Panther vs. Pershing - And other tank-rambling...

That engine was also used in the M3 Grant/Lee, but to a lesser extent. The Multibank was first put in the M3A4 Grant/Lees, but far more of that awkward thing were placed in M4A4s for the British Commonwealth forces.

The shortage of radial air-cooled engines forced American production to use a Chrysler (A-57) Multibank engine, this was an aggregation of the five engines of Plymouth truck/automobile engines, working a common crankshaft through a gearing system. Early in the life of the Multibank engine, it had been placed in the M3A4 Grant/Lee version made for the UK, but only in 109 of 3,352 M3s built by Chrysler's Detroit Arsenal had them. This was a stop-gap thing so production could continue until the "Sherman" production began in earnest. On the shorter M3A4s the hull (including tracks and chassis) was increased by just over a foot to accommodate the awkward engine. In the larger M4A4 "Sherman", only six inches of extra length were required.

Out of the tens of thousands of Shermans built only a total of 7,449 of the Chrysler engines were made for the M4A4 (dubbed Sherman V by the British), and 109 made it into the M3s. Both the M3 and M4s generally used radial aircraft engines in the beginning, but there was fast becoming more of a need for aircraft engines than engines for tanks. There were a total of five engine types installed in the Sherman alone, and three different engines in the M3. But there were Guiberson (sp?) diesel aircooled radials in the M3, GM 12 cylinder diesels in the M3 and M4s, Wright/Continental gas aircooled radials in both, Chrysler A-57s in both, Caterpillar diesel aircooled radials in the M4, and of course the best and most common engine; the Ford GAA V-8s.

For another decent color photo of one of these A-57 beasts, goto:

30 Cylinder Chrysler

 

On the power to weight for Tiger v. Sherman ages and ages ago in the thread, the Tiger is only just slower than the Sherman so it would be hard to consider it slow and immobile (hard to prove but just roll with it). But thats my historical fact out of the way, that 30cyl would be a bastard to change a gasket on, and how it distributed enough oil to every area needed is way beyond me.

 

YouTube - WW2 Combat Footage - Pershing vs Panther

don know if someone posted it yet but warning: GRAPHIC CONTENT

 

I voted Panther because it looks tool of destruction and Pershing not..

 

Doesn't really look like Hello Kitty to me but beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

 

Doesn't really look like Hello Kitty to me but beauty is in the eye of the beholder...




Just ask the T-34 smoking in the left hand corner...

 

YouTube - WW2 Combat Footage - Pershing vs Panther

don know if someone posted it yet but warning: GRAPHIC CONTENT

Crikey Moses, that Panther didn't stand a chance :wow:

The speed at which it brewed up just goes to show that it wasn't only Allied tank that did this :smash: