The M4 Sherman Tank Epic Information Thread.. (work in progress)

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

Hi folks,

 

I own a M4A3 Sherman and I am looking for information on the Israeli diesel conversions. I'm actually going with a Detroit 8V92T with an Allison transmission but I'm looking for pictures of the engine compartment. 

 

My Sherman is in the middle of a complete restoration and we are not going with a stock restoration. I am going to modernize it with air conditioning, viewing monitors, modern wiring and gauges. Here are some photos of the tank as it was received and along the way of the restoration.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That sounds like a pretty epic project.  The tank doesn't look to bad other than all the holes heh. 

 

Have you checked out the Sherman restoration page? He put a different motor in his M4A3 as well.  He chose an 8v71 Detroit, I think he got it as demilled surplus. 

 

How do you plan to mate your motor and tranny choice to the Sherman final drive unit? It sounds like a fascinating project! 

 

I don't have a lot of info on what the Israeli conversions looked like,  I haven't gotten to them yet for the page/website, but I'll check around in the books I do have. 

 

Do you have a website where you are documenting the restoration/restomod?  

 

Thanks for sharing the photos, please keep us updated, and welcome to the forum!

[BattlefieldVegas]

Thanks for the link. There are some great pics in there!!!

 

V/R

Ron

[Tied]

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

 

Thanks Tied!!!

 

I'm just about to post my first draft of the section that talks about that stuff.

[Priory_of_Sion]

Here is some text from the book Armor of Freedom by P. Pivka on Yugoslav use of the M4.

 

 

Yugoslav People's Army after 1953 as part of the military aid the United States which received 599 Sherman, allowing for replenishment of the gaps in armor-term units which have occurred after discontinuation of Soviet deliveries in 1948. Jugo-Slavia is possible by tanks M4 formed 5 tank Brigades (an average of 80 Sherman) and 4-tan Boskovski battalions (after the Sherman 31). Initially, the US wanted to Yugoslavia to send an old version of M4A1, which had poorer motor and arms, after lengthy negotiations, the out-after all come to a compromise. YPA won M4A3 tanks, which had an older model of the dome, but also more powerful 76-mm cannon. Provide such versions had a code-sharing M4A3E4. All Sherman received still go through before the next general overhaul and as such actually represent an extremely useful and high-quality weapons systems. Arrival of new weapons after a period of isolation between nekate-rhyme members of the army provoked a state of euphoria and emphasis on quality
the benefits of US armaments from the Soviet. M4 Sherman, who was part of the 2nd World War, was also in 1953 by the military leadership and the media characterized as an example of "the most modern tank techniques" derived "recently as aid by the military allies" and "better than the Soviet T-34 ". Sherman is arming the JNA lasted until the beginning of 70s, when he was due to obsolescence and the arrival of new Soviet tanks sent to the spare unit and then finally to a number of polygons, which mainly serve as a target for anti-tank combat. The longest line is Sherman maintained in use on the island of Vis, where it has its narrower overhead structure enable quick movement through the narrow island roads.

Interesting how the YPA was originally getting M4A1s but ended up with A3s. 

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

This is what I have so far.  Keep in mind this is the first draft, and I'm still working on the engines section. 

 

The Sherman of the future:  Advanced Sherman updates that almost made it into production.

 

The US Army was always looking for ways to improve the basic Sherman tank. Some of these didn’t pan out because they just were not that much better than the basic M4, or the US Army had no interest, or the war ended production of the Sherman before an improvement could be fully developed, or in some cases, just added to the production lines.  These ranged from whole new tanks based on the M4, like the T14, or in some ways like with the T1/M6, to improved guns, engines/transmissions to aiming devices.

Let’s start with Armor:  Add on Kits, they got developed, but were never used.

 

Bolt on Armor kits: CDA was asked to develop a set of bolt on armor for the Sherman, there are pictures of wooden mockups, but this program was canceled before the second gen large hatch hulls started production. At this point the best source for info on this program is R.P. Hunnicutt’s Sherman. He does not note why it was cancelled. It seems like with the success of the M4A3E2 Jumbo, and it’s only marginal effect on the reliability of the automotive components of the Sherman, this would have been a hit with the troops.

 

There was another program to improve the armor of the early differential covers. Both the early three part bolt together designs, and the early one piece cast designs, were found to have areas more vulnerable to penetration than the rest of the differential cover. They came up with add on armor for each type. After testing these kits were found to be good enough to make the differentials the best protected front area of the tank after installation. The Army approved them, but no evidence of any being used has been found. The final production cast differential cover was improved and would not have needed these kits. That may have been the reason the kits didn’t get used, since they could just use the ultimate production casting when doing rebuilds.

 

Plastic Armor and Spikes: When the threat of AT sticks like the panzerfaust become more prominent, an add-on armor kit made from called the HCR2 plastic armor kit was developed. It was made from a mixture of quartz gravel and a mastic compound made from wood flour and asphalt. It was held on by cables, and could be jettisoned with ease. The armor from this kit protected the Shermans turret well, but sponson penetrations could still happen. It also offered a little extra ballistic protection. It also did not cover the front of the hull or turret.

 

Another attempt to defeat shaped charged weapons involved installing spikes in lengths varying from 7 to 8 inches all over the armor. The idea behind this was to break up a heat warhead before it could detonate properly.  Testing on this continued after the war.

Now let’s talk about improving the tanks less passive defenses:  Improved Machine Guns and Flame Projectors!

 

The vulnerability of the Sherman, like any other tank, to close infantry assault was a problem the U.S. Army was always looking to solve.  This is why the Sherman prototype retained the .30 caliber mini turret on the commander’s hatch. This was a hard to use and unpopular cupola, that did not make it onto any production Shermans, but that wasn’t for lack of trying on the US Army’s part.

 

Improved ball mount with sight: The first thing we will cover is the improved ball mount for the co-driver/BOG. What they did was come up with linkage at connected the bow mounted .30 caliber machine gun to the gunners periscope. The co driver’s periscope would have a telescopic sight much like in the gunners periscope. The linkage and sight allowed much more accurate use of the bow mounted machine gun. Only the cessation of production on the Sherman stopped this one. It would have been useful if we had to invade Japan.

 

M3 grease gun adapter: Another interesting defensive device they came up with was a special adapter for the M3 grease gun that allowed the gun to be hooked up to a curved barrel extension fitted to a standard rotating periscope mount. Then a special periscope with sight could be installed and the M3 fired and aimed from inside the tank. It was found to be accurate enough to engage targets within 33 yards of the tank. I suspect this one didn’t make it into production because it seems like more trouble tank it would be worth, but it is still an interesting idea.

 

Co-ax M2 and M1919: A more conventional way was the installation of a M2 .50 caliber Machine gun, alongside the .30 caliber M1919 machine gun, mounted coaxially with the main gun. This would have worked out better if one of the advanced guns mounts using a concentric recoil system had made it into production. I’ll cover these mounts later in this post.

 

The T121 twin machine gun mount: This mount replaced the all-around vision cupola on the commander’s station with this rather large twin machine gun mount. The mount could take the M2 or M1919. This was a remote power turret and could be operated without being exposed. This mount missed the war, and development continued on it post war. I can’t find any pictures online though. It was very tall, almost as tall as the Sherman turret by itself.

 

Fragmentation grenade mounts, mines and pipe bombs: The Army decided to try mounting these to tanks and test how they would work to combat close in enemy infantry as a kind of last resort weapon. This did not work very well and only the grenades were found to have an effective fragmentation effect. They all risked damage to the tank so they were dropped. Shielding to protect the tank made them even less effective.  None of these worked as well as having close infantry support, and the idea was dropped.

 

The Scorpion/Skink anti-personnel flame projectors: This might have seen use if the war had gone on. This is just the type of thing to use on Japanese suicide troops if they have scared or killed off all your close infantry support. This system had four self-contained, phosphor based, flame projectors mounted at each corner of the tank. Each one could let off 20 to 30 bursts of the flaming phosphorus in a fan from each device, giving great coverage all around the tank. They could be fired off individually or all at once from inside the tank.   

 

 

Now let’s talk about to vehicles that almost made it to production: The M4 Improved and T14.

 

The M4 Improved or the idea behind an improved M4 started just about as the time the first production Shermans were rolling off the line. The proposed new tank design that came along was very interesting but not deemed enough of an improvement to change up the production lines.

Since the tank didn’t make it into production, you would think it would be hard to have an idea what one would have looked like. Normally that would be the case, but the game World of Tanks has added the M4 Improved as a premium tank, and they did a beautiful HD model for it.

The proposed M4 I would have used the same M3 75mm gun, with a welded turret, and an improved hull with thicker, sloped armor. It also used a modified version of the M6 heavy tanks suspension, a complicated precursor to the HVSS suspension installed on late production Shermans. It would have used the 625 horse power Wright G200 motor. Considering the US Army would have just been getting their hands on their first Soviet T-34, I think you can see the influence the T-34 had on the M4 Improved. The wide tracks and extra slope in the side armor being the most prominent.

Even though the improved Sherman had some big flaws, like putting the gas tanks under the turret floor, many of the improvements would be refined and make their way into the later improved Shermans. The suspension is clearly the father of the HVSS suspension, and the tracks probably showed the advantages of center guided tracks over end guided, at least on suspension that wide.

The T14 Heavy tank: They even made a few of these things.

On March 30^th 1942 representatives from Chief or Ordnance, Aberdeen Proving Ground and the British Tank mission had a conference to discuss tank stuff.  The need for an assault tank was established at this conference, pushed for by the British. The US Army had no interest in an assault tank at that time. It was decided the US and British would each produce a pair of pilot tanks, and then the better of the two would be put into limited production.  The Brits would go on to produce their assault tank on the Cruiser VIII, and the US would use the M4 as the basis for theirs.

By Juned they had finished the requirements, design, and wooden mock up, and American Locomotive Company was contracted to build two real tanks. Pilot 1 was finished in July of 43, and the second one was done a month later.  The pilot tanks used nearly the same suspension that was proposed for the M4 improved the horizontal volute spring suspension out of the M6, and the same M3 75mm gun the standard M4 carried.  It also carried an M2 .50 caliber machine gun in the bow, and a 1919 coax with 75mm gun. It would have also had either a M1919 or M2 for AA use mounted on the commander’s hatch.

The Tank used a Ford GAZ V8, an slightly uprated GAA. Other than the motor, and a final drive gear ratio change, the automotive components were standard Sherman fare.  The tank came in at 47 tons, and had a pretty good armor. The Armor was much better than the standard Sherman, but not as good as the later Jumbo, and there was really nothing the US Army found interesting about the tank. The design was supposed to have the provision to take bigger guns, and it had the same 69 in turret ring as the Sherman, but it also had problems.

It was a dog, the GAZ had trouble moving the 47 tons around. The track system was not very good at this point. Tracks were easily thrown in testing, the tanks armored skirts made getting the tracks back on a pain. Even with the wide tracks it wasn’t very mobile. It did have a scope for the BOG to aim his gun with, so it had that handy feature going for it.

Pilot one was shipped off to Fort Knox for further testing, and pilot 2 was sent to England. It is still there, and it seems to be in ok condition. It’s at the Royal Armored Corps Tank Museum at Bovington Camp in Dorset. None ever saw any kind of combat, and the program was canceled in 1944 after no one showed any interest in the tank.

Practically space age improvements that almost made it: Sherman advanced gear, multi axis stabilizers, better gun recoil systems, better trannys and motors. Concentric recoil systems: The Army had seen how good a concentric recoil system was from the one used on the M24 Chaffee.  Late in the war they had Rock Island Arsenal working on a similar mount for the 76mm M1A2 gun. A normal tank gun recoil system has a pair of cylinders on both sides of the gun to absorb the recoil energy of the gun. These systems are pretty bulky.  A concentric system uses one larger hollow cylinder and the gun is mounted inside it, this works better and saves space, it was named the combination mount T103.  There wasn’t much of an advantage in combat, but it would have allowed more room in the turret for other gear and ammo. It also would have left room for the M2. 50 Caliber machine gun being mounted along with the regular co-ax  gun.   This system was being tested and was doing well, when the war ended, ending any chance of seeing the mount on new production Sherman tanks.

 

The rigid gun mount: Yeah, just what it sounds like, the tank is the recoil system.

The rigid gun mount: A rigid system has a lot of advantages; it takes up way less room in the turret. The gun doesn’t retract into the crew space on firing making it safer, and you don’t need any kind of recoil guard. A rigid system is probably lighter too, but the mount has to be pretty beefy to handle the loads.  They designed the gun mount to take both the M3 75, and M1A2 76 guns, and it was tested with both.

The gun was mounted in a lightweight turret, and then onto an M10 hull. Test firing showed the stabilizer and turret race bearing took no damage, but the turret hold down bolts had stretched, and some threads were stripped.  Larger stronger bolts would solve that problem, and when installed in the heavier Sherman turret, would absorb the recoil better than the light weight turret it was tested on.

Can we all guess what killed this one off? Yep, the end of the war, boy, if the Japanese had held out, they would have been real sorry.

The two axis stabilizer: Two axis stabilizers almost made it in.

The Army had seen through battle experience crews trained in the use of the Shermans stabilizer had a advantage over the ones who didn’t. Unfortunately during WWII it was all to common to find units who were not in the systems use. So a very advanced system, something the Germans could not match during WWII, often went unused because of poor training.

The late production stabilizer in Shermans was simplified and easier to use. Experiments at Fort Knox found there was some backlash in the system, and they solved it at first with weights, and then later with a minor modification on how the stabilizer worked.

Once the elevation stabilizer was improved, the Army started to look into and azimuth stabilizer.  International Business machine had a design and it was tested at Aberdeen in late 43. At first the design did not work well, but after a series of modifications, they got the system working well enough to test. At the same time Ordnance came up with their own design, using off the shelf components, and it was ready for testing around the same time.

During the testing they used M4A3 75 tanks, a standard tank, and then one with each IBM and ordnance systems. The crews would be rotated through all three tanks to eliminate crew experience in one tank affecting the results. The IBM system worked better than the Ordnance system, but the ordnance system was much easier to adapt to the Sherman already in the field.

If you sensed a theme here, then you know what’s coming, the war ended before any of these two axis systems could see combat use. The Ordnance system was fitted to a 76mm Sherman and testing of the system continued after the war, comparing it to the Vickers system the Brits came up with. The Ordanance system needed to be beefed up and made more resistant to vibration, and what was learned here was probably passed on to later designs like the M26.

Better Motors: Motors that never had a chance or almost made it

 

Chrysler’s A65: This was a huge V12 that Chrysler designed on their own dime. It was 1568 cubic inches, was gas powered and made 650 gross horsepower, and 580 net HP, and was water cooled. A test installation was done to an M4A4, and they had to lengthen the hull another 9 an ½ inches to fit the mammoth motor. The tank only weighed around 500 pounds more with the motor in. The tank was a real hot rod, and climbed hills better and out accelerated the standard M4A4. Even after dropping the final drive gear ratio from 3:53:1 to 3:05:1, and it still out climbed and accelerated the standard M4A4 and even the M4A3.

After 400 miles of testing, the engine was pulled and examined and found to be in perfect running order.  The project closed with the Army recommending further study on engines in this power range. 

[LoooSeR]

Series of photos of the 2nd Armored Division (mostly - the 66th Tank Regiment division) during the offensive in the province of North Rhine-Westphalia; April 1945.

[Meplat]

 

 

Have you checked out the Sherman restoration page? He put a different motor in his M4A3 as well.  He chose an 8v71 Detroit, I think he got it as demilled surplus. 

 

That's about what I'd guess one'd have to do to fit a big DD V8 in there.  Though I'd have tried to route the air cleaner into the crew compartment and left the other sponson open for a second tank.  The original tanks extended into the engine "well" and down to the floor of the hull.

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

Ok, here the post thats going live tonight on the Sherman page, this thing took me forever, but I found this stuff to be really interesting, and it's also very good wehraboo bait.  4757 words for just this section alone!!

 

 

 

The Sherman of the future:  Advanced Sherman updates that almost made it into production.

 

The US Army was always looking for ways to improve the basic Sherman tank. Some of these didn’t pan out because they just were not that much better than the basic M4, or the US Army had no interest, or the war ended production of the Sherman before an improvement could be fully developed, or in some cases, just added to the production lines.  These ranged from whole new tanks based on the M4, like the T14, or in some ways like with the T1/M6, to improved guns, engines/transmissions to aiming devices.

Let’s start with Armor:  Add on kits, they got developed, but were never used.

 

Bolt on armor kits: CDA was asked to develop a set of bolt on armor for the Sherman, there are pictures of wooden mockups, but this program was canceled before the second gen large hatch hulls started production. At this point the best source for info on this program is R.P. Hunnicutt’s Sherman. He does not note why it was cancelled. It seems like with the success of the M4A3E2 Jumbo, and it’s only marginal effect on the reliability of the automotive components of the Sherman, this would have been a hit with the troops.

Up armored differential covers: There was another program to improve the armor of the early differential covers. Both the early three part bolt together designs, and the early one piece cast designs, were found to have areas more vulnerable to penetration than the rest of the differential cover. They came up with add on armor for each type. After testing these kits were found to be good enough to make the differentials the best protected front area of the tank after installation. The Army approved them, but no evidence of any being used has been found. The final production cast differential cover was improved and would not have needed these kits. That may have been the reason the kits didn’t get used, since they could just use the ultimate production casting when doing rebuilds.

Plastic armor and spikes: When the threat of AT sticks like the panzerfaust become more prominent, an add-on armor kit made from called the HCR2 plastic armor kit was developed. It was made from a mixture of quartz gravel and a mastic compound made from wood flour and asphalt. It was held on by cables, and could be jettisoned with ease. The armor from this kit protected the Shermans turret well, but sponson penetrations could still happen. It also offered a little extra ballistic protection. It also did not cover the front of the hull or turret.

Another attempt to defeat shaped charged weapons involved installing spikes in lengths varying from 7 to 8 inches all over the armor. The idea behind this was to break up a heat warhead before it could detonate properly.  Testing on this continued after the war.

Now let’s talk about improving the tanks less passive defenses:  Improved Machine Guns and Flame Projectors!

 

The vulnerability of the Sherman, like any other tank, to close infantry assault was a problem the U.S. Army was always looking to solve.  This is why the Sherman prototype retained the .30 caliber mini turret on the commander’s hatch. This was a hard to use and unpopular cupola, that did not make it onto any production Shermans, but that wasn’t for lack of trying on the US Army’s part.

Improved ball mount with sight: The first thing we will cover is the improved ball mount for the co-driver/BOG. What they did was come up with linkage at connected the bow mounted .30 caliber machine gun to the gunners periscope. The co driver’s periscope would have a telescopic sight much like in the gunners periscope. The linkage and sight allowed much more accurate use of the bow mounted machine gun. Only the cessation of production on the Sherman stopped this one. It would have been useful if we had to invade Japan.

M3 grease gun adapter: Another interesting defensive device they came up with was a special adapter for the M3 grease gun that allowed the gun to be hooked up to a curved barrel extension fitted to a standard rotating periscope mount. Then a special periscope with sight could be installed and the M3 fired and aimed from inside the tank. It was found to be accurate enough to engage targets within 33 yards of the tank. I suspect this one didn’t make it into production because it seems like more trouble tank it would be worth, but it is still an interesting idea.

Co-ax M2 and M1919: A more conventional way was the installation of a M2 .50 caliber Machine gun, alongside the .30 caliber M1919 machine gun, mounted coaxially with the main gun. This would have worked out better if one of the advanced guns mounts using a concentric recoil system had made it into production. I’ll cover these mounts later in this post.

The T121 twin machine gun mount: This mount replaced the all-around vision cupola on the commander’s station with this rather large twin machine gun mount. The mount could take the M2 or M1919. This was a remote power turret and could be operated without being exposed. This mount missed the war, and development continued on it post war. I can’t find any pictures online though. It was very tall, almost as tall as the Sherman turret by itself.

