The Patton Project

[Stuart]

I do like this family of tanks, I've always thought they were very cool looking, in the same way that I've always liked the British Centurions.

[Stuart]

One tequila, two tequila, 3 tequila, floor.....

[Stikpusher]

Thanks for the additional info, Carlos!

Glad to have been helpful Gary

I do like this family of tanks, I've always thought they were very cool looking, in the same way that I've always liked the British Centurions.

To my eye, the M26/M46 have a rather similar appearance to the Centurion. At least in basic body and turret shape. If the US had gone with the side armor plates over the tracks and stowage bins on the turret sides, the resemblance would be more pronounced.

[Stuart]

I do like this family of tanks, I've always thought they were very cool looking, in the same way that I've always liked the British Centurions.

To my eye, the M26/M46 have a rather similar appearance to the Centurion. At least in basic body and turret shape. If the US had gone with the side armor plates over the tracks and stowage bins on the turret sides, the resemblance would be more pronounced.

Actually, now you mention it - you're spot on.

M26



Centurion

[Stikpusher]

Very similar tanks... comparable armor and firepower. The main difference would be in suspension and power plant.

The top one is actually a M46. The sprocket is higher up on the M46 than on the M26 due to the new power pack. Also the tool rack on the glacis plate is another ID feature of the M46. Its under the field packs.

[Stuart]

Really? lol! Stupid google image search lol!

[Stikpusher]

Yeah that’s a 46. But in essence, the M46 is not much more than a M26A1 with a new engine and transmission, plus some other detail changes. The M26A1 is the basic M26 with a more powerful main gun and a few other changes such as the gun travel lock. Drivetrainwise, they are two different tanks, but the rest of the tank on both types is nearly identical. I’m curious as to why the Army did not designate the M46 as a continuation of the M26 series, say perhaps, A2 or A3. But then again they designated the 105 howitzer armed Pershing as the M45, and not as part of the M26 series.

[Stuart]

I suspect it was something to do with funding, like there was no funding left for the M26 so they moved it to another number, or maybe to do with congress etc. Kind of like calling the F-117A a fighter because they weren't allowed to call it a bomber or the RN calling it's 80's carriers 'Through Deck Cruisers' because they weren't allowed to call them carriers.

You're sparking an interest in these early Cold War tanks though Stik. It really makes me want to build one (I do have a Tamiya M48 but that's a bit later). I wonder if anyone does a good Centurion

[Stikpusher]

The M26 was at its max potential after the A1 with its' new gun. The engine and transmission were overworked, so thats where the M46 came in. They put a new engine and transmission into a M26A1 and suddenly had a "new" tank. But in all honesty it was about the same as changing from a M4A1 76mm
to a M4A3 76mm. The Air Force played such funding name games, but the Army didn't need to do so. Especially once the Korean War broke out.

As far as the Centurion goes, AFV Club makes a nice family of those in 1/35 from the original Mk.1 to the 105 armed Mk.5/2 and Mk.6. Plus a few IDF variants. Amusing Hobby has some nice ones too.

https://www.scalemates.com/search.php?f ... 20Hobby%22

[Stuart]

Thanks Carlos - I'll take a look at those!