M48 PATTON TANK QUESTION

captain hawkins 1696 · Post by **captain hawkins 1696** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 10:34 am

I just recently purchased one of these at my area Wal-mart.....what I was wondering is did the Army use these tanks as well as the Marines...the one made by 21st century toys is printed U.S.M.C.......Did the Army use this tank as well.I know the M41 Walker was used by the Vietnam people.........someone educate me please.....

digger · Post by **digger** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 10:40 am

captain hawkins 1696 wrote:I just recently purchased one of these at my area Wal-mart.....what I was wondering is did the Army use these tanks as well as the Marines...the one made by 21st century toys is printed U.S.M.C.......Did the Army use this tank as well.I know the M41 Walker was used by the Vietnam people.........someone educate me please.....

"Developed from the M47 "General Patton" tank, the M48 was the mainstay of the US Army and Marines in Vietnam"

Threetoughtrucks · Post by **Threetoughtrucks** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 9:30 pm

Again, now up pops the old question of overlapping of replacement equipment.

The M-48 was the primary tank for the Army from it's inception in 1953 until the late 50's. The M-60 replaced it.

That is the official line. Having said that, my Army unit in the early 60's (1st Cavalry Division in Korea) was equiped with M-48's and was just receiving M-60's when I left.

While I was in VN, the Army units near me had M-60's, and Sheridans. The ARVN units used M-47's. The Korean units near me used M-47's and M-48's and the US Marines used M-48's entirely while we were in VN.

As was usual with the Marines, "if it was old and leaked oil, then it was a Marine vehicle". While the Army used M-60's, the Marines continued to use M-48's. Finally and slowly, the Marines got M-60's and they used them up to the first Iraq War in the 90's and including Granada and Lebanon while the Army replaced the M-60's with M1A1's, the Marines used the latest equipment (for the 50's) and the Marines had M-60's to use.

The Marines used what they could afford and the Marine budget was never huge until the current war.

My feelng has always been the the Marines should be the "First Responder" for all our forces and their equipment should be top dollar stuff.

TTT

Threetoughtrucks · Post by **Threetoughtrucks** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:54 am

The M-60 was designed to go against the Russian T-54. It went to Europe first to counter the T-54 threat with it's larger main gun than the M-48.

The M-60 WAS also used in Vietnam. I saw them operating near me. I can accept that both the M-48 and the M-60 was used by Army units, but as I travelled, I saw M-60's in my area. I did see M-48's but in my area they were with Korean Marine convoys, along with M-47's and a few M-24's. I had no US Marine units operating in my area.

During one compound attack a M-60 rolled up to within 50 foot of me to fire supressing fire into the jungle. I can't say what unit the tank belonged to but the 173rd Airborne was right next door to us.

TTT

grockwood · Post by **grockwood** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 5:24 pm

Evertything that I have read including Hunnicut's book "the Patton' states
the only M60's that were in Vietnam were the combat engineer version with the short barreled morter replacing the tank gun, and I belive a dozer on the front. I was at Ft. Knox visiting the Armour school there in 1970/71 and an instructor there also told me that only M48A3's and the M551 Sheridan were the only combat tanks that went to Vietnam.

Threetoughtrucks · Post by **Threetoughtrucks** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:31 pm

Then, of course, if "an instructor at Ft. Knox" told you that there were no M-60's in VN, that must be correct.

I guess the tank that rolled up near me in VN and spent an hour firing into the jungle couldn't have been an M-60 because somebody told you they didn't exist in VN.

I spent a year in the 1st Cavalry Division, before it became the 1sr Cav Airmobile and it was just armor when I was in it and two years in the 1st Armored Division in Ft. Hood, so I guess I was wrong and can't tell the difference between an M-48 and an M-60......

Not for nothing, didn't this thread start with a question as to whether the M-48 was used by Army units in VN.

The answer is yes, some Army units did use M-48's in VN.

I think we can agree on that statement.

TTT

nfafan · Post by **nfafan** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 9:15 pm

Threetoughtrucks wrote:Then, of course, if "an instructor at Ft. Knox" told you that there were no M-60's in VN, that must be correct.

I guess the tank that rolled up near me in VN and spent an hour firing into the jungle couldn't have been an M-60 because somebody told you they didn't exist in VN.

I spent a year in the 1st Cavalry Division, before it became the 1sr Cav Airmobile and it was just armor when I was in it and two years in the 1st Armored Division in Ft. Hood, so I guess I was wrong and can't tell the difference between an M-48 and an M-60......

Not for nothing, didn't this thread start with a question as to whether the M-48 was used by Army units in VN.

The answer is yes, some Army units did use M-48's in VN. I think we can agree on that statement.

TTT

It's likely not that anyone doubts your word, but EVERY book that I ever read on armor in SEA indicated that no M60 "slicks" - or M47's for that matter - ever seen combat there.
Just M48s in Army and USMC service, M551s, and M41 and M24 with ARVN forces. Plus maybe an ex-FR M36 or so. But NO M60s or M47s.

Razor17019 · Post by **Razor17019** » Sun Aug 20, 2006 2:46 pm

I asked a friend of mine, a Vietnam Vet that saw heavy combat, about seeing M60s there. His anwser was YES he and his unit hitched a ride on one during his 2 TOURS in country.
History books are great, but when actual participants tell you something, maybe it's time to put the book down and listen!

