Sherman Superthread (now including Ram too)

[Kingsman]

@zigster Fortunately, the Sherman Minutia site has dimensioned drawings on their M4A4 page here: 

http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a4/m4a4_variants.html

 

I believe the rectangular plate was the same on both sides, but fitted in different places.  The angled plate was obviously only on the right.  The turret patch requires a bit more trial and error bending and shaping.  Cut a piece oversize and cut it down until it looks right.

 

Note that the applique plates were issued as 3 separate kits: turret, hull sides and drivers' hoods.  And they didn't all arrive at the same time or in equal quantities, so not every tank received all 3.  However, the 1,600-odd remanufactured ex-US M4A4s supplied to the UK in 1944 all received the full applique set during remanufacture.  But retained many early production features which the RFM kit does not have.  As RFM copied the Bovington tank they have modelled a July-ish '43 production tank.

[zigster]

Thanks @Kingsman, I should've checked their vast amount of info first.

Thanks for pointing me there!

"But retained many early production features which the RFM kit does not have."

Wow, that sounds more of Sherman confusion. 🙂 Where to stop?

Zig

[Kingsman]

@zigster Minutia is your friend here.  They list and show most of the production changes over time of the different variants.  I did chart up the changes for the M4A4, which were all built by Chrysler and therefore easier to track.  It is harder to do for the other sub-types because of the complication of factory variations and different change introductions across factories.  The RFM kit represents a fairly narrow production window from about April - June 43, about 1,000 tanks from the 7,499 built.

[zigster]

Thanks @Kingsman, sometimes those obvious things just get forgotten!

Minutia is a great site for Sherman things.

zig

[Kingsman]

An interesting HVSS thing I've never noticed before.  The inner edges of the roadwheels are heated, softened and swaged over by the friction with the guide horns, resulting in a much wider rim and wear to the tyre.

 

New.  This is an outside view but the inner edge would be the same when new.  Note also that some HVSS tyres had these pimples. 

 

Worn.  Notice how much thicker the rim seems, and that it no longer protrudes beyond the tyre.

 

This one has more wear on the tyre.  The original rim thickness is still dark but the swaged-over part has corroded.

 

So the cross-section would be something like this (Not to any scale, just diagrammatic)

[zigster]

Well, I'm sure it's very interesting, yet, all I can see is grey rectangles (placeholders?)

z

[Kingsman]

On 4/3/2023 at 9:39 AM, zigster said:

Well, I'm sure it's very interesting, yet, all I can see is grey rectangles (placeholders?)

z

Can't explain that.  Others have been able to see the images.

[Kingsman]

Here's a question probably aimed at @Bullbasket but feel free to chip in.

 

Remember I posted a photo of a "full" M50 (HVSS, Cummins etc) based on a Fisher small-hatch A2 hull?  I don't fancy another HVSS M50/51.  But I'm wondering if any of these existed as early M50s pre-HVSS/Cummins.  There is to date absolutely zero photo evidence, and one tends to think that if Dr Robert hasn't found it then it didn't exist.

 

But this is my thinking.  We all know that France supplied Israel with a polyglot mix of M4 sub-types.  We also know that the Free French operating under US command had a considerable number of small-hatch M4A2s: 382, I believe.  Which they almost certainly kept post-war - or at least the survivors.  The US did not want M4A2s back after Lend-Lease.  Which means that they may well have became M4A2Ts when France standardised on the Continental engine after receiving pretty much the entire US spare stock of them along with their 1,400 or so mixed 76mm M4A1/E8s in 1948-50.  So as far as supply to Israel is concerned, any Continental-engined tank is the same for maintenance etc.  We know that Israel certainly received a few M4A3Ts and many M4A4Ts.  So why not some M4A2Ts??  France was standardising on their mostly brand new 76mm M4A1s and had no further need of any old 75mm tanks, although they did keep some A2s for trials and proyotypes such as the first M50 and 51s.  In which case it would be logical if the surplus found their way along the Med. 

 

And the one which we know became a full M50 came from somewhere.  That was a type only used operationally by the UK, Canada, Free France and the Red Army, plus some with USMC and in the US for training.  Israel did not get scrap or running tanks from the USA or Soviet Union, nor directly from the UK.  They did get some hulks from Canada but I'm not sure anyone knows the mix and whther they were ex-Canadian or ex-US.  Canada of course standardised on the 76mm M4A2E8 post-WW2 and also had no need of old 75mm tanks.

 

So do you think that an early M50 based on a small-hatch M4A2 with the Continental conversion would be a swag too far??

[Bullbasket]

I couldn't find anything that was specifically M4A2 based. The nearest to it was the M4A4/A2 hybrids, captured from the Egyptians. As you probably know, these were A4 hulls with diesel engines, mounting the French oscillating 75mm turret. In one of Dr. Robert's books, there are several photos of these after conversion to M50 Dagem Alef and some 1/35th scale drawings. In the text he mentions conversions from M4, M4A1, M4 Hybrid, M4A3 and M4A4, but no mention (apart from the Egyptian tanks), of M4A2.

You could try emailing the good doctor. He can be reached on [email protected]

Sorry that I couldn't have been of more help.

 

John.

[zigster]

Guess it took them long time to come to Australia 😄

I can see your pics now @Kingsman, oh boy, looks like rubber needs a "cast iron" treatment 😉.

Very interesting "spot-on" re guide horn friction effect.

zig

[zigster]

Going back to add on armour plates:

no weld on any bottom of them?

z

[Kingsman]

5 hours ago, zigster said:

Going back to add on armour plates:

no weld on any bottom of them?

z

Not if they were field or depot applied.  Factory fits had welds all round. The hull side plates, that is. Turret patches were welded all round. Glacis patches were welded top and bottom

[Kingsman]

@Bullbasket raised an interesting little point on his current M51 build.  Shovel handles.  All US shovels of the WW2 era had D handles, and most of the stowage points had a little metal D for the handle to fit over.  This you see on Shermans on the right of the engine deck.  British GS shovels of the era - and since - had T handles.  So they would not fit exactly the US stowage if the original shovel was replaced in British service.  But well enough with the strap done up.   All Lend-Lease vehicles came with a US-pattern tool set, but a shovel is something that might easily be broken and replaced.  Something to think about if you're modelling British Shermans or just replacing poor tools with something better from the spares box or after-market set. 

 

In which respect I mourn the loss of both the TWS and TMD resin replacement OVM sets, which were excellent with nice moulded-on straps, clamps and brackets.  I still have a couple unused.  ET Model still do a Sherman tool set, EA35-045, with resin tools but very fiddly etched straps and brackets.  MJ Productions do some nice 3D tool straps which come with the footman loops attached.

[bigfoot]

Interesting point Peter.  Have to keep an eye out for that in reference photos.

 

HD Models based in Italy have just released a number of sets of 3D printed Sherman bits including tool sets. By all accounts they are very good. I’ve got some of their 3D printed parts in their recent kangaroo kit and those are very good.

[Kingsman]

THE GOOD NEWS........

 

2nd edition of Son Of Sherman book incoming soon from David Doyle Books.  Now expanded to 2 volumes.  I have the original part 1 but I REALLY need the new edition.  No pricing yet.  As I recall, part 1 cost me about £80.

THE BAD NEWS........

 

This will be a limited edition only available directly from DD in the US of A, so shipping cost will be a major factor on top of what will likely be an expensive book.  If you want a copy you need to reserve one here.

 

https://daviddoylebooks.com/coming-soon-1/the-sherman-design-and-development-2-volume-set

[SleeperService]

Price up is $149.99 before shipping etc. However it's 972 pages so there's going to be a lot more in this one compared to the first edition.
My view is that buying a few really good books is much better than many cheaper ones that regurgitate old information and many errors. This should be spectacular.

[Kingsman]

11 hours ago, SleeperService said:

Price up is $149.99 before shipping etc.

I was already not expecting any change from £250 all in.  Most countries will levy some sort of import tax or customs charge on top of the book and shipping.  In the UK that will be about $60 equivalent: 20%.

 

It is perhaps a shame that this book about one of the most important AFVs of all time will not be available through retailers.  It would likely have been a little less costly and certainly easier.  Most other DD books are available through retailers.  I got my copy of his excellent M3 book in The Tank Museum bookshop.  I'm sure that retailers like that and wholesalers like Worldbooks would have taken some copies.  There seems to be a reluctance to take the risk of a print run that will not fully sell out and which will end up as discounted remainders.  And of course the Limited Edition tag allows a price hike.  I would have thought that many thousands of people will be clamouring for this book even at $150.  And anyone who misses this launch will miss out.  It will undoubtedly be the ultimate reference on the subject.

