"Who makes 15mm WW2 horse drawn limbers?" Topic

Who makes 15mm WW2 horse drawn limbers?

Battlefront does. I have some of their soviet ones.

As do Peter Pig in their WW1 range.

Battlefront used to make some beauties, which came with both Soviet and German drivers. They've dropped them in favor of a generic abomination that is simply a crime aginst gamers.

Quality Castings (19th c. Miniatures) do some, but they're a bit small next to Battlefront models.

PP horses also will appear a bit small.

Allen

We only offer a Japanese limber specifically for WW2, not sure if any of the others we do would fit your needs with a WW2 crew though: link

Geoff
quickreactionforce.co.uk

Minifgs do a WWI French horsedrawn limber in 15mm which is appropriate for the French in WWII since they really did re-use their WWI limbers. They'd probably also do (with a rider change) for other armies too.

GFI/Minifigs also has a German limber in late WWI helmets. (British and Russian, also).

Tom Dye
GFI

QRF also do a nice German horse cart with pneumatic tyres, which do sometimes make an appearance with my QRF 105mm howitzers….

There is a rather nice pic on Peter Pig's site of a conversion of an ACW limber for this as well, it is the one I like the look of and will be convertaing, as I have a load.

Pat

Errr, ummm…
Would I be drummed out of the "correct buttonhole lace brigade" for using Great War limbers?

Duck and cover…

John: Guess that would depend on who you keep company with? You are building your armies to please whom?

Besides, buttonhole lace makes for easier targeting! />)

Tom Dye
GFI

True North Minis makes a Polish artillery limber.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think limbers were designed to go with a specific gun or family of guns. You went to the cannon store, and bought your guns and the limbers to go with them. So, if your army is using a WWI vintage gun, a WWI vintage limber would be correct. At least, I'd take that as the default position, and let anybody who objects prove that it is wrong in your specific case. Military spending was really low in the interwar years, and I just can't see countries spending lots of money to replace their limbers with an upgraded, Mark II horse drawn limber.
Grelber

Well, that's a lovely thought, but the presumption that equipment wasn't modernized but by exception is not necessarily supported by historical fact.

In some cases, it bears some truth: the French army, for example, kept lots of "75s" in reserve stocks, unmodified from the Great War, along with their original limbers. But they also modernized their 75s with solid wheels and pneumatic tires, and did the same with the limbers. Indeed, I have uncorrupted Minifigs WWI 75s to go along with my 1940 French infantry. But I also have QC modernized 75s for my motorized troops.

Even the Soviets built new limbers, both for new weapons:

link

link

…and old.

Even the Germans modernized their cavalry machinegun carts, which you would think would be quite acceptable without:

picture

And even the Finns produced new limbers to go with the new artillery they bought from the Swedish military-industrial complex:

picture

Of course, imagining that nothing ever changed, and nothing need ever be accurate, makes for much more economical wargaming. John need not be troubled with looking for such ill-supplied items as limbers for 15mm Rooshians. he could jump on the Flavor-of-the-Month bandwagon and get some boxes of Perry plastics, paint them up in Russian drab, and just *call* them a Strelkovaya Rota or whatever. Paint up some Perry plastic cavalry with drab jackets and blue trousies, and voila! A Coassack sotnia! ACW guns and limbers are reasily available, and who's going to quibble about their being from the wrong century?

Besides me?

But then I'd prefer that 15mm manufacturers got off their duffs and made proper WWII limbers, field kitchens, supply wagons…

Allen

Is this a campaign Allen? I'll join in.

And they could make some proper crews for their open topped vehicles while they're at it.

Says he looking at 20 Universal Carriers without crews.

We were just discussing the requirement for more crews yesterday…

Perry aren't the flavour of the month.

The Flavour of the Month is Wargames Factory.

Pat

Alan,
John asked who made horse drawn WWII limbers. Then he asked about using WWI limbers for his artillery. I said that World War I guns that were used in World War II probably used pretty much the same horse drawn limbers in the Second World War as they had used in the First: there had been neither the resources nor the need to replace them between the wars. I don't see this as an argument that "nothing ever changed and nothing need be accurate." Using the original equipment is, I think, a valid default position: start there, do some research on your specific system, and change it if necessary.

You mentioned that France (and several other nations) updated their guns and limbers with solid wheels and pneumatic tires for motorized transport. Absolutely. I didn't go into this because John asked specifically about horse drawn limbers, not motorized equipment. Also, when countries brought out completely new systems between the wars, particularly in the 1930s, they designed them for motorized operation from the start. The drawings you referenced showing a Soviet 1938 model 120mm mortar are a good example, as are the drawings of the Spandau and its 1908 MG cart versus the MG34 and its 1936 model cart. And, yes, I am aware of photos showing guns and limbers with pneumatic tires being drawn by horses, and wouldn't be surprised to see a photo of equipment with spoked, wooden wheels being drawn by a motor vehicle.

So, going back to John's original question, I'd still suggest he look at WWI limbers. Since he has been building a Finnish army for FoW, and Battlefront makes a model of the 76K/02 Putilov gun for the Finns (presumably, the ‘02' refers to the year the gun was introduced), I'd suggest he try to find a Russian WWI limber. This would be far more accurate historically than your suggestion that he use ACW limbers. If John isn't in a rush, he can, as you also suggested, wait for somebody to make a model of the limber for the specific artillery piece he has in mind (after all, I'm just guessing that he is interested in the Putilov 76K/02).

It's unfortunate Battlefront discontinued their more historically correct limbers and replaced them with the generic two horse limber: the Russian limber you mention might have been a good choice to use with the Finnish Putilov guns.
Grelber

My Finns are on the painting table now. I don't really feel like wiating for an "authentic" one to come along.
So far my FoW artillery have felt no pressing need for limbers, but the last game convinced me to buy some Bishops.

I am quite willing to buy some "close enough" limbers, and replace them when the "right" one comes along. If the Finns were able to use this policy successfully, who am I to argue?

Would any of the various 'older period' lmbers we offer be of use if they had different wheels?

Geoff – which ones do you have? The most recent I could find on the website was in the Spanish American war range & that set has one piece riders & horses which would also need amending. To answer your question though, often pneumatic tyres would be the only visible difference between the old & new limbers; better suspension & drawgear to allow for motor towing being other changes that could be present.

John – why not simply use the Peter Pig (or Minifigs) WWI Russian limbers? They're quite likely to have been used in WWII by the Finns anyway & are as close as you're going to get.

I don't think the Finns used bishops, John.

Oh, wait: that's probably not a safe post here, as this appears to be an "immune to irony" thread.

Allen

P.S. I do not believe that Minfigs makes a WWI Russian limber.

This stinks of the "4" botton Frock coat or "6" botton Frock coat debate. Use "make do" limbers. It's a game. Just make em' look good and nobody should complain.

Well you may feel that the differences between this link and this picture (several more horses, probably at least 4 will be there, out of picture) is trivial, but I beg to differ.

The model bears little or no resemblance to its historical couterpart. As Allen says, "a crime against gamers".

About the same degree of "make do" would see me using Pz IIs as Tigers.