MK · Post by MK » Sun Aug 20, 2006 4:41 pm

"Gather 'round children in a semi circle, and let's listen to TTT's stories."

Agreed, I would rather believe someone who was there over whats written in a book.

Threetoughtrucks · Post by **Threetoughtrucks** » Sun Aug 20, 2006 8:31 pm

I can accept the statement that ARVN units had no M-47's. Near my unit was a detachment of ROK Marines. They operated frequently on the roads near me. They had a few M-47's to operate with the M-24's they had. Nasty folks. To be a ROK Marine you had to be close to 6'. When was the last time you saw a 6' Korean? Like I said, nasty guys that took no guff from anybody and excellent fighters. Since it is hard for me to tell the difference between ARVN and ROK troops when they are sitting down in a convoy of trucks and armor. The M-47's I saw could have been ROK.

I did spend an evening close to a single M-60 in Long Bingh, VN in the fall of 1965. Whatever the books say.

Sorry, but certain things stick in your mind. I can't remember what I watched on TV last week, but I can taste Army SOS on a bitter cold winter morning in Korea and I can remember vividly, sitting in a French restaurant on the Siagon River having a five course meal for about three hours and relaxing on ice cold Swan Lager Australian beer. I remember sitting afternoons in a dark, cool bar in unbearably hot Texas days in little empty towns drinking beer so cold it gave you a headache...the first one anyway.

Equipment I remember, food I remember, good times I remember, bad & uncomfortable times I remember........now if I can just remember where my car keys are.....

TTT

29thLetsGoJoe · Post by **29thLetsGoJoe** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 12:53 pm

So how much was this tank for those who have found it at Wally World ??

KWR190 · Post by **KWR190** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 1:13 pm

I think It was $39.98
Kurt

ostketten · Post by **ostketten** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 1:31 pm

Equipment I remember, food I remember, good times I remember, bad & uncomfortable times I remember........now if I can just remember where my car keys are.....

I know the deal... I can remember my first can of "C Rations" like it was yesterday....beans and motherfu**ers we used to call em' (ham and lima beans actually) ah, well...such a long time ago.

Threetoughtrucks · Post by **Threetoughtrucks** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 5:13 pm

One of our board members (Rylau) has sent me a pic of Rylau, himself, sitting with two armored vehciles in the background. The pic was an instanmatic and I copied it and while Rylau himself is a little blurry, in the pic, I think the vehciles can ve clearly seen.

The one vehicle is clearly an M-88 Tank Retriever with an A-frame crane setting up to change an engine on the tank (that's how it looks to me from the pisition of the vehicles.

The tank I believe is an M-60. Can't be absolutely positive but the sides of the tank turret appear straight to me, not cureved as the M-48 was, the end of the turret also apears to be the M-60 also. A searchlight is clearly evident but both the M-48 and the M-60 had them and the .50 cal above the top of the turret but the cupola is not that clear.

Good looking pic of a good looking young guy in our service, many moons ago. Thanks again to Rylau for diging out the pic and bothering to send it to me.

TTT

grunt1 · Post by **grunt1** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 5:55 pm

Very cool picture! This debate has been so heavy you guys had to go to Vietnam just to prove a point.

Thank you both for your service, btw!

Here are pictures of each of the tanks in question. Pay close attention to the bogie wheel placement and count.

M-41 Walker Bulldog

M-48A2 Patton

M-60A1

TTT, I absolutely believe you, but I think Rylau's picture shows an M-48 due to the upper bogie placement/count.

Threetoughtrucks · Post by **Threetoughtrucks** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 6:53 pm

grunt1:

I just can't see how you can see any upper idler wheels above the boggies in Rylau's pic, I just see dark areas.

The shape of the commander's copula in the M-48 was higher than the more flattened M-60 copula. I think Rylau's pic shows the lower copula.

But, I'm still hanging my hat on the straight sides of the turret.

Now, I guess I have to identify those two guys by the tank, track 'em down, and ask 'em...

TTT

DocTodd · Post by **DocTodd** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 7:24 pm

TTT, let me know what they say when you track them down.

Threetoughtrucks · Post by **Threetoughtrucks** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 7:46 pm

Sorry guy, but everything you say can used to support my argument also.

"Round searchlight" is a new one on me. All the searchlights I've seen are rectangular with each side rounded. I think thats what we are looking at in Rylau's pic....the rounded sides, looks flat on the top to me. Both the M-48 and the M-60 used the rectanglular searchlight.

Turret, in the pic, to me, is not as rounded as the M-48 you see in the pic..I see a M-60.

Every M-48, I remember, had the bustle rack while not every M-60 had the bustle rack. I think we are seeing equipment tied on the turret, but not in the bustle rack.

If the pic was clearer, this argument would be dead but the pic had, as the subject, Rylau, and the tank is just background.

Can we agree to disagree? That is unless, of course, I can find these two crewman or mechanics in the background.

TTT

lsc1002 · Post by **lsc1002** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 11:38 am

I just got my first M48 in a lot of XD items off of evilbay. When I bought it it was the only item that I did not really care about. Now that have got it in hands my thoughts have completely changed. My Tiger S1 was my favorite 21C item but my new Patton is great. I'm so happy that I bought some of those surplus figures being sold by 21 Century.

Small Scale Military Headquarters

M48 PATTON TANK QUESTION

M48 PATTON TANK QUESTION

Re: M48 PATTON TANK QUESTION

ULTIMATE SOLDIER XD Patton M48 Cost??