US Army M32B1 Tank Recovery Vehicle

Jakko

Way past the mad part
SMF Supporter
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
10,737
Points
113
First Name
Jakko
A few weeks ago on this very forum,
I have an untouched Tasca M32B1 that's available to a be re-homed at a very reasonable price (or swap etc ...). Open to suggestion so if interested please PM me!
… so I did, and after waiting a while due to customs-related stuff, with thanks to Steve I found myself the somewhat unexpected owner of:—

823a93ba-7aa7-46d9-9982-6d6f05b394c2-jpeg.453123


As Steve said he was offering it to me because he would like to see it built, I’m going to start on it soon instead of sticking it on the big pile with all the rest of my “to be built sometime” kits :smiling3:

Instructions for it are available on Scalemates, for those who want to see what this kit should be like to build. As it’s a Tasca (now Asuka) Sherman, the basics of it are the same as their other Sherman kits, and thus, accurate and pretty nice to build. All the recovery gear, though, makes it a lot more complex than a tank with a turret.

(As an aside, Italeri also released an M32B1 in the 1980s, but the Tasca/Asuka kit is far more accurate. Most obviously, Italeri used the late-model M4A1 hull with large hatches they already had, when nearly all known M32B1s used early hulls with small hatches. Looking just now at the model I built over 30 years ago, I notice other inaccuracies in stowage, idler wheels and more. It’s certainly not a bad kit, and both cheaper and more easily available than the Tasca/Asuka one, but don’t build it straight from the box if you want an accurate M32B1.)

A quick, potted history of the real thing is that the US Army decided early in the war that it would need recovery vehicles for its tanks, to avoid them becoming losses when the battlefield had to be ceded to the enemy. Because the M3 medium tank (AKA the Lee) was the standard at the time, the M31 recovery vehicle was built, based on that. It had a number of drawbacks, both in the way its recovery equipment was fitted and in that the M4 medium tank (AKA the Sherman) would soon become the standard instead. So, a new recovery vehicle was to be introduced, based on the M4 rather than the M3. Two designs were built as prototypes, the T5 that replaced the turret with a fixed superstructure and added an A-frame pivoted at the front of the vehicle for lifting; and the T7, which mounted the same crane as the M31 used, on the front of the standard Sherman turret (minus its gun). The T5 proved more capable, so it was selected for production, with a few alterations, and was standardised as the M32-series.

m32b2rightrear.jpg

Designs were made for each basic Sherman version, all essentially the same and differing only in the hull. If built on the M4 hull, it was the M32; on an M4A1 hull, it was known as the M32B1; on the M4A2 hull, as the M32B2; and so on. Only the M32B1, -B2 and -B3 were built as more than prototypes, the B2 for the US Marines (because they used the M4A2 extensively and wanted the recovery vehicle to be as compatible as possible), the other two for the US Army. The majority of M32-series vehicles were rebuilt from Shermans that had come in for refurbishing, rather than built new as M32s. Because of a shortage of used M4A1 tanks for conversion, though, a number of M32B1s was built new by converting M4A1s that were still on the production line. (The picture above shows a T5E2 — that is, the prototype based on the M4A2 hull. The visual difference is that T5-series vehicles had three, flat plates in the superstructure front while M32-series vehicles had a single, curved plate there. T5E2s were built in series for the USMC for their first order, so these can be seen in the field in the Pacific; the subsequent order was built as M32B2s.)

In terms of capabilities, all these variants were basically the same. They had a winch of 60,000 lbs (ca. 27 tonnes) capacity centrally in the hull, whose cable could be paid out through a flap in the hull front for pulling directly, through a port in the front of the superstructure to go over the A-frame for lifting, or through an opening in the rear of the superstructure for winching to the rear. Over the A-frame, the maximum load was 30,000 lbs (ca. 13.5 tonnes) when stationary. A variety of tools and tow bars were carried to assist in recovery operations as well as in-the-field repairs. The vehicle was armed with an M2 HB .50-calibre machine gun on an anti-aircraft ring in the roof of the superstructure, an M1919A4 .30-calibre machine gun in a ball mount in the hull front, and an M1 81 mm mortar on the hull front intended for firing smoke bombs, to screen recovery operations from the enemy.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 1, 2008
Messages
225
Points
43
First Name
Jean-Marc
CCCCCCCCool choice, You bet I'll be here to follow your WIP !..Go,go,goooo !
 

