I have the Tamiya M4 kit, and since M4 means “early” and I just read a book about the Tunisian campaign, I figgered me build it as one of those.
I already had bought the M3 suspension as I’d read that the early M4’s carried the M3 instead of the M4 provided with the kit. I thought I was all set.
(Horror movie music)
Then I posted a message on the Shermans in use in Tunisia on the Allied WWII forum at Missing Lynx just to confirm I was good to go, and oh boy am I in trouble! It looks like most of my tank is now going to be Tank Workshop aftermarket pieces. I may use the odd piece or two of the Tamiya kit! [:O]
Let’s see:
The hull is wrong. Need direct vision. Tank Workshop hull with direct vision ports.
The gun and mantlet is wrong. Need M34, not M34A1. Tank Workshop mantlet plus aluminum barrel.
The nose is wrong. Tank Workshop three-piece welded nose.
The suspension is wrong. I already have the Tank Workshop piece for that though. Phew!
So you have to get all this paraphernalia for a Sherman that fought in the Western Desert and North Africa – and that’s hundreds of them! – but of course, there is a complete kit for the Sturmtiger, of which, what, seven were made? Oy vey. [:P]
All that aside, I’m asking myself, when is enough enough? When do you just say, the hell with it, I’m building it as it is in the box, no matter how inaccurate it is? Or I guess the better question is, when do you stop correcting the kit and just let it stand as is?
Build for yourself and build OOB. But if you want to display your kit at a show (maybe even at your club’s meeting), you will have to go all out or the joy-suckers will tear into your inaccuracies and attempt to make you feel like an idiot since you did not know that only direct vision slot hulls were used in Tunisia.
Every self-styled Sherman (or insert tank of your choice) expert will target you:
“What are you doing?!”
“Don’t you know those markings aren’t correct for the 100th Armored Toilet Scrubbing Battalion that fought in Tunisia?!”
Experts, right. They own the Squadron Signal in Action series, thumbed through the Modeler’s Guide, bought the Osprey Vanguard book and watched a special on that tank on the History Channel last year. Maybe even taped it. These are the guys that took the fun out of building OOB.
Larry,
i am new to the armor field, but w/ my plane builds, it was enough for the kit to capture the ‘spirit’ of the original. it is up to the builder to decide when ‘enough is enough’.
let each builder count their own rivets and check their own panel lines.
when i built the Tamiya 1/48 Wildcat
(sorry, it has wings, but the point remains the same)[:)]
i was aware from my own ‘research’ and reading reviews that Tamiya
had done the cockpit floor incorrectly. this did not ruin my enjoyment one bit. i was much more put out with the canopy that is too narrow to be displayed open w/o much fiddling, the fuselage underside marker light that i sanded off while working the seam, my use of Floquil ‘Dust’ that makes it look like it has real dust on it instead of flatting the paint, the parts where my masks creeped up and the soft edge of my camo line ran away, etc, etc.
if someone wants to pick on my shortcomings as a modeler, fine.
but don’t bust my chops because the kit is not a 100% accurate representation of the ‘real’ world. i built what they sold me. [:P]
i’m sorry, what was your question? [:D]
no, seriously,
“when do you stop correcting the kit and just let it stand as is?”
when you are happy, Larry.
or just before you stop having fun.
if you like research & mods & scratchbuilding, knock yourself out.
if you like to glue & paint and put finished models on your shelf,
hone your techniques and let the ‘inaccuracies’ go.
unless you feel some compulsion to compete (contests) or please others (not all of them will ever be happy) -
do what you want.
if you are having fun, the hobby has served it’s purpose.
if you want to make yourself miserable, start next year’s taxes early!
[:P]
You made me think of a photo I saw of some tanks in Tunisa over the weekend. Let me take a look tonight and I’ll get back to you. Once in a while, I go nuts over a vehicle and try to get every bit of the inside and outside correct (as much as my skills allow, which pale i comparison to some), other than that, I get more pleasure out of just building a kit.
I’m no expert on Shermans, although I’ve driven an M4A3, M4A1 Grizzly, M7 Priest, M32B3E8 (or what ever) and have worked on several others. There’s always more to learn. Always.
My advise, HAVE FUN!
One thing I should point out in the thread. I don’t want to give the wrong impression that the Missing Lynx guys were doing anything but responding to my requests for info, and responding in a very helpful way at that. These guys actually went and took down their volumes and looked through them trying to give me the straight poop on the critter I’m trying to build.
I’ve decided to go a little nuts on this one, and that will be part of the fun! I should have said that I was wondering where to stop – when you put the brakes on and just live with the stuff that’s not “right” on the kit.
The funny thing about this is, after I have added three hundred aftermarket pieces, no one will notice the damned difference anyway! I will though, and so will God. [:P] And maybe some day a veteran of the First Armored will see my kit and say, “hey, that’s my ride.” I’d like that a lot.
I know all about those guys who count the rivets though – it’s embarrassing to me to even be in the same room when they criticize other peoples’ build-ups. Right or wrong, it’s just rude. I mean, the thing is done – it’s built already-- so why not just give the guy a pat on the back on a job well done, for goodness sake?
I for one almost never worry about the inaccuracies in any of the kits I build. If someone points them out, I just tell them, “I know about them, but I don’t have the money or time to spend on all that is necessary to accurize it. Besides, I had fun building it, and that’s what counts for me.” I’ve entered many an inaccurate kit in my club’s contests, and some have even won. This is because I was judged on my Building technique, Which I ccan control with existing resources, (my skill) not whether the kit was accurate (no control with existing resources: manufacturer error.)
There was one person who wouldn’t let it go, so for fun challenged him by asking if he wanted to go to war over this, my collection against his. [}:)] Since he knew the size of my collection, he just smiled and politely declined; finally conceding that it is the building for oneself that really counts. [^] We have become good friends since then.
Ah yes, our club’s meetings are so fun! [:D]
BTW, any of you guys ever go to Orangecon? That’s sponsored by my club. Maybe someday, I’ll meet one of you there. [;)]
I know what you mean. The first time I used photo etched parts was on an M20 armored car. I spent over 3 hrs to make 1 small folding bench. It looked great, until I added the figure standing at the .50 cal, then you couldn’t see the bench at all. Oh well, it was a learning experience and I’m not upset with the time I spent on that bench. I find it funny that’s all.
So the bottom line is, you have to stop when you think it looks good or when it becomes a chore to do.
Funny story! And oh so true. Well, as I like to say, God knows you did it. God thinks your small folding bench really improves the appearance of the kit. [:)]
have you seen the formations web site? http://www.formationsmodels.com/
they have some early conversions sets out or coming out
like there M4a1
i know that its not the M4 but it might keep you sane
(this picture is from formations web site. not by me[4:-)])
If you want to cater to the technical experts then you might have to drown yourself in correcting the inaccuracies. But if you just want to build for the sake of enjoying it, I believe than the four corners of the box will be just fine.
I have been building for almost a year now. I have never tried correcting any of the kits (well because of the costs involved and the lack or AM parts here) but I don’t lose sleep over it. I am not an expert but I am happy with what I am doing.
Whatever your choice will be…hope that you’ll be happy with it. Good luck.
This thread got me thinking about my current Sherman build…
So, I stood back from my Sherman model and looked at it for the longest time. What will others think at the contest? Will the judges point out my inaccuracies? Was this equiptment carried in such and such a way?
I then realized, I DON’T CARE! I like the way it’s turning out and that is just fine [^]
If they determine it wasn’t good enough to meet their standards then, too bad for them. The beauty in building models, is the freedom of expression. Some like to go all out. Some like to build OOB.
Lots of good comments here. I like the ‘challenge my collection against yours’ and the ‘it’s already built, give the guy a pat on the back’ attitudes. I usually ask, “When’s the last time YOU drove a Sherman??” That shuts 'em up good too.
That’s a nice Sherman, Caveman! LIKE IT LOTS!
Anyhoo, Larry, took a look at that photo that was stuck in my mind last night… I looked through Hunnicutt’s Sherman book. All M4A1’s with early mantlets that I could find photo references of in North Africa. Pg 178 Early bogies, MID PRODUCTION nose, Vision Slots. Pg 179 Late V V SS suspension, early nose (three piece bolted), No vision slots. Pg 180 Late V VSS, Early nose, one with and one without vision slots… AND some unloading from an LST on pg 182 that have lighter painted turret tops (yellow???).
So, like Sherm said, these vehicle were right on the cusp of early and late Vertical Vollute Sprung Suspension and vision slots (now watch somebody will criticize the return skids atop the bogie assemblies… I couldn’t pick them out myself, but I’d bet on the early arched type… just a GUESS though!).
Of course, you could always set the M4 in ETO or Italy! LOTS of variations there. OR, the DML M4A1 I believe came with both types of main gun mount… That one would work too! Is it OOP? If so, evilbay… neeyah-haa-ha ha ha!
Here’s something to remember, too: it is scientifically impossible to prove that something does not exist.
Sure, there might be problems with anachronistic equipment showing up in the wrong time, maybe, but who can say with absolute certainty that the 100th Armored Toilet Scrubbing Battalion fighting in Tunisia didn’t use the ocassional oak-handled plunger, instead of the standard pine-handled version? [;)]
With all the variations on the sherman - it is very tough to say what did and didn’t exist. Look at all the recovered german armor that was made into completely different tanks.
I think there is a sherman attachmnet for toilet scrubbing as well …but it’s only found on the M4A3 with the …and the…with the 75mm gun
Thanks for all the comments. I’llbuild this sucker up and send her up the flagpole to see if anyone salutes. The only problem, as usual, will be photographing it. I have a little digital camera but am no expert photographer. Point and shoot, everything set on automatic! “What’s this button for? Whoops!”
I finally decided to model the thing on a bunch of tanks that were taken as prizes by the Germans after Kasserine, apparently shown in photos in a new book about the 10th Panzer Division. These tanks feature:
Direct vision port hull
The wee 75mm with skinny M34 mantlet
three-part welded nose
M3 suspension
Rubber block treads, IIRC
I may not bother adding the friuli T54e1 treads I bought.
(Warning: the Friuli treads described simply as Sherman treads are these kinds of treads.)
I think they were used in NA (people with the 10th Pz book tell me they are illustrated on captured Shermans), but I wonder if I can get the treads to look “live” as Sherman treads were. So maybe I will just scrounge some rubber-block tread lengths (not individual link) from a kit somewhere out there. Any suggestions? Particularly one I can give the T54E1 treads to? Waste not want not! Maybe I’ll add those things to the basic M4A3 late war tank with 75mm gun – to show that two tanks that are superficially identical can actually look quite different.
Yes, it’s cost me a fortune, [:I] but now I am obsessed, so may actually build the darned thing! Which, as Martha Stewart would say, is a good thing.
The first photo in Squadron’s “Sherman in Action” is a battalion shot in Italy in April 1945 and using their caption they say “there is an ancient early production M4” mixed in with the group. This thread got me to looking more closely and it’s really amazing, particullary with Shermans, the mix of equipment and parts and stowage etc. As far as building, well I build them for my own enjoyment, the guy that wins in our local shows usually has his track on backwards. Go figure.
