Rubicon Models
Rubicon Models => Work In Progress => Topic started by: Rubicon Models on January 04, 2017, 05:42:39 pm
-
This is a new project similar to our "M4 Sherman Digital Library". We have retired
our Panzer IV Mid-War (280010) kit during Q4/16, since then we had been creating
the all new "Panzer IV Digital Library". Here is a few pics based on the Ausf G. We
will add and subtract features to make other Panzer IV variants as we go along...
Besides what is described in our pics below, additional objectives as follow:
- Create common sprues that can be used with all variants to save cost
- To keep retail price as low as possible
- Hopefully be able to cover production models from Ausf D to J
- Will try new moulding techniques to create better products
- Will use experience gained to create the "Panzer III Digital Library"
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%20161222-01_zpsnkj4eoqw.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%20161222-02_zpstlr6kif4.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%20161222-03_zpslahtazbl.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%20161222-04_zps6hbszani.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Nice.
There is also the Stug IV option.
I was unimpressed with the other company's Panzer IV, hopefully this will be much better.
-
Looks good. We had a thread earlier about how you'd break this up into separate kits. You could probably do it with just two. I'd really like to see the Jagdpanzer IV.
I think the tracks are a bit of a problem, as the tread pattern is quite distinctive but difficult to replicate using the one-piece approach.
-
Great news! I'd like to see earlier options, like ausf. D, but I understand that in this kit there is no place for them.
Good job! Can't wait to see more :)
-
Great news! I'd like to see earlier options, like ausf. D, but I understand that in this kit there is no place for them.
Ausf D is the early "short" pre-series of the Panzer IV before the standardisation with the Ausf E. A total of 243 were built, the last being delivered in early 1940.
Depending on the number of parts on the final product, we will do an Ausf D; and depending on the layout of the spure, we will see how this will bring us!
-
FINALLY! I was waiting for this since months ago!Thanks
-
Ausf D is the early "short" pre-series of the Panzer IV before the standardisation with the Ausf E. A total of 243 were built, the last being delivered in early 1940.
Depending on the number of parts on the final product, we will do an Ausf D; and depending on the layout of the spure, we will see how this will bring us!
WoW! I haven't count on that at all! It's amazing idea.
Some of this 243 builds were on Africa front. I can't wait :-)
-
Ausf. J will be very cool!Can't wait for it ;D ::)
-
It's a pity from my point of view Rubicon can't go back as far as the Ausf C. According to the Encyclopedia of German Tanks of WW2 by Chamberlain and Doyle 138 were produced from September 1938 until August 1939. Later marks were too late to serve in 1939 Poland. According to the same source the Ausf C wasn't withdrawn until 1943 and therefore a legitimate opponent for many years to come.
-
It's a pity from my point of view Rubicon can't go back as far as the Ausf C.
Sure, but trying to cover every variant can be more trouble than it's worth. Better to cover the main variants properly. The Ausf D would cover France, Barbarossa and the early North African campaign.
-
It's a pity from my point of view Rubicon can't go back as far as the Ausf C. According to the Encyclopedia of German Tanks of WW2 by Chamberlain and Doyle 138 were produced from September 1938 until August 1939. Later marks were too late to serve in 1939 Poland. According to the same source the Ausf C wasn't withdrawn until 1943 and therefore a legitimate opponent for many years to come.
It is not that we can't but Ausf A to Ausf D are early "short" pre-series of the Panzer IV before the standardisation with the Ausf E. The earlier chassis had different hull and roadwheel design, plus narrower track width. Basically a new kit per production model... The Ausf D is the closest we can get without making it a total separate kit.
-
I'm sure both Pinky and Rubicon are 100% valid in their comments. Selfishly I would have liked to buy a legitimate Rubicon opponent to my Warlord 1939 Polish tanks. I had hoped their continued use in later years of the war would have made them a commercial proposition but that is clearly Rubicon's call.
-
You could always convert / kit bash a standard plastic IV kit . I did that to one of the BA IVs , its not perfect , but I got the staggered drivers plate , kit bashed the long exhaust out of T-34 fuel tanks and various plastic pipe . Added and removed details on the turret and hull , as well as messing around with the glasis plate hatches . The only part I'm still having trouble with is the single turret side doors , just can't seem to get two the same ::) . So I left it with the later 2 door side hatches , for now . Really not too worried about back dating the drive sprocket and idler wheel , any of the guys at the LHS who have seen it , don't know the difference any way !
-
I dip my lid to you ripley. Just reading your list tells me I'd be way beyond my level of incompetence. It is note worthy that you were prepared to go to this trouble to get to the variant you wanted. Of course you can't tell the difference applies to all but the most pedantic among us with most variants. You only have to look at the discussion on the Sherman variants to see how important it is to some to get it right. The very fact the differences are too great for Rubicon to produce the real thing (Ausf C) is enough to make me realise it is a task beyond my ability. Congratulations to Rubicon for intending to do as many variants as they can.
-
I'm sure both Pinky and Rubicon are 100% valid in their comments. Selfishly I would have liked to buy a legitimate Rubicon opponent to my Warlord 1939 Polish tanks. I had hoped their continued use in later years of the war would have made them a commercial proposition but that is clearly Rubicon's call.
I totally understand - we all have particular vehicles that we'd love to see in plastic from Rubicon, but which are probably not going to sell well enough to justify the investment. In my case, it's the Italian M13/40, but there have also been calls for Japanese and French tanks. I suspect these - and early war armour generally - fall into the 'niche market' category. 1/56 is already quite a specialised scale, so I expect that Rubicon need to be pretty hard-headed about which kits to target. That's why, inevitably, we're seeing them focus on German subjects (i.e. the BMW & sidecar, Maultier, Kettenkraftrad, various Paks and multiple half-track upgrade kits).
-
Fair enough Pinky. Perhaps when everyone in Rubicon is rich they might produce some Italian and 1939 vehicles just for us!
-
Tyro , you could kit bash yourself a C with minimal skill and effort, its just a matter of adding to or taking away pieces of plastic . You just have to decide how far you want to go . Get your self Squadron / Signal Panzer IV in Action book #12 ( about $15 US ) .Compare the drawings of the C to the plastic G/H kit . What has to change ? Lots is just cosmetic and won't really be noticed , even by FOW gamers ::). You need a flat drivers plate , no machine gun ( radio ops vision port from BA plastic Pzr III kit ). You need single turret doors ,( still trying to get mine right ) cupola moved back a bit and a bump out added to turret rear ( green stuff ), turret rear pistol ports , You need to have solid engine hatch doors ( fill with green stuff ) , and you need to make the long muffler and skinnier tube muffler ( T-34 fuel tanks and Plastruct tubing ) . You could add the raised brake access hatches to the glacis plate , but if you stow extra track there , no one will notice .And little things like remove turret roof ventilator and add air flap and signal port ( not really nessessary ) See really not hard with the right intel to build from , the first kit bash is always the hardest . Its gets so much easier as you try more . I'm to the stage where I am opening the Pzr IV / T-34 driver hatches as well as Pzr III / IV turret side doors , loader hatches on T-34 /85 and the rear escape hatch on my BA Panther . Ok , I have been building mostly 1/35 scale kits for 40 plus years , but I've done the same to them back in the day when you had to kit bash to get the version of the tank you wanted . Dragon wasn't around in the 70s to give you every single version of the Tiger ever built like they are today .
