Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
Sherman 105mm Gun-WW2 Vs. Korea
long_tom
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
Armorama: 2,005 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 31, 2016 - 05:06 AM UTC
I've been trying to find any armored vehicle that served significantly both in World War Two and the Korean War where one looks much the same as the other. The SHermans, as previously pointed out, were substantially changed from one war to the other, with new guns and such, but I wondered what the case was with the 105mm howitzer types. The turrets at least seems identical from one to the other, but what about the rest? I was thinking along the dozer blade version.
ericadeane
Joined: October 28, 2002
KitMaker: 4,021 posts
Armorama: 3,947 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 31, 2016 - 05:28 AM UTC
Sure, the M4A3 (105) HVSS looked the same in both conflicts but I think the M4A3E8 76W saw widespread use in both and were nearly identical.
Scarred
Joined: March 11, 2016
KitMaker: 1,792 posts
Armorama: 1,186 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 31, 2016 - 06:45 AM UTC
If it wasn't for the word "significantly" in your post I'd say why not build a M26 Pershing? Everyone builds Shermans. My first model was a Sherman and I have 6 in my stash right now not counting IDF modified versions. I've built dozens of 'em over 40 years but only one M26 and I think they are a interesting subject.
long_tom
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
Armorama: 2,005 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 31, 2016 - 04:04 PM UTC
Quoted Text
If it wasn't for the word "significantly" in your post I'd say why not build a M26 Pershing? Everyone builds Shermans. My first model was a Sherman and I have 6 in my stash right now not counting IDF modified versions. I've built dozens of 'em over 40 years but only one M26 and I think they are a interesting subject.
Because the purpose is to depict a tank that was also extensively used during World War Two as well. Yes, the M26 was used, but only for a comparatively short time in Europe. The Sherman of course was used far more extensively, which is the whole point.
ericadeane
Joined: October 28, 2002
KitMaker: 4,021 posts
Armorama: 3,947 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 31, 2016 - 05:03 PM UTC
The AFVs that fit your bill is limited.
M4A3 (105) HVSS
M4A4E8 76W
M24 light tank
M26
M7 HMCs
M16MGMC
and a few odd, older Shermans with VVS appear occasionally.
Maybe the M24 Chaffee is good for you? Both Bronco and AFV Club have Korean War variants
M4A3 (105) HVSS
M4A4E8 76W
M24 light tank
M26
M7 HMCs
M16MGMC
and a few odd, older Shermans with VVS appear occasionally.
Maybe the M24 Chaffee is good for you? Both Bronco and AFV Club have Korean War variants
long_tom
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
Armorama: 2,005 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 31, 2016 - 10:12 PM UTC
Quoted Text
The AFVs that fit your bill is limited.
M4A3 (105) HVSS
M4A4E8 76W
M24 light tank
M26
M7 HMCs
M16MGMC
and a few odd, older Shermans with VVS appear occasionally.
Maybe the M24 Chaffee is good for you? Both Bronco and AFV Club have Korean War variants
No, the Chaffee also barely served during WW2. That's why I decided on the title tank, since it's the only one available that looks close enough to its WW2 equivalent. I could use an M3 or M16 if need be, but I'd prefer the tank.
ericadeane
Joined: October 28, 2002
KitMaker: 4,021 posts
Armorama: 3,947 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 31, 2016 - 10:53 PM UTC
If I can perhaps interject the following: The M24 appeared on the battlefield in Nov 1944, frankly earlier than the M4A3 (105) HVSS or the M4A3E8 76W. While not issued in the 1000s like the two Shermans we've been discussing, the M24 was solidly, a WW2 participant -- 100s being issued to combat units. Just saying...
They formed the bulk of tanks in Korea at war's onset. But you certainly won't go wrong w/the two Shermans.
One thing about M3 halftracks: there is very little photographic evidence of them in Korea. They appear occasionally but mostly, halftracks were the M16 MGMCs.
They formed the bulk of tanks in Korea at war's onset. But you certainly won't go wrong w/the two Shermans.
