[sar4800]

Picked up this US ammo can that I cannot identify. It has original white paint. Ord bomb on each end. Marked "Ammunition Chest Cal. .30". A .30 cal cartridge embossed on lid. Two rotating latch handles on each end. The #D35299 stamped on ends. Anyone know its origins?

 

[bmbrzmn101]

Those are used in old tanks if I recall. Check over at BMGParts, he has some listed there. Chris

 

[Colorado1919]

Yes it is a tank can.

 

[KABAR2]

This one of those items I have had my suspicions about for years.....
why in time of war produce two styles of cans that do the same thing?
And you would have to have both styles on each and every thank!
you would need these inside and the style with the latch on them for the 17 mount on top of the turret.

I am thinking these may be prewar as quantities are less,
I have owned three of them over the years and all of them were in primer
not painted white,
the latch system when compared to the standard ammo can is awkward to say the least!
The large rings would lend them selves to a carry strap which would suggest the original intent
was for infantry use,
I really think this is one of those items that was produced in limited numbers either in the 1930's
or at the beginning of the war and sat in a warehouse some where after being rejected in favor of the standard can,
I have yet to see one that shows any sign of use.
I have a feeling some enterprising surplus merchant started painting the cans white and selling them as ones used in tanks,
hence the rarity, and may also be why I have had three mint new ones all of them in primer in the past 10 years.

What does Dolf's books have to say on this?

 

[CaliBoundAR15]

Yep, used in tanks where you couldn't have a "flip-up" type lid.

 

[Nosegunner]

A quick scan of Dolf's Volume III suggests that these were transitional between the wooden ammo boxes and the all steel M1.

I also looked through Weapon Mounts for Secondary Armament and doing another quick scan found these two images, both showing the M1.

I can't say as I have ever seen a WW2 period photo showing the T4 (the tank can in question) in use in any capacity, though the development of the
T4 was at the urging of the Chief of Armored Forces (Source: Dolf Goldsmith). I would imagine it was difficult to impossible to use the wooden boxes in armored vehicles do to the permanently attached lid. It's my understanding that ammunition was not issued in the wooden boxes but added in the field, probably because the wooden boxes are not water resistant and therefore could not be used to store ammunition for an extended period of time.

 

[Craig Johnson]

Here is a photo of the ammo cans in front of some tanks. Hard to tell from this photo,but when you blow it up its evident that they are the same ammo can by the latch on the end.

Craig

 

[KABAR2]

Well the one on the left is a standard M1 series, the one's next to the 75MM rounds to the right..... first three are 50 cal. the rest are undetermined, one problem with war era photos that were for release to the public is the amount of retouching done by the censors
also the light is playing hell with the items in the photo, while the ammo belt on the left is cloth, the fifty cal stuff is in links, the thirty cal. stuff on the right may be a mix of link and belt. It is also a staged photo as the only tank taking on ammo is the one in the foreground and the fact that belts are laid out loose to sand and grit while perfectly good containers sit under them, that is either very sloppy or nicely staged to show what is in the cans.

So from this photo we can definetly say the latter can was used as seen on the right, the rest are undetermined. I think with what nose
gunner has presented it looks like my suspicions may be valid.

 

[sar4800]

Thanks to everyone for helping me to identify the ammunition chest I acquired. It sure is in great shape for its age. I believe that the white paint is original. The lid still has a fiberboard liner glued inside with the white paint underneath. Since I don't have a tank to use it in anyone with one interested in it?

Thanks Again,

Lothar

 

[opie]

The primer color KABAR2 refers to is actually a reddish brown paint. There was some discussion about this on one of the WW2 reenactor boards awhile back. My theory is that these cans were painted the brown color originally and then were either repainted white later or the color was changed to white at some point during prduction.

 

[Dave S]

while the ammo belt on the left is cloth, the fifty cal stuff is in links, the thirty cal. stuff on the right may be a mix of link and belt.

Are you sure that isn't just a brown or green belt? Not that I doubt your powers of observation, but I've seen both colors of belts for .50's. I just can't tell that those are links with the B&W pics and lighting being what it is.

 

[KABAR2]

It is possible, but I have some WWII linked 50 cal. where the links are light grey which could be the type in the photo, they would appear white in that lighting.

 

[Colorado1919]

I remember as a kid in the sixties being in an M60 and on the floor of the turret basket were these exact cans. There .30 & .50 cal. cans on that floor all painted white because the inside of the tank was white. The loader would stand on the cans when looking out his hatch. I tried to find a pic in my books but could not find any. Are there no Patton tankers out there?

 

[Craig Johnson]

The lines stop at the bottom and do not go around like M1 and M1A1 boxes.

The lines here only go around to form a upside down "u"

Grabbed this off EBAY for a quick reference. The lines clearly go around to make a complete square. The M1A1 is pretty much the same. If you look at the wartime photo above you can see the end of the box has a small square hump coming out of the side.

 

[Craig Johnson]

I just sold this one a week ago. I have seen both white and primer. I dont have an answer what there real use was for. I was only trying to show a photo of wartime use. The postcard is dated 1945. I would also say that the hooks on either end were more than likely for hooking the ammo carrier strap to the box.

Craig

 

[KABAR2]

Craig,

I stand corrected! it would appear having the original & better technology to blow up the image helps.......

In the blow up it isapparent there are actually three of these box's on the left side not
one, so they did see use, now the only question is did they see use
in combat, the photo was probably staged out west during training,

it is possible that these never left the U.S.?
Just as in WW I the lewis gun never left for war with our troops,
but was used in training,
it is possible that these since being produced were utilized for training but not actual combat?

This not a criticism but the dating of the photo could be earlier than
1945...... I have seen cases where photos taken several years before
and would have been considered stock photo's were printed later in the war.
what would help is if some one could dig up a surviving tanker with his memory sharp,
it is possible he could shed more light on this discussion.

Allen <><