Hi friends I have a question for you, in the below driagram, are these the right proportions comparing both tanks?
Thanks

If you are comparing HL tanks...no. The M-41 is more 1;15 scale and proportionally too wide. The line drawings seem to pretty much OK. The searchlight on the M-41, used a lot in Vietnam may make it appear larger.

The M-26, 46 and 47 were 11.6 wide, 22 long and 9 ft high (M-47 was 10.11in high)
The M-41; 10.6" wide, 19 ft long and 8.9 ft high.

The M-41 was tagged with "Little Sports car tank" by big brother M-47 crews because of its sleek lines and compact size.

Hi Bill I was asking about the drawing, so is it ok?

Figuring three feet diff in length and a few inches in hight..Measurements are there to check with a ruler, but eyeballing looks pretty good.

Yeah the M41(my favorite tank) was actually rather small and unpopular with american crews for its tight fit(but it was quick and they did like that)...here's a good pic to give you some proportions..

p.s. I wish somebody offered the searchlightaftermarket.....

Of all the guys I knew that served on 41s, I only heard one complaint, but he was about 240 lbs. Most tankers of moderate build..like me 5'6" 145 lbs (at the time) had no problem. Driver had a lot of room as did the loader due to very good stowage design. The gunner was a bit tight and the TC had minimal leg room, but otherwise the M-41 was a great design. High speed, exceptional maneuverability and very little maintenance outweighed any complaints.