One thing about M3 halftracks: there is very little photographic evidence of them in Korea. They appear occasionally but mostly, halftracks were the M16 MGMCs.
long_tom
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
Armorama: 2,005 posts
Posted: Friday, April 01, 2016 - 04:45 AM UTC
Another thing-I believe the 105mm Sherman served in both Pacific and European theaters. I don't know the quantity of that type admittedly, though I did see an HVSS in a Pacific Theater photograph.
easyco69
Joined: November 03, 2012
KitMaker: 2,275 posts
Armorama: 2,233 posts
Posted: Friday, April 01, 2016 - 07:42 AM UTC
T-34 & T34/85, TYPE 95 JAPANESE
gmat5037
Joined: November 24, 2008
KitMaker: 103 posts
Armorama: 102 posts
Posted: Friday, April 01, 2016 - 04:50 PM UTC
The Koreans Army had a post war version of the M36B2 (different muzzle brake) and also apparently had some M10s and the Canadians brought some 17pdr SP Achilles, but they were replaced with M4A3 76mm HVSS before going into action. The British had the Churchill Mk VII Crocodiles and Cromwells and Universal Carriers. The MkVII Crocodile was a post-war version, I believe. Marines also used some unmodified LVT(A)5s along with the post war version.
I think that most armored vehicles that served in both conflicts didn't have "significant " service in one or the other conflict. By significant you generally seem to mean time in service, which leaves out the M26. But the M4A3 76mm HVSS didn't see combat until about Dec. 44 and for the M26, it was Feb. 25 1945. From 1939 or 1941 to the end of the war, neither would be termed significant compared with others. The M4 105mm VVS first saw combat in Normandy but I think that the M4A3 HVSS version entered combat in late 45. Some M4? 105mm VVS and M4? VVS with dozer blade saw service in Korea.
I understand that entered service and first saw combat are not the same, but I think that for your purpose, the latter is more appropriate.
Sorry, just some thought on the subject. Hope that this helps.
Grant
I think that most armored vehicles that served in both conflicts didn't have "significant " service in one or the other conflict. By significant you generally seem to mean time in service, which leaves out the M26. But the M4A3 76mm HVSS didn't see combat until about Dec. 44 and for the M26, it was Feb. 25 1945. From 1939 or 1941 to the end of the war, neither would be termed significant compared with others. The M4 105mm VVS first saw combat in Normandy but I think that the M4A3 HVSS version entered combat in late 45. Some M4? 105mm VVS and M4? VVS with dozer blade saw service in Korea.
I understand that entered service and first saw combat are not the same, but I think that for your purpose, the latter is more appropriate.
Sorry, just some thought on the subject. Hope that this helps.
Grant
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Friday, April 01, 2016 - 06:48 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I've been trying to find any armored vehicle that served significantly both in World War Two and the Korean War where one looks much the same as the other. The SHermans, as previously pointed out, were substantially changed from one war to the other, with new guns and such, but I wondered what the case was with the 105mm howitzer types. The turrets at least seems identical from one to the other, but what about the rest? I was thinking along the dozer blade version.
You also might want to consider color- By the time of the Korean "Conflict", US ARMY vehicles wore a deeper, warmer shade of OLIVE DRAB, more BROWN than GREEN. This new shade of OD was formulated with a "SEMI-GLOSS" sheen to it when new, and the color lasted into into the 1960s, up to the time of the Vietnam War, when the greener "Jungle GREEN" shade began to be seen.
The newer "OD" color was supposedly FS-24087 SEMI-GLOSS OLIVE DRAB, and can be replicated with RAPCO-24087 SEMI-GLOSS OLIVE DRAB, which comes in an 11 Ounce Spray Can. It is an exact match, according to the Product Classification on the label affixed to the can. This paint contains no CFCs, and I recommend thoroughly PRIMING your model, and letting it dry for 24-48 hours before you spray ANY type of paint on it. I obtained this paint from JEEP PARTS, on ebay.
I used this color very successfully on my HOBBY BOSS M26A1 (Korea), and on one of my DRAGON M48A3s. I also plan to use this paint on DRAGON's M48A1, and an AFV CLUB M41, when I get around to it. If you're going to try to mix this color with acrylic or enamel paints for airbrushing, I would suggest adding some CLEAR GLOSS or SEMI-GLOSS, and a small amount of a medium-to-dark shade of GLOSS or SEMI-GLOSS BROWN to your FS-34087 OLIVE DRAB...
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Friday, April 01, 2016 - 07:09 PM UTC
Quoted Text
The Koreans Army had a post war version of the M36B2 (different muzzle brake) and also apparently had some M10s and the Canadians brought some 17pdr SP Achilles, but they were replaced with M4A3 76mm HVSS before going into action. The British had the Churchill Mk VII Crocodiles and Cromwells and Universal Carriers. The MkVII Crocodile was a post-war version, I believe. Marines also used some unmodified LVT(A)5s along with the post war version.
I think that most armored vehicles that served in both conflicts didn't have "significant " service in one or the other conflict. By significant you generally seem to mean time in service, which leaves out the M26. But the M4A3 76mm HVSS didn't see combat until about Dec. 44 and for the M26, it was Feb. 25 1945. From 1939 or 1941 to the end of the war, neither would be termed significant compared with others. The M4 105mm VVS first saw combat in Normandy but I think that the M4A3 HVSS version entered combat in late 45. Some M4? 105mm VVS and M4? VVS with dozer blade saw service in Korea.
I understand that entered service and first saw combat are not the same, but I think that for your purpose, the latter is more appropriate.
Sorry, just some thought on the subject. Hope that this helps.
Grant
Hi, Grant! Your post is very informative and helpful.
I don't mean to be at all demeaning or hyper-critical, so if you would be so kind as to allow me a small correction:
Your "VVS" should read: "VVSS", which translates into "Vertical Volute Spring Suspension".
A few comments on the HVSS:
The HVSS, i.e, Horizontal Volute Spring Suspension, was accepted by the US Army and USMC as a solution to the M4-series Medium Tank's inordinately High Ground-Pressure. This high ground-pressure was due to the VVSS-system's comparatively narrow Tracks and Road Wheels. Ofttimes, this resulted in Shermans getting stuck in deep mud and/or snow, while German Panthers and Tigers I & II seemed to have no trouble in navigating in the same environment. Ditto, in the Pacific Theatre, where the mud during the rainy seasons seemed to incapacitate anything equipped with wheels or tracks. Also, the VVSS system rode hard, resulting in crew fatigue. To a great extent, the HVSS system alleviated these problems, and served the Sherman quite well for the rest of it's service life...
KurtLaughlin
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Friday, April 01, 2016 - 08:01 PM UTC
Quoted Text
You also might want to consider color- By the time of the Korean "Conflict", US ARMY vehicles wore a deeper, warmer shade of OLIVE DRAB, more BROWN than GREEN. This new shade of OD was formulated with a "SEMI-GLOSS" sheen to it when new, and the color lasted into into the 1960s, up to the time of the Vietnam War, when the greener "Jungle GREEN" shade began to be seen.
The newer "OD" color was supposedly FS-24087 SEMI-GLOSS OLIVE DRAB . . .
You are jumping the gun there Dennis. The five digit numbers come from FED-STD-595 and it was first issued in 1956. The paints (and thus the colors) used in Korea were essentially the same ones used in WW II.
KL
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Friday, April 01, 2016 - 09:29 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextYou also might want to consider color- By the time of the Korean "Conflict", US ARMY vehicles wore a deeper, warmer shade of OLIVE DRAB, more BROWN than GREEN. This new shade of OD was formulated with a "SEMI-GLOSS" sheen to it when new, and the color lasted into into the 1960s, up to the time of the Vietnam War, when the greener "Jungle GREEN" shade began to be seen.
The newer "OD" color was supposedly FS-24087 SEMI-GLOSS OLIVE DRAB . . .
You are jumping the gun there Dennis. The five digit numbers come from FED-STD-595 and it was first issued in 1956. The paints (and thus the colors) used in Korea were essentially the same ones used in WW II.
KL
Hi, Kurt! I don't think I'm jumping the gun, but there is always the possibility that maybe my source is incorrect. I will say that I've seen and photographed some restorations of WWII and 1950s US Armor and Soft-skinned Vehicles as "Camp Guards", WWII and Post-War reenactments, and at Frank Buck's Armor Museum quite some years ago, that seem to back me up, color-wise.
