I know the Mark IX Valentine tank had a 6 Pounder fitted on it, however I was wondering if the longer barrel 6 Pounder Mark V was fitted on it or did they only fit the shorter barrel 6 Pounder Mark III? I am Building the Bronco kit and was shopping for a turned metal barrel, and came upon both choices.The kit seems to come with a Mark III 6 pounder but I like the look of the Mark V 6 pounder.

Choose what you like, it's modelling.

This M-L Review says it had the longer Mk IV or V tube, for what it's worth. Haven't found confirmation elsewhere yet...

Im not sure myself if that is right. I found a picture of a Valentine at Bovington, looks like a longer barrel mark V..Im pretty sure it is a 6 pounder. I found out that when the 6 pounder was installed, there was no room for the co-ax machine gun. And its missing in the photo. Anyway, the barrel sure looks longer than the one in the Bronco kit.

The Mk IXs all had the longer 6 pdr. Mk V. Not the shorter 6 pdr Mk III.

Mk VIIIs also had the 6 pdr Mk V.

Paul

Thank you for the info..I think Bronco may have made a mistake and put a Mark III in the kit.

The Mk III barrel is both noticably shorter and stubbier. The barrel wall thickness is greater and there is not step in the thickness near the breech as there is in the Mk III.

If there is a step in the diameter then it is _meant_ to be a Mk V even if it's too short. If there is no step, then it is meant to be a Mk III, which is incorrect.

Howzat?? :-)

Paul

Firstly, my review linked above indicates two types of 6 pdr gun fitted but had a typo mentioning the Mk IV tube as well as the Mk V. It was supposed to refer to the Mk III Short barrel and Mk V Long Barrel. This was written in a hurry for a deadline and not picked up. I mention that the kit has a Mk V tube which in hindsight is incorrect and I will seek to get that amended. Sorry for the confusion.

Photos of Mk IX in service would tend to question that statement particularly those in Dick Taylor's excellent Armor Photo History title on the Valentine (Vol 2) and his historical descriptions therein. Both the Mk III and V were fitted. Bronco's excellent Mk IX kit matches photos of the subject well with the Mk III barrel with and without the threaded end cap (both supplied). The title also indicates that both 6 pdr types were also fitted to the Mk X

If you look closely at the first two pics on Page 11 you can clearly see the difference between the two marks of Gun and that the Mk III does have a small step near the breech and a stubbier thicker barrel. Pics of early Crusaders armed with the Mk III also show this as do the Mk II AT gun tubes. It is not as pronounced as the later Mk V tube but is still there. Bronco have captured it well.
Cheers
Al

Hmmm, again my mind speaketh without authorisation from the brain...

I coulda swore there were no Mk III tubes fitted to the Mk IX Valentines. but I will bow to Dick's book as that is where I would go to double check!

I abase myself for such a display of hasty ignorance! :-)

Thanks Al.

Really, it's good to know.

Paul