_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV: Allied - WWII
Armor and ground forces of the Allied forces during World War II.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Up armored M4’s?
UM83CANES
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: May 01, 2007
KitMaker: 275 posts
Armorama: 242 posts
Posted: Friday, August 27, 2010 - 05:17 AM UTC
I’ve seen a TON of photos of M4A3 in the ETO with “extra” metal plating welded to their hulls. And of course there’s no shortage of pictures from the PTO of M4A3 and M4A2’s in the PTO with all manner of improvised armor…but my question is, did M4’s in either the ETO or PTO get similar “up-armor” treatments?

If anyone has any pictures of up-armored M4’s they’d be greatly appreciated!

Thanks in advance,
Noah
GeraldOwens
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Friday, August 27, 2010 - 08:48 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I’ve seen a TON of photos of M4A3 in the ETO with “extra” metal plating welded to their hulls. And of course there’s no shortage of pictures from the PTO of M4A3 and M4A2’s in the PTO with all manner of improvised armor…but my question is, did M4’s in either the ETO or PTO get similar “up-armor” treatments?

If anyone has any pictures of up-armored M4’s they’d be greatly appreciated!

Thanks in advance,
Noah

Steve Zaloga's book "Armored Thunderbolt," deals with this in more detail. The uparmoring program was a project undertaken in Third Army in 1945, as Patton disapproved of the practice of using sandbag armor. He arranged for scrapped tanks to be salvaged for their armor, with the entire glacis being cut away, as well as sections of the side armor to be bolted to the new tank's transmission cover. It made sense to improve the newest tanks in service, rather than tanks manufactured in 1943, so the M4A3 tanks were the usual recipients. I have seen one photo of a flat plate welded to the curved frontal armor of an M4A1, but I have no information on the circumstances. I have never seen a 56 degree, dry-stowage hull Sherman with steel uparmoring, though all of the tanks deployed from England had the small applique plates added in 1944. The tanks that redeployed from Italy for Operation Dragoon in the South of France often had no upgrades at all, with no applique and sometimes the original M34 gun mounts.
Many units used sandbag armor, but the 12th Armored Division had elaborate baskets welded from sheet metal strips which allowed sandbags to cover the hull front, hull sides, and turret sides. Older tanks outside Third Army sometimes got elaborate, multilayer applique, consisting of welded steel track sections, topped by sandbags, covered by wire mesh and hessian tape. Steve's Osprey book, "Modelling the US Army M4 (75mm) Sherman Medium Tank," has a chapter devoted to building one. He also wrote a companion volume of the 76mm variants, so be sure to order the right one.
mmcalc
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: February 19, 2008
KitMaker: 55 posts
Armorama: 49 posts
Posted: Friday, August 27, 2010 - 10:42 AM UTC
Uparmored M4

http://www.mairie-montry.fr/iso_album/blindes_11.jpg


http://www.mairie-montry.fr/iso_album/blindes_12.jpg


http://www.mairie-montry.fr/liberation.html

It appears that elements of the 3rd Armored Division were uparmoring their M4's as early as August 1944. The pictures clearly show that the M4 turret has been upgraded to 6 inches on the front by adding armor cut from another 75mm turret. The bow armor looks to have been thickened to 3.5 inches by adding the 1.5 inch lower side armor from a riveted hull M4. Perusal of the various Cologne videos show that the practice was carried out on 3rd Armored Division M4A1 75mm and M4A3 (W) 75mm tanks as well. These could have been from the same August 1944 batch, as tanks that were obviously received later (e.g. remanufactured M4A1 75mm) do not have the uparmoring. I believe that the tanks are 32nd Armored Regiment.

I suspect that enough tanks were uparmored to allow platoons to have a "point" tank.

Mike Canaday
GeraldOwens
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Friday, August 27, 2010 - 11:04 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Uparmored M4

http://www.mairie-montry.fr/iso_album/blindes_11.jpg


http://www.mairie-montry.fr/iso_album/blindes_12.jpg


http://www.mairie-montry.fr/liberation.html

It appears that elements of the 3rd Armored Division were uparmoring their M4's as early as August 1944. The pictures clearly show that the M4 turret has been upgraded to 6 inches on the front by adding armor cut from another 75mm turret. The bow armor looks to have been thickened to 3.5 inches by adding the 1.5 inch lower side armor from a riveted hull M4. Perusal of the various Cologne videos show that the practice was carried out on 3rd Armored Division M4A1 75mm and M4A3 (W) 75mm tanks as well. These could have been from the same August 1944 batch, as tanks that were obviously received later (e.g. remanufactured M4A1 75mm) do not have the uparmoring. I believe that the tanks are 32nd Armored Regiment.

I suspect that enough tanks were uparmored to allow platoons to have a "point" tank.

Mike Canaday

Goodness gracious! Well, never say never with Shermans. Given the very early date of these conversions, I suppose they'd have had to use M4's, since only a handful of M4A3's had made it to France by August, 1944. And that could also be the origin of that M4A1 with the flat applique plates I mentioned earlier.
AgentG
Visit this Community
Nevada, United States
Joined: December 21, 2008
KitMaker: 1,109 posts
Armorama: 1,095 posts
Posted: Friday, August 27, 2010 - 03:02 PM UTC
Let's not even discuss Marine Corps modifications to their M4 variants.