-
I know I won't change any minds but I couldn't resist doing a little research on the breakdown of the Panzer IV variants early in the war. It appears that all 211 built before September 1939 were available at the outbreak of war. They were 35 Ausf A, 42 Ausf B and 134 Ausf C. There were no later marks at this time. A 63% chance Polish forces encountering Panzer IV's were engaged by an Ausf C. The Germans admitted to losing 19 Panzer IV's during the campaign that were beyond repair. If evenly applied across the various marks that leaves 122 Ausf C at the end of the campaign.
For the invasion of France, Belgium and the Netherlands the German forces had 278 Panzer IV's (another source says 280). None of the variants had been retired at this time. Although sources I'm looking at don't clarify whether all existing early tanks were engaged in the battle they do suggest nearly all were, including Ausf A and B. I think it's reasonable to suggest all Ausf C were engaged as the last of them had only come off the production line six months earlier and served for years into the future. On this basis 44% of the Panzer IV's available for this campaign were Ausf C.
Therefore I submit anybody wanting to game either earlier period should also be keen to see a model of Panzer IV Ausf C.
As I say I don't expect to change any minds but I found this interesting. Somebody might have some more definitive numbers.
-
Oops, production of Ausf C stopped 8/9 months earlier not 6
-
For those that share my interest in the early war period I have found some more information on Panzer IV numbers.
After the invasion of Poland another 45 tanks were built before the years end. None in September, 20 in October, 11 in November and 14 in December. The number 45 I've read in a couple of places but the monthly breakdown comes from a publication called German Armour 1939-1940 by Eric Grove. All of these were the new Ausf D. To reach the number of Panzer IV's available on 10 May 1940 at least another 41 Ausf D must have been built in the months leading up to 10 May. That is 192 survivors from Poland (likely 122 Ausf C as in earlier post) plus another 86 Ausf D to make 278 total. Although we know the Ausf A's took part in this campaign if any were excused there may have been a few more Ausf D.
These production numbers look very small for the task about to be undertaken but it appears German production was heavily skewed towards production of 37mm armed tanks at the time. 1940 production included 862 Panzer 111 and 367 Panzer 38(t) compared with only 268 Panzer IV's.
I've read that the book Panzertruppen by Jentz reports 97 Panzer IV's were lost during this campaign (77 in May and 20 in June). 35% of those initially engaged. If we assume the losses were proportional across the variants that would include some 43 Ausf C reducing them to 79. The 86 Ausf D would be reduced by about 30 down to 56 plus any new production in that 6 weeks.
I think it's reasonable to conclude that Ausf C continued to be the most numerous Panzer IV up until the Armistice. In Eric Grove's words "this was the major single PzKpfw IV type in service in Poland and France".
-
This is very interesting (I presume you've read other authors' comments on the accuracy of German 'on strength' reports, upon which 'Panzertruppen' as based).
I share your interest in early war armour. I think the issue is simply cost versus reward. The 'Blitzkrieg' period simply doesn't attract the same level of interest as NW Europe, the Eastern Front and the Desert War. That shouldn't be the case - arguably it's just as interesting from a technical perspective, and more interesting from an operational/strategic perspective. I think it probably just comes down to the enduring attraction of the late war AFVs (particularly German types). As a result, apart from a few one-offs (and vehicles that served into the latter part of the war, such as armoured cars), the early war period was generally neglected by kit manufacturers until relatively recently. A vehicle like the Panzer IV Ausf C would, if done properly, require a lot of different components to a later Panzer IV. That's a significant investment, when the aim would be to have as many common components as possible. I'd guess that most wargamers who wanted to game that period would be quite happy with an Ausf D (even if it was less common) - or even an Ausf E - as all they're really going to want is a Panzer IV with a short 75mm that basically looks the part.
Hopefully, as Rubicon expands, they will have the resources to focus on this important period, and do it justice with a balanced range of French, British and German subjects. Rubicon's style is well-suited to these early vehicles, as most of them had narrow tracks which are easily produced in one piece - there will be very little loss of detail. The subjects I'd love to see would include:
- Pzkw 38t
- Pzkw II
- SdKfz 232 8 rad armoured car
- Somua S35
- Panhard 178 armoured car
- A13 Cruiser
- MKIV Light Tank
-
Pinky makes a number of good points.
I suspect that most players use the Bolt Action rules, and that does not differentiate between B to F, so they would be happy with any howitzer armed Panzer IV (Armies of Germany V1 page 47).
I have not read much on the early war period, but from what I have read the medium tanks made up about 10% of the Panzer divisions. Players of the early war period would probably be more interested in the light tanks.
I often wonder if the lack of interest in the early war period is psychological (as Britain had few if any land victories prior to North Africa) or availability. It may be a combination of the two.
There are no plastic infantry except Blitzkrieg Germans and no plastic tanks (though Our Gracious Hosts have teased us with a T26 http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=310.msg4876#msg4876)
As I have mentioned elsewhere, I wonder if a package of vehicles and figures could kick start interest in the period.
But this is wandering off topic.
-
What early war ? The war didn't start till Dec 1941 according to the Yanks ....lol . Yes there are quite a few interesting early war vehicles that I would like at least one model kit of . Maybe if one of the gaming companies release an early war specific set of rules , this era might get more attention . Will the Dunkirk movie help or hinder ?
-
One issue with the 'Blitzkrieg' era is that it's quite hard to represent in wargaming terms (at least in 28mm). You need rules that properly represent factors such as crew efficiency, effective radio communications, reconnaissance, situational awareness and reliability - factors that generally worked in the Germans' favour. More fundamentally, when one side's main advantage is superior tactics, how do you represent that on the tabletop, and still have an enjoyable game?
-
What early war ? The war didn't start till Dec 1941 according to the Yanks ....lol .
I remember a tour guide telling me that.
-
Yes there are quite a few interesting early war vehicles that I would like at least one model kit of . Maybe if one of the gaming companies release an early war specific set of rules , this era might get more attention . Will the Dunkirk movie help or hinder ?
Rules and figures.
One issue with the 'Blitzkrieg' era is that it's quite hard to represent in wargaming terms (at least in 28mm). You need rules that properly represent factors such as crew efficiency, effective radio communications, reconnaissance, situational awareness and reliability - factors that generally worked in the Germans' favour. More fundamentally, when one side's main advantage is superior tactics, how do you represent that on the tabletop, and still have an enjoyable game?
Good points.
As you say, most of the hardware is comparable.
You would have to have rules about tank crews enjoying the full protection of their armour or being able to see their environment and assist their infantry colleagues.
Maybe tanks can only act if shot at or after a command roll.
-
Tank combat would be very hard figure out . There are battles where one tank a KV II , held up an attacking Company for a day or or a Char B destroying a line of enemy vehicles in a short time . When used properly a single Char B or KV II could really ruin a Panzer III crew's day . True these are not the typical stories you hear about the battles of the early war but they are historical fact .
(https://s23.postimg.org/pogb5gjs7/kv2_dead.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/pogb5gjs7/)
This KV held up elements of 6 Panzer Div at Raseiniai June 1941.
-
Yes, and in game terms those kinds of encounters are easier to replicate in a wargame, because a vehicle with good paper stats is generally going to defeat vehicles with inferior stats. But in most cases, Char Bs were defeated; the crew had poor visibility, the commander had too many tasks, and they weren't used well. They were also vulnerable to a shot through the side ventilator.
