From what I hear we put squirrels on steroids and they grew to be massive then started making a very awesome growling sound and we sent them from the U.S. to Europe. That may be the confusion there.
(edit: in the category of other things that sound nice: ) This one has the same engine as the new t50 super car, ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-P3DVUYTeOyQ.html + ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-q6N8C6ijw9k.html 1:51
@@randomguyingasmask I am actually not aware of the interwar 9 radial, i did know though that radials always have an uneven amount of cylinders in a single row. ( i have edited my previous comment, i just wanted to share other things that sound nice)
Well, it needed to run on 70 octane petrol that the army supplied, while making enough power to drive a 35-ton behemoth at speed. In that amount of time there are few choices, and only aviation powerplants could do it reliably
Why is this myth everywhere? It isnt true. The engine in use is Wright R-975 Whirlwind which was not used by any allied combat or cargo aircraft of world war 2. It was only installed on trainer aircraft Like the BT-11. The reason why the U.S. went with the radial engine was because tank engines had no industrial use whatsoever prior to world war 2. And since the pre world war 2 U.S. military was extremely underfunded and had not been prepairing for war since 1933 like every one of the fashist countrys, they had not developed proper tank engines (as they lacked the funding). That being said, the R-975 was a realy good choice. It was already extensively trialed on the M2 Medium and had proven to be extremely reliable (which was important for the U.S. army as they were working against the clock trying to supply the british in north africa with usable tanks as fast as possible), it was more powerfull then the piston engine on the Pz.III and Pz.IV and since it was large the M4 Sherman needed a large engine bay which meant that there was plenty of space to intigrate other engines into the sherman later down the line (M4A2 twin diesel engine, M4A3 Ford V8 engine, M4A4 Chrysler Multibank engine, M4A6 trialed multifuel radial engine).
@@jakobc.2558 The 6046 powerplant in the M4A2 is my second-favourite to the Conti, but man the Multibank sounds unique--like a swarm of angry, metal bees.
@@whereismymind1402 he fought under him. 3rd Army, may have been 4th Armored, not sure. He saw Patton give a speech in the field. He liked Patton even though he got my grandfather captured and wounded due to his reckless "Baum Raid". I always smile when Patton comes on the TV or I see a photo, I remember my Pop watching the movie Patton and him whispering to himself "old blood and guts". Hahaha. I miss him dearly.
Damn I feel bad, fighting with Patton was basically a suicide mission no matter what Edit: for those who don't understand, Patton was quite similar to Erwin Rommel. Both were masters of propaganda and making themselves look good to an outsider, while actually being rather incompetent in practice
They always have to turn those radials a few revs by hand first. Thats why you see the ground crew pushing the props around before starting. Oil leaks past the rings into the bottom cylinders if they just hit the starter it can crack the head, oil can't compress as air does.
Awesome. Love the sound of a radial engine, and to have it in a tank is always a plus in my book. I like that Sherman Configuration too, the cast hulls just look like classic Sherman.
rather more the impressively rapid mass manufacturing more than the reliability. more tanks, more parts, more spares; faster, easier fixes compared to what is was against or a side by in the war
No, sorry mate. It’s a sign that there were so much more of them produced than Tiger or Panther or Mark IV tanks. Further, the equipment of winning sides is more often found to be kept, glorified and maintained well. You agree?
Yeah, the reality is that the majority of German vehicles were destroyed in the course of the war and almost no one was trying to keep the remaining ones intact after the war until well into the 1980s, by which point there were precious few left to save. At best, a few hundred of any type survived the conflict in any usable shape, and most of those were quickly scrapped by their new owners, expended in testing, or run-to-death by poorer post-war armies. Syria, for example, basically bought nearly every Panzer IV and spare part for them left in the world in the 1940s and 1950s, only to see most of them destroyed in battle, thus ensuring precious few Panzer IVs of any kind are left to us now, let alone in operational order.
Considering there were 50 shermans built for every 1 tiger. Its not surprising there are so many shermans in decent condition and only 1 tiger in the same state.
The piece of a fighter in a ground pounder. :) Radial engines sound so different from conventional tank engines! Many thanks for this piece of wonder! Bądź bezpieczny i zdrowy! :)
The US had no engines that produced near 500 HP except for those in obsolete bi planes when they entered the war. They designed a diesel engine most of those went to the Marines and a model powered by 5 Chrysler car engines that the British favored and used in their Firefly models. Airplane engines where common in tanks the Panther and Tiger tanks where powered by Maybach V12 a company know for making Zeppelin engines. The British Cromwell, Comet and Centurion tanks where powered by the Meteor V12 a modified version of the Merlin engine that powered the Spitfire, Lancaster, Hurricane, and Mosquito
Even with the US being isolationist until Pearl Harbor, odd how unprepared the US was for WWII. Torpedoes which didn't work, no supercharged diesel engines for armored vehicles. At least we didn't throw away our small arms, as reportedly the Brits did... where can I find out about that curious action ?
