Cold War Spanish BMR Family

Pegaso 3560

Kingdom of Spain (1976-1978)
Armored Personnel Carrier – 3 Prototypes Built

Although the Pegaso 3500 had been a failure, Spanish military authorities remained keen to develop a 6×6 wheeled armored personnel carrier. Eventually, this would become the BMR-600, perhaps one of the biggest success stories of the Spanish military-industrial complex. Between 1977 and 1978, three prototypes were built and extensively tested. These received the designation Pegaso 3560 and each had a different turret and armament.


Context – A Changing Spain

The new geopolitical situation created by the Cold War had a fundamental impact on Spain. At that time, Spain was ruled by Francisco Franco, a far-right dictator who had gained power in a bloody civil war. Initially a pariah for its support of Hitler and Mussolini, Spain was brought into the Western sphere in 1953 by signing the Madrid Pact with the USA.

As a result, millions of dollars were pumped into the Spanish economy. In terms of military aid, the USA sent over 1,000 armored fighting vehicles, in addition to aircraft and warships. The USA also established four military bases in Spain and participated in the training and instruction of Spanish military personnel.

In spite of this close relationship, Spain was not allowed to join NATO and was excluded from the European Economic Community (EEC).

Internally, Spain was also changing. The economic policy of autarky was abandoned in the late 1950s, as widespread change to the regime was adopted, and technocrats were given positions of power.

During the 1960s, the technocratic government reversed the situation, giving rise to the ‘Spanish economic miracle’. Between 1960 and 1973, the Spanish economy grew at an average of 7% each year. The same period saw industry grow at an annual average of 10%, as Spain moved from an agricultural to an industrial economy and society. The economic miracle owed a lot to the growth of tourism, which remains one of Spain’s economic motors to this day. In 1960, there were 6 million foreign tourists, and just over a decade later, in 1973, this figure had leapt to 34 million.

Throughout this period, the Franco regime was becoming slightly less authoritarian in certain aspects. However, given Franco’s age and deteriorating health, some kind of transformation was inevitable. Within the regime, there were several factions vying for power. The more hard-line faction, headed by Admiral Carrero Blanco, ended up victorious, and the last years of the Franco dictatorship were marked by reactionary authoritarianism.

Although Franco had named the Bourbon prince Juan Carlos as his successor in 1969, it was expected that Carrero Blanco would call the shots and that the regime would not change significantly after Franco’s demise.

Spanish dictator Francisco Franco (right) and the future king of Spain Juan Carlos (left) preside over a military procession – source: Wikipedia

In December 1973, Carrero Blanco was killed by members of the Basque terrorist group Euskadi Ta Askatasuna (ETA) [Eng. Basque Homeland and Freedom]. Curiously, this was the same day as the Pegaso 3500 was tested for the first time. This coincided with a period of major internal and external pressure for Spain. The world economy was in recession, putting a stop to the Spanish Economic Miracle. Tensions with Morocco over the Spanish Sahara were at a boiling point. In Spain, students and workers launched mass protests and the international community put pressure on the regime for executing political prisoners.

Franco died in November 1975. The now King Juan Carlos I steered Spain towards democracy, although the process would not be plain sailing. In this context, the Pegaso 3560.00 was born.

The Pegaso 3560’s Predecessors

All the US aid and its own military developments were not sufficient for Spain to be able to prepare itself fully in the event of the kind of mechanized warfare that had emerged during the Second World War and which had become consolidated in the early Cold War years. Armored Personnel Carriers (APCs), able to transport an infantry squad in the relative safety of an armored hull, were tested towards the end of the Second World War and would appear in large numbers during and after the Korean War. In some instances, these vehicles also carried armament of their own to support the infantry dismounts.

Spain had the M-series half-tracks and the fully-tracked M113-based vehicles to perform these roles to different extents, but lacked the wheeled counterparts which would enable an even more rapid deployment of troops and quicker support across the battlefield.

During the 1960s and early 1970s, Spain considered several wheeled APC alternatives to overcome this deficiency in its arsenal.

DAF YP-408

From as early as 1953, Spanish companies had had dealings with the Dutch truck manufacturer DAF (Van Doorne’s Aanhangwagen Fabriek). In 1961, the Spanish state began to carry out business with DAF directly. The main aim of these contacts was to produce DAF military trucks under license, but armored vehicles were also thrown into the mix. In 1965, a single DAF YP-408, license plate ‘FS-83-64’, was sent for evaluation and testing.

