Tanks As Tractors

Dave in GA · Jan 28, 2012

After WWII, there was an effort in the USA to push surplus jeeps and Power Wagons onto farmers for use in fields pulling implements. In Europe, after the war, reportedly some of the half tracks left there were used as tractors. I also heard that the Russians employed some of their past-their-prime leftover tanks as tractors in the grain fields of Western USSR, pulling plows. I'll bet that would be one uncomfortable ride. They wouldn't have to worry much, though, if some yellow jacket nests get stirred up.

Gene Dotson · Jan 28, 2012

I remember as a child right after the war of a couple farmers in the muckland near Indian lake bought tanks or maybe powered gun tank destroyers to work the Sciota marsh lands. They worked good for flotation, but were very expensive to operate. I remember them using them for only a couple years.

Gene

fixerupper · Jan 28, 2012

They suck gas like there's no tomorrow and most of them had a torque converter so there's two strikes against them right off the bat. And the track pulls from drive sprockets in the front instead of the rear so basically the entire track is pulled tight when it's under a load.

The biggest downfall is there are no steering clutches. To steer you pull the brake for whatever direction you want to go. If the machine wants to drift to one side you can't just disconnect the other side to keep it straight, you have to drag a brake instead. The brakes are run in the 50WT transmission oil to cool them and there's a tranny cooler to help out, but it's still a very ineffecient way to steer a machine. A neighbor tried using a M5 tracked tractor similar to the M4 I restored but the adventure didn't last long. The gas truck couldn't get to his farm fast enough and the engine gave up because it wasn't built for a constant heavy load. But it was an impressive sight watching him! Jim

Spook · Jan 28, 2012

I remember a tank being used by a guy doing some construction work, this would have been about 1960. He only did one job with it, as my dad tells it.

The Dukester · Jan 28, 2012

Most tanks are so heavy I bet that their pulling power would be reduced a whole bunch going up hill. If you figured a way to pull a tillage tool like a big chisel plow I just imagine it would amaze you how poorly it would pull it going up much of a hill. Even the old TD-14 bulldozer I ran a little bit "way back when" doing simple jobs would pull down in the higher speed gears going up steep hills pushing nothing but itself, and high gear couldn't have been over 5-6 miles an hour. I noticed it when burying fence row stones and just "leveling up" after the stones were buried. IIRC the old girl had 6 speeds forward, with a regular "H" pattern on the main lever and a high-low auxillary lever. Even if you just backed up a steep grade, you had to use low reverse. I remember killing it a couple of times forgetting to use low range backing up a steep grade.

john *.?-!.* cub owner · Jan 28, 2012

In WW2 Dad was a crewman on a 105 Howitzer mounted on a tank chassis. He said they got gallons per mile, not miles per gallon.

oleclint · Jan 28, 2012

I remember seeing an article in a farm paper or newspaper telling about someome who got a surplus tank or something like it . It was plowing in the Rock River bottoms, East of Moline,Ill. From what I understand it did not work out. This was in the 1950 s.? clint

Brian G. NY · Jan 28, 2012

I remember, while out on a Sunday drive with my F.I.L. back in the mid 60s, seeing a tank alongside the road that was being used for skidding logs. The gun barrel had been cut off with a torch.
There was nobody around but we looked it over and discovered it was powered by twin Cadillac flathead V-8s.
This was in Northwestern Connecticut.
Sure would have liked to see that thing working!

oldtanker · Jan 28, 2012

Tanks are designed for battle field mobility not pulling. The WWII tanks were gear drive while more modren ones are autos. The old tanks got about 1 MPG. The M1A1 uses more than that. About 3/4 MPG.

Jeep did offer an AG version right after the war. When Japan surrendered the government cancled all outstanding contracts. Jeep had to do something.

Rick

ericlb · Jan 28, 2012

i remember reading about somebody trying to use a m4 sherman tank for a plowing unit after wwll, [ demilled, it was sold cheap as surplus] the idea was a terrible one, huge fuel comsumtion, wrong gearing for tractor work, and poor visibility, not a good idea

gbs · Jan 28, 2012

never seen then used as a tractor ,but i've used ones that were modified with truck engines,ford gas and diesel,chevy gas,2 stroke GM diesels, IHC gas and diesel etc. mostly M4's that had power-line const. equip.mounted on them tough as a lightered knot, if i can find some old photo's i will try to post them

Harold H · Jan 28, 2012

The City of Greenville had two draglines mounted on White half tracks. This was before backhoes were common. MP&L had a couple of International M-5 high speed track tractors for power line work.

Harold H

fixerupper · Jan 28, 2012

There were several different tanks used in WW2. If you do some Googling you can come up with some interesting info. One of them had five Chrysler flathead six engines. They were configured so they all used the same sump for oil, kind of like a dry sump system. I'd really like to see one just to see how the drive system worked. It was called the most dependable tank because if one engine conked out there were still four more running. There was one that was restored in the Minneapolis area but I think it was sold and went over seas.