Fragmentation grenade mounts, mines and pipe bombs: The Army decided to try mounting these to tanks and test how they would work to combat close in enemy infantry as a kind of last resort weapon. This did not work very well and only the grenades were found to have an effective fragmentation effect. They all risked damage to the tank so they were dropped. Shielding to protect the tank made them even less effective.  None of these worked as well as having close infantry support, and the idea was dropped.

The Scorpion/Skink anti-personnel flame projectors: This might have seen use if the war had gone on. This is just the type of thing to use on Japanese suicide troops if they have scared or killed off all your close infantry support. This system had four self-contained, phosphor based, flame projectors mounted at each corner of the tank. Each one could let off 20 to 30 bursts of the flaming phosphorus in a fan from each device, giving great coverage all around the tank. They could be fired off individually or all at once from inside the tank.   

Now let’s talk about to vehicles that almost made it to production: The M4 Improved and T14.

 

The M4 Improved or the idea behind an improved M4 started just about as the time the first production Shermans were rolling off the line. The proposed new tank design that came along was very interesting but not deemed enough of an improvement to change up the production lines.

Since the tank didn’t make it into production, you would think it would be hard to have an idea what one would have looked like. Normally that would be the case, but the game World of Tanks has added the M4 Improved as a premium tank, and they did a beautiful HD model for it.

The proposed M4 I would have used the same M3 75mm gun, with a welded turret, and an improved hull with thicker, sloped armor. It also used a modified version of the M6 heavy tanks suspension, a complicated precursor to the HVSS suspension installed on late production Shermans. It would have used the 625 horse power Wright G200 motor. Considering the US Army would have just been getting their hands on their first Soviet T-34, I think you can see the influence the T-34 had on the M4 Improved. The wide tracks and extra slope in the side armor being the most prominent.

Even though the improved Sherman had some big flaws, like putting the gas tanks under the turret floor, many of the improvements would be refined and make their way into the later improved Shermans. The suspension is clearly the father of the HVSS suspension, and the tracks probably showed the advantages of center guided tracks over end guided, at least on suspension that wide.

The T14 Heavy tank: They even made a few of these things.

On March 30^th 1942 representatives from Chief or Ordnance, Aberdeen Proving Ground and the British Tank mission had a conference to discuss tank stuff.  The need for an assault tank was established at this conference, pushed for by the British. The US Army had no interest in an assault tank at that time. It was decided the US and British would each produce a pair of pilot tanks, and then the better of the two would be put into limited production.  The Brits would go on to produce their assault tank on the Cruiser VIII, and the US would use the M4 as the basis for theirs.

By Juned they had finished the requirements, design, and wooden mock up, and American Locomotive Company was contracted to build two real tanks. Pilot 1 was finished in July of 43, and the second one was done a month later.  The pilot tanks used nearly the same suspension that was proposed for the M4 improved the horizontal volute spring suspension out of the M6, and the same M3 75mm gun the standard M4 carried.  It also carried an M2 .50 caliber machine gun in the bow, and a 1919 coax with 75mm gun. It would have also had either a M1919 or M2 for AA use mounted on the commander’s hatch.

The Tank used a Ford GAZ V8, an slightly uprated GAA. Other than the motor, and a final drive gear ratio change, the automotive components were standard Sherman fare.  The tank came in at 47 tons, and had a pretty good armor. The Armor was much better than the standard Sherman, but not as good as the later Jumbo, and there was really nothing the US Army found interesting about the tank. The design was supposed to have the provision to take bigger guns, and it had the same 69 in turret ring as the Sherman, but it also had problems.

It was a dog, the GAZ had trouble moving the 47 tons around. The track system was not very good at this point. Tracks were easily thrown in testing, the tanks armored skirts made getting the tracks back on a pain. Even with the wide tracks it wasn’t very mobile. It did have a scope for the BOG to aim his gun with, so it had that handy feature going for it.

Pilot one was shipped off to Fort Knox for further testing, and pilot 2 was sent to England. It is still there, and it seems to be in ok condition. It’s at the Royal Armored Corps Tank Museum at Bovington Camp in Dorset. None ever saw any kind of combat, and the program was canceled in 1944 after no one showed any interest in the tank.

Practically space age improvements that almost made it: Sherman advanced gear, multi axis stabilizers, better gun recoil systems, better trannys and motors. Concentric recoil systems: The Army had seen how good a concentric recoil system was from the one used on the M24 Chaffee.  Late in the war they had Rock Island Arsenal working on a similar mount for the 76mm M1A2 gun. A normal tank gun recoil system has a pair of cylinders on both sides of the gun to absorb the recoil energy of the gun. These systems are pretty bulky.  A concentric system uses one larger hollow cylinder and the gun is mounted inside it, this works better and saves space, it was named the combination mount T103.  There wasn’t much of an advantage in combat, but it would have allowed more room in the turret for other gear and ammo. It also would have left room for the M2. 50 Caliber machine gun being mounted along with the regular co-ax  gun.   This system was being tested and was doing well, when the war ended, ending any chance of seeing the mount on new production Sherman tanks.

 

The rigid gun mount: Yeah, just what it sounds like, the tank is the recoil system.

The rigid gun mount: A rigid system has a lot of advantages; it takes up way less room in the turret. The gun doesn’t retract into the crew space on firing making it safer, and you don’t need any kind of recoil guard. A rigid system is probably lighter too, but the mount has to be pretty beefy to handle the loads.  They designed the gun mount to take both the M3 75, and M1A2 76 guns, and it was tested with both.

The gun was mounted in a lightweight turret, and then onto an M10 hull. Test firing showed the stabilizer and turret race bearing took no damage, but the turret hold down bolts had stretched, and some threads were stripped.  Larger stronger bolts would solve that problem, and when installed in the heavier Sherman turret, would absorb the recoil better than the light weight turret it was tested on.

Can we all guess what killed this one off? Yep, the end of the war, boy, if the Japanese had held out, they would have been real sorry.

The two axis stabilizer: Two axis stabilizers almost made it in.

The Army had seen through battle experience crews trained in the use of the Shermans stabilizer had a advantage over the ones who didn’t. Unfortunately during WWII it was all to common to find units who were not in the systems use. So a very advanced system, something the Germans could not match during WWII, often went unused because of poor training.

The late production stabilizer in Shermans was simplified and easier to use. Experiments at Fort Knox found there was some backlash in the system, and they solved it at first with weights, and then later with a minor modification on how the stabilizer worked.

Once the elevation stabilizer was improved, the Army started to look into and azimuth stabilizer.  International Business machine had a design and it was tested at Aberdeen in late 43. At first the design did not work well, but after a series of modifications, they got the system working well enough to test. At the same time Ordnance came up with their own design, using off the shelf components, and it was ready for testing around the same time.

