WW2 M3 half tracks with British seated troops with side backpack and rolls etc.

[MartinKnight1333]

is this something that might be in the offering as I woul dhave 14 immediately 

[Zippee]

Why M3s?

Surely you'd want M5s

[Leon]

Seated troops are looming very soon, for all of the major nations, along with drivers as well...

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

Course Martin only nees 12 M5's, CHQ rode in M3 White Scout Cars. (Feeling pedantic).

IanS

[Sunray]

Seated troops are looming very soon, for all of the major nations, along with drivers as well...

If you base them in the vehicle with a small blob of Bluetack,  you can show the APC empty when they debus.    Simple.

[Dr Dave]

Course Martin only nees 12 M5's, CHQ rode in M3 White Scout Cars. (Feeling pedantic).

IanS

I'm politely asking Ian to make a bit of room in his sandpit as I join him and add: "But BHQ would be back in the M5, or more likely an M9."

Pedantry is a gift, a skill... a way of life.

[MartinKnight1333]

I want M3 half tracks for motorised infantry not m5 light tanks lol

[Ithoriel]

M5 Half-tracks for Brits, M3 half-tracks for Yanks.

[MartinKnight1333]

There is no refernece to M5 for half track in any book I have ?

I stick with M3 as the M5 was not British but a later M3 model in production only.

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

The M5 is a different model of 1/2 track, has a different engine and rounded corners, mostly supplied on lend lease, although a lot of the British ones were converted from M14's to troop carriers. That's why many British 1/2 tracks lack the pulpit of the "A" variant. A rough guide is M5 equates to an M3, M9 to M2 but with a full sized body, M14 to M13, M17 to M16. As an aside most of the Israeli 1/2 tracks came from British reserve stocks in the late 50's, so would be M5/M9. Many many years ago Airfix Mag published a photo of one being loaded in Liverpool.

IanS

ps - that's why I used M3 for all the 1/2 tracks in the tabletop books, and had someone write to point out that the Russians had only 2 M3's

[Ithoriel]

M5 half-track
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The M5 half-track (officially the Carrier, Personnel, Half-track, M5) was an American armored personnel carrier in use during World War II. It was developed in 1942 when existing manufacturers of the M2 half-track car, and M3 half-track could not keep up with production demand. International Harvester (IH) had capacity to produce a similar vehicle to the M3, but some differences from the M3 had to be accepted due to different production equipment. IH produced the M5 from December 1942 to October 1943.

Using the same chassis as their M5, IH could produce an equivalent to the M2, which was the M9 half-track. There were also variants of the M13 and M16 MGMCs based on the M5. The M13 and M16 were exported to the United Kingdom and to Soviet Union respectively. The M5 was supplied to Allied nations (the British Commonwealth, France, and the Soviet Union) under the Lend-Lease. After WWII, the M5 was leased to many NATO countries. The Israel Defense Forces used it in several wars and developed it into the M3 Mark A and the M3 Mark B.

[fred.]

The pertinent question being, are any of these differences visible on a 10mm model?

And if they are how would you convert an M3 to an M5?

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

Isn't the chassis longer?

[MartinKnight1333]

10MM in this scale it really doesn't matter as the differneces are miniscule.

the M% was still a later variant of the M3, so it all depends on when and where its used at what time.

So endex all i want is the troops in lol

[Dr Dave]

10MM in this scale it really doesn't matter as the differneces are miniscule.

the M% was still a later variant of the M3, so it all depends on when and where its used at what time.

So endex all i want is the troops in lol

I fear that the differences are quite apparent. The most obvious is the M5 and later types have very different front mudguards to the US M3.

The issue goes beyond WW2. The Israelis refer to ALL of their 1/2 tracks as M3, even when they're clearly not.

[fred.]

Done a bit of research (well reading up on wikipedia, and looking at a few photos)

Isn't the chassis longer?

Yes but only 13cm. So not enough to care about at this scale.

The main difference seems to be the back corners are curved on the M5, but square on the M3. I couple of quick passes with a file would sort this if you want - although on many photos the back corners are obscured by racks and other stuff.

[Dr Dave]

Done a bit of research (well reading up on wikipedia, and looking at a few photos)
Yes but only 13cm. So not enough to care about at this scale.

The main difference seems to be the back corners are curved on the M5, but square on the M3. I couple of quick passes with a file would sort this if you want - although on many photos the back corners are obscured by racks and other stuff.

But the front mudguards are a bit of a killer. They're the biggest difference. The odd thing is, at least to my eyes, the Pendraken "British M3" looks more like an M5 or later - at least the mudguards do?

[d_Guy]

Reads thread, wants desperately to join in:
"My pre-Flodden Scots carry M3 pikes but switch to M5's for the march south in 1513".

[Ithoriel]

While I understand that it's nice to have the exact model for a thing, I have had to use so many proxies over the piece that getting hung up over the minutiae of make and model aren't generally something I bother with.

One of the blokes who used to come here gaming had some hannomags, sprayed green and with an allied star on the bonnet, to move his US armoured infantry.  No one batted an eyelid.

[fsn]

Reads thread, wants desperately to join in:
“My pre-Flodden Scots carry M3 pikes but switch to M5’s for the march south in 1513”.

Pub! My Flodden Scots have the much superior M4 and, I know this is a little out of period, Brens.

I generally don't get too bogged down in exact versions. Since my August 1944 NW Europe Brits nay fight anywhere after 1943 and in a number of theatres I am bound to be wrong at some point.