-
There are good points here that probably deserve a topic of their own. Namely the rulesets we use to play 28mm WWII games and why we buy the models we do, which in turn influence Rubicon to make the choices they make.
Briefly, I think of Bolt Action and Chain of Command when thinking about rulesets for this period and scale. Both are intended for games set in 1939/1940. For Bolt Action Warlord have available an almost comprehensive set of Polish resin vehicles. I agree with Pinky there maybe short comings with these rules concerning effective radio communications, reliability etc but I'm not sure other holes can't be picked in them for different periods of the war for different reasons. Whether they can be improved on probably depends on your appetite for realism versus playability.
Back to the Panzer IV discussion and Pinky's comment on whether the numbers in German reports can be believed. I tend to give credence to evidence where it is believable and in the absence of more plausible evidence to the contrary. Fundamentally I think Eric Grove's conclusion that the Ausf C was the most common Panzer IV up until the French armistice is correct without evidence to the contrary.
I sometimes think I am the equivalent of the much disparaged Napoleonic Army button counter. Although I have some idea of the various Sherman hulls and main armament I wouldn't have a clue about the size of various hatches and where they go. In the unlikely event I knew I wouldn't criticise or point out to someone they had the wrong variant. However if I wanted to build an army with Sherman's I would want to do the research and buy the correct variant. Otherwise I would know it was wrong. Likewise it wouldn't be right to invade Poland in 1939 with any old short barrelled Panzer IV. It wouldn't be cricket! (small descent into farce here).
Of course Rubicon need to do what makes them strong. In which event we might get more of the vehicles we'd like to see eventually. I totally agree with all the vehicles on Pinky's 'love to see' list and would add on the German side Pzkw I and Pzkw 35(t). On the Allied side there is a long list.
-
Back to the Panzer IV discussion and Pinky's comment on whether the numbers in German reports can be believed. I tend to give credence to evidence where it is believable and in the absence of more plausible evidence to the contrary. Fundamentally I think Eric Grove's conclusion that the Ausf C was the most common Panzer IV up until the French armistice is correct without evidence to the contrary.
I just read a book which points out that German units routinely overstated their strength returns, so Jentz's numbers may not be as reliable as we all thought (at least in the latter part of the war). It doesn't undermine your point about the Ausf C.
-
That's very interesting Pinky. Can you give us the name of the book. I'll see if it is available and at what price.
-
It's a point made by Zaloga in a couple of books - Zaloga has taken upon himself the task of correcting the (in his view) false impressions created by some Panzer-obsessed authors. It's also mentioned by Forczyk in his books on armoured combat on the eastern Front. I would recommend these, except that I though the 2nd volume was a bit rushed compared to the 1st.
-
Thanks Pinky. I'm interested in what the motivation would be. I remember reading somewhere at least one commander of the SS Divisions at Arnhem had told his superiors before the battle many of his tanks were disabled and under repair. He feared they were going to be taken off him if they were known to be operational. Not sure how true that is.
-
I'll see if I can find the reference. You'd think that, as in your example, a unit leader would understate the number 'runners', for the reason you mention and also so he could some replacements.
-
So Forczyk's point is that Jentz's numbers overstate the actual number of tanks available. He says that the percentage of total write-offs in 1943 was only 12%, but the actual state of combat-readiness was far lower. According to Forczyk, strength returns included non-operational tanks, which were kept with the division rather than sending them back for depot-level maintenance. This was because the replacement system was chaotic and irrational, and units never knew when they would get tanks back from repair. From 'Tank Warfare on the Eastern Front 1943-1945'. As I said, this doesn't alter your point about the Ausf C.
-
That does make sense. Particularly the long grind in the East and later elsewhere. It occurs to me the same pressures on commanders probably didn't apply in the early campaigns in Poland and France. Firstly the campaigns were short and very mobile so badly damaged vehicles couldn't have kept up with their units. Secondly once the campaigns were over there were many months for the repair centres to do their work before they were needed again. In those circumstances it was probably in commanders interests to report honestly and get repairable vehicles fixed.
-
Pinky, I did note that you weren't saying this particular discussion related to the early war period and the Ausf C. By the way I do concede the Panzer IV Ausf C wasn't at Normandy, or later at Arnhem or in the Ardennes. Although (a little tongue in cheek) perhaps a couple of forlorn examples were dragged out of training establishments during the collapse of the Reich! A nice little scenario for a wargame.
-
That does make sense. Particularly the long grind in the East and later elsewhere. It occurs to me the same pressures on commanders probably didn't apply in the early campaigns in Poland and France. Firstly the campaigns were short and very mobile so badly damaged vehicles couldn't have kept up with their units. Secondly once the campaigns were over there were many months for the repair centres to do their work before they were needed again. In those circumstances it was probably in commanders interests to report honestly and get repairable vehicles fixed.
That's right - this point was being made in the context of the early 1943 period. But the German replacement system was terrible from the outset (mostly because of hopelessly inadequate production), and even in the 'Blitzkrieg' period the Panzer Divisions suffered from a gradual erosion in strength as tanks were knocked out or simply wore out. Apparently that was a major factor in the infamous 'halt order' as the Germans reached Dunkirk.
-
By the way I do concede the Panzer IV Ausf C wasn't at Normandy, or later at Arnhem or in the Ardennes. Although (a little tongue in cheek) perhaps a couple of forlorn examples were dragged out of training establishments during the collapse of the Reich! A nice little scenario for a wargame.
There were some early model Panzer IV's in Normandy - 21 Panzer had 21 of them.
An Ausf B (apparently - also sometimes identified as an Ausf C - it should be dark yellow, but it might be a very faded and weathered dark grey):
(https://s23.postimg.org/i8kpogqw7/Ausf_B.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/i8kpogqw7/)
An Ausf C of 21 Panzer Division (this one is quite well known and features in the Osprey Panzer IV title - note that it's probably dark grey with a dark yellow overspray, not overall dark yellow with green camo):
(https://s30.postimg.org/67vlcwkd9/Ausf_C.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/67vlcwkd9/)
-
Wow, that's interesting. It would appear the Ausf C would have wider appeal than even I thought. I'd read the survivors retired during 1943. Perhaps they did and made a comeback. The survival of the Ausf B is even more remarkable considering only 42 were built in the first place. I hope Mr Rubicon is aware of this. The 'C' might move one notch up the priority list. The gaming world doesn't appear to lack people interested in Normandy 1944.
-
IRC the IWM has a Pzr IV D hull with a long 75 mounted in the turret , captured in Normandy from a training unit rushed into combat . So the older versions of vehicles did see some combat ( SdKfz 222 in Berlin 45 :o )
-
This one?
http://preservedtanks.com/Profile.aspx?UniqueID=156
I am not sure if I have any photographs of it.
-
A lot of Panzers were rebuilt and upgraded in the process. I think that's the origin of the Tank Museum's 'hybrid' Panzer IV.
-
If you look at picture # 4 in the link smurf posted you can see it has the single turret side door and old style commanders cupola . The gun swap would be easy , the internals for the longer L43 or L48 gun rounds would not . There are pictures of similar tank in Encyclopedia of German tanks captioned tank driver school vehicle . Either wa,y for driver training , and gunner training when the longer guns with anti tank rounds its a cool vehicle . One of the old M3 style wheeled Shermans , that served in North Africa was knocked out in apr / may 45 near Berlin so all sides had vehicles that spent a long time in use
-
I think you're right ripley. All nations would have old equipment to some extent. Although those under the greatest stress and lacking the massive production capability of the US would be more likely to be placed in this position.