Edited April 8, 2023 by Kingsman
Saved too soon

[Phil Gollin]

.

 

The UK does not charge VAT on books.

 

 

.

[Kingsman]

1 hour ago, Phil Gollin said:

.

 

The UK does not charge VAT on books.

 

 

.

There are a couple of chargeable categories but this book will indeed be exempt.  DD has confirmed shipping at $80 a copy. Or $40 a copy if you buy 10!! So we're talking $230 a copy in the UK and Europe. This is much-discussed over on Missing Lynx. With suggestions of clubbing together to get the cheaper shipping.  I still fail to understand why this book can't be distributed conventionally.

[Bullbasket]

In my current build of and early, first batch M51, I've come across something that's got me stumped, namely the bases for the two aerials. They appear to be mounted on bases about 30cm high, with a cage similar to the British No.19 B set. My question is, does anyone know if there are any AM people who make these. They seem to be peculiar to these first batch '51s, as thy're not present on late M50's, nor on subsequent M51 batches.

 

John.

[Kingsman]

@Bullbasket got me stumped I'm afraid.

[Bullbasket]

8 hours ago, Kingsman said:

@Bullbasket got me stumped I'm afraid.

OK thanks anyway. I've solved the problem by scratch building them. Not perfect, but the general appearance is covered.

 

John.

[Kingsman]

FYI over on M-L about Firefly fittings.

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/missinglynx/firefly-turret-fitting-t334552.html

[junobeach]

Sherman III wheels. Starting on gathering references for my Sherman III build.

I have noticed they have solid and open spoke wheels and sometimes both. As well as three variants of drive sprockets, two variants of idlers. Are any more correct than the others or are any of them acceptable. All my research show a variety of all of them.

cheers Dennis 

[Kingsman]

@junobeach 75mm M4A2s - Sherman IIIs in UK designation - were built by 4 manufacturers who used different parts suppliers from the dozens of companies producing parts.  Hence why you see differences.  In service, tanks would be repaired with whatever parts were available.  Hence why you see mixed roadwheel types.  Sprocket rings wore out, the teeth becoming hooked.  Road wheels wore out more quickly, especially those on the first and last positions.  Tyre shedding was surprisingly common. 

 

Numerically, most M4A2s supplied to the UK were built by Fisher with Baldwin in 2nd place.  It is plausible that we had at least some of Federal's 540 and possibly some of ALCO's 150 but highly unlikely we had any of the 12 built by Baldwin.  Fishers are easily identifiable by their unique fabricated square-edged drivers' hoods, but identifying manufacturers of early direct vision tanks is a lot harder.  Available A2 kits from Dragon and Asuka in 1/35 all represent either Fisher or Baldwin production.  Dragon and Academy also offer the later large-hatch hull version, not used by UK or Commonwealth forces.

 

The most likely factory fit roadwheel type on a Sherman III would be the open-spoke type, followed by the solid pressed-spoke type.  You would not find the closed-spoke design on a British 75mm Sherman as this was a 2nd generation large-hub type and the only 75mm A2s they would be found on were the later large-hatch hull type only used by USMC and Red Army.  But they might potentially be a replacement on a Sherman III in NW Europe.  Some open-spoke wheels did have plates welded over the open holes but this was really only seen on US tanks in the Pacific where Japanese soldiers learned to jam things through the open holes.

 

The early open-spoke idlers were found to be weak and were replaced with the pressed-spoke type by everyone by about mid-43.  They do not necessarily match the wheel type, of which there were more than 2 types anyway.

 

Of the sprocket types, factory fits would be 1 of these 2 types.  The more elaborate Chrysler and Ford patterns were not used on A2s.  But in the field they would be replaced with whatever was available.

  

 

You don't mention bogie skids, of which there were 3 types over time, or return roller arm configuration: 3 variations again.  Or track types.

 

You don't mention your scale, your intended kit(s) or the location and time period of your subject.  All of these would help to refine the answers.

Edited June 8, 2023 by Kingsman
correction