The DAF YP-408 was a Dutch 8×6 armored personnel carrier. Developed in the 1950s, it was introduced into the Dutch Army in 1964 and remained in service until 1987. Like other APCs of the era, it was converted to fulfill many different roles, including ambulance, anti-tank, or command. A few also saw service with Portugal and Suriname.

Photographic evidence of the trials carried out at the Academía de Caballería de Valladolid [Eng. Valladolid Cavalry Academy] suggests they were mainly to test the vehicle’s ability over uneven terrain. Regardless, no further testing was carried out and the vehicle was returned to the Netherlands.

The DAF YP-408 during its tests in Spain in 1965 – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 53


Almost nothing is known about Internacional de Comercio y Tránsito S.A. (INCOTSA) [Eng. Commerce and Transit International Limited Company], the company that designed the VBTT-E4. It may have also previously been involved in the design of the unsuccessful Vehículo Blindado de Combate de Infantería VBCI-E General Yagüe, an armored personnel carrier/infantry fighting vehicle, and the Vehículo Blindado de Reconocimiento de Caballería VBRC-1E General Monasterio, a tracked cavalry reconnaissance vehicle.

In the late 1960s or early 1970s, INCOTSA created the VBTT-E4. The drawings would suggest some degree of inspiration from the Cadillac Gage Commando and the Portuguese Bravia Chaimite. Each of these had a number of derivatives or variants to carry out different tasks, such as mortar carrier or tank destroyer and the VBTT-E4 was to follow this example. It is not entirely clear why the VBTT-E4 was conceived nor how Spanish military authorities reacted to it, but what is clear is that it never went into production.

Rough drawing of the VBTT-E4, in which the shape of the front differs from the design drawings – source: Manrique García & Molina Franco, p. 34


In May 1962, the Spanish Army instructed Empresa Nacional de Autocamiones S.A. (ENASA) [Eng. National Truck Limited Company] to collaborate with DAF for the license production of the DAF YA-414 truck. ENASA had been founded in 1946, during the time of Spanish economic autarky. Pegaso was the ENASA brand in charge of building automobiles, including trucks for the Spanish Army.

ENASA’s DAF YA-414 truck production was to be overseen by a Spanish military commission. A department for military production was also to be created at ENASA. Two production stages were agreed for ENASA’s DAF YA-414, or Pegaso 3050, as it was known. The first, with a petrol engine, had 65% of components produced domestically. The second, with a diesel engine, had 86%. At this point, ENASA was producing fewer than 8,000 trucks, of all models, annually. A decade later, in 1973, they were producing over 20,000.

A Pegaso 3050 military truck, the Spanish version of the Dutch DAF YA-414 built by ENASA – source: Wikipedia Commons

ENASA’s military department was based just outside Madrid in Barajas, near the city’s airport. Its head was José Ignacio Valderrama Curiel, and Carlos Carreras was in charge of military design. Manuel Serdá was in charge of the military design sub-department located at the Pegaso’s La Sagrera factory in Barcelona.

Pegaso 3500

On March 7th 1969, the Estado Mayor Central (EMC) [Eng. Spanish Army General Headquarters] released document ‘nº6-1109’, calling for the creation of a wheeled armored vehicle. With several unrecorded proposals having been rejected, ENASA was given the task. The initial vague requirements set by EMC and the Alto Estado Mayor [Eng. Defense High Command] stipulated a family of 6×6 amphibious vehicles. 4×4 vehicles were rejected because of their limited mobility, whilst 8×8 vehicles were deemed too expensive. The priority was to use the fewest possible imported components in the vehicle’s construction. To this end, ENASA was to collaborate with Spanish civilian industries to develop components and solutions.

Momentum gathered in June 1972 with the creation of a mixed working group within the Spanish Army headed by Colonel Antonio Torres Espinosa. The mixed technical working group designed a vehicle before completing a full-scale wooden mock-up. Though the initial plans were to construct two prototypes, only one was assembled at some unspecified date in 1973 at the Pegaso factory in Barajas (Madrid) following the specifications of scope statement ‘V-05-E’.