During the testing they used M4A3 75 tanks, a standard tank, and then one with each IBM and ordnance systems. The crews would be rotated through all three tanks to eliminate crew experience in one tank changing the results. The IBM system worked better than the ordnance system, but the ordnance system was much easier to adapt to the Sherman already in the field.

If you sensed a theme here, then you know what’s coming, the war ended before any of these two axis systems could see combat use. The Ordnance system was fitted to a 76mm Sherman and testing of the system continued after the war, comparing it to the Vickers system the Brits came up with. The Ordnance system needed to be beefed up and made more resistant to vibration, and what was learned here was probably passed on to later designs like the M26.

Better Motors: Motors that never had a chance or almost made it

 

Chrysler’s A65:

This was a huge V12 that Chrysler designed on their own dime. It was 1568 cubic inches, was gas powered and made 650 gross horsepower, and 580 net HP, and was water cooled. A test installation was done to an M4A4, and they had to lengthen the hull another 9 an ½ inches to fit the mammoth motor. The tank only weighed around 500 pounds more with the motor in. The tank was a real hot rod, and climbed hills better and out accelerated the standard M4A4. Even after dropping the final drive gear ratio from 3:53:1 to 3:05:1, and it still out climbed and accelerated the standard M4A4 and even the M4A3.

After 400 miles of testing, the engine was pulled and examined and found to be in perfect running order.  The project closed with the Army recommending further study on engines in this power range.

General Motors Corporation V8-184 diesel engine:

GM developed this as tank motor, it was based on a large marine diesel cut in half, and was still very large. This V8 diesel motor came in 1470 cubic inches and 3750 pounds. It made 600 gross horsepower at 1800 rpm and 1910 foot pounds of torque at 1000 rpm. The motor ran at a 16.8:1 compression ratio.

One test versions of this motor were installed in M4A3 hull, and tested. It was called the M4Y at first, then when ordnance started testing it, it was re-designated and M4A2E1. The tank had to be stretched 11 inches, and lost a little ground clearance to a bulge in the belly needed to fit the engine. They put 2914 miles on this test vehicle and it was another hot rod. It had much more power than any other Sherman but the A65 powered one. Some minor mechanical failures happened during the test, but nothing major or out of the ordinary that couldn’t be fixed. Nothing needed any kind of major redesign to support the motors power.

Much like with the A65, diesels in this power range were going to be studied due to the success of the M4A2E1.

CaterpillarD200A air Cooled Radial: The motor that made it into 75 Shermans

This motor used a large number of Wright G200 components, and modified it with a bunch of Caterpillar parts. At some point I may go into detail on how they did this, but for the moment, if you really want to know, the section in Hunnicutt’s Sherman book starts on page 167.

This motor made 450 horsepower at 2000 rpm and 1470 foot pounds of torque at 1200 rpm.  Good, but not great.  It did perform well enough to get into production, but after only 75 M4A6 tanks production was cancelled and the tank was regulated to stateside training use.  This motor was no hotrod power plant like the other two, but I had to fit it in somewhere.

. . .

A few other diesel designs were tried, but none worked as well as the V8-184, and they were all dropped early in their design period.  There is also one motor we have not covered, the motor that powered the M4A6, the Caterpillar G200A air cooled radial.

One thing to note about all the high horse power Sherman tanks, none of their other drive train components saw major modification, because they did not fail.  So a transmission and final drive designed for a 400 horsepower 30 ton tank, had no trouble taking 650 horsepower from the monster motors above, or any trouble handling the 42 tons of the M4A3E2 Jumbo.  To me that says, well designed, in that it was very overbuilt, and lasted a very long time. The Transmissions and final drives just kept on working, and all the post war Sherman modifications used the same old tranny and final drive.  That’s the kind of engineering that people should consider to be great. Not some German, garbage tank, named after a cat, which broke down every 150 kilometers.

Now let’s talk about transmissions, final drives and other automotive tidbits: The stuff that makes the tank go.

 

Like with the motors, many different transmissions and final drives were experimented with. Nothing was so ground breaking it made it into production, but much of it helped develop transmissions and final drives in later tanks. There were other automotive odds and ends we’ll cover too.  Starting with …

The high speed revers transmission: This transmission modification came out of the desire to speed up the Shermans reverse speed. The reverse gear ratio was 5.65:1. This was almost as high as the ‘Granny’ gear used in first gear. This meant the Shermans speed in revers was rev limited to a 2 to 3 miles per hour max in reverse. The tank was geared this was so it could climb a hill in reverse if it had to. There are cases on tight roads or trails in forests or cities you can’t get the tank turned around.

The first thing they tried to solve this was raising the gear ratio, and this did speed up reverse, but it made it extremely hard to climb any hill or incline.

The way they solved this problem was by adding a secondary planetary gear box to the back of the transmissions. This allowed the whole transmission to be reversed, allowing all five speeds to be used backing the tank up. This new add on gear box including a new low level oiling system that reduced the oil capacity from 43 to 20 gallons. This modification lowered the operating temp of the tranny and transmitted 25 more horsepower to the sprockets.

The drive shaft mounted generator had to be moved and the drive shaft had to be shortened, but that was the extent of the modifications needed. The shorter drive shaft also worked better, deflecting less, so the universal joints lasted longer. After testing the transmissions for nearly a year they were enthusiastically endorsed as far superior to the stock unit.  Can  you guess why these wonderful transmissions didn’t make it into the Sherman? You guessed it, the war ended and Sherman development and production stopped.

Next up, automatic, or semi-automatic transmissions, because driving a stick is hard: The Spicer 95, General Motors 3030B Torqumatic, and the Model 900T, were all considered for use in the Sherman. The Spicer unit was in testing as the war ended. The 3030B was discontinued by GM before it could be tested.  This was the transmission used in the T20 and T20E3. The 3030Bs replacement was the 900T, but it was in high demand from the M18 Hellcat program. They went back and used Spicer 95s to test the concept. By mid-1944 GM was able to more than handle demand from the M18 program and was able to furnish test transmissions.  Two M4A3 tanks were modified and re-designated M4A3E3. They were then sent to Aberdeen Proving Ground for testing against the Spicer 95 equipped M4A1E3 and M4A3E1 from the early tests. The tests were promising, but the end of the war, and the cross drive transmission in the works really killed this one off.

 

The Cross Drive Tranny/Differential: Work on this new type of transmission/final drives started in early 43. What would be developed from it would be the standard transmission for post war US tanks. It was designed for not just use in the Sherman but later model tanks as well.

Model EX100 Cross Drive Tranny: This was the first cross drive tested the US and it went into a M4A3 Sherman. The installation on the Sherman required a large whole to be cut in the upper part of the Transmission cover, and a large bulged armored cover was placed over it, to fit the new transmission. This cover was called the “manhole cover”, by engineers and the tank maintainers.  The was an automatic transmission using a torque converter, with electric steering and braking, and all in a much more compact unit than the Shermans current transmission/final drive setup. There were of course problems, and since work on this started late, when they solved the problems, it was no longer for use in the Sherman.

