Hi Group
Here is another question from a Sherman newbie.
I am trying to build a US Army M4 Sherman from the 70th Tank Battalion on D Day.
This is my first Sherman, so I find myself in a jungle of variations.
My tank has vehicle number 3066192 ( Cannon Ball )
1. How can I know by knowing that vehicle number, what version differential cover this very vehicle had ?
2. How can I know if it had its pistol port welded shot?
3. Is 3066192 an early of late production M4, I cant find that number in any of the different serial number lists. http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/data/sherman_SN.html
Please help me progress on this model.
Bobber
Hosted by Darren Baker
Sherman differential covers
Bobber
Denmark
Joined: September 08, 2010
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Joined: September 08, 2010
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 03, 2010 - 06:52 AM UTC
chefchris
North Carolina, United States
Joined: February 06, 2006
KitMaker: 1,544 posts
Armorama: 1,464 posts
Joined: February 06, 2006
KitMaker: 1,544 posts
Armorama: 1,464 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 03, 2010 - 07:14 AM UTC
Boerge,
Welcome aboard. The 70th used mainly remanufactured M4s and M4A1s during Normandy. Your tank could have the early 3 pc or the later "beaked" cover but more than likely it would be 3 pc. As for the pistol port question..... mid turrets had the port deleted then it appeared back again. I would leave the port on if I were you.
If you are using the Tamiya M4 it'll need some fixes to make it an accurate M4. The front glacis is really more a M4A4 and the antenna pot is the wrong style.
Chris
Welcome aboard. The 70th used mainly remanufactured M4s and M4A1s during Normandy. Your tank could have the early 3 pc or the later "beaked" cover but more than likely it would be 3 pc. As for the pistol port question..... mid turrets had the port deleted then it appeared back again. I would leave the port on if I were you.
If you are using the Tamiya M4 it'll need some fixes to make it an accurate M4. The front glacis is really more a M4A4 and the antenna pot is the wrong style.
Chris
Bobber
Denmark
Joined: September 08, 2010
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Joined: September 08, 2010
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 03, 2010 - 07:57 AM UTC
Hi Chris
Thanks a lot for these answers.
Do you know “my” Sherman ?
It is to be found on page 142 in Zalogas brilliant book, Armoured Thunderbolt.
You say that they were remanufactured M4s. Maybe this is a stupid question, but remanufactured from what ?
Regards
Bobber
Thanks a lot for these answers.
Do you know “my” Sherman ?
It is to be found on page 142 in Zalogas brilliant book, Armoured Thunderbolt.
You say that they were remanufactured M4s. Maybe this is a stupid question, but remanufactured from what ?
Regards
Bobber
Bobber
Denmark
Joined: September 08, 2010
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Joined: September 08, 2010
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 03, 2010 - 07:59 AM UTC
No I don't use Tamiyas kit. I build Dragon 6511 Sherman 75mm Normandy
GeraldOwens
Florida, United States
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 03, 2010 - 01:42 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Hi Chris
Thanks a lot for these answers.
Do you know “my” Sherman ?
It is to be found on page 142 in Zalogas brilliant book, Armoured Thunderbolt.
You say that they were remanufactured M4s. Maybe this is a stupid question, but remanufactured from what ?
Regards
Bobber
Remanufactured is the wrong term, in all likelihood (remanufactured tanks actually went back to the plant for rebuilding, and this was done commonly to refurbish ex-training tanks in the USA, mostly early M4A3 and M4A4 variants--the M4A4's were subsequently shipped to the UK).
M4 and M4A1 Sherman tanks built in 1942 and early 1943 did not have applique armor, and had the original M34 gun mount. The tanks being stockpiled in England were upgraded before the invasion with applique armor on the right turret front, both hull sides, and in front of the drivers' hoods (though only rarely on M4A1's), and also received the M34A1 gun mount with the wide shield. Dragon's "Normandy M4" kit gives you the option of using or not using these parts, to depict tanks in various theaters at various times. US tanks in Italy mostly did not have these upgrades, and US units from that theater were later used in the invasion of southern France in August, 1944, so very late and very early Shermans could both be seen in the tank battles in France and Germany. I have no specific information on "Cannonball," your particular Sherman. It was probably built by ALCO, PSC or Pullman Standard, as it is not a Baldwin (which retained the direct vision ports) or Chrysler tank (which used the composite hull). Steve Zaloga also has four photo books published by Concord which might be of use: one on Normandy tank battles, one on the Sherman specifically, and one on US tank battles in France (as well as a companion volume on US tank battles in Germany). You may be able to glean additional photos on the 70th Tank Battalion from these, and use them to fill in the gaps in your information.