The completed Pegaso 3500 prototype at Pegaso’s Barajas’ factory grounds – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 60

The first tests were carried out during the second half of 1973 on the grounds of the Pegaso factory. These were followed by tests outside the factory on December 11th 1973, when the Pegaso 3500 was put through firing and driving trials at La Marañosa, a hilly area south-east of Madrid. On December 17th, the prototype was shown to the Alto Estado Mayor.

On December 24th, disaster struck when the prototype sank during testing at the Buendía reservoir. Fortunately, all the crew members were able to evacuate the vehicle. Although the prototype was recovered not long afterwards, its fate was sealed.

In September 1974, a mixed committee evaluated it and submitted a report to the Alto Estado Mayor. Whilst mostly positive, the report did highlight the overly large size of the prototype. At the time, on Spanish roads, a vehicle wider than 2.5 m had to be accompanied by a Guardia Civil [Eng. Civil Guard] car. The report recommended a reduction in size and weight and noted the need for a redesigned interior.

The next step would not be taken until January 23rd 1976, when the Estado Mayor Central published document ‘6-0199’. It praised the efforts put into creating the prototype, but rejected it, as it had exceeded the original specifications. The document also ordered the creation of new prototypes along with an updated set of specifications.

In its appearance, the Pegaso 3500 was quite similar to other six-wheeled armored personnel carriers, albeit larger – source: Manrique García & Molina Franco, p. 47

Berliet VXB-170

Although the Pegaso 3500 had demonstrated that an armored personnel carrier could be developed and produced in Spain, foreign options were still under consideration. In 1975, a single Berliet VXB-170 was tested at the Academia de Infantería de Toledo [Eng. Toledo Infantry Academy]. The Berliet VXB-170 had only just entered service in France and would go on to see service mainly with military police and peacekeeping forces. Not much is known of the outcome of the tests.

A Berliet VXB-170 during its trial process in Spain in 1975 – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 54

New Orders and Requirements

Carlos Carreras, by this point chief engineer at Pegaso’s Barcelona’s plant, was put in charge of the program for the Pegaso 3500’s successor in 1975. Early in 1976, the design drawings were presented by a mixed commission with representatives of the Army and ENASA. The new design, called Pegaso 3560.00, was much changed compared to the Pegaso 3500. To begin with, width had been reduced to 2.5 m to be road compliant. There were also changes to the space between axles and to the engine’s position inside the vehicle.

In May 1976, General of the Cuerpo de Ingenieros de Armamento y Construcción (CIAC) [Eng. Armament and Construction Engineers Corps], Antonio Torres Espinosa, who was also the President General of the Comisión de Desarrollo de Vehículos Blindados [Eng. Armored Vehicle Development Commission], sent a letter to the head of ENASA with the Army’s position. They requested a series of modifications to the drawings and set out a calendar for development and assembly of prototypes.

  • Three of the armored personnel carrier version (V-09 configuration)
  • Two of a mortar carrier version (V-02 configuration)
  • One of a cavalry reconnaissance version
  • One of an anti-aircraft version (V-05 configuration)
  • One of a reconnaissance/combat version (V-05 configuration)

Of these, only the three original armored personnel carriers, one of the mortar carriers, and the cavalry reconnaissance prototypes would be completed. The last of the three armored personnel carrier prototypes was actually reconceived as an infantry section support vehicle.

The contract for the production of the three armored personnel prototypes, file number ‘2476’, worth 43,470,000 Pesetas, was signed in 1976.

The Three Prototypes

Over the following two years, the three prototypes would be completed and tested. These were called BMR-600 PP. ‘BMR’ stood for “Blindado Medio de Ruedas” [Eng. Wheeled Medium Armored Vehicle], the ‘6’ in ‘600’ for the number of wheels, and the ‘00’ to show they were the first prototype. ‘PP’, in this context, stood for “portapersonal” [Eng. personnel carrier].

The three armored personnel carrier prototypes
Official name BMR-600 PP/A.1 BMR-600 PP/C.1 BMR-600 PP/T.1
ENASA name ENASA 3560/00 ENASA 3560/01 ENASA 3560/02
Chassis number 1817.00001 1891.00005 1893.00001
Engine number 1793.00005 1793.00006 1637.00308
Prototype finished September 1977 January 1978 May 1978 (?)
Tests October 3rd 1977 to December 3rd 1977 January 1978 May 1978
The BMR-600 PP/A.1 during one of its initial tests. This was the simplest, and as a result, perhaps, cheapest, of the three prototypes – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 62

The three prototypes were presented to the EMC together for the first time on May 19th 1978. Later that month, on May 27th, at the Zarzuela royal palace, the Spanish monarch inspected them.

The three prototypes differed from each other. The main variation between them was their turret and armament.

  • BMR-600 PP/A.1 had an open fixed circular TE-1 turret armed with a 7.62 mm MG 3 machine gun
  • BMR-600 PP/C.1 had a closed MOWAG turret armed with a 7.62 mm MG 3 machine gun which was fired from the inside
  • BMR-600 PP/T.1 had a closed T-20/13 type C TOUCAN-1 turret with a 20 mm GIAT M693 autocannon and a 7.62 mm AAT-NF1 machine gun
Left-to-right: the BMR-600 PP/A.1 with a TE-1 turret armed with a 7.62 mm MG 3 machine gun; the BMR-600 PP/C.1 with a closed MOWAG turret armed with a 7.62 mm MG 3 machine gun; and the BMR-600 PP/T.1 with a closed T-20/13 type C TOUCAN-1 turret with a 20 mm GIAT M693 autocannon and a 7.62 mm AAT-NF1 machine gun – source: Manrique García & Molina Franco, p. 53

Additionally, there were a number of differences in terms of amphibious equipment, vision slits, etc.

Differences between the three armored personnel carrier prototypes
Prototype BMR-600 PP/A.1 BMR-600 PP/C.1 BMR-600 PP/T.1
Turret TE-1 MOWAG T-20/13 type C TOUCAN-1
Armament 7.62 mm MG 3 machine gun 7.62 mm MG 3 machine gun 20 mm GIAT M693 autocannon
Secondary armament None None 7.62 mm AAT-NF1 machine gun
Hydrojets space No Yes Yes
Hydrojets No Yes Yes
Side hatches Two right side
One left side
None Two right side
One left side
Glass slits None Two right side
One left side
NBC capacity No Yes Yes
NBC equipped No Yes Yes
Winch space No Yes Yes
Winch equipped No Yes Yes
Rear door hatch Yes Yes Yes
Rear door vision block No No No
Radio AN/VRC-64
Intercom AN/VIC-1
Wheel arch (cm) 1,600 1,650 1,650
Distance from center of rear wheel to rear (cm) 1,350 1,400 1,400
Total length (cm) 6,000 6,124 6,124
Crew 2 (driver + assistant) 2 (driver + assistant) 1 (driver)
Infantry dismounts 11 11 11

After some modifications, the BMR-600 PP/A.1 was eventually used as the base for the serial BMR-600s. The design section below will broadly describe the BMR-600 PP/A.1 but provide details for the areas in which the other two prototypes were different.

Detailed dimensions 1:50 scale drawings for the BMR-600 PP/A.1 from February 1977. The modifications in red are from May 2nd 1977. There are additional annotations on the document for February and October 1978 – source: Manrique García & Molina Franco, p. 62
The 1:50 scale drawings for the BMR-600 PP/C.1 from January 1978 – source: Manrique García & Molina Franco, p. 63
The 1:50 scale drawings for the BMR-600 PP/T.1, here named BMR-600 PPA/C.2 from January 1978. The ‘PPA’ name may refer to “portapersonal asalto” [Eng. troop transport assault] – source: Manrique García & Molina Franco, p. 63


External Appearance and Dimensions

The Pegaso 3560 was externally quite similar to other six-wheeled armored personnel carriers of the era. Somewhat smaller than its predecessor, the Pegaso 3500, it stood at 6 m long, 2.5 m wide, and over 2 m high.

Empty weight varied during the development and testing of the prototype. The BMR-600 PP/A.1, as of the February 1977 drawings, was estimated at 13,772 kg. The hull alone was 3,512 kg. The total volume of the vehicle was calculated at 17,723 dm3. When weighed in February 1978, the figure was 12,518 kg, reduced to 11,470 kg in October 1978.

The Pegaso 3560 compared to other 6×6 armored personnel carriers of the era
Length (m) Width (m) Height (m) Weight (tonnes)
Pegaso 3560 (BMR-600 PP/A.1) 6 2.5 2 12.5
BMR-600 6.15 2.5 2 11.5
Pegaso 3500 6.93 2.98 2.6 19.2
E-11 Urutu 6.1 2.85 2.12 14
Véhicule de l’Avant Blindé 5.98 2.49 2.06 13.8
TPz Fuchs 1 6.8 2.98 2.5 17
Sisu XA-180 7.35 2.9 2.77 13.5


The Pegaso 3560’s armor was made of a lighter material than its predecessor. It consisted of 20 mm to 80 mm Al-Zn 4.5 Mg 1 prestressed aluminum capable of withstanding NATO 7.62 mm ammunition. To compensate for aluminum’s weaker resistance to potential enemy fire, the plates were sharply angled.