Suspensions: The ones that didn’t make it, I might throw a bit in about wider tracks here too.

Seemly like every other part of the tank there were extensive tests of various types of suspension on the Sherman. When we talked about it before we only covered the suspension that made it into production.

Early HVSS: This was an attempt to increase spring life but used the same width track. This was also the suspension used on the T20, T22, and T22E1. These units had shocks in the front and rear bogie units, and they made the ride more smooth and had a favorable effect on gunnery and overall ride. It did not however offer enough improvement for any slowdown in the production lines so it was never mass produced.

Christie Style: A heavily modified version of a Christie type suspension was tried on one tank. The springs were installed on armored boxes under the sponsons but outside the hull. It showed it was feasible, but no one was really interested. Christie suspension may be the most overrated suspension for a tank ever.

Torsion Bar: In March of 1943, Ordnance recommended a design and construction of a Sherman tank with wide tracks and torsion bar suspension. This type of suspension had been seen on German tanks like the PIII and Stug, Russian tanks like the KV series. Two M4A2E4 tanks were produced for testing. These tanks borrowed a lot from the T20E3, since it was getting a torsion bar suspension a too and it would use the same 24 inch wide track. The suspension offered few advantages over the HVSS system that reached production and the test vehicles had a lot problems with things breaking. It did provide valuable information about the torsion bar suspension that would go on to be used in later tanks, and it had a very low 10 psi ground pressure.

World of Tanks gave the in game version of this tank away to the North American Beta testers when the game went live,  and it’s always been one of my favorite in game tanks.

Leaf Spring: Yeah, just like what it sounds, paired leaf springs, six per side and it didn’t work well. It didn’t go far either

T16 Halftrack truck “Centipede”: This suspension was overloaded and didn’t work well, and looked really odd.

Heavy Tractor T22:  Looked a little like a combo of the early VVSS suspension and late HVSS, but overloaded and it did not go anywhere.

Odds and ends: Weird stuff I couldn’t fit anywhere else.

This section is going to cover the numerous odds and ends that don’t fit elsewhere, anything from the proposed crew compartment cooling system, to the auto mapping system etc.

 Let’s start with…

The Odograph: This was a early auto-mapping/navigation system that used a magnetic compass and data from the speedometer drive to keep track of the vehicles movement on a chart. This worked well enough in a jeep, but all the steel of the tank messed with the magnetic compass. Once we were no longer fighting in the desert where navigation could be troublesome support for this program fell off. They installed this in the M4A1E2 and had it working, showing just what 40s tech could do.  This project led to further development of magnetic compasses for the Sherman and tank use in general, so the program was not a waste of time.

The crew compartment cooling system: There was a project to put a crew compartment cooling system on the Sherman. This was very early in the tanks production, and an M4A1 was selected as the test vehicle and re designated to M4A1E2. The lined the interior with insulation, and put an evaporative cooling system in. The system did not work all that well, and demand for it dropped off when the fighting moved out of the desert. The project languished and was eventually canceled.

The infrared night driving system: The infrared night driving system was tested in in 1942; the system consisted of a set of infrared head lights, which could not be seen by the naked eye, and an infrared detecting viewing device that replaced his periscope for the driver. The system worked, but not well enough to see any kind of service use. It would be another decade or so before anyone produced a reliable system.  The US and Russians tried them out first and very late in the war, the Germans came up with a system like it, that they quickly dropped after tests.

The US actually had a man portable version of this that could be mounted on a rifle size weapon. Both systems were still considered experimental when the war ended. 

[Meplat]

The Odograph: This was a early auto-mapping/navigation system that used a magnetic compass and data from the speedometer drive to keep track of the vehicles movement on a chart. This worked well enough in a jeep, but all the steel of the tank messed with the magnetic compass. Once we were no longer fighting in the desert where navigation could be troublesome support for this program fell off. They installed this in the M4A1E2 and had it working, showing just what 40s tech could do.  This project led to further development of magnetic compasses for the Sherman and tank use in general, so the program was not a waste of time.

 

 

 

I've dealt with a couple armored vehicle compasses, they are very wonderfully made creations, usually made by Walton or Weston.

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

Yeah, I thought that was really interesting, and had never heard of anything like that from the 1940s

 

 

 

I also made a new section with a list of the PDFs I have on the Sherman tank, the FM and TMs. I wish I could find the FM and TN on the M4A4, I love the A57 motor. 

 

I'm now sorting through the almost 1000 PDFs I have, and deleting duplicates and naming them. 

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

This went up last night and got expanded today. 

 

Downloads page: The place for things to big to post, like Manuals.

Tech Manuals on the Sherman. Or WWII Armor. 

 

US Army Field Manuals

FM17 AFFM The Armored Division: The ultimate Armor formation, and where a lot of Shermans got used

FM17-3-2 ARMOR IN BATTLE : more of a history than a FM, but still interesting.

FM17-5 armored force field manual 1943 armored force drill. This manual has a lot of information on how an Armor Battalion drills.

FM17-10 AFFM tactics and technique 1942 This one is more about what they do in the field when fighting.

FM17-12 AFFM Tank Gunnery 1943, This one is about Tank gunnery.

FM17-15 Combat Practice Firing armored Force Units : how to set up live fire training

FM17-20 AFFM employment of armored units reconnaissance platoon and company 1942,  Using your recon guys without getting them killed.

FM17-22 AFFM The reconnaissance Battalion 1942, how to run a recon battalion

FM17-25 AFFM Assault gun section and platoon Your assault gun platoon and you!

FM17-30 AFFM The Tank Platoon 1942 The five tank unit that does everything together!

FM17-33 ARMORED BATTALION LIGHT & MED 42: The early war armored battalion, this changed a lot by the end of WWII.

FM 17-50 AFFM Logistics: the name says it all on this one!

FM18-15 TDFM Tank Destroyer Drill and Crew Drill M10, T70, and M5 : Get to learn your M10 by drilling on it, a lot.

FM 18-18 Crew Drill M36 All the stuff the crew had to learn to drill on!

FM18-20 Tactical Employment of Tank Destroyer platoons self propelled 1944: Got self propelled TDs? This will tell you how to kill Nazis with them.

FM23-95 BFM 75mm gun M2, on Lee : all you need to know about the old M2 gun installed on early Lee tanks.

US Army Technical Manuals.

TM9_759_1942 M4A3 1942 How to operate and keep an early M4A3 working.  Slightly later edition.

TM9-752-Tank-Medium-M4A3-1942: How to operate and keep an early M4A3 working.

TM_91750K_Tracks_and_Suspension,_Turret_and_Hull_for_Medium_Tank_M4_and_Modifications_1943 The changes made to the M4 tanks.