However, I AGREE to the point you made regarding FED-STD-595 not being released until 1956. BUT- WWII US OLIVE DRAB was NEVER uniform in color, as paint manufacture before and during WWII was anything but an exact science. The guideline, according to the US Ordnance Department was to "mix CARBON BLACK into OCHRE YELLOW, to be matched to PULLMAN GREEN", which was a Railroad Color. This, from an article by Pete Harlem, found in the original Ampersand/MMIR book, "Son of Sherman", which I usually refer to as "Book 1".
The various US paint manufacturers before and during WWII used the aforementioned US Ordnance Department's "guideline" as exactly that, resulting in various shades of OD. Factor in the effects of nature on the paints manufactured before the advent of today's "color-fast" high-tech acrylics, these early paints weathered to a bewildering variety of color that could satisfy any WWII German "Tri-Color Camouflage-Fan", if they took the time to look. That goes for British BRONZE GREEN, Russo/Soviet 4BO GREEN and any other military, or civilian for that matter paint color.
The company that I obtained my FS-24087 SEMI-GLOSS OLIVE DRAB spray paint from, offers WWII US "OLIVE DRAB" in four or five, maybe even six (I don't remember, exactly how many), distinctly different shades; "early", "late", and two different shades for the WC-series Dodges come to mind, plus the initial WILLYS "Jeep" OD and later FORD "Jeep" OD, to confuse matters even further. This company, JEEP PARTS, also supplies a myriad of newer "MERDC" and present-day (I forget the exact designation) US military vehicle camouflage colors, all of which are purportedly accurate, according to the Product Classification and Instruction labels on the back of the cans.
If you care to Kurt, (me not trying to be a "wise guy"), check out JEEP PARTS on ebay, and you'll see what I mean when you compare the different shades of color on their company paint-sample photos. It is also available from the supplier, FORT RYAN SUPPLY, P.O. Box 191, Bowie, TX 76230 (940-872-240)...
I hope that we can continue in this vein without becoming embroiled in any hostility directed against each other.
long_tom
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
Armorama: 2,005 posts
Posted: Friday, April 01, 2016 - 11:48 PM UTC
I suppose I could go with the M16 instead, even if it's not technically a tank. Is it safe to assume that that one was very heavily used in WW2? (It was nicknamed "the Krautmower".)
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Sunday, April 03, 2016 - 06:06 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I suppose I could go with the M16 instead, even if it's not technically a tank. Is it safe to assume that that one was very heavily used in WW2? (It was nicknamed "the Krautmower".)
Also, "The Skysweeper"...
Removed by original poster on 04/04/16 - 13:29:18 (GMT).
GeraldOwens
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Monday, April 04, 2016 - 01:28 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I suppose I could go with the M16 instead, even if it's not technically a tank. Is it safe to assume that that one was very heavily used in WW2? (It was nicknamed "the Krautmower".)
Many M16's in Korea were actually M16B variants, being M3 halftracks retrofitted with the quad 50 Maxson mounting using the truck-mount conversion kit (a similar conversion was done during WW2 using redundant M2 halftracks). The M3 body lacked the fold-down panels, so an additional riser ring was used to get enough elevation to fire the guns horizontally. A wider
"bat-wing" armor array was fitted to offer better protection to crew members (this was once offered by Eduard as a photo-etch accessory).
long_tom
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
Armorama: 2,005 posts
Posted: Monday, April 04, 2016 - 08:35 PM UTC
GeraldOwens
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Tuesday, April 05, 2016 - 04:11 AM UTC
Quoted Text
How does this one compare?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dragon-6381-1-35WWII-U-S-M16-Multiple-Gun-Motor-Carriage-/252109379960?hash=item3ab2e3d978:g:ytkAAOSwVL1WDIIv
Dragon's kit is a stock, factory built M16, not a postwar conversion.
long_tom
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
Armorama: 2,005 posts
Posted: Sunday, April 10, 2016 - 03:37 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextHow does this one compare?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dragon-6381-1-35WWII-U-S-M16-Multiple-Gun-Motor-Carriage-/252109379960?hash=item3ab2e3d978:g:ytkAAOSwVL1WDIIv
Dragon's kit is a stock, factory built M16, not a postwar conversion.
I figured, but I also assume that at least some factory built versions landed in Korea and not all were conversions.
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.