The front of BMR-600 PP/C.1 showing the driver’s vision hatch, rear mirrors, headlights, and winch compartment – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 64


The available secondary sources do not provide much detail about what engine components were used. It is unclear if the 352 hp diesel Pegaso 9156 engine of the Pegaso 3500 was retained or if the 306 hp Pegaso 9157, which would power the serial BMR-600s, was used instead.
The engine was positioned vertically in the front left, parallel to the driver’s position, inside a closed and soundproofed compartment. A large door on the front left of the hull gave access to the engine. The engine’s exhaust ran towards the middle of the right-hand side of the vehicle. A cover on the right side of the roof, parallel to the turret allowed for the emission of the engine’s fumes.

A Pegaso 352 hp 9156 diesel engine – source: Motor 9156 y derivados
The Pegaso 9157 306 hp engine in a Pegaso sales brochure – source: Tractores Gama Pesada

Amphibious Components

The BMR-600 PP/A.1 was not designed with amphibious capabilities in mind, as it did not have a wave breaker or hydrojets. This was in contrast to the BMR-600 PP/C.1 and BMR-600 PP/T.1, which had both and were tested in reservoirs.

The BMR-600 PP/C.1 being tested in a reservoir. The use of the wave breaker can be quite clearly seen – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 68


The suspension and running gear of the Pegaso 3560 remained the same as on the Pegaso 3500. There were three large wheels per side. The driver could let out air from the wheels down to 1.8 kg/cm2 to improve the drive over rough terrain. All wheels had independent steering.

To keep the impact on the steering to a minimum, the suspension consisted of parallel triangles with hydropneumatic cylinders, providing the maximum verticality of movement.

The steering was servo-assisted rack and pinion on the first and third axles, which also had cylinders that made it possible to make it rigid from any position. The height of each cylinder could be adjusted separately, although it complicated the driver’s work.

The cylinders allowed for the Pegaso 3560 to change its elevation depending on the surface it was driving on. There were four heights:

  • ‘Maximum’ for traversing the most challenging obstacles
  • ‘All-terrain’ for most rough surfaces
  • ‘Driving’ for most roads
  • ‘Minimum’ to facilitate entry and exit from the vehicle

Each side could be elevated independently, so that water that may have accumulated in the bottom could be drained out. The capability to elevate each individual wheel independently, such as when a tire or wheel became incapacitated, enabled the Pegaso 3560 to drive with as few as four wheels, two per side.

The BMR-600 PP/T.1 showing off its suspension – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 63

Turrets and Armament

The main variation between the three prototypes was their turret and armament.

  • BMR-600 PP/A.1 had an open fixed circular TE-1 turret armed with a 7.62 mm MG 3 machine gun
  • BMR-600 PP/C.1 had a closed MOWAG turret armed with a 7.62 mm MG 3 machine gun which was fired from the inside
  • BMR-600 PP/T.1 had a closed T-20/13 type C TOUCAN-1 turret with a 20 mm GIAT M693 autocannon and a 7.62 mm AAT-NF1 machine gun

BMR-600 PP/A.1

The small open fixed circular TE-1 turret on the BMR-600 PP/A.1 had eight daytime periscopes, made by ENOSA (Empresa Nacional de Óptica Sociedad Anónima [Eng. National Optical Limited Company]), around it. On top of the turret was a circular fitting that held the 7.62 mm MG 3 machine gun on the right. The MG 3 was a development of the WWII-era German MG 42, which had armed the Pegaso 3500. The Spanish company Santa Bárbara produced the MG 1A3, MG 3, and MG 42 under license.

The BMR-600 PP/A.1 during its time at the Regimiento de Instrucción Calatrava n.º 2 [Eng. Instruction Regiment Calatrava No. 2] in the Academia de Caballería [Eng. Cavalry Academy] in Valladolid. Notice the MG 3 machine gun on the turret fitting – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 63

BMR-600 PP/C.1

The BMR-600 PP/C.1 had a Swiss closed MOWAG turret. Vision was provided by periscopes. The MG 3 machine gun was fired from inside the vehicle. This turret and armament combination was used on some of the first serial BMR-600s. Nevertheless, most would end up with the TC-3 turret and 12.7 M2 Browning machine gun.