It occurs to me games would be more interesting if they occasionally included a variety of the old and new. Particularly if historically correct. Unfortunately I think we tend to be driven by points values and the like and the need to get the greatest bang for the buck in the effort to win.
-
I think you're right ripley. All nations would have old equipment to some extent. Although those under the greatest stress and lacking the massive production capability of the US would be more likely to be placed in this position.
The Germans did this a lot - especially in the final years. So you see Tiger Is with mis-matched components, usually serving in scratch units. But the US did it too - a lot of Sherman's were rebuilt, upgraded with later pattern gun shields, appliqué armour etc, and sent back into service.
It occurs to me games would be more interesting if they occasionally included a variety of the old and new. Particularly if historically correct. Unfortunately I think we tend to be driven by points values and the like and the need to get the greatest bang for the buck in the effort to win.
I agree entirely. But it seems to be a minority who play miniatures games principally for the visual enjoyment of having interesting models on the tabletop. This is an issue that I think Rubicon needs to keep in mind. Most wargamers would prefer a fairly generic Sherman with fully swappable turrets. With Rubicon's discontinued M4A3, there were more complaints about not getting 2 complete turrets than there were about the inaccurate 76mm turret. By producing multiple Sherman kits, but with limited swappable options (i.e. you can only build the model one way), they risk appealing more to modellers - in a scale primarily identified with wargaming. It's a difficult balancing act, because of course they are under constant pressure (including from many of us on this site) to provide better and better detail and accuracy.
-
You both make exceedingly good points.
As a "non gamer" (more due to other commitments than anything else) I tend to build what interests me (it also leads to long construction times as I have no dead lines). I do use army lists to add some structure to what I build.
If you build to game then there must be some reward to choosing to build stuff that is aesthetically pleasing but in game terms is pretty lame. I know that some competitions award points for both composition and authenticity.
In the old GDW rules Command Decision, the writer lamented the use of nicely painted Stuarts to locate the Tigers by blowing up.
On the options point, there is always a bit of annoyance over stuff left on the sprue after the model is built. Sometime there is nothing that can be done without reducing the options - all the left over running gear on the Tiger and the JPzr 38(t) are good examples.
The PSC kits leave almost complete hulls on the sprue.
On the other hand there are the bits of turret that Pinky mentions. The Sherman and T34 being good examples. Sometimes this can be a bit petty - another manufacturer's Churchill lacking a bin and three bits of detail (the Crusader does not count because there are bits to fully build two out of three turrets in the kit).
Manufacturers need to balance options, buildable options and accuracy.
They may gain kudos from a kit that builds a tank with two different turrets but lose the sale of a second kit. Okay, accuracy wise the finished model with the second turret is less likely to be accurate but the gamer is less likely to be bothered with that when the money can be spent on something else.
-
There appears to be different camps within the hobby. At one extreme I remember listening to a podcast in which the host was lamenting the fact the plastic guns that came with the game looked like anti-tank guns and were being used as howitzers (or was it the other way around). His guest confessed to not knowing what the difference was and what's more didn't care. They were to him mere gaming tokens.
I think I am at the other end of the spectrum and I'm looking for something near Tamiya accuracy with concessions to parts count for ease of construction and robustness to enable constant handling on the wargames table. Hence my desire for a genuine 1939 Panzer IV.
I suspect I am in the minority but perhaps a large minority. I note there is a thriving small industry in providing quite expensive wargaming terrain. Including very specific items like Pegasus Bridge in Normandy. I can't imagine these companies producing these if the interest is small.
Fortunately Rubicon have a demonstrated interest in producing a high quality product. Their Panzer IV Digital Library is a case in point. I'm sure it would have been easy to continue producing their original Panzer IV but they think they can do better and they are to be congratulated for that. I think if Rubicon produce products near Tamiya quality there is no reason why they can't capture some of the top end of the market with more of their products ending up in dioramas and looking good in display cabinets.
-
Tyroflyer - I'm pretty much with you. I have always been a big fan of Rubicon's original philosophy, which was to provide simplified but accurate wargaming kits. While (or perhaps because) I've been building armour kits for over 35 years, I don't want to glue on every single wheel - I really like the way Rubicon have simplified the tracks and other features. But the simplified tracks seem to be the feature that makes some people choose Warlord over Rubicon; they tend to dismiss it as looking 'toylike' (the lack of crew figures is another factor, but Rubicon are including figures now). Oddly, these same people are prepared to overlook the shortcuts that Warlord take (such as solid roadwheels) which arguably are just as noticable.
I agree that Rubicon could be the 1/56 equivalent of Tamiya. I think they struck almost the perfect balance of options, detail and ease of assembly in the JagdPzr 38t and Crusader kits (and the simplified tracks don't result in any real loss of detail). I think these are the best plastic kits in 1/56 scale available (I know they don't include crew or stowage, but Rubicon will soon have all of that covered with separate sets). They are detailed enough for a modeller, and accurate, versatile and easy enough to build for most wargamers. The forthcoming M4A3 is a bit more of a compromise - lots of features for modellers (and personally I'm very happy that it includes the extended end connectors and the HVSS suspension), but less options that are useful to wargamers. Rubicon slightly fudged the tracks by adding more detail to the front, but not the back. I don't think that's going to appease the modellers. I'm not sure what the answer is here - it will be interesting to see what they do with the tracks on the forthcoming Panzer IV range. If the detail could be enhanced (perhaps by slide moulding) then these kits will be enormously popular on both sides of the fence.
We seem to have come full circle, and are thus back on topic...
-
I don't think any company making kits in a game scale will ever satisfy every camp , but Rubicon , IMO , comes pretty close . As a model builder I would like more kits of tanks I like , weather they be a single version kit or a 2 in 1 with alternate turrets . Even a 3 ( maybe 4 ) in one kit like Rubicons Tiger , Stug , Hetzer and Crusader kits . Yea , lots of " useless " bits left over maybe , but then again , who knows which kit in the future might get up graded by steel wheel Tiger tracks , the Crusader 1 turret or an early Stug roof . Keep up the good work Rubicon . If I want a version bad enough , I kit bash it my self ::)
(https://s24.postimg.org/g5fhiv8ht/IMG_20170122_215407467.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/g5fhiv8ht/)
(https://s28.postimg.org/rbzc2hjsp/IMG_20170122_215458279.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/rbzc2hjsp/)
Plastic Warlord Panzer IV G/H turned into a D . Still haven't got the turret side doors figured out , but I'm working on it >:(
-
Thank you for all the comments - had taken notes and some being followed up by our studio team.
Being a design studio, it is difficult to please everyone, including the bossman! While we have the freedom to create what we wanted to a certain degree, we do have a lot of constraints throughout the whole process.
Design Phase - With the available references and data, trying to consolidate components from several variants into a single "vehicle". Also need to check historical photo with museum/collector vehicles. Sometimes (which is rare) we have to omit features or try to fake it to make the kit multi-variant.
Prototype Phase - Depending on the number of sprues per kit, we have to make good use of limited space to fit everything onto these sprues. Some parts needed to be combined or simplified for mould making.
Mould Making Phase - Mould release angle is our biggest enemy. All parts are designed with mould release angle in mind. Facing of parts played an important role on how fine details each part can be. Making figures require a totally different approach and mould making process.
