Author Topic: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles  (Read 48534 times)

Offline Zaskar24

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #125 on: July 09, 2019, 06:10:35 PM »
Early George Barris custom work? :P ;)

One might think!

Offline ChernayaAkula

  • Was left standing in front when everyone else took one step back...
  • Global Moderator
  • Putting the "pro" in procrastination since...?
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #126 on: July 10, 2019, 06:57:55 AM »
That chopped Sherman looks really cool!  :smiley:
Cheers,
Moritz

"The appropriate response to reality is to go insane!"

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #127 on: July 10, 2019, 09:35:30 AM »
On a somewhat serious note:

Obviously they were trying to lower the (very high) silhouette/profile of the M4 but that chop would have reduced the crew space from good to unworkable! :icon_crap:

When you consider that even a difference of an inch or two in any dimension can make the difference between an acceptable workspace to a cramped one, taking a foot off the top was not meant for crew comfort & would, therefore, have seriously negatively impacted the combat efficiency of the vehicle, which, along with speed, was its big advantage over German armour.

I wonder if that was a post-war modification, when the low-profile Soviet armour was the big threat? ???

Nicholas Moran (a.k.a. The Chieftain) would not have been happy with this one! :o
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline Zaskar24

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #128 on: July 10, 2019, 10:01:56 AM »
It is actually an IDF attempt at modifying the Sherman.

I would guess that the loss of working space and comfort caused by the chop job is why it was not pursued further. I could see the low-profile armor that the IDF was facing as the reason this was looked at and made. Of course you could always limit your tankers to say 5"6"/1.7 meters in height for the driver and assistant driver.

I do have to wonder what weight savings were realized by this reduction in material.

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #129 on: July 10, 2019, 12:25:27 PM »
It is actually an IDF attempt at modifying the Sherman.

I would guess that the loss of working space and comfort caused by the chop job is why it was not pursued further. I could see the low-profile armor that the IDF was facing as the reason this was looked at and made. Of course you could always limit your tankers to say 5"6"/1.7 meters in height for the driver and assistant driver.

I do have to wonder what weight savings were realized by this reduction in material.

That explains it! :smiley:

(Also explains the strange quasi-British uniform in the 2nd photo that had me a tad baffled.)

That's what the Soviets did - 5' 6" was tall for a Soviet tanker.

A few tons but most of the weight is turret, engines & drive train, so not as dramatic as one might think.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2019, 12:27:56 PM by Old Wombat »
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline Zaskar24

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #130 on: July 10, 2019, 06:13:02 PM »
It is actually an IDF attempt at modifying the Sherman.

I would guess that the loss of working space and comfort caused by the chop job is why it was not pursued further. I could see the low-profile armor that the IDF was facing as the reason this was looked at and made. Of course you could always limit your tankers to say 5"6"/1.7 meters in height for the driver and assistant driver.

I do have to wonder what weight savings were realized by this reduction in material.

That explains it! :smiley:

(Also explains the strange quasi-British uniform in the 2nd photo that had me a tad baffled.)

That's what the Soviets did - 5' 6" was tall for a Soviet tanker.

A few tons but most of the weight is turret, engines & drive train, so not as dramatic as one might think.

I wonder if it would bring an M4A3E2 back to close the same weight as an E8?

Offline Jacques Deguerre

  • Older and fatter but not wiser.
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #131 on: July 11, 2019, 03:59:46 AM »
Thatís extremely cool looking although, like Old Wombat said, you have to wonder about the interior space. I guess you have to compare it to other low slung tanks of the same era like the M24, M18 tank destroyer or even the M26. Other considerations are how much ammo and equipment you could store and whether the existing turret basket could be modified to fit.

Obviously, the IDF didnít pursue it past the prototype stage. Possibly, it just didnít work too well or possibly, the availability of more modern tanks like the Centurion and M48 made them feel it wasnít necessary. Then again, thereís the extensive work to create the M51 and the various Sherman-based SPGs, so who knows?

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #132 on: July 11, 2019, 04:23:59 AM »
The Yeramba was an Australian self-propelled howitzer built after the end of the Second World War in the late-1940s. They were produced by mounting the 25 pounder gun howitzer on an American M3A5 Grant tank hull:



All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #133 on: July 11, 2019, 04:40:39 AM »
Random idea:  anti aircraft version of M3
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Logan Hartke

  • High priest in the black arts of profiling...
  • Rivet-counting whiffer
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #134 on: July 11, 2019, 04:53:26 AM »
Thatís extremely cool looking although, like Old Wombat said, you have to wonder about the interior space. I guess you have to compare it to other low slung tanks of the same era like the M24, M18 tank destroyer or even the M26. Other considerations are how much ammo and equipment you could store and whether the existing turret basket could be modified to fit.

