Home > Discussion Groups > Allied

Message posting guidelines:

Full real names must be used at all times.

A valid e-mail address must be provided. (This is not optional)
Images must be posted at low resolution (72 dpi) and no larger than 760 pixels wide, and copyright/trade mark owners must be credited whenever reasonably possible.

From 20 April, registration is compulsory if you wish to post messages on the Discussion Groups. For further information, please see the following message: http://www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=47208&messageid=1113823018

Please read our Community guidelines before posting.
By contributing to this discussion group, you indicate your agreement to the Terms and Conditions of Use.
Posts that violate the guidelines or Terms and conditions of Use of the Missing-lynx.com discussion groups will be erased, and repeated violation of this policy may result in termination of the violator's account.


 Return to Index  

I have just checked your data and...

May 23 2012 at 4:19 AM
Nacho Roces  (Login astursimmer)
Missing-Lynx members
from IP address

Response to More info

Hi Kurt

First of all many thanks for your contribution.
I have carefully put everything together according to your instructions. The drawing for the DH E8543 that you posted time ago is very helpful as it contains some of the data you mention.
I had noticed in this drawing the the upper bolt strip seemed to be at a different slope as compared to the DH casting angle indicated beside, 34º 30', which is also different to the known glacis plate angle. I thought it could be my eyes plying tricks, or a distorted copy (this happens). But now everything fits together very very well.

However what affects the vertical positioning has an issue, according to my sketch.
You say that the lower hull height once assembled is 28-13/16. That´s ok afaik and Dragon M4A2 hulls are ok by the way.
You mention the height between Final drive center and lower bolt flange, inside surface, which should touch the low surface of the hull bottom, is 14.204 in.

If I "assemble" the DH to the lower hull using those dimensions (28-16/16 for the hull and 14.204 for the housing) then my bolt strip in the DH results to be "flying" 1/2in over the bolt strip flange, glacis side. If I have time today I´ll prepare an sketch today and update the post.

I think I know why. It seems that the bottom plate of the lower hull was made actually of two pieces. The rear part was 0.5in, while the front one, below the driver and probably as additional protection against mines, was THICKER at 1.0in, the additional thickness being on the outside.
I think the lower hull side plates match the dimension 28-13/16, and the bottom plates in the area 0.5in thick are flush with this dimension, but in the front part the additional bottom plate thickness protrudes out of this dimension by 0.5in.
By the way both Dragon and Tasca kits show this arrangement of additional outer thickness.
If I´m right the DH must be "assembled" using the 14,204in dimension touching to a outer bottom surface located at 28-13/16 + 1/2in. In this condition everything fits with just an small interference at the glacis-DH joint of only 2mm.

Please let me know what you think.

Willing to quickly reach conclusions, Tasca kits (I have one Sherman III), in case all a.m. things are true, have:
1) a slightly too low lower hull side plates, 20,5 mm instead of 20,9mm.
2) a slightly too low DH parts, around 0,5mm, at least the E4186 versions. This is consistent with deviation 1).
Not dramatic though!!

Kind regards
Nacho Roces

This message has been edited by astursimmer from IP address on May 23, 2012 4:39 AM

 Respond to this message   

  1. Correct - The floor plate varied in thickness - Kurt Laughlin on May 23, 2012, 6:10 AM
    1. Then a bit later the sketch - Nacho Roces on May 23, 2012, 7:25 AM
      1. Great info - Marc Brandes on May 23, 2012, 10:03 AM

Terms and Conditions of Use
Report abuse