Other factors affecting production or alterations include:
- overall production cost per project
- extra cost to amend design
- extra cost to change/modify mould
- importance of making amendments
- time to market
For example, a multi-slide mould is an excellent solution to create very nice one-piece track; but that will increase our total production cost by over 30%... just for that two particular parts! Then come the critical decision - should I have better tracks or an extra sprue for all the other variants? Truck cabin is a totally different story, a multi-slide mould improve assembly experience and model integrity; but to keep cost down, accompanying sprues had to be limited to one or two at max.
This is the type of design & production considerations we faced everyday.
;)
-
Thank you Rubicon for your post. I hope you forgive us for attempts to nudge you in the direction we want as individuals. I recognise I don't know the cost of certain decisions and you can't please everyone. Hopefully as time goes on more and more kits will become available and the gaps will be fewer.
-
For example, a multi-slide mould is an excellent solution to create very nice one-piece track; but that will increase our total production cost by over 30%... just for that two particular parts! Then come the critical decision - should I have better tracks or an extra sprue for all the other variants? Truck cabin is a totally different story, a multi-slide mould improve assembly experience and model integrity; but to keep cost down, accompanying sprues had to be limited to one or two at max.
The Rubicon approach works brilliantly for the truck kits. I don't think anyone has any issue with the level of simplification.
Where you have a range of kits which have virtually identical tracks and running gear (like the Panzer IV - and any spin-offs, like the JagdPanzer IV and Wirbelwind), would it perhaps be worth the additional cost to use slide moulding? Any differences in detail can be covered by providing different outer wheels/sprockets/idlers. [Edit - on second thoughts, this is probably getting too far into Rubicon's internal costing etc, which really isn't something they should feel they need to debate on a website! :-[ ]
-
Going back to the discussion about upgraded early model Panzer IVs, I found this photo of a row of refurbished Panzer IV Ausf Ds. Apparently, starting from July 1942, these early models received the L/48 gun, Ausf G wheels and tracks, and turret Schurzen. Some ended up in Italy and one was captured in Normandy.
(https://s27.postimg.org/4jcqt4tq7/IMG_0041.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/4jcqt4tq7/)
-
Pinky, I'll forgive Rubicon if they don't include this one in their kits!
Is there any book you know of that includes details of upgraded tanks, ie what was done to them and to how many. In your example my reference simply says 'Later in 1943, several Ausf D were refitted with 7.5cm KwK L/48 for use with training and replacement units.' Potentially several could mean a substantial number (or not).
-
I don't know if this information exists. According to Spielberger, "all vehicles that were sent back to Germany to be repaired during the war were always brought up to the latest technical level. It was quite possible to install improved assemblies, additional armour and more powerful weapons in these older vehicles. A precise technical identification was thus made considerably more difficult.". I take it from this that the available records don't distinguish between new and rebuilt tanks.
Apparently 21 unmodified early model Panzer IVs served with 21st Panzer in Normandy [edit: but see below].
-
21 Panzer Div appears to have accumulated a lot of old equipment including French vehicles from 1940. When you say it had 21 old unmodified Panzer IV's do you mean Ausf A to E? Is the composition of the 21 known?
-
Panzer Regiment 22 initially had 70 unmodified Hotchkiss tanks in I Abteilung and 54 up-gunned Somuas in II Abteilung. The Hotchkiss were replaced with Panzer IVs. Most of the Somuas in II Abteilung were replaced with 21 Panzer IVs but 23 Somuas were retained (it was supposed to get Panthers but they hadn't arrived). It is these 21 replacement Panzer IVs that we're talking about.
Some sources say that all of these Panzer IVs were old models (hence my earlier post). Jentz's 'Panzertruppen 2' says there were "21 PzIV(kz)" in June 1944. But I did some more digging. According to Lefevre's 'Panzers in Normandy Then and Now', "there were around half a dozen ancient Ausf Bs or Cs in II Abteilung of Panzer Regiment 22 which were most likely used for training or as OP tanks but were nonetheless sent into action.".
Panzer Regiment 22 also had Panzer IIIs serving in HQ units - according to Jentz there were "4 PzIII(75)", although Lefevre says there were 6. Presumably they were Ausf Ns. 21st Panzer also included Sturmgeschutz Abteilung 200, which fielded self-propelled 75mm and 105mm guns based on Hotchkiss and Lorraine chassis.
Overall, I'm inclined to believe Lefevre's numbers because Jentz doesn't mention any French tanks in service with 21st Panzer Division, which seems wrong. Also, Lefevre references a contemporaneous organisational chart - but maybe the French vehicles were dropped by June? Perhaps someone else has more info. I've only found photos of 2 of these old Panzer IVs, including the ones I posted above.
-
Thanks for the comments and discussion on the Panzer IV. Had been interesting read. Will definitely take them into considerations!
After a long silence on updates, here is the latest drawings on the Ausf D turret...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Turret%20D%20170131-02_zpsiuempvp2.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Turret%20D%20170131-03_zps1gv3vamu.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
So the Ausf D is going to be part of the Panzer IV range? That's great! Along with the forthcoming Rubicon SdKfz 222, it's another reason to think about doing some Afrika Korps vehicles.
The turret looks very nice - I really like the separate side doors. The AA mounting wasn't introduced until later, however, so it wouldn't appear on an Ausf D. There were some quite prominent bolts on the cupola, although maybe these were omitted for moulding reasons.
(https://s24.postimg.org/6xs9btva9/Pzr_IVD.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/6xs9btva9/)
-
I agree. This looks first class.
I can't help noticing this turret looks very similar to the Ausf C. I think with an alternate gun mantlet and side hatches (I think the vision ports weren't as deep) it could be built in this version as well. An expert will probably point out I'm wrong.
-
There were some quite prominent bolts on the cupola, although maybe these were omitted for moulding reasons.
You are correct, those bolts had to be omitted to eliminate moulding issues to save production cost.
-
Looking good.
-
It looks sooo good! I can't wait to see the Ausf.j ::)
-
Creating these digital libraries will undoubtedly be hugely useful & I hope that they're eventually extended to the whole range.
I'd be curious as to how Rubicon might handle the Ausf J's mesh schurzen, (if indeed they decide to) as I'd have thought it'd be a bit fine at this scale for easy plastic molding & while easier in PE, it'd probably be rather fragile for a wargaming model.
-
I'd be curious as to how Rubicon might handle the Ausf J's mesh schurzen, (if indeed they decide to) as I'd have thought it'd be a bit fine at this scale for easy plastic molding & while easier in PE, it'd probably be rather fragile for a wargaming model.
TBH, we are still having a big debate over at the studio on the Ausf J mesh schurzen... we now have 2 to 3 possible solutions, one not so realistic but practical, while the other one is realistic but very expensive to produce!
-
Is the mesh Schurzen really worth including? It's very rarely seen in photos (although admittedly the Germans weren't taking as many photos by the time it appeared). If it's not done properly then it's likely to look a bit rubbish. If you were thinking about options to include in a late model Panzer IV kit (presumably covering the Ausf G, H and J), then you could consider including a turret for one of the anti-aircraft versions. Just a thought...
-
maybe they can make it with only turret's schurzen it will not be so bad
-
Is the mesh Schurzen really worth including? It's very rarely seen in photos (although admittedly the Germans weren't taking as many photos by the time it appeared). If it's not done properly then it's likely to look a bit rubbish.