Obviously, the IDF didnít pursue it past the prototype stage. Possibly, it just didnít work too well or possibly, the availability of more modern tanks like the Centurion and M48 made them feel it wasnít necessary. Then again, thereís the extensive work to create the M51 and the various Sherman-based SPGs, so who knows?




I don't think it's unworkable, but it was probably an unworkable conversion. The main thing driving the Sherman's height was the radial engine in the M4, M4A1, and M4A6, coupled with a front-mounted transmission. The drive train had to run through the fighting compartment and the turret basket was above that, so that's why it was so tall, relatively. The M10 and M36 had the drive shaft in the same place, but they refused to use the radial engines (instead sticking with the twin 6 cylinder diesels or the Ford V-8) and opted not to use a turret basket, so they had lower overall heights.



Cousins to the M4 tank were the T20 series. They achieved a lower silhouette while still using most of the same components as the Sherman a different way. They kept the turret basket, but moved the transmission to the back of the vehicle and again opted against the very big radials. Finally, the M18 Hellcat (although largely unrelated to the Sherman) stuck with the giant radial and the front-mounted transmission, but again opted against a turret basket (like the M10 and M36). While not as short as the T20 series, it was a good deal lower than the Sherman.



There's more than one way to achieve this, it just depends on your priorities and what components you have to work with. You can see that with Chrysler's proposed 90mm Sherman. They again abandoned the radial and changed the orientation of the drive shaft to keep the turret basket and front mounted transmission, but still achieve a lower overall height.



So, if you designed it that way from the start, you could build it so that it was workable (albeit with a few trade-offs), but if you're trying to convert an existing Sherman, you may have a hard time finding places for everything. Almost all of the above solutions got wider. That's not obvious in the cutaways, obviously, but that's not something that happened with the "chopped" IDF Sherman. It was just a new loss as far as volume was concerned. It also may have worked alright, but just not been worth the conversion cost. I bet a cutaway of the IDF Sherman would have done something similar to the Chrysler redesign, though.

Cheers,

Logan

Offline Jacques Deguerre

  • Older and fatter but not wiser.
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #135 on: July 11, 2019, 04:54:36 AM »
Again, thatís rather cool! At first glance, you think itís a Sexton but then you notice the partially riveted hull, the somewhat different side profile and most obviously, the M3 side doors. Itís not a simple conversion either, having a rebuilt hull and upgraded, later style Sherman VVSS. Iím sure the interior was significantly altered as well.

Offline Jacques Deguerre

  • Older and fatter but not wiser.
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #136 on: July 11, 2019, 07:49:14 AM »
So far, the little bit Iíve been able to learn about this chopped Sherman is that it was a one off test vehicle, produced sometime between 1958 and 1965. Tom Gannon mentions it in a couple of his books but didnít have accessed or publishing rights to the few known photos of it. It was built in one of the IDFís major repair facilities and named Degem Yod after the facilityís commander, Major Yitzhak Jakobson.

The best guess is that it simply wasnít judged to be a cost effective conversion.

Still, it demonstrates that it would be possible to build a lower hull Sherman with a high degree of validity. Since Iím a Sherman fan, this looks like a great Whif World project for me!

Offline Zaskar24

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #137 on: July 11, 2019, 08:06:51 AM »
So far, the little bit Iíve been able to learn about this chopped Sherman is that it was a one off test vehicle, produced sometime between 1958 and 1965. Tom Gannon mentions it in a couple of his books but didnít have accessed or publishing rights to the few known photos of it. It was built in one of the IDFís major repair facilities and named Degem Yod after the facilityís commander, Major Yitzhak Jakobson.

The best guess is that it simply wasnít judged to be a cost effective conversion.

Still, it demonstrates that it would be possible to build a lower hull Sherman with a high degree of validity. Since Iím a Sherman fan, this looks like a great Whif World project for me!

THat is the information I gathered from the thread over on Armorama as well. I still have not heard back from Sabinga about what book more information on the chopped Sherman is in. It would be cool to do as a one-off pressed into service during the 6-Day War to shore up an under strength alongside M50's.

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #138 on: July 11, 2019, 09:14:27 AM »
Of course, & I'm very sure Logan's aware of this, the M10, M18 & M36 were all tank destroyers, not tanks, &, as such, were designed for a different fighting style to the M4, so were able to dispense with the turret basket much more easily, & were less heavily armoured, so didn't require the power provided by the aero-radial.


