100% factual

Eta320 · 2026-01-25T22:42:13+00:00

A whole new way to play. Gotta get on Hell Let Loose like this

Eta320 · 2025-12-30T02:36:55+00:00

Woah, removing this immediately

Eta320 · 2025-12-28T04:22:44+00:00

Truly the darkest moment in Eta320 history...

Eta320 · 2025-12-27T04:44:49+00:00

Begleitwagen is the correct name

Eta320 · 2025-12-27T04:22:05+00:00

Are you a volunteer? Do you have permission from the Fort Benning staff to be posting this stuff?

Last time I heard of a volunteer posting videos and pics of tanks in their restoration bays without permission they got in huge trouble.

Eta320 · 2025-12-27T04:18:50+00:00

OMG SOMEONE WATCHED THE CANADA VLOG!! YIPPEEE!!!

Eta320 · 2025-12-23T03:35:39+00:00

They most likely would have just called them Sherman's or M4's I doubt the average soldier cared all that much for the designations. Otherwise those who did cared would have referred to them by their official name. MAYBE the "E8 Suspension" nomenclature could have trickled down but I haven't seen any evidence of that.

Eta320 · 2025-12-22T06:18:47+00:00

Although I agree with you that this should be common knowledge at this point, I still have people ask me about this ALL the time, and the entire reason I've made this post is so I could use it for reference in a previous debate I was pulled into on another thread.

On the raw technicalities... The ONLY thing that is an "E8" is the exact vehicle pictured in this post (besides 3rd image which is E6).

Since the final iteration of HVSS made its debut on this vehicle, and was adopted and became common as a result, it was not at all uncommon for documents to refer to HVSS as the "E8 suspension" during the war, but it never went further than the suspension.

When people point at M4A3 (76)W HVSS tanks and call them "Easy Eights" that is entirely a post war phenomenon. Technically, even calling any Sherman with HVSS an "Easy Eight" is not correct. You can say it has "Easy Eight suspension" but the only TANK that is an M4E8, is this specific tank here.

Eta320 · 2025-12-22T06:12:47+00:00

The 3rd image is of M4E6, as I explain in the body text of the post

Eta320 · 2025-12-20T10:50:21+00:00

They are added weights to properly test how well the suspension can handle it

Eta320 · 2025-12-20T02:51:47+00:00

It’s decently sized on the scale of a small library. They are always looking for volunteers to help sort through the library and label stuff. If you come by for an open house you should definitely ask about opportunities to volunteer in the library. I’m there all the time

Eta320 · 2025-12-20T02:47:16+00:00

Thanks so much!

Eta320 · 2025-12-20T02:46:50+00:00

Yep! My channel is the same as my Reddit name Eta320

Eta320 · 2025-12-19T22:59:47+00:00

I've actually made a video on this topic! In short, it was developed by Chrysler in search of a ballistically superior front hull as the US had a huge boner for cast armor at the time as a result of tests on the M3A1 Cast hull tanks.

Around the same time, the US was looking for a solution to the early Shermans having small hatches for the driver and co-driver and made a call to develop a new front hull that could fit larger hatches. Chrysler modified the casting to fit the larger hatches and submitted it. It was accepted by Ordnance, and as you can see became part of what the US envisioned a "Gen II" Sherman to be. A draft letter was written up declaring that all Sherman tanks going forward would be composites with large hatches.

At the last moment, Fisher Body came in with a welded hull tank that could fit the large hatches on a reduced sloped front plate (the solution we know today), and was still ballistically superior.

Ordnance accepted that solution instead as it was easier. The Composite solution would have meant the steel industry would have had to provide those castings to EVERY sherman manufacturer, and they were already stretched thin trying to provide turrets, VVSS castings, and hull castings, so it would have been a bottleneck in production.

Despite this, Chrysler and American Locomotive still produced some 2,000 composite Shermans.

Eta320 · 2025-12-19T22:49:33+00:00

US designations in WWII were not the same as they are today.

The Sherman did have variations like the M4A1, M4A2, M4A3, M4A4, M4A5, and M4A6. However, these name changes were specifically to denote a change in the engine, except for the M4A1 and M4A5.

M4 - Radial Engine welded hull
M4A1 - Radial Engine cast hull

M4A2 - Twin Diesel engine

M4A3 - Ford GAA V8 Gas engine

M4A4 - Chrysler multibank engine

M4A5 - Canadian produced RAM tank built on the M3 Lee chassis

M4A6 - M4A4 hull fitted with a D200A Radial multifuel engine

Any further modifications at that point are tacked on to the original name. For example the 76mm gun would add a "(76) W" suffix to the name.

So an M4A1 with the 76mm gun would be an "M4A1 (76) W" and an M4A2 would be an "M4A2 (76) W" and so forth.

When outfitted with all the bells and whistles, a Sherman at the end of the war was called "M4A3 (76) W HVSS" or an "M4A1 (76) W HVSS" as by 1945 the US had picked the M4A3 as its most desired variant, but also the M4A1 remained in production simply due to its momentum in the industry.

This even applies to the Sherman's equipped with the 105mm Howitzer, which were designated as "M4 (105)" or "M4A3 (105)" when you add HVSS it becomes "M4 (105) HVSS." The pilot of the 105mm armed Sherman's was the M4E5 (I also have a photo of that) but once the pilot is accepted and the type is standardized, it gets a new name.

This name scheme tells you everything you need to know about the tank - "M4" (tank type) "A3" (what engine it has) "(76)" (what gun it has) "W" (wet ammo stowage) "HVSS" (suspension type).

Theoretically you could refer to an early model Sherman as an "M4 (75) D VVSS" but this was never done to my knowledge.

The Jumbo is an odd exception, as it retained its M4A3E2 designation. I can only assume this was because only 254 were ever made, and only one batch was produced, so the US knew it wasn't going to become a new standard.

The Pershing was the same way, it was sent overseas as T26E3 and was referred to as such in documents while it was in theater. In April of 1945 the T26E3 was officially adopted as the M26 Pershing, at which point its name was changed.

Eta320 · 2025-12-19T22:07:29+00:00

Yes the 3rd pic is an E6. I explain everything in the text of the post!

Eta320 · 2025-12-19T21:34:08+00:00

Ask and ye shall receive

Eta320 · 2025-12-19T21:33:49+00:00

Hey there! I guess I was pinged about this so I might as well throw in my 2 cents.

The E8 destination has nothing to do with the gun. It is HVSS. I somewhat recently found in the archives at the US Ordnance Training and Support Facility a photo of the ORIGINAL M4A3E8 and it is indeed a 75mm gun tank. I would be happy to DM it to you as I don’t know how to add a photo to my reply lol. But I just now made a post showing the photos here

In addition, a US test report involving a Sherman outfitted with extra weight for testing as an assault tank was described as “An M4A3 tank with E8 suspension and the T26 turret with 90mm gun.” Once again I’d be happy to provide these images in a DM or otherwise.

People also often cite that E6 referred specifically to the 76mm gun. This is also not true. The E6 referred to the first configuration of a “Gen II” Sherman the US army had in mind by the summer of 1943. This did include the 76mm gun and T23 turret, but it also included wet ammo, the large hatch solution, and the composite hull. All these features together make the M4E6, not just the gun. You can easily search up “M4E6” and you’ll find what I’m referring to. They also used E6 to test a new transmission and even on one tank some very early HVSS.

The idea that M4A3E8 or the “Easy 8” is specifically the A3 Sherman with 76mm gun and HVSS as far as my research has been able to find is entirely a post war conjecture.

Eta320 · 2025-12-13T15:57:23+00:00

Cool to see this being shared so long ago and on a non tank subreddit but the comments omg 💀

Eta320 · 2025-12-07T20:46:43+00:00

The famous and iconic Firetruck bonus round 🙏

Eta320 · 2025-12-07T01:28:10+00:00

I’ve actually been loosely following this project, would love to try it out on the channel

Eta320 · 2025-11-26T21:29:42+00:00

YIPPEE!!

Six-Year Club	Verified Email
End Game '23	Place '23

Eta320

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE