Hall-Scott did build engines for the M25 Tank Transporter, though I can't be sure if they were Invaders.
Sir John Valentine Carden Survives. Part 2.
- Thread starter allanpcameron
- Start date
No I was talking about the amount of radiator space needed to cool the engine, you had more cooling available to marine engine as opposed to a land engine. An example of this is having a heat exchanger to cool the engine water/coolant and having the continuous flow of cool or actually cold water that is more efficient than air cooling a radiator.
Some engines also did not have water pumps integrated into the engine and were driven separately to make it easier to run the piping for the engine.
Its a nothing problem, engines the size a tank would use were routinely converted, normally it was a common core made in at least two of air, land and marine variants anyway, as in the case of the Lion.
No issue with it, other than the fact Britain did not really consider American material assistance until 1940 or so. The GM 6-71 in Valentine was a 1939 proposal at the earliest. Otherwise I noted in Alt AFV Part 4 that it was probably a very good engine for military adaptation at the time.
I can confirm it's an Invader, at least the bored-out version of it.
Yep, thanks guys. And Bougnas is right it was an Invader / Defender - to the excellent points of the others - it was called the 440 vs 400 version - bored out AND given a bigger radiator for cooling 
. I hadn't heard of them ( I live in Northern California close to where they were based and there is an exhibit close by I might check out). It really was a superb engine by all accounts and known for it's extreme reliability, ease of service - lots of redundancies in it but also a much more modern design than the Liberty.
Seems that when the war needed more engines - Hall and Scott had been sold off to Packard but still run as a brand - their engine still in steady production but Hudson were given the tooling and licence to crank out more for Low volume ( compared to say M3/ M4 engines) / High power requirements - eg Tank Transporter (lots of Torque!) and rescue launches.
They were also , and unusually for US Engines in the 30s, super charged regularly by the manufacturer and H&S were good at that too apparently. It was the Brits who - unusually pre war - came to US and asked Hall to put two togetehr to make a V-12. In 1937. Sold to the UK. For Motor launches. So that's a V-12 , 36L , approx 600 HP engine that was tooled, in prodction, being sold to the UK - basically a much better albeit Petrol equivalent of the Soviet, nevermind the neverquite right Maybach HL240 for Tiger/Panther. Years earlier. being sold to the UK military. Shit the Germans should have bought them instead of Maybach.
Oh the more you learn about the what ifs of UK 1930s Military procurement and design the more "Slap head" moments. This Hall & Scott engine "Makes my dreams come true".
Other features of this 1931/1937 engine - Came standard in interchangeable parts for left and right hand versions ( in case of need for balanced propellors or retro fitting), Land and marine versions ( also powered some rail cars on narrow gauges), featured 100% power in reverse which is a very handy feature when dealing with Tracked vehicles. So you'd have the Straighth 6 "Invader" Version powering Matildas or Valentine/ Victor Vickers things in the 250/300 Hp range in 39/40 and then with the same set of tools, spares, training the V-12 Defender version good all the way through to Comets etc. And if you want to licence production all the drawings are actually to a decent automotive standard and in Imperial dimensions. It's certainly not quite as efficient power to weight as a Kestrel/,W-12 Lion or Merlin/Meteor , teh weight seems very high for it's size, that might be the Salt water proof masive cast iron base it's mounted on, but it's a land based engine, turns the right way and is available. Or you could slap two bus engines together and hope to drive marginally faster than an Italian can run away.....
Some great info here.
. I hadn't heard of them ( I live in Northern California close to where they were based and there is an exhibit close by I might check out). It really was a superb engine by all accounts and known for it's extreme reliability, ease of service - lots of redundancies in it but also a much more modern design than the Liberty.Seems that when the war needed more engines - Hall and Scott had been sold off to Packard but still run as a brand - their engine still in steady production but Hudson were given the tooling and licence to crank out more for Low volume ( compared to say M3/ M4 engines) / High power requirements - eg Tank Transporter (lots of Torque!) and rescue launches.
They were also , and unusually for US Engines in the 30s, super charged regularly by the manufacturer and H&S were good at that too apparently. It was the Brits who - unusually pre war - came to US and asked Hall to put two togetehr to make a V-12. In 1937. Sold to the UK. For Motor launches. So that's a V-12 , 36L , approx 600 HP engine that was tooled, in prodction, being sold to the UK - basically a much better albeit Petrol equivalent of the Soviet, nevermind the neverquite right Maybach HL240 for Tiger/Panther. Years earlier. being sold to the UK military. Shit the Germans should have bought them instead of Maybach.
Oh the more you learn about the what ifs of UK 1930s Military procurement and design the more "Slap head" moments. This Hall & Scott engine "Makes my dreams come true".
Other features of this 1931/1937 engine - Came standard in interchangeable parts for left and right hand versions ( in case of need for balanced propellors or retro fitting), Land and marine versions ( also powered some rail cars on narrow gauges), featured 100% power in reverse which is a very handy feature when dealing with Tracked vehicles. So you'd have the Straighth 6 "Invader" Version powering Matildas or Valentine/ Victor Vickers things in the 250/300 Hp range in 39/40 and then with the same set of tools, spares, training the V-12 Defender version good all the way through to Comets etc. And if you want to licence production all the drawings are actually to a decent automotive standard and in Imperial dimensions. It's certainly not quite as efficient power to weight as a Kestrel/,W-12 Lion or Merlin/Meteor , teh weight seems very high for it's size, that might be the Salt water proof masive cast iron base it's mounted on, but it's a land based engine, turns the right way and is available. Or you could slap two bus engines together and hope to drive marginally faster than an Italian can run away.....
Some great info here.
Hall-Scott Defender Engines
Description of the Hall-Scott defender engine and its development. The history of the company, including it's life after WW II & Korea.
www.uscrashboats.org
Last edited:
The Invader also was available in a laying-on-its-side version, for installation under the rear-seats floor of 1930s buses. That version in a blank-sheet-of-paper tank design would require more hull width, but would be much less tall. Sometimes maximum hull width was limited due to rail/sea transport and bridge widths; but certainly hull height, and therefore glacis height, was a key determinant of tank combat survivability.