Venjra ICQ 2126434 Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 Hello guys, I posted this message in the wrong board. Im confused about the modeling on the M4a1 Tank. I went to buy me a model from 21st Century Toys wich someone told me it was an exact replica of the real thingy...but I noticed that the turret was longer than the ones in my CMBO Simulator. Im adding a Pic of my model in the hopes that any of you could point me in the right direction about this. [ 12-17-2001: Message edited by: Venjra ICQ 2126434 ]</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 Trust me on this: that picture is no M4 of any kind. That appears to be either an M41 or M47. A quick trip to google.com (or your preferred web search engine) will bring up many, many pages devoted to the M4 Sherman in all its varieties, and you can compare the pictures/statistics to what is in BTS. DjB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splinty Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 DjB is right that's an M41 Walker Bulldog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juardis Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 M4A1's did not have muzzle brakes. Your model does. By the way, nice model. No damage effects? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zitadelle Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 That "tank" isn't anything- except for some dream out of a toy maker's imagination! Let's examine the image. Those tubes at the very front ontop of the fenders. Are those machine guns? Get real. No tank I know mounted "co-ax dual hull-mounted machine guns". Who would mount a barrel traveling lock to the right side rather than directly in the center? (see illustrations of the PzKW V and VIB) Where is the driver hatch? The drive sprockets are all wrong. As is the entire suspension. The stowage at the rear of the turret isn't anything realistic; especially the gas can at the very rear. What are the large things in front of the turret hatches. Pre-mounted binoculars? The commander's machine gun- a very poor modelling of a .50cal. Also, very interesting mounting for his hatch- unfortunately, it would be an engineering nightmare. This is just what comes quickly to mind. This thing is a model of nothing that has yet been developed (nor probably ever will be). Anyone else want to add discrepancies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gredeker Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 This just goes to illustrate how incredibly CONFUSING the whole U.S. Army classification system was in WWII. An "M1" could be a rifle (Garand), an AT gun (pick either 37 or 57mm), a helmet (standard G.I. pot), whatever. It just meant the first model of that particular item. For example, there were both the "Light Tank, M3" (Stuart) and the "Medium Tank, M3" (Grant). When the Stuart was updated, it was originally proposed to call it the "Light Tank, M4" but someone actually _thought_ about it and called it the M5 instead to avoid confusion with the Sherman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyrene Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr> Those tubes at the very front ontop of the fenders. Are those machine guns? Get real. No tank I know mounted "co-ax dual hull-mounted machine guns". <hr></blockquote> Those are called mufflers. Smoke comes out of them. <blockquote>quote:</font><hr> Who would mount a barrel traveling lock to the right side rather than directly in the center? (see illustrations of the PzKW V and VIB) <hr></blockquote> That is to save space during shipping. <blockquote>quote:</font><hr> Where is the driver hatch? <hr></blockquote> In the front. You are looking at the rear of the tank. Notice the fuel cap. <blockquote>quote:</font><hr> The drive sprockets are all wrong. As is the entire suspension. <hr></blockquote> Considering you don't know what kind of tank this is, that is a bold statement. <blockquote>quote:</font><hr> The stowage at the rear of the turret isn't anything realistic; especially the gas can at the very rear. <hr></blockquote> Why not? <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>What are the large things in front of the turret hatches. Pre-mounted binoculars? <hr></blockquote> Lights. <blockquote>quote:</font><hr> The commander's machine gun- a very poor modelling of a .50cal. Also, very interesting mounting for his hatch- unfortunately, it would be an engineering nightmare. <hr></blockquote> Looks like a good model to me. What's so "interesting" about that hatch? <blockquote>quote:</font><hr> This is just what comes quickly to mind. This thing is a model of nothing that has yet been developed (nor probably ever will be). Anyone else want to add discrepancies? <hr></blockquote> I'll have to go tell some Korean War tankers that their tank didn't exist. I'll be right back. Gyrene [ 12-17-2001: Message edited by: Gyrene ]</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 It looks like an M41 with the turret turned rear, I have a picture of the rear of an M41 in Vietnam, and that is a similar if not exact match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zitadelle Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 Ok, my bad. It does appear to be a M41 "Walker Bulldog." After reviewing AFV Interiors, I realized that I jumped to conclusions. Not the first time; probably not the last. web page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogface Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gyrene: I'll have to go tell some Korean War tankers that their tank didn't exist. I'll be right back. Gyrene <hr></blockquote> Ha, Well thats the last we will see of Gyrene... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Determinant Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gyrene: I'll have to go tell some Korean War tankers that their tank didn't exist. I'll be right back. Gyrene [ 12-17-2001: Message edited by: Gyrene ]<hr></blockquote> Thank you Gyrene for one of the funniest pomposity bursting posts that I've read on this board. 'Where's the drivers hatch?' 'It's the back of the tank - note the fuel filler cap' Tee hee hee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfe Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Zitadelle: No tank I know mounted "co-ax dual hull-mounted machine guns". <hr></blockquote> The early M3 Stuart had a pair of sponson-mounted MGs. 5 MGs: yum! Did that early Stuart variety make it to the Eastern Front (i.e. might it be in CMBB)? - Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shipmonkey25 Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 Just a guess, but the "poorly modelled" 50cal is actually a nice looking M60. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von Lucke Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Wolfe: The early M3 Stuart had a pair of sponson-mounted MGs. 5 MGs: yum! Did that early Stuart variety make it to the Eastern Front (i.e. might it be in CMBB)? - Chris<hr></blockquote> Actually, early model M4A1 Shermans had twin MG's in a fixed mount sticking out of the front of the hull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venjra ICQ 2126434 Posted December 17, 2001 Author Share Posted December 17, 2001 Guys thanks for all insights and opinions. I have found the true source of this tank, and it was done to replace the Chaffe..please refeer to this link to read the story. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m41.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts