I don’t see a problem here. All of the kits represent different production patches of the tank. I don’t think any of the releases have repeated the variant. (not including the original DML PZ IV kits)
Honestly, I think they would make more money if they made a standard kit and sold it for like… 5-10$ cheaper then they normally would, and just make the variant parts in addon kits you can use on their base kit, and charge like 5-10$ for it, to make up their costs.
That one is next, the Pz V he used while his main ride was having the road wheels rotated and oil changed followed by the tank he drove to church on Sundays.
I know they are all “different”, but it’s more of a shell game at this point. It isn’t really a true “new” kit. It’s often a shuffle of new decals and existing sprues from various kits to give the illusion that they are releasing brand new kits.
As long as people are willing to purchase, more power to them
Honestly, what manufacturer doesn’t do this?
You don’t think Tamiya’s 1/32 Spitfire VIII and XVI are new-mold kits, do you? They borrow extensively from the IX. Same’s true of so many of their 1/48 kits (P-51, P-47, A6M, Mosquito, Beaufighter, F4U-1, etc).
Accurate Miniatures back in the day with the Allison 'Stangs, the Dauntless…
Hobby Boss with the F4F-3, F4F-4, FM-1, FM-2…
How many Shermans does Tasca make again?
Heck…Dragon with the Panzer III.
It’s just that the Germans made so many incremental changes to the Pz.IV resulting in a ridiculous # of variations on more-or-less the same theme…
I agree with you on that one, Bish [dto:]
I’m slowly making my way through all the Panzers with the odd Allied build thrown in when I feel like some ‘Green’!
I’ll be happy with the early, mid and late options - it will make things a lot easier for the average modeller who just wants to show the development of a particular piece of armour throughout it’s life without getting boged down in all the Ausf. variants.
One more thing I’d like to see Dragon doing is starting to focus on a few Vietnam era kits. It was my interest in the 'Nam conflict that I learnt about early in High School that led to me becoming a ‘20th Century Hobby Historian’ (I’m still learning, of course) and ultimately, into the world of Modelling, which has become an exciting part of my life now.
I’d like to see a decent ONTOS for a start. It’s a piece of armour that I find ‘mesmerising’ and visually stunning - I tried the Academy version and hated it (it’s an unfinished test bed for my airbrush now) so I’m now just hoping that Dragon or Tamiya releases a decent one sooner or later
ATVB
Ben [t$t]
Actually that would be very innaccurate as March 11, 1944 was on a Saturday .[whstl]
I was trying to be sarcastic on that one. [whstl] In reality there were now such terms as early middle or late. These are post war terms. They haven’t been applied so much to Pz IV’s before. And to be honest, building a tank from an early middle or late production run doesn’t really reflect the changes the Germans made during production. These changes often happened monthly. So take the Tiger I for example. If you wanted to build every different version, you would have to build one from every month of its production. And rather than making it easier, it makes it harder. useing the Ausf designations is alot easier than getting bogged down in all the little changes made during each Ausf’s production period.
Hello Bish,
I’m sorry buddy but I didn’t detect any sarcasm there [;)] the box clearly states ‘Mid Production’ and although I’m well aware that there were no early, middle or late Panzer IV’s this addition of ‘x-production’ helps a lot for a relative newbie like me.
If I know that the Pz IV I’m looking at is a very early or late one I can look at it’s Ausf designation and see how it would have differed from the design of other IV’s.
I haven’t been building long enough to know much about Ausf designations and how they affect Panzers (IV’s inparticular as I am yet to build a true Panzer IV - I’ve only made builds that utilise the IV’s chasis).
Cheers buddy,
Ben [t$t]
The whole terminology of armoured vehicles can get complicated. Even though i had been redaing about German armour for years, i only begain to realise the way things work when i went into the battalions MILAN platoon back in 95. Part of that was AFV training and i begain to see the systems that difefrent countries used and that helped my understand the German system better.
Without trying to teach you to suck eggs, the term Ausf refers to the various models. In the British Army we use Mark, for example, Challenger Mk 1 and Mk 2. The Germans of course use letters, Ausf H, Ausf J for example. The new model designations are normally given when there is a major change in the vehicle, a new gun for example. But later in the war, little things changed often on a monthly basis, but on there own they weren’t big enough to justfy a new Ausf letter
Of course, models are one thing, variants are another issue by themselves. The German system is in my view one of the most complicated i have come across, the same goes for their aircraft.
persoanlly, i wouldn’t get to worried about the early mid and late production, not if you are interesed in collecting as many versions as you can. Once i have a certain Ausf, i am happy with that. Not interested in getting vehicles with all the changes within that Ausf. The only exception i have made in this is with Tigers, and thats only because i want to get vehicle from every one of the Tiger battalions.
Only problem is that the Dragon kits in question are not even reflecting different Ausf designations—they are reflecting “time-periods” within Ausf runs!!!
Though to be fair i think all the panzer IV models, except the Ausf A (Hint Hint) are covered ain’t they. Maybe not all by Dragon, but i am sure they are all covered.
But yes, in my veiw, trying to cover all the minor changes within Ausf runs is a tad over the top.
The best way to send a message is not to buy the kit.
Jim