I'm figuring it's a unique & relatively unknown modification, so I'd be tempted to do it RW, based on the photo's you have, & plonk it onto a competition table of other M4's & watch the hackles rise. ;D
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline Jacques Deguerre

  • Older and fatter but not wiser.
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #139 on: July 11, 2019, 10:37:07 AM »
And going into pedantic JMN mode, the M36 and M18 both have partial turret baskets, with the M36 having a vaguely similar design to wet stowage Shermans. I included the M10/M36 and M18 as a relative size comparison with a lowered Sherman even though they arenít technically tanks.

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #140 on: July 11, 2019, 11:19:42 AM »
The Yeramba was an Australian self-propelled howitzer built after the end of the Second World War in the late-1940s. They were produced by mounting the 25 pounder gun howitzer on an American M3A5 Grant tank hull:


There is still an existing Yeramba at the Armour Museum at Puckapunyal:











There is an article about how to construct a Yeramba here: http://mheaust.com.au/Aust/gallery/Yeramba/Yeramba.htm

Offline Logan Hartke

  • High priest in the black arts of profiling...
  • Rivet-counting whiffer
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #141 on: July 11, 2019, 09:37:01 PM »
Of course, & I'm very sure Logan's aware of this, the M10, M18 & M36 were all tank destroyers, not tanks, &, as such, were designed for a different fighting style to the M4, so were able to dispense with the turret basket much more easily, & were less heavily armoured, so didn't require the power provided by the aero-radial.

I'm figuring it's a unique & relatively unknown modification, so I'd be tempted to do it RW, based on the photo's you have, & plonk it onto a competition table of other M4's & watch the hackles rise. ;D

Exactly. They weren't supposed to be fighting from the move, either, but from pre-selected ambush positions. That's also why they weren't equipped with gyro-stabilizers. Under those conditions, a turret basket is-if anything-a greater inconvenience. In fact, they cut away large portions of the M4 Sherman's turret basket for that very reason. To get at ammunition better.

And going into pedantic JMN mode, the M36 and M18 both have partial turret baskets, with the M36 having a vaguely similar design to wet stowage Shermans. I included the M10/M36 and M18 as a relative size comparison with a lowered Sherman even though they arenít technically tanks.

True, but the point is that they protrude into the hull less than the original M4's design.

Cheers,

Logan

Offline Zaskar24

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #142 on: July 12, 2019, 07:51:08 AM »
Wombat, I think one would look good with a display of other IDF Shermans and really confuse people.

Rickshaw, thank you for posting the additional photos of the Yeramba!

Offline Story

  • Nicht mein Zirkus, nicht meine Affen...
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #143 on: December 16, 2019, 09:58:20 AM »
Haven't seen this one mentioned yet - by a pwtomczak

M3 Lancer Tank Destroyer
Experimental Tank Destroyer built on an M3 Grant Hull
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/americanscalemodel/airfix-1-76-m3-lancer-td-t1603.html

Among the tanks used by the 8th Army in this battle, was a prototype tank destroyer built on the chassis of the M3 Grant tank. While the Grant tank was key to some earlier successes in the desert war, the 75mm waist gun had less AT penetration than the 37MM turret gun. The tank itself was tall and hard to hide. To solve both issues, the hull of a grant tank was used as a mount for the new 17 Pounder AT gun. To reduce overall height and increase ammo storage, the turret was removed from the Grant Chassis. To mount the fairly large 17ponder gun in the hull sponsoon, the gun was turned 90 degrees on its side.

Offline finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #144 on: December 16, 2019, 01:42:47 PM »
Fine build in 1/76.  Looks larger.  1/35 armor builder otta go do this.
Remembering reversed Lee/Grant build on BTS from a while back.  Great ingenuity and skill put into it.  :smiley:
« Last Edit: December 16, 2019, 01:45:26 PM by finsrin »

Offline ChernayaAkula

  • Was left standing in front when everyone else took one step back...
  • Global Moderator
  • Putting the "pro" in procrastination since...?
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #145 on: December 16, 2019, 06:27:23 PM »
Wait... that's 1/76? No way!  :icon_surprised:
Cheers,
Moritz

"The appropriate response to reality is to go insane!"

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #146 on: December 16, 2019, 07:05:33 PM »
 :smiley:

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #147 on: December 17, 2019, 02:45:30 AM »
Love the idea, though the backstory might be stretching it a tad given the 17pdr only really entered service in early 1943.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline tankmodeler

  • Wisely picking parts of the real universe 2 ignore
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #148 on: December 18, 2019, 03:14:31 AM »
Love the idea, though the backstory might be stretching it a tad given the 17pdr only really entered service in early 1943.
Maybe for Tunisia? Loads of obsolete Lee/Grant hulls laying about by early 43...

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: M3 Lee/Grant and M4 Sherman Family of Vehicles
« Reply #149 on: December 18, 2019, 03:18:41 AM »
Maybe for the latter stages.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.