Wood, concrete, sheet steel from shipyards, chicken wire and sandbags are just a few.

G
mmcalc
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: February 19, 2008
KitMaker: 55 posts
Armorama: 49 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 28, 2010 - 06:03 AM UTC
[/quote]
Goodness gracious! Well, never say never with Shermans. Given the very early date of these conversions, I suppose they'd have had to use M4's, since only a handful of M4A3's had made it to France by August, 1944. And that could also be the origin of that M4A1 with the flat applique plates I mentioned earlier.[/quote]

I have seen photos of an the M4 75mm in the picture posted above, and M4A3 75mm (W) with the same turret treatment. There are numerous pictures of various types with the glacis aromor additions, but the M4 above is the only one I have come across that shows what appears to be armor salvaged from another tank.

You can see the M4A3 75mm (W) on the following video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qfHgoSTm48
and here

The M4A3 75mm (W) in the picture is in Cologne in March 1945. Apparently only got the turret treatment, but not the glacis treatment. It has camouflage and could possibly be from the same batch done in August 1944 as you pointed out there were some M4A3's in theater by August 1944.

Mike Canaday
barkingdigger
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
ARMORAMA
#013
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: June 20, 2008
KitMaker: 3,981 posts
Armorama: 3,403 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 28, 2010 - 06:36 AM UTC
Hey all,

Can I complicate things? I too have only seen the extra armour on 47-degree "big hatch" hulled tanks, but are these all M4A3s? The "A3" designation refers to the engine (Ford GAA vs earlier Continental radial in the M4) since both late-production M4s and most M4A3s were built with the 47-degree hull. (The M4A2 was also switched to the 47-degree hull, but most all of these went to Russia...)

I don't know, though, how many (if any) of the late-hulled M4s made it to Europe for D-Day...

Tom
TonyDz
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: December 13, 2009
KitMaker: 420 posts
Armorama: 419 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 28, 2010 - 08:54 PM UTC

Quoted Text

since both late-production M4s and most M4A3s were built with the 47-degree hull.


There were no 47 degree M4 75MM gun tanks. There were M4 105MM HOW tanks with the late hull.
HONEYCUT
Visit this Community
Victoria, Australia
Joined: May 07, 2003
KitMaker: 4,002 posts
Armorama: 2,947 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 28, 2010 - 09:57 PM UTC

Quoted Text



There were no 47 degree M4 75MM gun tanks


Are you certain Tony? I think you mean the more upright 56 degree angled glacis.
TonyDz
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: December 13, 2009
KitMaker: 420 posts
Armorama: 419 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 29, 2010 - 12:13 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text



There were no 47 degree M4 75MM gun tanks


Are you certain Tony? I think you mean the more upright 56 degree angled glacis.


Yes, I'm very certain, I think it is you who are confused. The 56 degree hull were the early hull and the 47 degree hull was the late hull.
HONEYCUT
Visit this Community
Victoria, Australia
Joined: May 07, 2003
KitMaker: 4,002 posts
Armorama: 2,947 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 29, 2010 - 12:41 AM UTC

Quoted Text



Yes, I'm very certain, I think it is you who are confused. The 56 degree hull were the early hull and the 47 degree hull was the late hull.


Quite right mate. I stand corrected. Was measured from the vertical not the horizontal then.
barkingdigger
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
ARMORAMA
#013
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: June 20, 2008
KitMaker: 3,981 posts
Armorama: 3,403 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 29, 2010 - 02:40 AM UTC
Tony,

Were there absolutely no M4s with the later hull? I know there were the 105s with it, but I had thought the very last of the 75mm M4s might also have had the late hull. As i said earlier, I could be wrong...

And yes, the angle was measured downwards from vertical, so the later, steeper hulls were "only" 47 degrees while the earlier shallower hulls were 56. What always amazed me was how long it took the designers to realise the early hull with hoods was overcomplicated and full of shot traps! Then again, the Germans never outgrew the vulnerable driver's flap on Panthers & Tiger IIs...

Tom
TonyDz
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: December 13, 2009
KitMaker: 420 posts
Armorama: 419 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 29, 2010 - 02:59 AM UTC
Yes, you are wrong. There were no 47 degree hull M4 75MM gun tanks.
GeraldOwens
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 29, 2010 - 02:04 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Tony,

Were there absolutely no M4s with the later hull? I know there were the 105s with it, but I had thought the very last of the 75mm M4s might also have had the late hull. As i said earlier, I could be wrong...

And yes, the angle was measured downwards from vertical, so the later, steeper hulls were "only" 47 degrees while the earlier shallower hulls were 56. What always amazed me was how long it took the designers to realise the early hull with hoods was overcomplicated and full of shot traps! Then again, the Germans never outgrew the vulnerable driver's flap on Panthers & Tiger IIs...

Tom

Only M4 105 mm howitzer tanks were produced after February, 1944. The M4 was scheduled to start receiving the 76 mm turret in June, 1945, but the end of the war in Europe, and the Army's switch to the M26 Pershing led to its cancellation (Sherman production ended after VE Day, though Pershings were built through the summer). In 1944-45, the M4A1 was built with the 76 mm gun only, while the M4A2 and M4A3 were built with 75 mm and 76 mm guns. The M4A3 was also produced with the 105 mm howitzer.
 _GOTOTOP