I see That Cyberhobby is slated to release a Pz Kpw Panther II shortly. Is a Panther II just a schmallturm Panther , or is it a differant beast altogether ? Thanks,keith
Should be the panther II chassis with tiger II transport tracks, like the one in patton museum.
I’ve never seen photo of the chassis with 88 schmallturm, only with a late G turret.
That would be awesome–if they get it right?
The old Dragon one with the “shmalturm” was just a theoretical design.
edit–sigh…actually, it’s not–it’s the old Dragon kit re-done, with the schmalturm and gonzo gun. You still have to kibash if you want the Fort Knoz one.
Thanks guys,but keep in mind your both many steps ahead of me in WWII German armor knowledge.Doog,would you be so kind as to translate " gonzo gun " .I’m guessing they were gonna put the long barreled 88 from the King Tiger into the shmalturm.Is that what you mean ? And if so is that what that kit probably is ? Satori, What was the main thing differant about the Panther II chassis from the standard Panthers ? Thanks again , keith
I think the “new” Orange box Panther II is just a rebox of the old Panther II.You get some "new"figures and a new tool sprue.If you decide to get this kit,get a new turret from Accurate Armour or FCM or purchase a new turret sprue from Dragon. The kit turret has some dimentional issues.Too wide for the hull. The AA kit comes with both the 75 mm and 88mm gun. I hope this helps with the decision making process. Ted Nichols
I think I got the subject of this thread right.
Yeah, rudedog–the Panther II with the schmalturm was supposed to have a huge 88mm KwK 43 L/71 gun–same as in the KIng Tiger, but without the muzzle brake. It’s huge size is underscored even more by the small turret! It looks like it’s “gonzo”! LOL!
I think I’m starting to get it thanks to all your help,doog,satori & ted.Basically,I may as well just use a Panther “G” I hav"nt yet built & get that awesome looking turret ted is talking about that I just saw at AA [ plus all the other items countless hours of research will turn up ] & skip that new Cyberhobby kit.I don’t believe it had the 88MM gun on it anyways,did it ? Thanks for the free education. keith
What would be Gonzo would be putting a 88mm DP gun (AA version) onto a Panther II chassis.
Take a real good look at the Panther G/F roadwheels and the Panther II. They are totally different. 8 pair on the F/G and 7 on the II and they are of a different style. Again,hope this helps. Also look at the AA Panther II complete kit.
From Spielberger’s book
Thanks Satori,for the pix.I see what Ted means about the running gear on the Panther II being completely differant than a standard Panther.It is much more like a Tiger.I guess DML Is just trying to pull a fast one,though 99% of they’re stuff is usually [ I feel ] up to par.Boy, you guys have my envy.You really know your stuff.I thought I read alot about WWII armor till I started reading this & other forums.Nada,bubkus,zilch,niche,no way,etc.I supposed by the time I piecemealed everything needed to accurately build a Panther II,It would be cheaper to just buy AA’s full kit.Which is kinda outta my price range.I guess ya just buy all the parts for one a little at a time ! P.S. Whats the title of Spielberger’s book ? And a hearty thank you to all of you. If this comes to fruition , a photo will be forthcoming [ I do have a penchant for Panthers ! ] Semper fi ,keith
I do believe the Panther I and Tiger I were also similar as well. Wasn’t there a general order in the WehrMach to standardize parts for use in both the Tiger and Panther Tanks? In fact the Tiger and Panther used the same Maybach powerplant. And I also believe the lower hull in both the Tiger and Panther were the same so it would be safe to assume that torsion bar assembly was exactly the same in both tanks same with the TigerII and PantherII.
At first it was planned to standardize the running gear on both the Tiger II and Panther II. The hulls are not the same between the 2 tanks being that the TII is much larger overall.
Panther II and Tiger B, guys, not Tiger.
I don’t see much similarities between panther and tiger chassis, besides that they both had interlaced road wheels and torsion bars. Even though the 2 could both be counted as heavy tanks, they had entirely different development history. The panther was a copy of the Russian design, a hurried project to catch up with the enemy. The tiger on other hand, was developed from ground up to carry the 88.
If panther (the mom) and tiger (the dad) got married and had a kid, then that kid probably would look like a tiger B (king Tiger). It’s got the mom’s look, and a more massive built than the dad.
The Panther II was specifically intended to standardize as many production parts between the KIng Tiger and the Panther. It used as many parts as practical which were already in production.
That would have finally made aguably the wars best tank more econically feasible.So,if they’d have done that to start with & not invaded the Soviet Union,we’d all might be writing this in German right now.But lets not start that hypothesis,that thread would go on forever !!
Russian practically had t-54/55 in wwII you know. Years ahead of the german still.
One thing that unquestionablyhelped America win the war was the fact that we had so many tanks vs the Germans. We could “afford” to lose 5 Shermans to take out one Tiger.
One of the things that unquestionably helped America make so many tanks was the standardization of design, and sharing of components between chassis, drivetrain, armament, etc.
Even more so with the T-34 series.
I was just joking of course.Unquestionably,doog,our industialization,quailty & inginuity of our products prevailed.The same engineering genious behind the nordan [ not sure about the spelling ] would have eventually have been applied to tank design,no doubt.
hey did anyone get the ‘pototo’ part??~ i mean… they are still spelled the same, no? =P