Wookie2486

SMF Supporter
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
219
Points
43
First Name
Martyn
I built the italeri version quite a while ago so I will follow along with this one
 

Jakko

Way past the mad part
SMF Supporter
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
10,737
Points
113
First Name
Jakko
Great :smiling3: This won’t be a replica of a real photo, though — more “inspired by.” I’m still waiting for something to be delivered to add to this model, but I can start before that gets here.
 
Last edited:

adt70hk

I know its a bit sad but I like quickbuild kits!!!
SMF Supporter
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
9,480
Points
113
First Name
Andrew
Ooooooo interesting!!! Looking forward to this.

Andrew
 

Jakko

Way past the mad part
SMF Supporter
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
10,737
Points
113
First Name
Jakko
Let’s start with what you get in the box. I already referred to the instructions so I won’t post them here other than to note the kit also includes an errata sheet to correct some minor but possibly important mistakes.

Actual parts are all of these:

A23F4DD5-E999-463D-A74E-EC0D96E78DA4.jpeg45E5A141-384E-41C4-9D36-7D7F30EFC170.jpegFB86042A-9061-40FA-A77E-90A04D62B1B8.jpeg22286D5B-0F35-4503-9E81-D7DDBC38851B.jpeg73C197BB-5B02-43FA-8D5A-2EAEDC75720E.jpeg16815F2D-AB8C-45D0-B124-10FA74675FFD.jpeg

If you’re not familiar with Tasca or Asuka kits, you’ll notice there are a lot of small sprues and what appears to be a good deal of duplication and unnecessary parts. For example, there are two bows, two full sets of roadwheels, three different drive sprockets, but also several gun mantlets and other turret pieces.

Partly, the reason for this is that there was a good deal of variation in individual Shermans, so many of these parts are alternatives: you can choose either the open or the closed wheels, for example, or even mix them on the same model.

The other reason is because these Sherman kits are designed to be very modular: by swapping out major parts like the upper and lower hull, and adding in specific detail sprues, Tasca and later Asuka (Tasca went under about ten years ago, then got resurrected as Asuka) can produce a lot of Sherman variants. That’s why this kit includes things like gun mantlets, for example, even though it has no turret to take any of them: there are other parts on these sprues that are needed, and it’s cheaper to just include the superfluous parts than to make a new sprue to include only what will actually be used. If you intend to build multiple Shermans, buying one or two Asuka kits is a good way to start a Sherman spares box that will come in handy for any subsequent models :smiling3:

I’m sure you’ve spotted the nice, bright yellow string supplied for some of the cables :smiling3: I think black would have been preferable, so I may go and look for a replacement for this that won’t need as much painting.

One area where I think Tasca/Asuka kits could be improved, though, is in the tracks. They always include soft, two-pieces-per-side tracks that look okay but not outstanding. Sherman tracks are supposed to be tight around the wheels, of course, and these are as well-detailed as you can expect of this kind of kit part, but they don’t look quite convincing enough, IMHO. So, I grabbed this set off the shelf:

97EA75FA-09F7-4BEB-933D-37B331E39395.jpeg

I had bought it because I needed a few links of this type for another model, but they are fiddly to assemble. I’m hoping that another way than the one the manufacturer shows, will make it easier :smiling3:

ABADDCFE-F5FA-4B6E-B3BA-CEA87C866BA0.jpeg

The large sprue is in the box eight times, the smaller on the left is included sixteen times — it has the outer faces only, again modular kit design so that Bronco could release a lot of Sherman tracks with the large sprue in common. The very small one is part of the AFV Club track sets, and contains extended end connectors, which served to widen the tracks and reduce ground pressure in the muddy conditions of late 1944/early 1945. It should end up looking like on this M4A1 (76 mm) tank:

93EC418A-1C12-4B12-A826-00D5B1941150.jpeg

I have tons of the AFV Club extended end connectors in my Sherman suspension spares box, because each of their track sets includes a full set and I’ve never used any, so I might as well give myself more fiddly work on the track by adding them :smiling3:

Both these T49 tracks and extended end connectors were not seen much on M32s as far as I can tell, but they’re not implausible either, so I’m going to go with it. Probably …
 
Last edited:

Lee Drennen

Box Stock Builder with a Twist/ Rabble Member
SMF Supporter
Joined
Apr 29, 2018
Messages
5,627
Points
113
Location
Wortham Mo
First Name
Lee
Nice choice Jakko. I’m going to try one of these in 1/48 some day. Front row please.
 

Jim R

SMF Supporter
Joined
Apr 27, 2018
Messages
13,695
Points
113
Location
Shropshire
First Name
Jim
Hi Jakko
Very interesting. Probably sensible to go with the Bronco tracks - well sensible for a better look but not for the extra work. I'm sure you'll come up with a 'method' to make life easier. Looks a high parts count but as you say a lot aren't used.
Jim
 

Jakko

Way past the mad part
SMF Supporter
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
10,737
Points
113
First Name
Jakko
I’m going to try one of these in 1/48 some day.
Is there a kit, or a conversion set, or will it be scratchbuilt on a Sherman hull?

Probably sensible to go with the Bronco tracks - well sensible for a better look but not for the extra work. I'm sure you'll come up with a 'method' to make life easier.
The main problems are that first, the track is supposed to be workable, so you have to be really careful not to get any cement on the pins. Second, but the first one you’ll actually encounter, is that those same pins are very fragile. The sprue they’re on is of the common ca. 3 mm thickness, so you can see how thin the pins are, and they’re attached at opposite ends … I have been assured elsewhere that the more sensible way to construct these tracks is to glue the block halves together without pins between them, cut the pins in half and then insert them from the outside.

I started on the model by building the lower hull:

IMG_8851.JPG

The main part of the lower hull is all flat plates, so it’s important to get everything square. The firewall helps a lot there, and though this one has detail on the inside that most Asuka Sherman kits lack, they all include a basic version whose main purpose is to align the rest to. It’s best to also dry-fit the upper hull as soon as you’ve glued the main lower hull pieces together, and leave it on until the glue dries. This will again help everything align and ensures the upper actually fits :smiling3:
 
Last edited:

Lee Drennen

Box Stock Builder with a Twist/ Rabble Member
SMF Supporter
Joined
Apr 29, 2018
Messages
5,627
Points
113
Location
Wortham Mo
First Name
Lee
Is there a kit, or a conversion set, or will it be scratchbuilt on a Sherman hull?
There is a Conversation kit for a Cckw GMC that MP Originals makes Thought about customizing it but probably be easier just to scratch build it. I might use a Sherman Hull.
 
Last edited:

CarolsHusband

SMF Supporter
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
430
Points
93
Location
Sunny Cornwall
First Name
Dan
Hi Jakko.

I'll be watching this with interest. I borrowed an Italeri version from a mate many years ago and took measurements to scratch build all the recovery parts on to a regular Sherman.

I may have to treat myself to a 'real' one sometime.
 

Jakko

Way past the mad part
SMF Supporter
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
10,737
Points
113
First Name
Jakko
That sounds like the hard way to go about it :smiling3:
 

CarolsHusband

SMF Supporter
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
430
Points
93
Location
Sunny Cornwall
First Name
Dan
That sounds like the hard way to go about it :smiling3:
At the time I think Italeri had stopped making it & being the early 90's I couldn't track one down on the internet. It came out alright though.

With your permission I can post a pic.

Or not.
 

Jakko

Way past the mad part
SMF Supporter
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
10,737
Points
113
First Name
Jakko
Of course you can — you don’t need to ask permission, as far as I’m concerned :smiling3:
 

Jakko

Way past the mad part
SMF Supporter
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
10,737
Points
113
First Name
Jakko
I added the parts the kit provides for the sponsons, and filled the ejector pin marks on the insides of the superstructure parts:

CAE2B2F4-58A1-4822-A902-D81B657DAD25.jpeg

The white bits in the hull are 2 by 2 mm square plastic rod, because the hull floor rests only on four very small points at its corners, and regularly falls off them if you dry-fit it.

After I had sanded the putty on the superstructure parts, I glued the details to their insides and assembled them:

B2D4DC3E-187F-4CCF-88DF-E4AE0F1F5437.jpeg

The roof is still loose, but in place here so I could tape the sides to it to get everything square.

Even if it might not look like it, this is a hard part to build. The ring you can see at the bottom is a very, very tight fit around the walls, making it difficult to get everything in without breaking it (it’s very thin, maybe half a millimetre or so). There are also gaps to fill at the front, as you can see, as well as ar the lower rear corners.
 
Top