An old WW2 vet from my local town drove the one with the twin engines, and it might have been the Caddys. He said it was tricky to drive because each engine powered one track and you had to constantly balance them, in his words. I get the idea it was steered with individual throttles and brakes. Anybody know anything more about them? Jim

Paul from MI · Jan 28, 2012

Anb English company tried to make a crawler tractor using tracks from a Bren gun carrier. Didn't work out, tracks were not heavy enough for tractor work. I have an M38a1 military jeep I restored a few years ago. I used it on a hay rake once just for fun. Notice I said ONCE, it doesn't turn short enough and the axles aren't heavy enough for extended heavy field work. Pulling wagons, etc. is OK, but that's about it.

buickanddeere · Jan 28, 2012

There was a version of the Sherman that used a pair of 6-71 Detroit two strokes.
A diesel powered Sherman would be somewhat less likely to burn than a gasoline powered Sherman.

CenTex Farmall · Jan 28, 2012

Years ago I saw a post war gov't video advertising surplus tanks. Showed the guy driving a Sherman variant through an old house. Great for demolition! It either didn't have the gun or the turret. The video had a narrator talking up how useful it was. I don't remember where I saw it either, possibly History channel or some other documentary type program.

buickanddeere · Jan 28, 2012

And the powers that be still stick with the old
fuel hog Allison gas turbine. It's so fuel hungry
Allison was embarrassed and did a much more fuel
efficient re-design. The military still refuses to
use either the improved Allison turbine. Or a turbo
diesel as the rest of the world uses.
The M1A1 series requires a much larger and more
vulnerable fuel supply support system. Than other
Nato tanks.

John A. · Jan 28, 2012

Guys,I haven't seen, or heard of any tanks being used to farm with! BUT in the High Plains of Texas and Oklahoma Halftracks were used to a small degree after the war. Mainly used to pull oneways in dryland operations.
Sherman Co. Grain Elevator @ Texhoma Tx still had and old Halftrack that they used to move Rail Road grain cars there all through the 80s, it was still there in 1990 the last time I saw it.
Later,
John A.

lloyd in sc · Jan 29, 2012

In the early 60's the armored personnel carriers used twin caddy in line 6 cy engines. Each one ran 1 track & it was a bear to get the tracks going at the same speed.
Most of the time a light brake was applied on the faster one.

Roy in UK · Jan 29, 2012

A WW2 Sherman Tank converted after the war for agricultural use in England. I have actually seen this thing plowing. Talk about "full of sound and fury signifying nothing". Too noisy, too fast. Certainly not a commercial success.

Roy in UK · Jan 29, 2012

* and too thirsty!

Joe Shmoe · Jan 29, 2012

The Empire tractor company had the Willys jeep as the platform for their tractor.
I would think that the Sherman tank would suck down a serious amount of gasoline. But it would pull a huge multi-bottom plow like nuthin.

fixerupper · Jan 29, 2012

Those draglines were most likely made by Bantam from Waverly Iowa. They put draglines on Deuces and Half tracks. I know of one on a half track in Nebraska but he won't sell. Jim

KIP in MX · Jan 29, 2012

Sorry, but the engine is a Lycoming. Transmission is made by Allison

KIP in MX · Jan 29, 2012

Sorry, but the engine is a Lycoming. Transmission is made by Allison

Russ from MN · Jan 29, 2012

There used to be one of those power plants in the car museum in Rogers, MN.

Mel in SW Iowa · Jan 29, 2012

The M88 tank recovery vehicle would pull a lot, either on the tow bar or on the 90T main winch. You might have to sell a farm to drive it to town. They do have a Cadillac ride though.

buickanddeere · Jan 29, 2012

You are correct it is the Honeywell Lycoming.

The new LV100-5 engine is lighter and smaller (43% fewer parts) with rapid acceleration, quieter running and no visible exhaust. It also features a 33% reduction in fuel consumption (50% less when idle) and near drop-in replacement.] The Abrams-Crusader Common Engine Program was shelved when the Crusader program was canceled, however Phase 2 of Army's PROSE (Partnership for Reduced O&S Costs, Engine) program calls for further development of the LV100-5 and replacement of the current AGT-1500 engine.

oldtanker · Jan 29, 2012

The powers that be want to stick with that engine because it's in the supply line....thats the Lycoming AGT 1500 (Army Gas Turbine 1500 shaft HP). That means parts and complete replacement engines plus the engine currently installed in running tanks. It cost a heck of a lot because when they start to replace tan engine because they also have to replace everything in the supply line at the same time. (that way if the ballon goes up during retrofit both engines are supported)

An interesting side note. The Army did look at a rotary diesel engine but it wasn't finished developement when they were ready to start production of the tank. Not positive but I was told JD was the company working on it.

The M1 when first adopted held 525 gallons of fuel and had a range of 300 miles (works out to .57 MPG). The M60A3s they replaced held 300 gallons and could go 310 miles. When in the field we normally refueled every day but with the 60's we sometime went every other day. We didn't dare do that with the M1s. They figured that just driving the M1 down the road cost about 48 dollars a mile in fuel and wear and tear in 95. Track life was supposed to be about 2500 miles but I never saw tracks last much past 2k. Cost of a set of tracks in 95 was 28,000 dollars.

Rick

Tanks As Tractors

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

New User

Well-known Member

Member

Member

Well-known Member

Member

Well-known Member

Well-known Member

Similar threads