That's exactly part of the debate, lol. We are still looking into it, we still have not reached the Ausf J. Is a long way...
If you were thinking about options to include in a late model Panzer IV kit (presumably covering the Ausf G, H and J), then you could consider including a turret for one of the anti-aircraft versions. Just a thought...
That was already in the plan! ;)
-
That was already in the plan! ;)
I suspected as much, as you the same thing so successfully with the Crusader. A late Panzer IV with the option of building a Wirbelwind would be quite a kit!
-
IRC shurzen in true 1/48 scale looks like coffee filter material if you make it exact . You would have to make the holes bigger than 1/56 so the eye could actually see it , not to mention the problems you might have plugging the holes up when painting . That being said I have some plastic window screen that looks the part ( although not to scale :-[ ) which I intend to use on the scratch J I'm working on
-
Would a plastic frame with a photo-etch mesh work as a first approximation, and a photo-etch frame for nearer scale?
-
The supports on the hull were the same as the H . It was the bar on the actual panels the changed , instead of a C channel or a L shaped bar it was a pipe , so round plastic rod would work . IRC there was a thread on missing lynx about it a few months ago .discussing how big it would be in 1/35 scale . ( IRC about 3mm diameter ). Plus the thread talked about using an IKEA frying pan slash guard for the mesh. So is pretty small in 1/35
(https://s30.postimg.org/epr4q6rm5/pz_iv_j_wreck_zpscmpdhiuh.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/epr4q6rm5/)
(https://s27.postimg.org/n65i369pb/pz_IV_rear_zpswjryht7w.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/n65i369pb/)
Now that I'm home from work I can post some photos . The mesh looks real small , maybe 1cm square ? That won't fly in 1/56 scale , have to be over sized . Also note the extended hull sides to incorporate the tow rings on the J in the top picture
-
I seem to recall that Nitto (anyone remember them?) provided 'mesh' Schurzen with their 1/76 scale Panzer IV. Basically a criss-cross texture on solid plastic. It didn't work.
-
We will worry about the "mesh" Schurzen when we come to it... now with an update on the Panzer IV hull in general.
Here is an almost finished Ausf F1 for preview...
NOTE: The turret mount MG was a mistake, forgot to remove it from the render!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-F1%20170131-01_zpsn4hnf6s1.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-F1%20170131-02_zpsmgfpwizx.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-F1%20170131-03_zpsb5r4kuvd.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-F1%20170131-04_zps5c2talaw.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-F1%20170131-05_zpsyqiervkd.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-F1%20170131-06_zpsfkepqk4u.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looks very good . In the 3rd drawing down ( right side ), you show the gas cap flaps . They were only on the left side of the tank . Fuel tanks on left floor , ammo stowage on right . BA goofed on their plastic IV and had caps both sides , I of course, removed the right ones ;D
(https://s30.postimg.org/l8xdt4dyl/IV_2.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/l8xdt4dyl/)
The fuel tanks are under these ready rack bins . On the right side you have ammo under the ready racks
-
Looking good. Again, no anti-aircraft mount was fitted at this stage.
The antenna mount on this drawing is for the later version with a rear-mounted antenna. The antenna mount for these earlier versions (which folded down into the trough) should look like this:
(https://s30.postimg.org/kpwqz9ktp/antenna.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/kpwqz9ktp/)
-
Looks good.
-
Pinky is right,f1 hasn't an mg
anyway,nice work!
-
Fixed the missing links from previous post. Seems like Photobucket had a server restore, and some of the image uploads were deleted. Please report any missing links, and we will try to fix them.
-
Over 200 Pz IV Ausf D were produced by Krupp-Gruson, from Oct 39 to Oct 40,
and had been used in various theatres into late war. Similar to what we did with
the M4 Sherman, this is part of our Panzer IV Digital Library project.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20D%20170224-01_zpshwziabtv.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20D%20170224-02_zpsrfb88meo.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20D%20170224-03_zpsz2mp2tg5.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20D%20170224-04_zps67euxych.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looks great!
-
Agreed - looks really good. One down, Ausf E to J to go!
-
Looks good. Unfortunately I can't attack Poland with it in September 1939. I wonder whether it would be possible to modify it via an expansion kit to make an Ausf C. I think 3 small pieces would correct the turret (new mantlet and side access hatches). The hull machine gun would need to be removed and replaced with a plate that is flat with the driver's. The real tanks were a centimetre different in width (nothing in 1/56 scale).
Brings me to the wider question whether even more vehicles could be made via an expansion kit. Perhaps command/observation tanks or perhaps parts to make a submersible for river crossing. Perhaps metal parts could help here.
-
Agreed - looks really good. One down, Ausf E to J to go!
The drive sprocket is still the wrong type. We will add new drive sprockets and rear idler wheels once the main hulls are done!
We also have the F1 done too... will post later!
;)
-
Brings me to the wider question whether even more vehicles could be made via an expansion kit. Perhaps command/observation tanks or perhaps parts to make a submersible for river crossing. Perhaps metal parts could help here.
Expansion kit will depends on development and production costs. Sometimes is not the best solution or interest of RM.
A good example is our SdKfz 250/251 series. It takes 4 base kits to "justify" all the expansions that we had done; don't think some will ever make the money back! Is more of a trail project to see how cost can be distributed among various sub-projects.
Being that said, we are also looking into small volume production - resin or metal... But development time is the same; and production cost (per unit) probably much higher too!
-
Well thanks for considering it Rubicon.
I think there are quite a few things that could go on an expansion. Even spare lengths of tracks and/or wheels could be added to a number of other Panzer IV specific items in an expansion kit.
-
I think there are quite a few things that could go on an expansion. Even spare lengths of tracks and/or wheels could be added to a number of other Panzer IV specific items in an expansion kit.
Spare parts are for a stowage kit. It basically takes at least 6 months to get a project finished if there are no surprises; an additional one or two months if there is a major holiday or an overlook during the design phase.
-
Ok. No hurry. I thought stowage kits would be fairly generic whereas an expansion could include spares for the tank in question (tracks & wheels often carried but not often for a different vehicle).
-
In April 1941, production of the Panzer IV Ausf F started. It featured 50mm single-plate armor on the turret and hull, as opposed to the appliqué armor added to the Ausf E, and a further increase in side armor to 30mm. The main engine exhaust muffler was shortened and a compact auxiliary generator muffler was mounted to its left. The weight of the vehicle was now 22.3 tonnes, which required a corresponding modification of track width from 380 to 400mm to reduce ground pressure. The wider tracks also facilitated the fitting of track shoe "ice sprags", and the rear idler wheel and front sprocket were modified. The designation Ausf F was changed in the meantime to Ausf F1, after the distinct new model, the Ausf F2, appeared. A total of 471 Ausf F (later temporarily called F1) tanks were produced from April 1941 to March 1942.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20F1%20170224-01_zpsqpmwfyo3.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20F1%20170224-02_zpsvuu1444t.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20F1%20170224-03_zps0huidgae.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20F1%20170224-04_zpsuzdh8fah.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Both look really good . The D should have S shaped tow hooks on the fender , you have the later C shaped ones . The F1 seems to be missing the small square shaped muffler ( could be picture angle ) . And jacks on both really need to be bulked up , they look like a small car jack , could the image be a cad design limitation ? I've noticed somethings look really off in cad , but are perfectly fine when rendered in plastic
-
Very nice. Would you package both the Ausf D and the Ausf F together, or seperately?
