Com-Central.net

Okay, I'll admit I havent followed this thread all that well - its a little confusing! So is there a consensus? Do I need to remove or add a listing?

Neil

Neil

In the Roebling, NJ entry change the serial number from 431 to 4074A. RN stays JJ0198

4074A is the Anniston rebuild SN. Do we know what the original SN is?

Neil

Hadn't really been paying much attention to this thread until now. But here is part of the problem in id'ing the locations involved. Burlington
City is a distinct seperate municipality surrounded by Burlington Township, a different municipality. To compound the problem both are part of Burlington County( the largest NJ county), which includes among many other municipalties Florence, Wrightstown, Pemberton, Roebling, and Fort Dix. So if part of the location is given as Burlington, NJ without furhter clarification It could mean City, Township, or County . Hope this clarifies the issue some even though it doesn't give a concrete location for the tanks involved.

Jeff Lewis

Okay maybe we can get this worked out,
This M-60


is located in Burlington Township at the municipal complex and park about 60 yards from Rt. 660 AKA Old York Road.

Bob's M-60

is located in Burlington City just off of a street called Veteran's Drive right near the Burlington City, NJ - Bristol, Pa bridge

hope this is of some help

Jeff Lewis

Thanks Jeff,
That explains it nicely, Now I can straighten out my records,

Joe D

I was able to run up to Burlington today and picked up this info

Regarding the M60 in Burlington City There are too many layers of paint on it to read any numbers. I was surprised to see this on the left side of the turret
It's the only visible identifiying mark and it has 4 lifting lugs on each side of the hull

Regarding the M60 in Burlington Township The serial number has been completely ground off the front lug. The RN is JJ04XH . Left side of the turret has either U304 or U3U4 but it looks more like it is the first one with a damaged #0 . The rear deck number is 2654 beneath a series of numbers so heavily X stamped that they are unreadable. 4 lifting lugs on each hull side. Plaque identifies it as being built at Detroit Tank Arsenal

Jeff Lewis

Please note that the above photo is from a grizzly not that particular M60 but it is the same caster's marking

Jeff Lewis

Jeff,
Thanks for the info, Where did you get the Registration Number from, the left front hull below the head lamp or was it on the left rear hull below the rear deck ?? I'm asking because all A3 examples I've seen with the tow lug ground were Mainz rebuilds, They would also weld a little plate similar to what you see on M1 skirts on the rear deck with the serial number and weld below it on the hull a plate with the registration number. Serial number 2654 doesn't make sense unless the deck was swapped at one time (happens quite a bit). Also, was the plaque saying Detroit Tank Arsenal the Chrysler Manufacture plate affixed on the rear above the tow pintle??

Curious,
Joe D

Whats the story with the turret machine gun ? Why was it discontinued as a design element?

Would a variant of that be helpful on the M1s deployed in urban situations today?

Hi Blair,
If your talking about the cupola for the commander (M19 w/ M85 .50 cal MG), It had some serious disadvantages. What I hated the most about it was it was designed as an anti-aircraft/ ground weapon, so all the vision blocks were angled and very small, and there was none looking forward. Made it a real pain in the a__ to TC when buttoned up. I would traverse it over to the right and try to look out the side block. The sights were pretty good compared to the M1's, You had a daylight channel with a diopter ring to focus along with a night sight, early ones IR, late were Passive, the IR sucked but the passive was pretty good, problem was it would wash out when firing so you fired short bursts. Another good thing was if you lost all power you could still opereate the night sight with a battery backup pack. Elevation and traverse was manual but was very well laid out, Right hand had a crank to traverse, left hand had a crank for elevation and a firing button. The weapon had an electric solenoid built into the back plate. It also had a high elevation angle. A lot of people disliked the M85 either for it's complexity or reliability (Doug is on that list I believe), I myself never had any issues with it (I loved it) but my experience was during the '80's so they probably worked out most of the bugs by then. A nice advantage was the ability to reload from inside the turret. I personally know some guys that wished they had that capability during the thunder run into Baghdad. As far as mounting it on another vehicle, unless it's a tank it's way too heavy, about 2300 pounds of cast armored steel. Though it's better than anything we have on the M1 right now. BTW, The sight housing it used is still around though. The M1117 uses the same set up with an updated passive sight.

Joe D

- Joe_D

Hi Blair,
A lot of people disliked the M85 either for it's complexity or reliability (Doug is on that list I believe), I myself never had any issues with it (I loved it) but my experience was during the '80's so they probably worked out most of the bugs by then.
Joe D

Yep, I am. Well, when all was working well (not often) it was a hoot in the high ROF mode we non-PC´ly referred to as "Chinese overdrive"...that is to say, it ripped. But reliability was poor in those days (early ´70´s) and maybe 1 out of 4 guns would fit that description...and only for a little while. Too fussy. And access was poor in the M60A1 and M60A2 cupolas....can´t say about A3, that was after mah´time and I don´t know what might have been done to improve things. Not a fan of those cupola-mounted .50´s anyway....limited ammo supply, poor access, bad visibility...but protection was good. Then again, we weren´t faced with MOUT. Things change....

What's wrong? It has an M-2 Cal .50 MG barrel instead of an M-85

Hi Joe

The RN was from just under the headlights on left front hull ( tank driver's left hand). The lug was a clean grind and it didn't look recent. no sign of any plates or other id on the rear. The 2654 appears twice, on the seperate piece above the plate and again under the x'd out numbers sort of like so

2654
____________ this line represents the seam between the parts

XXXXXXX not necesarrily the correct # of X's
2654

The plate saying Detroit Tank arsenal was the placard on a post for the tourists to read not on the vehicle itself

HTH

Jeff Lewis

Thanks Jeff,
This one's got me a little confused in a way, Your description of the rear numbers makes it a rebuild and the way it's marked with the SN on the deck and hull is how Anniston stamped them. It's not the original A1 number because it's too low for a 4 lug hull. That's the A3 number it was assigned but I would have expected an "A" stamped to the right of 2654. The number being ground off the front tow lug usually indicated a Mainz rebuild but they always stamped the registration number on a small plate that was welded to the rear hull position. The deck was the only external place you could find the serial number and those ended with an "M". This is just a guess but I believe the reason why Mainz marked their tanks that way was because they didn't have the capability to stamp new numbers into the armored steel (Records I found show they only made 458). Anniston did produce a number of A3's without an "A" in the serial number, but those were produced near the end and had retained their original A1 numbers. 6903 in Boscobel WI and 8111 in Sikeston MO are like that. Maybe you found an oddity here.

Joe