Military Modelling

was the M60 a reliable hull, engine, transmission, track and suspension, I expect your Mate "Texas Tanker" will be along to comment later.
From what I can gauge very much a contemporary of the Chieftain and a Tank of its time. The longer it was in service, the better it got. The last models M60 A3 RISE, were firing on the move etc. Still in service during the first Gulf shindig, USMC used them for a bit longer.
 

Daz

LE
USMC were in the process of changing from M60 to M1A1 when GW1 kicked off, so they deployed with what they were equipped with.

Didn't the Israelis re-engine their Cents with the same engine as the M60?
 
USMC were in the process of changing from M60 to M1A1 when GW1 kicked off, so they deployed with what they were equipped with.

Didn't the Israelis re-engine their Cents with the same engine as the M60?
2456E62B-04DD-4D32-AFB0-728D11947708.jpeg
 
From what I can gauge very much a contemporary of the Chieftain and a Tank of its time. The longer it was in service, the better it got. The last models M60 A3 RISE, were firing on the move etc. Still in service during the first Gulf shindig, USMC used them for a bit longer.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that it was very well liked by its crews - reliable, easy to maintain etc. The only complaint was the size, particularly the height - being such a bulky vehicle it was difficult to conceal it on exercise. No pulling in behind a hedge in one of these giants...

1280px-M-60A3_near_Giessen_in_Germany_1985.JPEG
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
I seem to recall reading somewhere that it was very well liked by its crews - reliable, easy to maintain etc. The only complaint was the size, particularly the height - being such a bulky vehicle it was difficult to conceal it on exercise. No pulling in behind a hedge in one of these giants...

1280px-M-60A3_near_Giessen_in_Germany_1985.JPEG
As opposed to the sylph-like Chieftain and Leopard 1:

1624264167507.png
 
I seem to recall reading somewhere that it was very well liked by its crews - reliable, easy to maintain etc. The only complaint was the size, particularly the height - being such a bulky vehicle it was difficult to conceal it on exercise. No pulling in behind a hedge in one of these giants...

1280px-M-60A3_near_Giessen_in_Germany_1985.JPEG
From what I’ve read, very much a contemporary of Chieftain. In so far it was fixable in the field and didn’t require a doctorate in IT to fix it!
That is a big old turret though, bags of room inside I’d have thought.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Yep.
I think they were issued in theater, a reserve unit might even have had them.
Aye. Loaned from the US Army, in theatre and operated by guys who'd had a rapid work-up

Splitting hairs but I think where I had my thinking from was on arrival in-theatre the USMC only had M60s on-strength. No doubt someone will be along to tell me that's wrong, too.

Nevertheless, it underlines how the Marines have always been the poor cousins in terms of kit; the M60s weren't even A3s but the Army was already transitioning to the Abrams.

Incidentally, did the M60 ever have its own name, or was it just seen as a progression of the M46/47/48 Patton series? I've never seen anything. In which case, would it be unique in not being named?
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top