Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

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


Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
On 7/16/2018 at 9:41 AM, Wiedzmin said:

Sherman-Ball-mount-7008929-from-Secondar

m4a2pullman_6.jpg

 

read some british report about M4A4, it syas that bow machine gun have bronze(on second photo shield is painted yelow, but ball look like bronze?) parts C and BB, does all shermans have same ? and is there any good blueprint or measures of B(shield) part(1-2 inch thick?) ? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lt7rgP00Pos.jpg

 

one more about bronze

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Wiedzmin said:

 

 

 

 

lt7rgP00Pos.jpg

 

one more about bronze

 

I've never heard of the part being bronze before, and since its a gun mount, the part is not in the G104 parts lists, so I don't have a good description of the part either.  I'll ask over on the Sherman mailing list and see if they have any idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

So that's a tank that spent 70 years underwater?

I posted 2 tanks that were found underwater iirc. This one probably should have spend more time there to avoid being "restored" in such way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/16/2018 at 5:57 AM, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

The biggest problem with written direction really is when it does not get read.

 

Comparing US Army TMs from the 1940s–60s to those of the 1980s and beyond shows this very clearly: the former have walls of text with airbrushed photographs showing the main things to do (and the older the manual, the fewer the photos), the latter mainly have line drawings that illustrate every little step in the procedure, with relatively short bits of explanatory text to go with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2018 at 2:53 AM, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

I've never heard of the part being bronze before, and since its a gun mount, the part is not in the G104 parts lists, so I don't have a good description of the part either.  I'll ask over on the Sherman mailing list and see if they have any idea.

at least on M4A4 tested by brits it was bronze, and seems to be bronze on some restored tanks 

WhEPpzf.jpg

AT.100 Ballistic test of hull and turret of general Sherman tank (courtesy of Fu_Manchu)

 

btw maybe you know exact thickness of bow MG shield ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, whelm said:

was this one ever posted?

  Hide contents

 

 

Chase vehicle at 4:34 shows the speed

 

I love that video.  How often do you get to a Sherman hauling ass down a road, I wouldn't be surprised if NO other Sherman owner gets their tank out of second gear,  and would be actually surprised if any ran them at max speed, in fifth like these guys did! Hell, the music isn't even horribly annoying, and they stop it later in the video! It a shame really, mechanical things like to be used, and getting the engine up to speed, and keeping it there is good for them. Same with the Tranny and powertrain, heat that gear oil up and really get it moving around!  Who wants to see a tanking puttering along at walking speed, like they are afraid it's going to break down like some German tank, I wanna see them hauling ass!! 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, EnsignExpendable said:

75 mm gun with a cast hull, but a travel clamp in the front? If I'm not mistaken, that's a Grizzly!

An M4A1 of some kind for sure, but going by the single piece lower front and the larger rear plate I think it was originally a late M4A1 hull.

 

Either way should be rocking a Radial in that thing unless they modified it to take something else. Doesn't seem to have an info about what it was using and I tried and failed to see if I could find more on that specific tank but no luck. The video was apparently made to show off the new tracks they had made.

 

Would be interesting to know if they played around with the engine at all or is it stock to get those speeds. M3/M4's had it governed to 2100 rpm? I believe and 2400 rpm could be done for short periods.

 

Interestingly the Canadians seemed to like to push the R-975 harder in the Ram then the US did in the M3 and M4, I'm unsure if this applied to the Grizzly as well.

 

Ram I and early II's

 

Normal engine speed  2200 rpm   (M3's during this period 2100 rpm)
May run at 2400 rpm in emergency

 

In later Ram II's the manual (1943) states the engine is now governed at 2400 rpm with a surge of 100-150 rpm allowed. This is backed up with the memo from Oct 1943 stating the Ram was faster on roadways then the M4A1 due to being governed at a higher rpm. Probably also why the manual and other sources state it's sustained cruising speed is 25 mph while in the M4 it's 21 mph. No idea on actual max but probably peaked at about 30 mph if you look at newspaper articles from the period that state 30mph max, a few tests they did like the Horstman suspension test checking deflection (27 mph tested) towing the 17 pdr (28 mph tested) the sexton (governed to 27 mph) Ram M10 spec sheet (30 mph short periods) it's clear it's higher for short periods then 25 mph.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sure sounds like an R975 to me. The gear ratios in the Sherman and Grizzly are the same, so the only speed differences would come from the Engine RPM Governer, and who knows how the one on that tank is set, assuming its and R975, and R975 powered Shermans are still pretty common. They complicated all mechanical little contraptions with weights and springs and finding people who even know what one is, in today's day and age is almost a miracle.  I'm pretty sure even back when these tanks were new, the governors were not something the crew was allowed to mess with. If it broke, they took it off, sent it back for repair and put a repaired one on, that was delivered on a truck and came from a parts depot. 

 

I'm going to have to watch again and really look the back end over.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the rear dogdodger is correct the exhausts have been lowered quite a bit.

 

as for the tampering

 

aYR5UIn.png

 

None of these orders seemed to stop crews, every month or so there's a new order or such in the war diaries about how crews keep speeding heavily and it needs to stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, it probably varied a lot unit to unit how much they tolerated. Back then Officers could make things pretty miserable for men who blatantly broke the rules. Once in combat they would have less time to care, but I bet tampering was way less common in units still in the US training. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...