Tank Battalion AARs: Some of these are harder to read than others but they are all interesting

37TH TANK BATTALION AAR DEC 44

702 TANK BATTALION AAR AUG 44

743 TANK BATTALION HISTORY JAN 45

Odd and ends: Reports and other things about the Sherman.

REPORT ON THE RELIABILITY OF THE CROMWELL, SHERMAN AND CENTAUR MAINTENANCE

FORT KNOX SURVEY OF TANK CREW PROBLEMS 52

FORT KNOX REPORT ON TOXIC GASES IN CREW COMPARTMENT OF ARMORED VEHICLES 1943

[EnsignExpendable]

Stealing this for the documents thread.

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

New expanded downloads section, including a TM on the M6 heavy tank!

 

This section is for manuals on the Sherman or Sherman related subjects.  It will also be the place I post AAR's when I find them and interesting reports or studies. 

US Army Field Manuals:

FM9-6 OD AMMUNITION SUPPLY 44: Everything you could want to know about Ammunition and keeping it supplied.

FM9-10 OFM ORDNANCE FIELD MAINTENANCE 42: How Ordnance sets up its field repairs workshops and runs them.

FM17 AFFM The Armored Division: The ultimate Armor formation, and where a lot of Shermans got used

FM17-3-2 ARMOR IN BATTLE : more of a history than a FM, but still interesting.

FM17-5 Armored Force Field Manual Drills 1943: Drilling, and not the power tool. Drilling instills,  control, discipline and teamwork, and this FM has lots of drills.

FM17-10 AFFM tactics and technique 1942: This one is more about what they do in the field when fighting.

FM17-12 AFFM Tank Gunnery 1943: This one is about Tank gunnery.

FM17-15 Combat Practice Firing armored Force Units: how to set up live fire training

FM17-20 AFFM employment of armored units reconnaissance platoon and company 1942:  Using your recon guys without getting them killed.

FM17-22 AFFM The reconnaissance Battalion 1942: how to run a recon battalion

FM17-25 AFFM Assault gun section and platoon: Your assault gun platoon and you!

FM17-27 ARMORED FORCE FIELD MANUAL 81MM MORTAR SQUAD AND PLATOON 42:  All you wanted to know about the Mortar platoon

FM17-30 AFFM The Tank Platoon 1942: The five tank unit that does everything together! Except when two wander off and do something else.

FM17-32 THE TANK COMPANY LIGHT AND MEDIUM:  17 Tanks and the men who run them, a how to book. Published in late 1942.

FM17-33 ARMORED BATTALION LIGHT & MED 42: The early war armor battalion, this changed a lot by the end of WWII.

FM17-42 ARMORED INFANTRY BATTALION 44: The Dough (old school slang for GI) in an Armor Division.

FM17-45 ARMORED ENGINEER BATTALION 42: The Dough who likes to dig and blow things up with C4 in an Armor Division

FM 17-50 AFFM Logistics: the name says it all on this one!  Beans, bullets and bombs, and how to keep enough of them around.

FM17-68 CEW DRILL M5 LIGHT: How to drill on your M5 tank, thus learning to use it better.

FM17-76 CREW DRILL AND SERVICE OF THE PIECE MEDIUM TANK M4 SERIES 44: Crew drills for the Sherman and its gun.

FM18-15 TDFM Tank Destroyer Drill and Crew Drill M10, T70, and M5: Get to learn your M10 by drilling on it, a lot.

FM 18-18 Crew Drill M36: All the stuff the crew had to learn to drill on!

FM18-20 Tactical Employment of Tank Destroyer platoons self propelled 1944: Got self propelled TDs? This will tell you how to kill Nazis with them.

FM23-95 75MM GUN M2, ON M3 LEE: all you need to know about the old M2 gun installed on early Lee tanks.

US Army Technical Manuals:

Sherman related:

TM9-752 TANK MEDIUM M4A3 44: M4A3 TM from 1944

TM9-759 MEDIUM TANK M4A3 42: M4A3 TM from 1942

TM9-374 90-MM GUN M3 MOUNTED IN COMBAT VEHICLES: this is a TM for the gun used on the M36

WWII related:

TM9-392 4.5 INCH MULTIPLE ROCKET LAUNCHERS T66 AND T66E2

TM9-394 4.5-INCH ROCKET MATERIAL FOR GROUND USE 45

TM9-396 7.2-INCH MULTIPLE ROCKET LAUNCHER M17 45

TM_91TM9-707 BASIC HALF-TRACK VEHICLES IHC M5, CAR M9A1, MULTIPLE GUN MOTOR CARRIAGE M14 AND SIMILARE IHC VEHICLES

TM9-710 BASIC HALF TRACK VEHICLES WHITE AUTOCAR AND DIAMOND T

TM9-721 HEAVY TANKS M6 AND M6A1 43: What M6 Heavy tank?!?!?

TM9-726 LIGHT TANK M3 42

43750K_Tracks_and_Suspension,_Turret_and_Hull_for_Medium_Tank_M4_and_Modifications_1943 The changes made to the M4 tanks.

Tank Battalion AARs: Some of these are harder to read than others but they are all interesting

37TH TANK BATTALION AAR DEC 44

702 TANK BATTALION AAR AUG 44

743 TANK BATTALION HISTORY JAN 45

Odd and ends: Reports and other things about the Sherman.

REPORT ON THE RELIABILITY OF THE CROMWELL, SHERMAN AND CENTAUR MAINTENANCE

FORT KNOX SURVEY OF TANK CREW PROBLEMS 52

FORT KNOX REPORT ON TOXIC GASES IN CREW COMPARTMENT OF ARMORED VEHICLES 1943

The tank infantry team By Mudd 1999

[EnsignExpendable]

I got a copy of the Hayes Sherman book as an early Christmas present. Opened it to a random page, saw it gushing about how in 1939 German tanks were "state of the art" and how they kept ahead of the Allies in everything during the whole war. Closed it. Is the rest actually decent?

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

I've never read one, I think Walt may have. 

[Walter_Sobchak]

Its a pretty handy resource.  Just ignore the intro section.  It has some pretty nice charts and lists.

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

New section done tonight. 

 

Israeli Shermans: The most powerful Shermans ever to see action.

 

Israeli use of the Sherman tank would be long and glorious, with updated models using extremely upgraded guns. They would use the chassis for more thing than the US Army did. They also went with their own strange naming system, making trying to figure out the Israeli Shermans even harder. There is also not a lot of good book in English on the subject, and Hunnicutt only has a little info on them and I think it’s a tad out of date. This section will be updated as I find out more info on the subject and or correct what is here, based on newer better info.