Bobber
Denmark
Joined: September 08, 2010
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Joined: September 08, 2010
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 03, 2010 - 10:57 PM UTC
Thanks Gerald and Chris
Your answers helps me alot.
My "new problem" is now the rear access panels, There are also a ton of different versions.
Thanks for the info on ALCO, PSC or Pullman Standard. Did these plants use both the casted and bolted differential covers ?
Your answers helps me alot.
My "new problem" is now the rear access panels, There are also a ton of different versions.
Thanks for the info on ALCO, PSC or Pullman Standard. Did these plants use both the casted and bolted differential covers ?
GeraldOwens
Florida, United States
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Monday, October 04, 2010 - 01:15 AM UTC
PSC started using the one-piece, rounded transmission housing quite early, during production of the direct vision hulls, but they also sporadically used the three-piece (which was in production at one foundry, at least, until October, 1943) much later, even after they switched from the direct vision ports to the solid drivers' hoods. However, looking at "Cannonball" again, it does not appear to be a PSC tank, as the position of the drain holes on the side of the armor coaming that protects the turret ring appears to be too low. That suggests Pullman Standard or ALCO.
In all likelihood, all three companies probably made some use of the three-piece type. These parts were considered interchangeable, and the Army would accept either type. Obviously, the one piece types were stronger, but the difference was apparently not considered significant--the M4A4 used the three piece type through the end of production in August, 1943, and the Army made no arrangements to replace the three-piece transmission housings on existing M4 and M4A1 tanks during wartime upgrade programs. They are widely seen in Normandy, though their numbers dwindle as the older M4 tanks were lost in combat, and the wet-stowage M4A3 began to predominate later in the fall.
In all likelihood, all three companies probably made some use of the three-piece type. These parts were considered interchangeable, and the Army would accept either type. Obviously, the one piece types were stronger, but the difference was apparently not considered significant--the M4A4 used the three piece type through the end of production in August, 1943, and the Army made no arrangements to replace the three-piece transmission housings on existing M4 and M4A1 tanks during wartime upgrade programs. They are widely seen in Normandy, though their numbers dwindle as the older M4 tanks were lost in combat, and the wet-stowage M4A3 began to predominate later in the fall.
Bobber
Denmark
Joined: September 08, 2010
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Joined: September 08, 2010
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Posted: Monday, October 04, 2010 - 10:59 PM UTC
Hi Gerald
You wrote
” the drain holes on the side of the armor coaming that protects the turret ring appears to be too low”
Where can I see these drain holes ?
Do you got any pictures of the turret brackets for the Wiz Bang launcher ?
Regards
Bobber
You wrote
” the drain holes on the side of the armor coaming that protects the turret ring appears to be too low”
Where can I see these drain holes ?
Do you got any pictures of the turret brackets for the Wiz Bang launcher ?
Regards
Bobber
HONEYCUT
Victoria, Australia
Joined: May 07, 2003
KitMaker: 4,002 posts
Armorama: 2,947 posts
Joined: May 07, 2003
KitMaker: 4,002 posts
Armorama: 2,947 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 - 01:15 AM UTC
Hmm i'm getting a sense of déjà vu, Boerge
the drainholes in question can be seen in you Cannonball photo immediately above the draping tow cable over the hull edge. Follow the low raised armour edge to below the turret rear. The vertical line of the front wading stack points straight at the two small black holes in question.
Brad
the drainholes in question can be seen in you Cannonball photo immediately above the draping tow cable over the hull edge. Follow the low raised armour edge to below the turret rear. The vertical line of the front wading stack points straight at the two small black holes in question.
Brad
Bobber
Denmark
Joined: September 08, 2010
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Joined: September 08, 2010
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 - 03:48 AM UTC
Thanks a lot guys.
Yes I know that I allready got that picture before, but I was hoping for other pictures
and thanks for pointing out these drain holes.
Regards
Bobber
Yes I know that I allready got that picture before, but I was hoping for other pictures
and thanks for pointing out these drain holes.
Regards
Bobber
Bobber
Denmark
Joined: September 08, 2010
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Joined: September 08, 2010
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 - 09:18 AM UTC
My questions keeps coming.
Are these drain holes to be found on both sides of the vehicle deck ?
Are these drain holes to be found on both sides of the vehicle deck ?