-
Very nice. Would you package both the Ausf D and the Ausf F together, or seperately?
There is no product yet... still in 3D drawings. Need to see what all these drawings brought us to!
We still have Ausf E / F2 / G / H / J to do!
-
Both look really good . The D should have S shaped tow hooks on the fender , you have the later C shaped ones . The F1 seems to be missing the small square shaped muffler ( could be picture angle ) . And jacks on both really need to be bulked up , they look like a small car jack , could the image be a cad design limitation ? I've noticed somethings look really off in cad , but are perfectly fine when rendered in plastic
I think the muffler for the auxiliary generator is there - the corner seems to be visible behind the engine muffler. I didn't notice the tow hooks - good spot. Everything else looks good.
-
Could be there , would be much easier to see detail in a regular front / rear / left / right type drawing . These 3/4 views in cad always seem off to me . Maybe its me ::) lol . Good to see Rubicon fine tuning their Panzer IV file , I hope all the versions they want to make do get made as I want one of each , at least
-
If they were available I'd buy one of each too. From A onwards! After all, they all served.
-
Progress had been smooth! Panzer IV Ausf E basically done. Sprocket wheels will be done last!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-E%20170301-01_zpsjs53kp6a.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-E%20170301-02_zpslyjld3vd.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-E%20170301-03_zpshmime5fr.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-E%20170301-04_zps6d3nqmsx.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
This also looks good. It would be great if you could also include an engine deck with the raised louvres, as fitted to desert vehicles - the Ausf E will be popular as a DAK vehicle. Also - would it be possible to include some of the common stowage items that began to appear on Panzer IVs by this time, such as the spare wheels, tracks and jerrycan racks?
-
It would be great if you could also include an engine deck with the raised louvres, as fitted to desert vehicles - the Ausf E will be popular as a DAK vehicle.
Any good references? Don't seem to see any info on the Schiffer book.
Also - would it be possible to include some of the common stowage items that began to appear on Panzer IVs by this time, such as the spare wheels, tracks and jerrycan racks?
That will really depends on sprue space. Will try!
-
I'd like consideration to be given to including these items in an expansion kit. There appears to be a lot of items that could supplement a basic Panzer IV kit.
- raised louvers (DAK) variant
- Pz Bef Wg/Pz Beob Wg
- Tauchpanzer IV
- components to create earlier Pz IV's :)
- Pz IV spare wheels, tracks etc
I could include the Bruckenleger IV but think that involves too much plastic! Each expansion kit sold would mean at least one base kit sold as well, possibly more.
-
Here is the raised louvre design for a tropicalised Panzer IV. According to the Squadron/Signal Panzer IV title, these were standard from the late Ausf D onwards, but I don't think that's right as there are photos of Ausf Es with 'flat' engine decks. This seems to be the initial version (I think this is an Ausf F, but it was the same on the Ausf E):
(https://s4.postimg.org/atovwdbix/IMG_0070.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/atovwdbix/)
(https://s29.postimg.org/bl8ntskab/f1louvres_5.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/bl8ntskab/)
It looks as though the design was subsequently changed, so that both sets of louvres were rectangular and narrower.
Also:
- the Ausf E should have appliqué armour on the superstructure sides on each side of the driver and co-driver. It might be there (I can see some rivets), but the side visors need to be recessed.
- Ausf Ds were retro-fitted with turret stowage bins and appliqué armour plates, just like the Ausf E. I hope this can be done with the kit.
-
Also, the smoke candle rack design on the Ausf D was fixed to the muffler, not the rear plate. Here's what it should look like (note the removable cover):
(https://s28.postimg.org/xtkjb0jrd/IMG_0071.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/xtkjb0jrd/)
(https://s28.postimg.org/557l7shl5/IMG_0072.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/557l7shl5/)
I think the Ausf E's should also look like this. I see that Dragon's Ausf E has the same smoke candle rack design as yours, but I can't find a photo of that design.
The Ausf F version is right - it was moved up to the upper left corner.
-
You get early style tanks with some, not all , newer features .The Germans used the new stuff as soon as it arrived .So if the tropical engine deck covers arrive , they go right onto the assembly line . If you run out , you use up the older style you still have .There was a discussion about this dealing with Panthers and Stugs on the Missing-Lynx site a while ago .
-
Sure, but the raised louvres were initially a modification for vehicles intended for North Africa. As you know, some tropicalised vehicles ended up going to the Eastern Front instead, but it looks as though the raised louvres didn't become a production feature until the Ausf F1.
I assume that Rubicon could provide a choice of engine decks, as they did with the M10/M36. It looks as though an Ausf D/E/F kit would need 3 different engine decks.
-
I guess it could end up being a 3 sprue kit like the Tiger . I wonder if Rubicon really wants to go that route , on a plain Jane tank ( not cool like Tiger :) ). There's got to be a point where it costs more to add all the features than they're to get back in sales . Maybe a Panzer IV detail kit of all little bits and pieces of a variety of Pzr IV marks A- J , engine covers , driver's visors , add on armor panels , Thoma skirts , etc . I'ld be up for getting one , but its the kind of thing released in small numbers in resin , for big bucks in 35th scale , I don't think Rubicon will bite ;D
-
Good points, but the Panzer IV is a pretty vital tank, and likely to be popular.
I'm expecting Rubicon to do at least 2 separate kits - maybe Ausf D/E/F and and Ausf G/H/J (possibly with an optional Wirbelwind turret, given that these later versions weren't hugely different from each other so less parts are needed). That would be more manageable, and hopefully give them enough space on the sprues for some extras.
-
@Pinky, we are indeed looking into two Panzer IV kits. Will see how the rest of the drawings going along, then decide. We have decided to omit or simplify some minor features to cut down on part counts. Some parts are just too difficult to produce and look real.
-
[edited]
I do not know enough about the Panzer IV to comment on any potential kit count or accuracy of the isometric pictures we have seen (they look nice though).
I do understand the merit of Ripley's comments on orthographic projections, they are easier to compare with other sources' drawings. They do however require the viewer to be able to assemble the drawing as a 3D object in their head, something that is not required for the perspective modified isometric views.
Some orthographic views would be nice, engine decks and hatches are easier to see with a top view and silhouettes often define people's idea of what a particular vehicle looks like.
-
My thoughts are an expansion kit with all the bits and pieces for different variants might not be profitable in its own right but would create extra sales of the base kit to make up for that.
-
The J version alone would require , 2 kinds of exhaust ( barrel & flame damper ) , 2 idler wheels , ( welded & cast ) , steel return rollers , . some had the extended hull sides with the tow ring , both full steel and Thoma mesh hull skirts , I don't know if 2 kits will cover the IV
(https://s24.postimg.org/6zmx05xox/pz_iv_j_wreck_zpscmpdhiuh.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/6zmx05xox/)
(https://s21.postimg.org/vsdmygqs3/pz_IV_rear_zpswjryht7w.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/vsdmygqs3/)
(https://s21.postimg.org/rda204xf7/EDBA3_DFD_179_D_AA8_B_9_F7_C_2636_F2592_EF7.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/rda204xf7/)
(https://s12.postimg.org/lgtaemsw9/IV_J_late.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/lgtaemsw9/)
-
Ausf J is the most troublesome for us because of multiple production versions; we might end up doing only ONE variant instead. Will see...
