Something Many Will Like

kwselke

kwselke

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2011
Messages
5,312
Reaction score
16,956
City & State/Province
Houston, TX
I cannot believe I did not hear this story until this morning. River Oaks is the old money extreme wealth neighborhood of Houston. That baby will be good for feral hog hunting or charging bear.

HOA fight over World War II tank in River Oaks | khou.com

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDbpFpz5oWs[/ame]
 
Last edited:
That's pretty cool!:cool:
That would look good in my front yard but of course the wife would nix that idea plus say I'm crazy! :D
 
I've always loved Sherman's, but the truth of the matter is it was a terrible tank. The German tanks it faced had far superior fire power and armor. A Tiger could destroy a Sherman at 1,500 yards, while the Sherman rounds would literally bounce off the Tiger's front armor at point blank range. Allied tank crews had to take on German tanks by having one or more act as decoys while another Sherman tried to sneak up behind the German tank where it was more vulnerable. Both sides referred to the Sherman as Ronson's in reference to the tank's reputation for erupting into flames from just about any hit. The German's also called them "Tommy Cookers". What made the Sherman successful was America's ability to produce over 50,000 of them against a far smaller German out put.
 
Tom S. said:
I've always loved Sherman's, but the truth of the matter is it was a terrible tank. The German tanks it faced had far superior fire power and armor. A Tiger could destroy a Sherman at 1,500 yards, while the Sherman rounds would literally bounce off the Tiger's front armor at point blank range. Allied tank crews had to take on German tanks by having one or more act as decoys while another Sherman tried to sneak up behind the German tank where it was more vulnerable. Both sides referred to the Sherman as Ronson's in reference to the tank's reputation for erupting into flames from just about any hit. The German's also called them "Tommy Cookers". What made the Sherman successful was America's ability to produce over 50,000 of them against a far smaller German out put.
Click to expand...

And they were reliable and easy to maintain. The US had lots of good ol' boy shade tree mechanics that could fix them in the field. Patton blocked new tanks because he wanted lots of what was available NOW.
 
zzzippper said:
And they were reliable and easy to maintain. The US had lots of good ol' boy shade tree mechanics that could fix them in the field. Patton blocked new tanks because he wanted lots of what was available NOW.
Click to expand...

They were fairly reliable, but maintenance was complicated by the fact that the M4 used several different engines. Everything from a radial aircraft type engine to five inline six cylinder Chrysler engines coupled to a common output were used. Also used was a Ford V8 that had fairly complicated twin overhead cams in each head and a super charged GM Diesel engine. Below is a picture of the multi-bank Chrysler product.

i-KRzDQGN-L.jpg


Here's a picture of one being installed:

i-WMXXWc7-S.jpg


Besides the different engines, there were also two different suspension systems, which I don't think were interchangeable.

Last, but certainly not least was the unenviable job of having to clean the inside of one out after it had taken a hit. The projectile had a habit of bouncing around, having the effect of a blender. :eek:


EDIT: Here's a clearer picture of the multi bank inline 6 engine:

i-pMZGTW3-L.jpg
 
Last edited:
The Germans could design and build a new tank design anytime they pleased. They had a hard time keeping existing tanks combat ready, because all the manufacturing was for Right Now Current production, not replacement parts for last week's model. by late 44, any part put on a previous model tank or other tracked vehicle, came from another vehicle not from parts storage! When you only make 200 of some thing then stop making any unique parts, it won't last long in wartime usage!

The M-4 on the other hand had lots of spares plus what you could strip off battle damaged hulks. And all the dead tanks from both sides were behind our lines in just a few days, if not hours!

One of our trim carpenters in the 70's was in the 2nd Armored Div., Patton's "Hell on Wheels". He told me he preferred the model with twin Cadillac V-12 engines to the model with 5 Chrysler straight 8's, In combat the strain of higher speed turns stressed the transmission, and that broke the drive belts from the top two 8 cylinders... repeatedly! It is a pain to move with a thrown track, but you can move some, lost power leaves you a sitting duck, you didn't intend to be the decoy target, but the Germans shot you any way!

