Grant vs Lee | Which was the better M3?

The Americans created the M3 Lee. The British demanded that their versions of the M3 were different and thus the M3 Grant was created. But what was the need for these changes? Why couldn't Britain use the M3 as designed? In this video I delve into the differences between these two iconic vehicles and try and answer these questions as well as a very important one - which was better?

MORE INFO:

Any feedback is greatly appreciated, I'm always trying to improve.

If you enjoyed the video please leave a like - and if you want to see more like it, I'd encourage you to subscribe!

Credit to these excellent articles:

All content is presented in historical context for educational purposes. All footage is owned by it's copyright holder and is used in this channel under "fair use".

Music:

[bigblue]

The British approach to the M3 was to give the radio to the tank commander. The US approach to the M3 is give the driver two static mounted machineguns.

[dexexmachinatu]

I like how you mention the commander machinegun was replaced with a smoke launcher on the Grant and then show an image of the Grant with an added machinegun along with it.

[PitFriend]

One of the changes Australian Grants had (not sure about the British ones) is that they put a large drinking water tank in the place where the radio operator would sit in a Lee. That had to have been nice to have in the western desert and in the Pacific jungle fighting.

An advantage the Lee/Grant had in the jungles was that the 37mm gun could be elevated to 60 degrees. This made it good for clearing the treetops of snipers when using its canister shell.

[garyd.schnurr]

Another reason that the British liked the General Grant/Lee was that it was mechanically reliable. With the loss of almost all their tanks in the retreat from France, new tanks were ordered "off the drawing board" and consequentially had major reliability problems. The Six Pounder AT gun had been designed but not yet put into production. It was a 57mm gun and superior to the 50mm gun on the later Panzer III's. So production of the Two Pounder (a 40mm gun) was continued so that troops had something to fight with.

[billballbuster]

The M3 Grant for the first time in WW2 gave the British the the ability to destroy Axis anti-tank guns at long range with the highly accurate 75mm gun. In previous British tanks, the 2 Pounder and 6 Pounder guns did not have an HE Shell, and to destroy an anti-tank gun they had to hit it directly. The 75mm shell could destroy the gun and kill the crew in its blast radious of up to 35 meters. This was important because anti-tank guns destroyed more British tanks, than did German tanks in a 4-1 ratio.

[IvanAlvarezCPACMA]

One was better at attacking north and the other south, hence, why you needed both.

[ironwolfF]

In the CBI Theater, the Grant became the analog to the StuG. With no significant armored opponents, they could trundle up to Japanese hard points and go BANG. For the bonus round, the 37mm had a canister round available.

[christosvoskresye]

In an early episode of Hogans Heroes, one of these (I'd have to go back and check if it was a Lee or a Grant) was passed off as a "Tiger tank". That still bothers me more than it should.

[neilmanhard]

Good video. The only subjects I would've included was that the Grant/Lee 75mm gun gave the British an effective anti-personnel weapon. They could engage German AT guns at a respectable range. British designed tanks rarely carried HE rounds and the 6 pdr HE round had a lot to be desired. And, the 75mm gun's limited traverse wasn't really a disadvantage considering the Germans deployed turretless AFVs throughout the war with considerable success.

[QALibrary]

The Australia armour and artillery museum are currently taking apart a Grant/Lee and doing a full restoration on it - they tend to post on youtube what they have been up to

[SamwiseOutdoors]

I like the M3. It was such a fascinating attempt to fuse together the dominant doctrines of Infantry Tanks and Cruiser Tanks and the emerging engineering that would become the M4, all in one. One foot in the future, and the other foot trying to hold down as many present roles as possible. An oddity that could have only existed in a specific set of circumstances for a short window.

[OneLastEcho]

"Maybe those brits with their irritating modification requests, might have known their stuff after all"
Suddenly remembering how many times the British kept trying to add extra turrets on their tanks

Pastaboo extra fun fact of the day: there is a slight myth that the M3 (and Sherman) were immune to the M13/40 and M14/41. They could actually pen frontally, albeit only at close range. Which didn't happen often considering the environment. Otherwise, Italian tank crews main tactic in fighting them was what they did against Matilda's: aim at the treads and then call the truck mounted artillery (or Semovente's) that would follow close behind.

[HootOwl]

While the British-style split hatch was definitely used on some US Army Shermans, the American tanks had a ''Manhole Cover'' style hatch that pivoted on a single point and the whole disc of the hatch swung over. To close, the hatch was swung back over the opening and battened down. It was embedded with periscopes that gave the TC a 360* view when buttoned up.
Early M3s also had a pair of .30 Cal Browning MGs in a fixed forward-firing aspect to be controlled by the Driver. As they could not elevate or traverse, they were deleted.

[omlmm]

Interesting to see the 19 set. I am actually old and wrinkly enough to have operated one of these back in the early 60s, but as an infanteer (would not get me into one of those big targets, much safer outside. I suspect the tankies said exactly the opposite).

[chemicalman]

The humor of choosing the name Grant vs Lee demonstrates that even during the horror of WW2 British Wit was no less sharp.

[phil_]

I'm guessing since the British were in combat already, they had some good reasons for modifying it. There's nothing more annoying than trying to command when somebody else has control of the comms. When you look at most american combat scenarios, the guy with the radio is almost always with the commander. Communications have to be fast.

[johnfisk]

Coffins for seven brothers, as the Soviets called them. In British service in Europe they ended up as recovery vehicles or gunless as command vehicles in Italy. Both benefitting from the extra internal space compared to the M4. Plus they were the mounts for the top secret Canal Defence Lights. To illuminate the night battlefield and blind the enemy’s vision. So secret that the regiments were never used until the crossing of the Rhine in 1945.

[HMSHyde]

Had this same question for as long as I’ve known the Grant and the M3 lee were separate vehicles. But I never understood WHY?
Many thanks for the making of this video friend 👍🏻

[philo]

Great job producing this, enjoyed watching, thanks very much! 👍

[johnharrison]

Frankly, I love the Grants/Lees. To me, they're like unsung heroes.