The BMR-600 PP/C.1 with its closed MOWAG turret and MG 3 armament during tests – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 68

BMR-600 PP/T.1

As it was intended for the role of squad support, not just armored personnel carrier, the BMR-600 PP/T.1 had stronger armor. The turret and armaments were of French origin and consisted of a closed T-20/13 type C TOUCAN-1 turret with a 20 mm GIAT M693 autocannon and a 7.62 mm AAT-NF1 machine gun.

The GIAT M693 was a relatively new weapon at the time. It was used as a towed anti-aircraft weapon and on warships. The French AMX-10P amphibious infantry fighting vehicle was armed with it. The 20 mm autocannon fired Armor-Piercing Discarding Sabot (APDS) and High Explosive (HE) rounds.

The AAT-NF1 was the version of the 7.5 mm AA-52 machine gun rechambered to fire the standard 7.62 mm NATO rounds. It had a rate of fire of 900 rpm and has been used on the French Leclerc main battle tank.

The BMR-600 PP/T.1, which had two in the turret, was the only of the three prototypes to be initially equipped with smoke dischargers.

The BMR-600 PP/T.1 with its T-20/13 type C TOUCAN-1 turret with a 20 mm GIAT M693 autocannon and a 7.62 mm AAT-NF1 machine gun – source: Manrique García & Molina Franco, p. 57

Crew and Dismounts

The BMR-600 PP/T.1 had a crew of one, a driver, but the other two Pegaso 3560 variants had a crew of two, a driver and a commander. The driver sat in the front left and had a hatch above the position for entry and access. For vision, the driver had a large openable hatch in front and a glass protected opening to the left. Behind the driver’s position, a small corridor connected the position to the fighting compartment in the middle of the vehicle. The commander’s station was at the end of this corridor.

All three prototypes carried an infantry squad of eleven dismounts who sat on two benches along each interior wall, with their personal weapons stored in the middle of the vehicle. The infantry dismounts could fire from inside the vehicles on the BMR-600 PP/A.1 and the BMR-600 PP/T.1, which had an openable hatch on the left and two on the right. The BMR-600 PP/C.1, in contrast, had vision slits instead of these hatches. On the BMR-600 PP/A.1 and BMR-600 PP/C.1, there were two large rectangular hatches on the roof for the infantry to fire from. On the BMR-600 PP/T.1, there was only one at the very rear, but there were two circular hatches not present on the other two prototypes.

The side of the BMR-600 PP/T.1 with its rear ramp open – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 66

Entry and exit of the vehicle for the infantry dismounts was primarily through a ramp at the rear. The ramp also had a smaller door cut into it.

The rear of the BMR-600 PP/T.1 showing the ramp with the door cut into it and the hydrojets – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 67

The onboard radio was an AN/VRC-64 of US origin, which weighed less than 20 kg. It is unclear if the radio was operated by the vehicle’s commander or the infantry dismounts’ squad leader. The crew communicated by using an AN/VIC-1 vehicular intercom system.

The AN/VRC-64 radio system carried inside the Pegaso 3560 – source: Radio Museum


All three prototypes, alongside the mortar carrying prototype, BMR-625 A.1, were thoroughly tested between 1978 and 1979. Although there is not much information about the tests, it is known that the Army wanted to test them in the most extreme environment that could be found in Spain, so they were put through their paces in the mountainous Sierra Nevada and the deserts of Almería.

The BMR-600 PP/T.1 going through trials. Notice what appears to be the BMR-600 PP/A.1 in the background – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 64

In 1979, the Estado Mayor del Ejército (EME) [Eng. Spanish Army General Staff] produced dossiers ‘nº4012’ and ‘nº4052’, entrusting ENASA with the production of twelve pre-series BMR 600s. The twelve BMR-600s would be a slightly longer and wider version of the BMR-600 PP/A.1 with provision for hydrojets and NBC protection, even if the systems were not installed.

A year later, in 1980, ENASA was presented with dossier ‘nº4209’ to produce another 135 BMR vehicles:

  • 106 BMR-600s
  • 22 BMR-681 PM and BMR-612 MR
  • 1 BMR-625 VEC prototype
  • 4 BMR-625 VEC preseries vehicles
  • 1 BMR-636 prototype [not completed]
  • 1 BMR-620 prototype [not completed]

A 1981 request for ENASA to produce 120 BMR-600 (dossier ‘nº4479) was later modified to 90 BMR-600s and 30 BMR-625 VECs. This total initial order for 267 BMR vehicles was set to be constructed at Pegaso’s new factory in Valladolid.

In all, since the production of the three Pegaso 3560 prototypes, a total of around 700 BMR vehicles have been built in many variants. They have seen service with Spanish forces in peacekeeping missions in Afghanistan, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iraq, Lebanon, and the former Yugoslavia. They have also been exported to Egypt, Peru, and Saudi Arabia.

All three Pegaso 3560 prototypes continued to see service:

  • BMR-600 PP/A.1 was assigned to the Regimiento de Instrucción Calatrava n.º 2 [Eng. Instruction Regiment Calatrava No. 2] and sent to the Academia de Caballería [Eng. Cavalry Academy] in Valladolid to be used during the instruction of future crews. It had ‘ET-VE43237’ as a number plate.
  • BMR-600 PP/C.1 was also initially sent to the Academia de Caballería before being sent to Toledo to the Academia de Infantería [Eng. Infantry Academy] for a similar purpose. It is possible that it was upgraded to an M1 standard command vehicle in the early 1990s.
  • BMR-600 PP/T.1 was given the number plate ‘ET-VE-4325-6’ and also assigned to the Regimiento de Instrucción Calatrava n.º 2 based at the Academia de Caballería. The T-20/13 type C TOUCAN-1 turret was removed and the whole vehicle was modernized to M1 EDEX standard.
BMR-600 PP/A.1 and BMR-600 PP/T.1 at the Academia de Caballería [Eng. Cavalry Academy] in Valladolid. Note that they have both received Wegmann smoke dischargers – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 66
The BMR-600 PP/C.1 during a training exercise at some point in the 1980s or 1990s – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 62
The BMR-600 PP/T.1 with the number plate ‘ET-VE-4325-6’ after it was modernized to M1 EDEX standard (even if externally it looked significantly different) and its turret and armament were removed – source: Manrique García & Molina Franco, p. 56


The three Pegaso 3560 prototypes were the last step before the highly successful BMR series could enter production. Conceived to massively modernize Spain’s armored forces, they coincided with a period in history during which Spain itself was undergoing extensive modernization. Having learned the lessons from the Pegaso 3500, the Pegaso 3560s were more in line with other 6×6 armored personnel carriers in service with other nations. Of the three prototypes, the BMR-600 PP/T.1 in particular demonstrated the flexibility of the platform, which has been a constant across the whole BMR series since their introduction.

The BMR-600 PP/T.1 during water trials – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 67
BMR-600 PP/A.1. Illustrations by Godzilla funded by our Patreon Campaign.
BMR-600 PP/C.1. Illustrations by Godzilla funded by our Patreon Campaign.
BMR-600 PP/T.1. Illustrations by Godzilla funded by our Patreon Campaign.

Pegaso 3560 (BMR-600 PP/A.1) Specifications

Length (m) 6
Width (m) 2.5
Height (m) 2
Weight (tonnes) 12.5
Armor (mm) 20 – 80
Crew 2 (driver + commander)
Infantry dismounts 11
Main armament 7.62 mm MG 3 machine gun


Francisco Marín Gutiérrez & José Mª Mata Duaso, Carros de Combate y Vehículos de Cadenas del Ejército Español: Un Siglo de Historia (Vol. III) (Valladolid: Quirón Ediciones, 2007)

Francisco Marín Gutiérrez & José María Mata Duaso, Los Medios Blindados de Ruedas en España. Un Siglo de Historia (Vol. II) (Valladolid: Quirón Ediciones, 2003)

José Mª Manrique García & Lucas Molina Franco, BMR Los Blindados del Ejército Español (Valladolid: Galland Books, 2008)

Octavio Díez Cámara, “BMR V-001, cincuenta años del blindado 6×6 del Ejército de Tierra: ¿llegará el BMR 2 español?”, (15 April 2023)×6-ejercito-tierra-llegara-2

Pegaso, ‘Tractores Gama Pesada’

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *