Pz I track?

[Nick Komiya]

I picked this up and I myself have identified it as a track link for a Pz I Ausf. C. It is 295mm wide, so I think it is the enlarged width track introduced from May 42 to replace the rubber padded 260mm version. Am I on the right "track", you think or is it from some other vehicle I have not considered? The version I think this is has the designation Kgs 62-290/90, but despite being profusely marked the numbers don't confirm this. Ideas?

[Nick Komiya]

more

[Nick Komiya]

more markings

[Nick Komiya]

I would be very happy if I could learn what all these numbers mean, if anyone can help.

[Bullitt]

tracklink

Hi

I'm sorry to dissapoint you but this tracklink does not belong to a Panzer II.
only the Ausf D had a central guidehorn all the other ausf had double rows of guidehorn since those Pz II's had single roadwheels. Even the Luchs Ausf L had double guidehorns per tracklink.

Now I hear you think from what vehicle is this Tracklink from then ?
its from a halftrack ...a Czech postwar OT 810

ciao
Bullitt

[Nick Komiya]

I never said Pz II. Pz I Auf. C. and F. both had single guide horns like this, but the F tracks, Kgs 61-500/130 had a width of 500mm, and the C had a spec of 290mm. Mine is 5mm oversized, but otherwise it has the right shape and spec.
I am open minded about other possibilities, including post war Czech, but your reasoning does not apply, so please show me something that ID's it positively as an OT 810. Photos perhaps?

[NickG]

I did not recognize it either...compare with this one I own.

Does the tag makes sense?(came with it so I left it on....)

[Dingo44]

Ot 810

I tend to agree, not a perfect picture but something to convince you.

http://www.google.se/imgres?q=ot+810...23&tx=92&ty=64

[steverobertsbbc]

The tread pattern does not match a Panzer I Ausf C. I think the evidence thus far presented confirms that it's a OT810 link.

[Nick Komiya]

Dingo, thanks for that link. Indeed, they look identical, whereas there are minor differences between what I have and what a Pz I Ausf C track should look like. Anyway what i see is compelling enough to convince me, case closed. Also, I recalled after posting that the last digits of the designation, Kgs 62-290/90 was supposed to be the pitch of the caterpillar track, which must be the pin to pin measure. Hole to hole distance is 90, but hole center to hole center is about 105, so the discrepancy is enough to prove my guess wrong. For what it's worth, here's what the Pz I Ausf C. track is supposed to look like.

[Bullitt]

Tracklink OT 810

Hi

I never said Pz II. Pz I Auf. C. and F. both had single guide horns like this, but the F tracks, Kgs 61-500/130 had a width of 500mm, and the C had a spec of 290mm. Mine is 5mm oversized, but otherwise it has the right shape and spec.
I am open minded about other possibilities, including post war Czech, but your reasoning does not apply, so please show me something that ID's it positively as an OT 810. Photos perhaps?

sorry for the confusion Pz I / Pz II but we finally agreed on the real identity of this tracklink, beeing OT 810

cia
Bullitt

[PresidentEvil]

Someone is selling off OT810 chains as grounddug battlerelics in hope that the collectors cant spot the difference?

[NickG]

I didn't want to interfere with this (now identified as OT810) track subject...)
just wanted to post my "pzkw" link for comparison as its tagged Pzkw II.
(= post# 9)

So what is mine? (as it looks nothing like the drawings either...)
Is it for an RSO maybe?
Thanks

[steverobertsbbc]

Nick,

Panzer I and II links look pretty similar, but the II is a little larger - it's definitely one or the other. I don't have one in my collection to measure directly, but my Panzer I links measure 26cm wide (28cm with pin). From memory the Panzer II should be 28cm (30cm with pin).

[recceboy]

Here is a Pz 1 & Pz 2 track.


Anthony