0:40 Driver: “Dude why?!? Get out of my face, I’m driving here!!”

Looks for all the world like an armored riding mower. But, it had it's day. At Amien in 1940, R35's destroyed the German bridgehead during Fall Rot, the R35's finest hour, and the Panzers had to switch to a different bridgehead at Peronne. ALSO, in Italian hands, captured R35's gave Colonel Darby and his Rangers a big headache during the invasion of Sicily. It may have been pathetically armed, but it did have decent armor.

@SacredVolk

2 жыл бұрын

Still better than gringos one's 😂

@RJN95jacf

26 күн бұрын

Also used effectively by the Romanian army to fight in the eastern front

So cute i wanna hug it 😍😆

Looks like a WW1 Renault so tiny .... would have fit perfectly to a paratrooper battaillon. Great work to preserve and show that tank in action instead of just displaying in a museum where a tank naturally does not belong to.

@user-hj7wt3tq9d

4 жыл бұрын

Actually thus os the Direct succesor if the ft

@thearmoredgeorgian2736

2 жыл бұрын

In fact, I believe a lot of the H-35’s, and R-35’s were given old FT-17 guns.

Thx u very much,i was waiting for an modern video of this tank

It's a life, it's a life!!! Very cool!!!

Marvelous work - formidable!! 😊 K

amazing!

Amazing to see

I really like the way the commander sits, altough that doesnt seem like very good place to be in real battle

@quentintin1

3 жыл бұрын

in battle he would be in the turret, with his head stuck in the rotating cupola to try and find the enemy

@taistelusammakko5088

3 жыл бұрын

@@quentintin1 yes i know thank you

such a beautiful ball of crépes and baguettes

It's So Tiny And Cute!

Great communication system, commander climbs to front of tank to talk to driver 😅

my god imagine being at war in that tank

R35 was just an upgraded model of the FT17 Renault. A good armored in the last thirty's but too small and too slow with an old-fashioned gun VS panzer but enough VS infantry. It was made to support infantry only, not to be in the armored division. There was the same problem with H35 and FCM 36. The old-fashioned SA18 37mm gun was not powerful enough. The best french tank was the Somua S35 with B1bis and D2 with SA 35 gun 47mm, but these tanks were not made enough and were not used efficiently in the few armored units. And more, there was one in the turret. The new prototypes in 1940 were with two in the turret, best armored, and guns, and engines. But Petain signed the armistice very fastly. In 1944, the new free French army used US equipment entirely. (M4 Sherman, and Wolverine, and Stuart, and the GMC for the armored materiel). In the WWI, US army used the French tank FT17 Renault.

@obsidianjane4413

5 ай бұрын

For anyone else reading this; That is false. R35 has nothing to do with the FT17 besides using the same gun (literally). Its a completely different design and role. Yes, this was designed to be an infantry support tank. The FT's were the "fast" cavalry tank of WWI.

It was pre-released Renault Logan.

Sounds like its not running on cylinders

You're telling me one of these *things* is still running?

@robinvermot4946

3 жыл бұрын

After a few years of work ... yes

@quentintin1

3 жыл бұрын

there are at least two, as far as i'm aware, most of the WWII French collection in the Saumur Museum is running and they have a R35 the tank in video is in the hands of a private association which specialise in the restoration of French vehicles, when they got the the tank which was used post war in a farm, it was missing it's top hull, they were able to recast one from a tank loaned to them by the Saumur museum (a Lybian R35 with a 2pr) i remember they have a second R35 restoration project, but the advancement is unknown as is if it's going to be running

@robinvermot4946

3 жыл бұрын

@@quentintin1 @Max Exactly ! Saumur museum helped us a lot providing us a tank to copy some missing parts, they're now good Friends the second R35 isn't a restoration project ... In fact we're building it from scrap. The only originals parts on this R35 are the turret, a few wheels and tracks We're building it exactly like a real one with originals blueprints ! We Hope it will be running in one or two years

@quentintin1

3 жыл бұрын

@@robinvermot4946 O_O that's a lot of work, tho most of the tank seemed to be there when the first picture about it was posted on the blogspot late 2015

@robinvermot4946

3 жыл бұрын

@@quentintin1 we love to work ! So we have to find ambitious projects haha

Not sure if this tank is an early ww2 tank, or a late ww1 tank.

Voici le Renault r35

Renault sub compact class ! 82 HP petrol !

Quisiera tener uno en mi patio trasero, son muy adorables

@pl2706003

Жыл бұрын

Te servirian para una invasion extraterrestre, cuando haya que pelear con todo

0:21 guy in tank :nice Jeep you Americans have Old guy in jeep : thanks

you could hear that thing coming from 10 miles away

I want one

CHANTON L’OIGNION!

Looks like it couldn’t pull the skin off the top layer of a chocolate pudding.

Metal Slug is real ~

Vous pouvez me le donner ? Si'il vous plait !

Sounds like it could use a tune up; seems to be mis-firing.

@exxusdrugstore300

8 ай бұрын

I know this is two years old, but they had a V-4, not inline, so it's naturally un-balanced and therefore going to sound like shit.

I wonder if they have repacked that muffler yet so they can hear themselves think? lol.

Panther it isnt

Just imagine Tiger 1 crew hiding in bushes and seeing this shit driving towards their position.

@user-hj7wt3tq9d

4 жыл бұрын

Most problably an ft17

@RandysFiftySevenChevy

4 жыл бұрын

Was zum Teufel ist das ?

@user-hj7wt3tq9d

4 жыл бұрын

@@RandysFiftySevenChevy sry,un mexican and i just can speak my languaje and inglish for now, so, can you Tell me that in inglish please?

@captainwin6333

4 жыл бұрын

@@user-hj7wt3tq9d Copy paste into google translate. Easy.

@larry-three8225

4 жыл бұрын

France fell before the Tiger I was introduced, so a Renault R35 would not have encountered it. This tank would have likely fought Panzer III's, and maybe a few early model Panzer IV's.

Watch and play in wot

C'était la mort assuré face a un simple obus de canon de campagne.

@quentintin1

3 жыл бұрын

certes, mais en 1940 c'était le cas de presque tous les chars, et les pièces antichar allemandes avaient bien du mal a se débarrasser de ce petit bolide blindé a 40mm

@BFVK

3 жыл бұрын

@@quentintin1 Heu..."petit bolide" ? Il se traine et picole comme un trou... a Abbeville 3 ravitaillements en 5 heures de combat. Et facilement perçable a courte distance par les pak 36/37... or avec son ridicule SA18 il doit aller a courte distance pour faire feu. Tellement mauvais que De Gaulle ne les utilisait qu'en dernier recours. Et il a reçu deux bataillons de R35 en remplacement d'un seul bataillon de H39, façon d'essayer de compenser la nullité du char par le nombre... Ce qui entraine juste un plus grand nombre d'épaves sur le champ de bataille.

@quentintin1

3 жыл бұрын

@@BFVK ironie, bien entendu que le R35 n’avançait pas, il était conçu comme un remplacement direct des vieux FT la nullité du SA18 est seulement acquise pour le tir anti-char, pour le tir contre cibles "molles" il était tout a fait capable, et la portée utile était alors de l'ordre de 600m, la précision était suffisante pour atteindre des cibles de faible taille quand a la protection, selon les valeurs allemandes les PaK/KwK 36 étaient incapable de percer la cuirasse du R35 a 100m, selon des performances calculées sous le standard US il leur fallait s'approcher a moins de 200m pour avoir une chance de percer la caisse sous conditions d'un angle d'impact proche de 90°

@tony_du5725

3 жыл бұрын

@@BFVK tu peut allé voir la vidéo de "maitre lugger" il a présenté ce même R35 qui défile ici. Certe la cloche n'est pas celle d'origine mais provient d'un autre char français qui a été détruit, cette cloche a les même propriété que celle des R35 et a résisté a 3 tir de pak37 dans la cloche. Donc bon ...

@BFVK

10 ай бұрын

@@quentintin1 La nullité du SA18 est aussi acquise en anti personnel: son obus a la puissance d'une grenade a main, trop faible pour un char de combat. Le Pak36 très légers et mobiles dans les mains d'unités entrainées aux tactiques d'infiltration n'a pas de problème de distance si le terrain n'est pas dégagé. Sa force est dans le nombre. Les Pak36 portaient le blindage des B1bis au rouge a force de les marteler. Un R35 est bon pour 1918, pas 1940.

If I ever win the lottery I would buy one of these take out the 82 hp engine and put in an electric one. The Renault Zoe has a 135hp option.

@puebespuebes8589

3 ай бұрын

WHAT NO ! NEVER !😡 Tu est un monstre le son est magnifique est c'est une pièce historique.

@kraig800i

3 ай бұрын

@@puebespuebes8589 Just think about though, when all the tigers, leopards, Churchills, and challengers have been put to pasture. This, this little magnificent beauty will still be rolling down the highway gleaming in the post-apocalyptic nuclear winter sun.

