Nick Johns Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 (edited) 1944 US Army tests of Cromwell v M4 http://www.criticalpast.com/video/65675029165_tank-comparison-tests_Centaur-Cromwell-tank_American-M-4-tank_Aberdeen-Proving-Ground Edited April 11, 2011 by Nick Johns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RecyMech Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 Guess that makes it one-nil to the Cromwell then ?. (Two nil really cause its British & that's enough on its own!) H Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddy8men Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 nice clip, i'm glad the cromwell did well but then again it was built after the sherman so it's not surprising really, just goes to show the advantage of the christie suspension setup. eddy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveo578 Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 (edited) eddy8mennice clip, i'm glad the cromwell did well but then again it was built after the sherman so it's not surprising really, 6¾months:whistle: prototype by prototype 1st M4 -an M4A1 runnng at Aberdeen on 20-9-41 and Cromwell meteor engined prototype running at Farnbough on 19-3-42, 2 months before the A24 Cavalier turned up for its trials. so basically they were contemporaneous. Edited April 11, 2011 by steveo578 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddy8men Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 i thought they came into production in 43, you learn something new everyday. cheers eddy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveo578 Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 eddy8men i thought they came into production in 43 That's correct -it took the British longer get production going on the Cromwell whereas the US managed to get production of the M4A1 going by February 1942 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajmac Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 The long drawn out development period for the Cromwell perhaps tells why it was reasonably good and also why it's main gun (just like the Sherman) was a little out moded by the time it saw action in NW Europe. I've got a cromwell book for you to borrow rick, pm if want it, I'm afraid it got wet in Nigeria but it is still quite readable. PS. Can't view the video, bloody apple! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveo578 Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 ajmac The long drawn out development period for the Cromwell perhaps tells why it was reasonably good The Cromwell A27M was regarded as very good when it was tested at Farnborough in March 1942, the problem was the Rolls Royce Merlin was still the main British aircraft engine and the Liberty A27L was developed as an interim with the Meteor as a long term solution when faclitity could be developed. The photo of the T184005 centaur is interesting is the gun a early 95mm howitzer? and if so it seems even shorter than expected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LUCAS ENGLAND Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Reminds me of the clip of the Panther vs Lee/Grant clip. larger road wheels have it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveo578 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 LUCAS ENGLAND Reminds me of the clip of the Panther vs Lee/Grant clip.larger road wheels have it. Doesn't necessarily follow -the Churchill with almost a centipede of tiny road wheels, restricted suspension travel and far lower power/weight ratio would have taken that step without any problem. Many factors are relevant -not least but rarely mentioned are the design of the track -the relative position of the idler in relation to the nose of the tank and the loading-C of G etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin powles Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Hi, Just looking at this film, Is that not a Cavalier in the test?, the track looks to be Cavalier, but does anyone know the differnce between, Cavalier, Centaur and Cromwell track?, Cavalier track appears to be unique and the Centaur and Cromwell very similar in apperance. Also anyone know were to get NOS Centurion wheels to make them into Centaur wheels?. kevin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lauren Child Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 I would have thought Centaur and Cromwell track would be identical. From what I understand they'd be the same tank if enough engines were available whereas the Cavalier was an earlier version/design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Barrell Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 (edited) There is no such thing as Cavalier track. All of the A24 and A27 series used the same track but there is an earlier style with more reliefs cast into the face of the spud. This style is more usually seen on Cavalier and Centaur simply because it is an earlier style. The tank in question is clearly a Centaur, the rear hull on Cavalier is totally different as it was based on Crusader. Regarding NOS wheels, I'm not sure if Hirsts still have any? They will be Chieftain rather than Cent those they are almost identical. It's a fair bit of work to convert them for Centaur. Making them fit is not too hard but they are quite a bit wider with a heavier flange. Edited September 14, 2012 by Adrian Barrell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddy8men Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 comet wheels from a wreck on kirkcudbright might be a good place to start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Barrell Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 I wouldn't expect Kirkcudbright wheels to have a good rubber to steel bond anymore....... Not an issue for a static though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 Regarding NOS wheels, I'm not sure if Hirsts still have any? Plenty still there a month back .... Andy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin powles Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 Thanks guys, I was unsure about that track, but yes clearly not a Cavalier tank. I will certainly look at converting the wheels, having machined Windsor wheels to make Carrier wheels before, a good finish can be achived on the rubber sides, I will cost up this conversion to see if it viable. Were the holes in the rubber for suspension 'give' or to aid cooling the tyre?, would like to try and replicate this on the converted wheels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Barrell Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 The holes were for cooling but led to more failures in the tyre than overheating so they were deleted. They are round bottomed holes about an inch deep, not sure how you would put those in, freeze the tyre? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lauren Child Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 Any ideas on the adhesive process used to stick the rubber to the wheel? I'm just pondering that there will come a time when you can't adapt other wheels. At that point we'll probably be getting rubber rings moulded or cutting them from sheet. I'd imagine you could use a press to get them on, but how to stick them there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Barrell Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 There is no problem with getting the wheels re-rubbered, other than the cost! originally they were moulded directly to the wheel, there is no seperate tyre as in Sherman. This is still possible but needs a mould. The other method is to wrap the wheel with a rubber strip to build up the required thickness, this is then clamped and vulcanised and finally the new tyre is machined to the required profile. Either method is several hundred pounds each wheel, there are twenty on a typical cruiser tank...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lauren Child Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 There is no problem with getting the wheels re-rubbered, other than the cost! originally they were moulded directly to the wheel, there is no seperate tyre as in Sherman. This is still possible but needs a mould. The other method is to wrap the wheel with a rubber strip to build up the required thickness, this is then clamped and vulcanised and finally the new tyre is machined to the required profile. Either method is several hundred pounds each wheel, there are twenty on a typical cruiser tank...... OK, that is rather expensive - thanks for the explanation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.