Just curiosity, you understand.
*except Neil
** absolutely except Neil
http://www.tiger-tank.com/secure/history2.htm
The diagram shows a torsion bar internal in the bogie assembly running
the length of the bogie. The front axle was solidly mounted to the
bogie. The aft axle was attached to the torsion bar by a linkage that
is not well documented in the diagram. So the action is the bogie
pivots on the hull and the springing action is provided by the aft
axle which moves in relation to the bogie arm. I can see why this
design was not widely used. It's very highly stressed and doesn't
provide much suspension travel. It does have the benefit of taking up
no internal hull volume.
The closest design to this built by our members would be the pivoting
unsprung bogie system used by Marc on his big Leopard.
http://members.upc.nl/m.methorst9/7.JPG
http://members.upc.nl/m.methorst9/8.JPG
http://members.upc.nl/m.methorst9/9.JPG
Steve Tyng
It's not very clear, Steve, but thanks for the link. The best I'd come
up with was a plastic model . . .
http://www.bpmodels.net/Model/TigerP/Step2.jpg
You don't fancy a little trip to Aberdeen to have a look for me, do
you? :-)
Steve
On Mar 9, 11:10 pm, Steve Tyng <steve...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The model pic brings it into sharp focus for me. Are you planning on
> replicating this design in scale?
>
> Steve
Good grief, no! I just have a suspension fetish and I like to know how
things work. As you said, the system used on the Elefant / Tiger (p) /
VK3001 (p) seems to have no great advantages and some serious
disadvantages. Makes me wonder why ol' Ferdinand didn't use Horstman
suspension or leaf springs like the 38(t). Looks like they'd have
greater travel and leafs and coils are much easier to make than
torsion bars.
Pete.