Ivan
 
Last edited:
He should put a concrete pad in his yard.....

The only real concern I would have is that it IS blocking the road. If you have to put traffic cones around it so people won't hit it, it IS presenting a danger. Cars from behind have to approach it blindly and swerve into the oncoming lane. Also, pedestrians will be less visible and have limited visibility themselves.

Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you should. I appreciate the historical value, but he should have to put it IN his yard.

If I built a monument to fallen veterans on wheels and parked it in the road like that it would be the same thing. It's great, but get it out of the road.
 
rwsmith said:
The only real concern I would have is that it IS blocking the road. If you have to put traffic cones around it so people won't hit it, it IS presenting a danger. Cars from behind have to approach it blindly and swerve into the oncoming lane. Also, pedestrians will be less visible and have limited visibility themselves.

Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you should. I appreciate the historical value, but he should have to put it IN his yard.

If I built a monument to fallen veterans on wheels and parked it in the road like that it would be the same thing. It's great, but get it out of the road.
Click to expand...

River Oaks Blvd. is a City of Houston street, and he would be violating two parking ordinances. One is parked in the same spot for over 24 hours, the other would be parking an oversize vehicle on a residential street overnight. There are plenty of people in Houston that could rig that tank and haul it to a storage lot. The police would be present while it was moved. The owner would be have to pay the parking fines, the rigging and trucking costs, and the storage lot fees to get it back. The last I heard is that he has agreed to move it out of siight for the time being until it is transported to his ranch.
 
Last edited:
Ivan the Butcher said:
One of our trim carpenters in the 70's was in the 2nd Armored Div., Patton's "Hell on Wheels". He told me he preferred the model with twin Cadillac V-12 engines to the model with 5 Chrysler straight 8's, In combat the strain of higher speed turns stressed the transmission, and that broke the drive belts from the top two 8 cylinders... repeatedly! It is a pain to move with a thrown track, but you can move some, lost power leaves you a sitting duck, you didn't intend to be the decoy target, but the Germans shot you any way!

Ivan
Click to expand...

To my knowledge, and I've read a lot about Shermans, Cadillac engines were never used and the inline Chrysler engines were 6 cylinders, not 8. Maybe your friend was shell shocked. ;)
 
More tank trivia:
Shermans were fitted with a variety of engines.
Continental R-975 9-cylinder radial.
GM 6046 Diesel. (Two 6-71s geared together.)
Chrysler 30 cylinder multibank. (5 6-cylinder flatheads geared together.)
And, the best for last, the Ford GAA, an 1100 cubic inch DOHC aluminum V8.
 
Many years ago my late brother used to have a recurring dream that would make him wake up laughing (which drove his wife nuts).

He would dream he was back in the Navy and living in married enlisted personnel housing. He'd be walking home and passing the quarters of a petty officer buddy. And there would be an M4 tank sitting in the guy's little yard, with its engine idling. The petty officer would be in the turret, wearing a tanker's helmet, and the gun would be slowly traversing back and forth.

"What's the tank for, Lou?", Gerry would ask.

Lou would growl, "You give me any (fertilizer) and you'll find out what it's for."

And my crazy brother would wake up laughing.

I wonder if the guy in Houston has been tempted. :D
 
Tom S. said:
To my knowledge, and I've read a lot about Shermans, Cadillac engines were never used and the inline Chrysler engines were 6 cylinders, not 8. Maybe your friend was shell shocked. ;)
Click to expand...


The M5 used twin Cadillac V8's mated to hydromatic transmissions, as did it's replacement, the M24
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

rwsmith
I got something more out of "Breaker Morant"...
2
Replies
31
Views
869
brians356
brians356
B
WWII Veteran and his "Old Army Hat"
Replies
3
Views
989
Rudi
R
boykinlp
Extremely Sad News For Me!
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
boykinlp
boykinlp
Jeroenw114
45ACP pistols. The unknown, the rare and the prototypes.
2 3
Replies
61
Views
17K
gew98
G
Rastoff
Be like Bob.
Replies
0
Views
356
Rastoff
Rastoff

Latest posts

Back
Top