 

 

Sherman M1

In the dark early days when Israel was struggling to become a nation, they managed to get ahold of a few Shermans. Three or so were acquired from the British, probably M4A4s. They also managed to get de-milled Shermans from Junk vendors in Europe. They had to re arm some with an old German 75mm field gun, they were called Sherman (Krupp). When they managed to get ahold of a Sherman armed with a M3 75mm gun the tank was called a Sherman M-3, when it had a 105mm gun, it was a Sherman M-4. As you can see already, naming convention confusion has commenced.

 

In the later fifties Israel was able to get more up to date Shermans. The tanks were M4A1 and M4A3 models with the 76mm M1A1/A2 gun, probably from France. These Shermans were called Sherman M1s, regardless of what motor or hull they had. If they had HVSS suspension, they were called Super Sherman M1. Some of these tanks had an upgraded engines, probably late in their careers, and with Cummings diesels.

 

The Story gets more interesting, and slightly less confusing in the naming area, when they started to rearm the tanks.

 

Sherman M50

The M-50: In 1954 Israel and France went to work on a project to fit the excellent French CN 75-50 75mm gun to the Sherman 75mm turret. This gun could shoot an AP round out 3200 feet a second. To fit the gun they added an extension to the front, and rear of the turret, the front one to fit the gun, and the rear one to add counterbalance weight. The first fifty tanks were based on the M4A4 hull that had been converted to use the R975 radial motor. This motor, though less powerful than the A57, was much more numerous, and easy to repair, and the French specialized in this conversion.

 

These M4A4 hulls with R975 radials still had their VVSS, with 16 inch tracks. The added weight of the new gun on the already larger and heavier hull made for a very sluggish tank with poor off road ability. These early M-50s also had early split hatches on the commander’s cupola. I think these tanks had a loaders hatch installed.

 

They solved this by installing HVSS, and in many cases a Cummings diesels motor. Once production got rolling, they were installing improved all around vision cupolas and HVSS on all the converted tanks, but some seem to have retained the R975 radial or in rare cases the maybe the Ford GAA? I’ll have to look into this more. One thing is clear from looking at pictures of the tanks in action, and survivors in museums and private collections, is they were not picky about what hull they used, as long as it had a 75mm turret. I’ve seen M4A4 hulls, and other early small hatch hulls in photos, they could be M4, M4A2 or A3, and pictures of a large hatch hulls, that could have been M4 105 tanks, (the only large hatch hull M4 tanks), or M4A3 75 or 105 tanks or even M4A2 75s. I have seen very little evidence that M4A1 hulls were used, I’ve only seen two clear pictures of the M-50 turret on M4A1 hulls, and one was on a non HVSS M4 and you couldn’t see the front of the hull to tell if it was large or small hatch hull.     

 

The M-51 Sherman

The M-51: In the early 60s the Israelis went to the French for help shoehorning an even bigger gun into the Sherman. They took a shortened version of the 105mm Model F1 gun; this was a modification of the gun used in the AMX-30. The gun retained a stabilizer, I’m not sure if it was the original Sherman one or a more advanced design.  This gun could fling an AP round at 2969 feet a second and had a HEAT round that could penetrate 14 inches of steel.  They chose to use M4A1 76 W tanks exclusively. These tanks had the larger T23 turret and they was helpful in getting the guns to fit. The French prototype retained its VVSS, and R975, but the Israeli production modifications had HVSS and the Cummings diesel fitted to the M-50 models. This was a 950 cubic inch diesel that put out 460 horsepower. This was enough horsepower along with the HVSS, to keep the tanks reasonably mobile, but they were no hotrods.

 

Both these tanks saw extensive combat use with Israel all the way into the 70s, and then a lot of them were sold off to collectors and museums or used as range targets

 

 

I'll add pics later tonight. 

[EnsignExpendable]

10 km/second sounds like a lot, I think you meant 3200 fps, not 32000. Also you managed to put a picture between "Sher" and "man". Otherwise, perfect!

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

10 km/second sounds like a lot, I think you meant 3200 fps, not 32000. Also you managed to put a picture between "Sher" and "man". Otherwise, perfect!

 

Thanks for the tips EE, I fixed  them.  

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

Check out my new section. Also note the Sherman drifting video. 

 

Shermans in motion

Sherman related Videos 

The Motors!

Video of all the major tank motors running. I’ll add more videos as I find them.

R975 running.

https://youtu.be/NIJPzCOQZKM

GM 6046 running.

 

A57 being run.

 

Ford GAA being run up.

 

 

Tanks in motion

Here is an older video of an M4A1 that was restored and had new tracks installed.  They really put this tank through the paces and it’s worth it even if the music is a bit dated.

 

 

Here’s a short video of an M4A4 driving around.

 

The M4 105 Dozer, a video dedicated to just it! bonus includes Sherman drifting! They look like they are having so much fun in this video! Well until they bust it! This video is a BLAST!!!!

https://youtu.be/BV5nBQGn0w8

Shermans and a M31 ARV gutted and made to look like a M3 Lee again.

 

Restoration Videos

Here is a video of a restored Firefly Vc, a Sherman M4A4, with the a working A57 multibank motor, getting new tracks.  This may not look tricky, but these men are all risking losing fingers or toes, or worse, if someone messes up.

 

Video of a Very nice looking M4 105, with dozer blade being used to recover a M4A4 in very bad shape.

 

A start to finish ‘flower pot’ restoration on an M4A1.

 

A resto mod on a M4A1, with more footage of that nice M4 105 dozer.

 

 

Here's the link to the post, I'm having a moment, and will have to update this post after a bit. 

http://www.theshermantank.com/sherman/shermans-in-motion/

[CrashbotUS]

For sale. 

https://www.troostwijkauctions.com/uk/medium-tank/03-20818-23045-3200879/

 

[Walter_Sobchak]

For sale. 

https://www.troostwijkauctions.com/uk/medium-tank/03-20818-23045-3200879/

 

It's weird that the description says it's powered by twin GM six cylinder diesels, but for the life of me that looks like an M4A3.

[CrashbotUS]

I believe you are correct. If you look at the photo of the engine compartment it appears that engine is a V8.

 

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

I believe you are correct. If you look at the photo of the engine compartment it appears that engine is a V8.

 

 

 

Negative!

 

So, as we know from reading my awesome web site, the 105 M4 was only installed on Chrysler built large hatch M4s, and M4A3, but the motor in the description is the GM 6046 twin diesel and pics is the twin diesel of the M4A2. 

 

So the most likely case is it is indeed an M4A3 and the GAA V8 died, and they couldn't find a replacement, but had a GM 6046 on hand, and swapping them would be a pretty easy engine swap. 

 

It could also have started out life as a large hatch M4A2, either 75 or 76, and then had the 105 turret installed.  This is a less likely possibility because finding 105 turrets lying around isn't easy, and if it had a 75 or 76 turret, why swap it for a 105?

 

 

Cool link though Crash!