV is a light and agile all-terrain troop carrier intended to transport a nine-Soldier infantry squad moving throughout the battlefield. But the ISV must also be light enough, weighing 5,000 pounds or less, to be sling loaded from a UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter and compact enough to fit inside a CH-47 Chinook helicopter for air transportability.
The total production ISV contract award value is $214.3 million for the initial Army Procurement Objective of 649 units, while the approved Army Acquisition Objective is 2,065 vehicles.
The GM Defense Infantry Squad Vehicle is based on the 2020 Chevrolet Colorado ZR2 midsize truck architecture that leverages 90 percent commercial off-the-shelf parts, including the dual spool-valve dampers (DSSV dampers) from Multimatic as well as Chevrolet Performance suspension components. In fact, the chief engineer of the project, Mark Dickens, told GM Authority that the vehicle is a Colorado ZR2 “from the waist down.”
The durability and performance of these parts have been proven in the exacting Best in the Desert race series, where the Colorado ZR2 is one of four vehicles to compete in 11 consecutive races (out of a total of 434 rivals). This enables GM and GM Defense to “deliver an ISV with world-class manufacturing efficiencies, ease of maintenance and a well-established global supply chain.”
Additionally, all GM ISV models will be equipped with “an occupant and cargo superstructure,” while being powered by a 186-horsepower 2.8L I-4 LWN turbo-diesel Duramax engine, and six-speed automatic transmission. As GM Authority exclusively reported last year, the small diesel will have a different tune than the production model since it doesn’t have to meet emissions requirements.
“Winning this Army award is well-deserved recognition for the hard work and dedication of our GM Defense team and their production of a fantastic vehicle. We are confident the GMD ISV will meet and exceed all of our customers’ requirements,” said David Albritton, president of GM Defense. “It’s indeed an honor to leverage our parent company’s experience as one of the world’s largest automotive manufacturers to design, build and deliver the best technologies available to the men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces and our allies.”
GM Defense has partnered with Ricardo Defense after the U.S. Army awarded three contracts worth $1 million each to industry providers to develop the ISV prototypes. Ricardo Defense’s role includes supporting key product logistics and fielding requirements of the GM Defense ISV, as the vehicle is officially known.
“The entire Ricardo team is proud to continue our work with GM Defense on the ISV contract, and to provide our infantry troops in harm’s way with this highly-capable, and much needed vehicle,” said Chet Gryczan, president of Ricardo Defense. “Being awarded the ISV program is a testament to Ricardo’s success in developing and delivering key integrated product logistics and life-cycle sustainment plans for our customers’ top priorities. The ISV will showcase the speed at which the Army can rapidly produce, field and sustain new equipment by leveraging a proven commercially available vehicle and the global supply chain infrastructure of General Motors, supported by Ricardo.”
Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM Defense news, Chevrolet Colorado news, Chevrolet news and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
- All photos except for top three are copyright GM Authority
Comments
I had recently been wondering who was awarded this contract. I think our military made a good choice and congrats to GMD!
They must be including a free toilet seat to justify the $330,000 per vehicle cost.
You do understand that the contract is not only for the vehicle but also for support and service covering the lifetime of the model, right?
I could replace the vehicle every 6 months with a new one for less money than that service contract. The cost is 15 times what the vehicle should cost. It’s just a chassis with some roll bars and jump seats.
It would be a great ranch / farm vehicle.
Bet that diesel get a cranked up to 250hp and 450lb-ft
How about a Hummer GMC version for the public?
Would be better as a Polaris rival from Chevy.
GMC doesn’t belong in this space, as its new focus is on higher end of the mainstream space.
I hate to tell you but if they build it right it ain’t going to be very cheap. Hence the Hummer name.
This is much more than a glorified side by side.
And I hate to tell you that this would be the same price as a Colorado ZR2 and probably even less.
The imaginary civilian version of this would be a Colorado ZR2 with a roll cage instead of a roof… no cab and no bed. Just a frame with some seats and a safety cage. Cheaper to build, minimal engineering effort, less components, end of story.
I hate to tel, you some reality. This truck would need to re engineered for the road that is added cost. It has much more content that added content not shared with the other trucks, it will need air bags and a bumper system for crash test. It would need doors and some kind of roof.
