Hi

I've been comparing top views of M2 vehicles, and have two very similar shots to set side by side. The first is in Military Modelling January 2007, p.28 (Zaloga article) and the other is in Tamiya Magazine #136, p.29.

The two halftracks have significant minor differences, some of which would really show up in a model.

Judging by the headlights, the Milmod vehicle is earlier production than the Tamiya Mag vehicle, which has the lights moved from the mudguards..

Differences:

Later (Tamiya Mag) vehicle lacks the triangular corner reinforcements with two holes, supporting the skate rail at the rear.

Later vehicle has 'U' shaped skate rail supports around the body, rather than 'T' shaped versions.

Later vehicle has a square stowage box on the outer rear wall.

Later vehicle has rod rails at ankle height around the rear personnel compartment (What ARE these for?)

Later vehicle has some sort of channel on the central transmission hump between the fronts of the driver and front passenger seats.

Is there any significance to these variations, or are they just production differences? When making a model, are these differences important to link up with the period of manufacture?

Any advice much appreciated.

Chris

Chris, some interesting points - i'll be doing some checking myself to see what other variations I can find. Personally, I think is to do with the time of production and also the manufacturer themselves...

Thanks Jim


I'll be really interested in anything you come up with

Chris

What you are noting are minor manufacture differences in fittings for the M2 Half-Track. They are minor production changes during the run, but aren't given a special modifier like M2EX.

The M2 Half-Tracks produced by White Motor Company, Autocar, Diamond T Motor Car and International Harvester were all pretty similar.

White Motor, Autocar and Diamond T were most similar to each other, with only small differences in fittings - what you related in your post. All are from the same "family" so there is no taboo about which feature goes with which production item, other than matching them roughly to time period. The Half-Tracks went through Fixed Idler Mounts when first introduced, then were improved with Single Coil Spring Mounts, then were further improved with Double-Coil Spring Mounts - all more important features visibly. The reinforcements in the Fighting Compartment, and other minor fittings can and did remain the same, regardless of the Idler fitting improvements. Same with the Headlight fitting, as the production continued, later vehicles exhibit a change in mounting from the Fenders to the sides of the Radiator Armored Housing - but you can still see either Single or Double-Coil Springs equipping vehicles in the same unit. It would be less likely that you'd see a Fixed Idler Mount/late Headlight Mount arrangement deeper into the war, like at the Normandy Invasion.

Less likely, but not impossible - it could have survived or been refurbished from North African service, and got some maintenance improvements. Not all H/T's were upgraded in the same manner. A photo to document your effort when doing this would be advisable.

The International Harvester version formed the basis of the later M5/M9 Half-Track variants. It's engine is a slightly different design than the White Motor "Hercules" 160AX used in all three manufacturer's products above. Also, the IH M2 H/T did not have the door in the rear armor plate - like what is found in the vehicles made by the three manufacturers above. This is an easy-to-spot identifier for a 1:35th scale model. The rear door itself is a very interesting feature - as it was truely blocked by the Skate Rail, forcing the troops into contortion trying to use it for ingress/egress into the Fighting Compartment. They didn't like it.

Unless one has actually researched, restored or climbed around on the real vehicle, spotting the difference between the White 160AX or International Harvester 450B would be difficult in 1:35th scale. If you built the Dragon model as presented, you can produce a nice representative of the White Motor, Autocar or Diamond T produced vehicle with a little extra work. If you opened up the bonnet and wanted to work out some kinks with the powerplant - you could improve it, or even make the lesser-known International Harvester version without a great deal of difficulty.

It is harder to cut off that lump Dragon cast into the cab armor plate to mount the Jerry Can Holder and plug the resulting hole, than it would be to make some powerplant change(s).

The stowage bars, ankle-height rails inside the Fighting Compartment, were often used by the crew to lash/stow kitbags and canteens. In some production batches, there were formal tie-downs mounted on higher vertical surfaces inside the Fighting Compartment, but in service, the crews often deviated from the standard Technical Manual description for stowing items - to make it easier for them to operate inside the half-track's tight interior. What else are they good for? Well, sitting in the real vehicle to catalog it for the MVTF Collection, I naturally reached down to either side of my legs when sitting on a cushion. Without seatbelts, I could easily imagine myself grabbing the rails while trundling down the road...

Gunnie

Excellent piece of help. Thanks so very much. What you have said is entirely joined-up with the text and drawings in Hunnicutt (my copy just arrived!). There seems little doubt that the observable differences are linked to early / mid production changes, rather than whether the vehicle came from White or one of the other manufacturers.

This is most significant. For an accurate model it will be important to avoid a mix of early / mid / late features, although some cross-over can be expected at times.

Thanks again,

Chris

Chris - glad to be of some help to you!

Please share photos of your project as you progress.

Gunnie