From: Auke Dijkstra (auke.dijkstra@wxs.nl)
Date: Wed Oct 02 2002 - 11:47:56 PDT
The roller is indeed for crossing ditches etc. I don't know if they really
worked.
The International Half-Tracks also had rollers and some had winches, just
like the
M3 and M2 models.
The M2 has a shorter body then the M3, the M2 was built for scouting duty's
and could
carry about 7 people (including driver) it has a completely different
internal lay-out then the M3 which was built transporting soldiers only, it
could carry 13 people (including driver). The International M9 could be
compared to the M2 and the M5 could be compared to the M3, the International
Half-Tracks had the same outer dimensions though.
The M16 was built for carrying quad .50 machine guns for anti-aircraft duty
(and
anti-personell duty also). The upper armour plate could be folded to the
outside
to give the gun tower free clearence all around. M3's were converted to
M16's later in the war and after the war, they are a little different from
the real M16's.
Because of the rubber tracks it has to be no problem to get the Half-Track
licensed and
use it on the street. They are real fun to drive, on the road they are a bit
less fun to drive,
especially when they are nicely dressed out with lot's of ammo cans and
other stuff on them, the noise that they make then is incredible. The M5 has
a great engine and a very nice gearbox, they can do 50 mph easily and they
drive just fine at 40 mph. Be very carefull of braking hard, always whatch
in the mirrors if there is somebody behind you
bacause nothing on earth can stop as fast as a Half-Track (except for a
full-track off course).
Best Regards,
Auke Dijkstra
Netherlands
----- Original Message -----
From: "micdunn" <micdunn@ev1.net>
To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
Sent: woensdag 2 oktober 2002 20:02
Subject: Re: [MV] H2: Not so fast... (+half track questions!)
> I asked someone with an M3 what the roller on the front was for. He told
me
> that when they cross really rough terrain (like ditches) the roller would
> prevent the nose from digging in. He also told me that some military units
> cut them off to save weight, and because they did not function so well.
I've
> never owned one, so I'm giving you third hand info. If this information is
> incorrect, believe me, someone on this list will correct it.
> -Sarge
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Horrocks, Aaron" <ACHb@pge.com>
> To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 3:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [MV] H2: Not so fast... (+half track questions!)
>
>
> > I don't get it. It's not a Hummer, not a HMMWV, and not worth $50k. Just
> > flipping through the adds in the back of my Military Vehicles Magazine,
I
> > can find many better ways to spend $50k. I could get myself two humvees,
a
> > yard full of Jeeps, some armour, etc, etc.
> >
> > One of my neighbors has one. I see it drive by every couple of days, and
I
> > always cringe - Can't find the attraction of that hideous thing.
> >
> > Real MV related question: I'm already looking at my next project! What's
> the
> > roller thing on the front of a half-track for? was it stock? What's the
> > difference between the M2, M3 and M16 models? And what's the
street-legal
> > deals?
> >
> >
> >
> > Aaron Horrocks
> > 1952 M38A1
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: HOWARD WRIGHT [mailto:dvsww2@mindspring.com]
> > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 12:01 AM
> > To: mil-veh@mil-veh.org
> > Subject: Re: [MV] H2: Not so fast...
> >
> >
> > What did it say in the commercials, as tested 52K? Only the Yuppies
have
> > money to spend like this.
> >
> > > [Original Message]
> > > From: w7ls <w7ls@blarg.net>
> > > To: <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
> > > Date: 9/30/02 1:59:15 PM
> > > Subject: [MV] H2: Not so fast...
> > >
> > > First, I'd wait for an exhaustive test, one that includes long term
> > > durability, as opposed to a single, short test. Second, if the H2 does
> > > indeed perform and hold up as well as the H1, then how about going a
> > > little cheaper and just buying Chevy Tahoes off the rack? According to
> > > Popular Science, the H2 is only slightly different in the frame and
> > > running gear than the Tahoe. At least our guys could finally ride in
> > > comfort! :-) Jim
> > >
> > > ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> > > To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> > > To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to
> <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> > > To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
> >
> >
> > --- HOWARD WRIGHT
> > --- dvsww2@mindspring.com
> > --- EarthLink: The #1 provider of the Real Internet.
> >
> >
> >
> > ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> > To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> > To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to
<mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> > To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
> >
> > ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> > To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> > To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to
<mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> > To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
> >
>
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Apr 23 2003 - 13:24:04 PDT