A cab and bed shared with 400,000 other similar trucks are not expensive. There would be significant added engineering cost as this as it is now is no where legal for any road. To sel, it as an off road only is not going to be worth the volume you would sell.
It will sell in fewer numbers to get the ROI back.
The reality for it to sell to the public is not likely and if it were it would add to the cost.
It is more a nice dream but often less is not always cheaper when it comes to auto mfg.
It’s a stripped down truck…
Hate to say…
Thats what it is….
Take a look again , nothing an off-road shop can’t do to a totaled p/u…
I would say that most of the price of that vehicle, is the diesel engine an all the components that goes with the diesel engine . When it comes to GET a diesel engine everything is built bigger a stronger, even the radiator . You just don’t use gas engine components when using a diesel. A diesel engine is TOTALLY all by it self ,you can’t use gas engine components when using a diesel!
Chris just doing the math $214 million decided by the 649 units makes this $330,000 per vehicle that GM is charging. The 2000 unit are what they eventually want buy.
So I see little chance this will be less than a ZR2 or even a vehicle for the public unless it is sold as surplus.
No armor ?
If your read the article it was stated that the truck had to weigh less than 5,000 lbs. I’m assuming these vehicles be followed by a pallet of armor on a drop or at a base.
Or armor is simply not appropriate for the missions it’ll participate in.
never heard 👂 of Kevlar or carbon fiber,
That would be light armor ?
Not always 1 in plate…
Is classified as armor…
@ 6.2 LT4 @ 2021 Escalade
Look at those tabs sticking out with a little hitch sticking up, about mid way up the B & D pillar, maybe those are attachment points for armored/body panels that can be easily replaced if damaged, or completely taken off as necessary.
More than likely, this would be configured to Unit specifications; Delta Force, Special Forces and the 75th Ranger Regiments would know exactly how to make this vehicle work for them based on the use of their weapons and tactical movements when involving the use of this type of vehicle and more than likely, those are the type of Elite Soldiers this vehicle is aimed at.
Sitting ducks…
So glad our BRAVE and STRONG military chose an AMERICAN company for the Halo type vehicle. No more Wuhan products!
I bet they start trying to up armor it like they did with the hummers and get kids killed.
This is just a drop chassis that can be deployed in fast and easy methods from a Chinook, or other large chopper. Then it is to cover ground fast once it is rolling.
This is not a replacement for a Hummer or one of the larger trucks for general purpose
While it may have a suspension bits, axle and engine from a ZR2 this is a specific built model that is not converted from the truck. It has special material for light weight and strength.
Owning a mid size GM truck I have watched this program and seen there is a lot of SLE isl work and materials involved here. They did not just remove the cab and bed.
The military has used a small air cooled model now but it lacks the ability to carry many troops. This should resolve that. .
It’s unbelievable that people accept and justify a $330k / unit cost for a vehicle that shares 90% of their components with a $35k vehicle. Service contracts don’t account for $200k+ per vehicle. Attach a military label to government spending and people don’t seem to question the frivolous spending of tax money. Corruption at the highest level where tax payers are raped with 10x market costs due to inefficiencies and payoffs. No wonder the country can’t fund a decent health care system and is ravaged by poverty on par with 3rd world nations.
Go to a 3rd world country and see if you can repeat that last statement.
Also in another story I read GM stated that 70% of the vehicle is of commercial products
Not really 95% shared over some suspension parts and maybe the engine. Even they may see upgrades over the stock units. Nor will it be on the same assembly line.
These are specific built vehicles that are going to be more fabricated than assembly line. Much of the work will. Be done by hand and not robots.
So while it is a shame this is not going to be cheaper it can be rationalized due to the time, materials and labor coast involved for a low volume non production model.
As for the last comment I have been to the third world several times. We are not even close to that.
The reality is no hospital will turn anyone away and if they can’t pay they generally get written off, It is those with insurance and the tax payers that get screwed as those who have coverage often get charged more than those wo do not. I worked in the medical field and saw the pricing.
We need to control the cost of medical services not throw more government money at it. The left and the lobbyist just want more money and prevent the cost controls.