@puebespuebes8589

3 ай бұрын

@@kraig800i why ? The battery will be dead, use an old diesel engine instead and make it run on vegetal oil

@kraig800i

3 ай бұрын

@@puebespuebes8589 hmmmm maybe, I whatever engine it would require I would love to see what is the maximum speed one of these little ones can do.

In compare with German Tanks, I did not wondered why France lost the war at WW II

@deltateam7278

4 жыл бұрын

you are professional !

@yanousse3217

4 жыл бұрын

By the way the french tanks used in 1940 were way better than the most advanced panzer at the time, the pz IV. -The B1 Bis (char de bataille Renault B1 Bis) was a four crew tank armoured with 60 mm armor at the front ant likely 50 on the sides. It was equiped with a 47 mm SA 35 gun and a 75 mm ABS 1929 on the hull, they could penetrate any of the tanks named by our comrade Robert Willis! -The Somua S35 was the medium cavalery tank, 35 mm at the Front and 40 at the sides And on the turret. It was fast and had the same 47 mm of the B1. There were a lots of others tanks, but these were the most seen and successful ^^ The thing is the french High Command was incompétent, and used these tanks in the wrong way, using the format of the Division Cuirassée was not fitting against the Panzerdivison. In a 1v1 fight, a B1 Bis would be successful against any German tank of the time

@user-yf4up2px2u

3 жыл бұрын

@@yanousse3217 That's right. Allied high command (French but Brittish as well) was still thinking war with old ww1 tactics. Though General Estienne or De Gaulle raised in the early 30s the crucial importance of Armored divisions and the combination with aircraft. They were not enough listenned, sadly, In Germany, you had the same debate during the 30s but Hitler finally followed Guderians views, and gave primacy to Panzer divisions. French tanks were good and much more heavy than German tanks... but used in the wrong way as you said. A major waste of beautiful material. Soldiers fought well, tanks did well, but tactics and logistics was not adapted the new war. Allied forces learned a lot from year 1940 mistakes, and improved their tactics all along the War to finally outnumber the germans

@BFVK

3 жыл бұрын

@@yanousse3217 You say absolutly wrong just because you don't look further than your nose. All french tanks are bad tanks, one man in turret, bad communication, heavy fuel consumption. You can have a good gun or a good armor, it's absolutly useless if you can't put it in the good position, at the right time, in accordance to the other tanks. Put all the french tanks in a bucket, choose one by random and you have more than 50% chance to find a smal uneffective SA18 gun, so general statement "french tanks had good guns" is wrong In 1 vs 1 you can say nothing relevant because it NEVER happens on a battle field... And the B1 bis is an absolute waste of energy and money, good for nothing, an illusion of power. "The thing is the french High Command was incompétent, and used these tanks in the wrong way, using the format of the Division Cuirassée was not fitting against the Panzerdivison." Maybe you don't know that it's the politicians who decided the strategy and the doctrine and build the tool for the military. So, no, the french high command wasn't incomptent. Bad slow tank drinkng more than russian drinks vodka, with bad communication, in a bad doctrine is a politicial responsability. General WEYGAND managed to build two DLM, armored division, in 1936-37, liked in an armored corps. This armored corps successfully faced the panzer division at Hannut. It prooves that a large part of the high french command were much competent and put their ideas in practice.

@BFVK

3 жыл бұрын

@@user-yf4up2px2u " Though General Estienne or De Gaulle raised in the early 30s the crucial importance of Armored divisions and the combination with aircraft. They were not enough listenned, sadly, " De Gaulle didn't understood the aerial dimention and didn't wrote about it. After the war he tried to correct his books to hide his lack of perspicacity but people noticed it and his books were republished as the originals, without the aerial dimention. And just to say it: he was a very bad officer, making mistakes and faults. The battle of Abbeville show how much he was not creative, obstinate, repeating the same wrong method for the same fails... In 1940, frenchs had 3 DLM, real armored division, 1st 2nd created in 1936-37, destined to form an armored corps, who successfully supported the shock of the panzers at Hannut. It's the work of general WEYGAND, who said exactly as Guderian said: fast tank with good communication linked with the aerial power. De Gaulle was out of this, just writing books, WEYGAND worked with an headquarter, builded the divisions, the corps, and made it as the best french unit in 1940 So the statement "French commanders didn't understood except De Gaulle" is absolutly wrong.

sound like a tractor loool 🤣🤣🤣🤣

R35 so slowe hahaha 😂

In 1940 France had much better tanks than the Wehrmacht