New WWII film, Fury . . .

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Are the M4s in the film the same model, or are they mixed? Cast/welded hull, running gear etc.

'Fury' is an up gunned version of the M4. The others are earlier M4s. Running gear and other details I wasn't looking for or even could discern. They do a good job of talking about the different rounds they have to shoot.

The inside of the tank seemed almost 'big' to me. I've never been in one, I didn't realize that it was all open, I thought there was a partition between the driver and the turret. On a modern M1, can you get from the drivers seat to the turret area?

I thought the recoil and report of the main gun was understated? I thought it would have been more 'loud'.

I thought the Firefly's gun was good on Tiger tanks at a pretty good range?

[alienb1212]

This movie was worth seeing in theaters. Not the most realistic towards the end of the movie but the banter inside the vehicle was pretty spot-on.

[jerrysimons]

This movie was excellent, well worth seeing. Not idealistic or romantic about WWII but with depth it has a sense of trueness to life. The acting was also excellent in addition to a stellar script. While the action towards the end strayed away from realism it can be easily forgiven IMO.

[joe138]

I believe the Fury was a M4A3E8, if memory serves. The others were earlier variations of the Sherman. I think the earlier Sherman's had a 75 mm main gun, while the E8 version had a 76 mm hi velocity gun. The Tiger engagement pretty much matched what is on the History channel, where vets said that they would engage 3 Sherman's to one Tiger. I think the losses would show that ratio also. But it has been a long time since I've studied this in depth. It is a good movie though. And I am open to correction on the Sherman variants.

[wild_wild_wes]

Was it pointed out in the film dialog if it was a 76mm gun?

[joe138]

I don't remember, but the bogie wheels are that of the E8 and the muzzle device on the barrel indicate the E8 version.

[MAUSER202]

I believe the Fury was a M4A3E8, if memory serves. The others were earlier variations of the Sherman. I think the earlier Sherman's had a 75 mm main gun, while the E8 version had a 76 mm hi velocity gun. The Tiger engagement pretty much matched what is on the History channel, where vets said that they would engage 3 Sherman's to one Tiger. I think the losses would show that ratio also. But it has been a long time since I've studied this in depth. It is a good movie though. And I am open to correction on the Sherman variants.

Just saw it tonight, and liked it a lot. Yes, fury is an M4A3E8, the Tiger and the Sherman are from the Bovinton museum in England. It is the only running Tiger 1 in the world. Wish they would have showed more of it.

[Moose-Knuckle]

The wife took me to see it for my birthday over the weekend.

H O L Y * * * *!!!!!!!!!!! Go see this movie if you have not already.

I plan on seeing it a second time in the theatre for the big screen effect alone. Totally blew me away. The scene with the Tiger was white knuckle as you can get in a movie. The first firefight of the movie where the four Shermans and dismounted infantry rescue the halftrack survivors set the tone for the entire film. When they opened up on Jerry in the tree line . . . WOWSERS! I could go on and on but I'll shut up so as not to spoil anything for those who have not seen it.

It might just be the "best" WWII film to date. Yes, I just typed that.

[Averageman]

The inside of the tank seemed almost 'big' to me. I've never been in one, I didn't realize that it was all open, I thought there was a partition between the driver and the turret. On a modern M1, can you get from the drivers seat to the turret area?
You need to traverse over the rear deck to allow the driver to open a gate in the basket to access the Driver Compartment. Once the gun is over the front you're pretty isolated with a heat deflector between you and the turret.

I thought the recoil and report of the main gun was understated? I thought it would have been more 'loud'.
Inside the turret the cannon is relatively quiet compared to outside the vehicle, most of the noise you'll hear has much to do with the mechanical action of the breech and the ejection on the aft cap.

I thought the Firefly's gun was good on Tiger tanks at a pretty good range?

Those Sherman's (and I've been honored to speak to a few crews) would go out in at least a group of three to take on a Tiger for a very good reason. It was not unusual for MG rounds to deflect rather than penetrait frontal armor. Apparently the trick was to come at three sides and keep pounding until someone got a rear shot in to the engine.

[MountainRaven]

The fact that we could reliably call in artillery and close air support to kill enemy tanks helped greatly... and the inability of the Allies to provide close air support during the Battle of the Bulge was one of the factors that made Eisenhower and other American generals decide that, yes, we really might need a tank that can go toe-to-toe with Tigers and Panthers and win and resulted in the deployment of the M26 Pershing heavy tank. (Which was redesignated as a medium tank after the war and was the basis for the M46 Medium tank... which was the basis of the M47 and M48... which was the basis of the M60.) Of course, by the time the Pershings got to the front, the war was pretty much almost over and they suffered the inevitable mechanical issues that plague any weapon system rushed from development into production during wartime... but the few times they met German Panthers and Tigers, they (and their 90mm gun) acquitted themselves well.

And the M26 faired poorly in the mountainous terrain of Korea and was withdrawn, in favor of the lighter Sherman and the later M46. And the Sherman would continue to soldier on with the Israelis until the 1960s, where it faced the latest and greatest of American armor... in the hands of the Jordanian military. And still managed to come out on top, although the Israelis armed with Shermans facing Pattons did not fair as well as the rest of the IDF armed with (smuggled) Centurions and (smuggled) Pattons against Soviet armor in the hands of Syrians and Egyptians.

And I feel it should be mentioned, that by the end of 1944, many, many US tank crews were clerks or infantry by training, not tankers. This fact probably did not help the kill ratio of Shermans to StuGIIIs/PzkpfwIVs/Panthers/Tigers/King Tigers.

Also: While the 17-pounder gun mounted on the British Firefly Shermans performed well against German armor, the lack of an appropriate general purpose HE shell, meant that the Firefly was not well-regarded by British tankers.