In this interview I talk with Rob from the Nashorn Restoration Team. The team's restoration can be followed on: Rob’s YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/c/jackofalltrades_Nashorn_restoration On the teams facebook page https://www.facebook.com/Nashorn.SD.KFZ.164.restauration Support the Restoration https://www.gofundme.com/f/nashorn-sd-kfz-164-restoration Cover Photo provided by Rob. 0:12 Jasper: Errors in the original Manuals? I have two light American military vehicles. I have all of the manuals on pdf which is great, but sometimes there are errors. Do you have access to the original manuals and are they accurate? 2:20 Sina: Dicker Max influence on Nashorn? My question is how the combat trials of Dicker Max contributed to the development of Nashorn. More precisely, why did Dicker Max was canceled after 2 prototypes while around 500 Nashorns were built. Did they learn something from Dicker Max that they fixed in Nashorn? I think of the smaller caliber(but higher velocity) gun and more powerful engine but was there something else? 3:26 Bryan: Combat Effectiveness compared to the Marders? Was actual, versus theoretical, combat effectiveness gained versus the 75mm and 76.2mm Hummels [Marders]? The gun itself was more powerful, but some sources mention that mobility was worse. 6:37 Gerrit: Accurate restoration versus working/running restoration? I would be interested in the following question: Running tank or precise/accurate tank? What is the problem when working on a restoring? Do u try to keep as many original parts as possible? Where is the "red line" where u have to exchange an original element with a modern part? Does it have some impact (emotional for dropping an original part - ambition to keep as many original parts as possible?). Is there an "economical aspect" like "it is too expansive to keep the original part instate of a modern element that is cheap and easy to get?". Hope u get my point. Thx a lot. Gerrit 13:4