@@xzqzq actualy the ussr was the only country wich had a dedicated tank engine that lasted them trough the whole war without much issues. Tank weights (and sometimes desired speeds) increased dramaticaly during ww2 wich meant most countrys struggled to find a desent, small yet powerfull and reliable tank engine. That is why the us grabbed the next best thing available for most of there shermans, a downtunned aircraft engine. That way they had reliable and good power. The downside of this was an engine with less than optimal dimensions for a tank.
not only cool, actualy very cold :D shermans don't have heaters, (well the transmission might warm you a bit when that is hot, but you have to drive a lot before that happens) Everything you touch is bare metal and very cold. Add to that that the engine draws air from the fighting compartiment, so trough the same hatches you stick your head trough. The result is that you have to cloth yourself very well or suffer terrible cold.
Kwestia gustu, choć ten ( M4A1 76 W VVSS ) jest ładny tak zawsze bardziej mnie "robiły" M4A3E8 76 W HVSS czyli tzw. Eaisy Eight lub izraelski M51 Super Sherman :P
A British tanker serving in North Africa said you could hear the volute springs squeaking before you heard the engine. It must have been a dry heat thing.
@@OpenGL4ever The Leopard doesn't have the angry machine sound of the radial Sherman. It sounds great but the Sherman's sound is more fitting for it's purpose
bei diesem panzer und dem sound muss ich immer an den film "der tank" mit "james garner" (gott hab ihn seelig) denken. "Festhalten Kinder jetzt wirds ein bisschen holperig!!!!" 😎😀 der sound geht echt hart ab alter ✌
I kind of want the ability to start my truck like that. Battery dead? Get out the crank for the tire jack. Stick it in through an opening in the grill in front, wind up some starter, and then pull some release when you're behind the wheel.
The best way to have dead-start capability in a vehicle is to have a manual transmission and push-start it if necessary. A crank starting system would need some sort of heavy flywheel, gearing and a clutch. Way too much added weight, bulk and complexity to be practical.
Would love to drive 1 round around the block in a Tiger. Sadly they changed the law in my country, you can only drive a tank if you use it for Argicultural purposes... If that problem woulden't be there i would have bought a old soviet tank years ago :D
@@randomguyingasmask >Detroit 2 stroke >Quiet Yeah... Have you ever firewalled a loaded 6-71 up a hill? The sound is wild. Even God can hear you. Now consider the 6046 is two put together. The radial has much more displacement with a less restrictive exhaust, so there is that. Still the diesel sound is scary for little kids and the uninitiated. This tank driving by is pretty par for the day vs something with a potentially blown out exhaust throwing off a cloud of fire and brimstone that sounds like a beat up angry scalded demon [see the Ford L9000 on This Guy's Stuff and Stuff channel if you don't know how the sound can get]. You will historically be firewalling the M10 up some big ass grades riding right on the governor where you otherwise would overrev the radial to disaster.
@@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537 Well that's just what I heard. And also from the videos I saw where they roll up both kind of vehicles (Shermans and M10s alike), the radial and the Ford GAA just overshadows the diesel of the M10 in sound.
@@randomguyingasmask The radial is, but actually no... Maybe you aren't old enough to remember when the diesels were everywhere, but in person you would hear them pulling grade from miles out. If you operate them with any sort of straight through exhaust especially, wear your hearing protection unless you want to be like the rest of us with hearing loss.
As an aircraft mechanic retired from the last days of piston-engined airliners, I must say that start seemed almost too easy. I wonder if a little pre-heating may have been involved.
Yeah exactly.... Like i pointed out, if i was running one them during the war with the intent of staying alive the last thing i would want is a engine that never starts right, runs like crap, an leaves a smoke signal for miles. Piss on that!!! Lol.... Ford GAA any day!!!!!!! lol
@@Jungleland33 In those temperatures, everyone was litting fire under the tank, even the Germans with their petrol powered tanks. It's a 1-2cm thick plate, you won't damage anything with the fire.
Do you think its got a decomp lever? Im wondering how you "pull it through" so you dont get a hydrolock from the oil in the lower cylinders. Assuming the engine is horizontal shaft and not mounted with it vertically
okay i know that sherman 76 was not as powerful as panthers and tigers until the germans were making low quality panthers after 1943. but man sherman looks cool and it was the best tank for new tankers. i love the sherman and all german tanks.
I don't know what it is about this video in particular but its just surreal to see this tank in real life (not in a movie or game, etc.) Maybe it's the lighting? Since it would've seen weather like this...i think lol.
@@capitaljushman5756 if my understanding of the engineering behind this stuff is correct, high octane fuel is less susceptible to pre-detonation. As a result you can reconfigure the engine geometry to give you higher compression ratios, which means more power. If you're only going to use low-octane fuel it works, but you have to then reconfigure the geometry for a smaller max compression, otherwise it'll knock (pre-detonate) Less compression means less power but this can use the cheaper fuel safely