-
It isn't necessary to cover all the variations in the Ausf J. Just pick one if the more common incarnations that doesn't involve too many additional parts.
-
All versions of the IV have a few variations depending on where on the production line was when things were introduced . The early A-D had different hub caps on the road wheels than the later models . Then there's the different drive sprockets and idlers , the exhausts , as well as various vision ports on the turret and hull sides came and went . Just give it your best shot Rubicon .
-
We spend a lot of time trying to find the most common features of each production variant,
then consolidate them into each type. Since Panzer IVs were being produced by so many
factories, each had their own changes due to availability of components during the war. We
can only do so much on this front.
Here is an Ausf F1, with something different...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-F1%20170309-1_zpskawgtiva.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
I like it.
It is relatively small changes like this I think would make an Ausf C from an Ausf D. Then the entire war would be covered.
-
Wow. I don't believe that I've ever seen a picture of the add-on turret armor like that pictured before. Where did you reference this from??
-
Called a " Vorpanzer " ( tank with additional armor )
(https://s17.postimg.org/5qhfzsvq3/7268242916_41f41b5523_z.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/5qhfzsvq3/)
(https://s30.postimg.org/jb0gnoaot/9d1e3f0508ca4f82803c9bd502d25d07.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/jb0gnoaot/)
-
Interesting. I would suggest there are better things to put on the sprue though.
[edit - I noticed both Ripley's photos show Ausf Es, not Ausf Fs.]
-
Interesting. I would suggest there are better things to put on the sprue though.
It really depends on how many variants per kit plus how many sprue and sprue space is available.
This is a digital library, and we are trying to put in as many features into the library as possible in
a single go! These feature might not be able to make it to the product, but might appear as an
expansion in either plastic or resin form... just like what we did with the Sherman project.
-
I like your thoughts on this Rubicon. I hope you include Ausf C parts! As said before there are lots of bits that could go into an expansion which would encourage extra sales of the base kits.
-
I can't vouch for the truth of this but various internet sites indicate these 'vorpanzer' additions could be found on Pz IV Ausf D, E and F. I suspect they weren't common on any of them but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be available in an expansion.
-
I can't find any photos of Ausf Fs with this additional armour. The Ausf F was uparmoured anyway - maybe that's why.
-
I can't find any photos of Ausf Fs with this additional armour. The Ausf F was uparmoured anyway - maybe that's why.
This was particularly mentioned (with technical drawings) in the "Panzer IV & Its Variants" book from Spielberger German Armor & Military Vehicle Series.
-
Pzr IV B - D turret armor 30mm , superstructure 30mm ( plus 30mm bolt on late D/E ). F - turret 50mm , super 50mm . G - J turret 50mm , super G - 50mm +30mm bolt on , H-J 80mm . Not much protection in any of them really . Goes back to the initial design as a infantry support vehicle . The Vorpanzer stuff might not be for everybody , the same with the Tauchpanzer , submersible details for those underwater traveling tanks for Operation Sea Lion . Maybe Rubicon can do a Panzer IV add on kit with all these weird bits and the late J exhausts , mesh side skirts , etc . I'm sure a few of us modellers are strange enough to want these weird , low produced tanks , wether there is a large enough market amongst the gamers to make it profitbale is another story . If not, I'm sure one of the after market companies could fill the void . They do make ARV add on resin / metal bits for the Cromwell , Sherman and Panzer III ., as well you can get AM turrets ( Sherman , Panther F , Whibelwind ) and dozer blades . I'm sure its just a matter of time till more AM parts are released
-
I am only wanting to buy at this time 4 x panzer IV ausf J as this will fill an immediate gap in my collection.
I don't do anything earlier than 1944 currently, but that could change.
I am desperately waiting for the sdkfz 250/9 kit as well, although i did pick up a 251/3 and a 250/1 last weekend.
Tim
-
Really the only things common to all versions of the J was the L48 gun and no auxiliary engine ( and its small exhaust ) for the turret traverse , instead it was manual .( The space was used for extra fuel tank) . You could find J's with the large barrel or flame damper exhaust , regular production or extended side with tow ring hull . Rubber or steel return rollers ( 3 or 4 ), some had the side visors on the turret , hull sides and loader's side of the turret face removed . Both metal plate and wire mesh ( Thoma ) side skirts were seen . Most J's had the single piece commanders hatch but not all . Just remove the small exhaust from the late G/H and you have a easy to make J .The difference in a L43 and L48 gun in this scale is mm , so why worry about it ? The rest is just little cosmetic details ( who sees the turret and hull visors hiding behind the skirts any way ?( I posted pictures of various J versions on Mar 02 page 8 this thread ),
-
I think the gun length of an L43 is 334mm less than the L48. That's 6mm in 1/56 scale. I think I can spot that particularly if the different vehicles are near each other. Others might like to differ but I'd like to see Rubicon model these different variants. It think it adds depth to your tank collection!
In contrast my reference suggests an Ausf C is 10mm narrower than a D. Or less than point 2 of a millimetre at 1/56 scale. Pretty sure I wouldn't notice that. I don't know whether there is a theory on what the human eye/brain can distinguish. I imagine there is a relationship between the size of the discrepancy and the proportion that is of the object in question.
-
Personally I would rather try to match the look of the vehicle I'm trying to model then really go to town , scale wise . I mean the real side skirts were 5-8mm in thickness , how thick are the plastic ones in the kit ? Even using 1mm plastic card they are still too thick for scale . And , except for a small hand full of rivet counter nerds ( of which I'm one ::) ) most regular folks don't have a clue what tank I've built ( Pzr III or IV ) never mind a H , J or N, unless I tell them . And again , except for us nerds , people have no clue what details should be included on said tank , and what should not . Is there a right or wrong way to build? No , we all build to our own skill level and enjoyment wether the kit is to be used as a gaming piece or in a diorama . * Did Rubicon include L48 guns in the Stug III kit ? Might be a source of longer gun barrels
-
I accept your point with the side skirts ripley. However I don't think there is a technical limitation with the barrel length. Depending on the wargames rules being used it might be valuable to model armour variations (eg vorpanzer) or different barrel lengths representing different penetration capabilities. I think it adds interest to the hobby.
I agree not many observers will know the difference but it's the model builder/owner that's learning and hopefully gaining something when they part with their money. My two cents worth anyway.
-
I can't find any photos of Ausf Fs with this additional armour. The Ausf F was uparmoured anyway - maybe that's why.
This was particularly mentioned (with technical drawings) in the "Panzer IV & Its Variants" book from Spielberger German Armor & Military Vehicle Series.
The uparmouring of the Ausf F is mentioned but I can't see any mention of an Ausf F Vorpanzer [edit - I think we're talking about different Spielberger books].
The uparmouring of the Ausf F put more weight on the suspension, so the tracks were widened. Personally, I don't think that's going to be noticeable on a 1/56 scale kit - especially when the tracks are already somewhat simplified.
-
Pinky, the Tank Encyclopedia has an artists side view of what purports to be a Pz IV F1 Vorpanzer. I don't know what evidence was used to create it.
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/nazi_germany/Panzer_IV.php
-
Yes, I saw that. I don't think they're a very reliable source - especially their colour schemes.
I found a very poor photo of an Ausf F1 with Vorpanzer, and a little bit of information from what seems to be a Spielberger book. I think this may be Rubicon's source. My point is that the Ausf F already had increased armour protection, and by adding the Vorpanzer they would have increased the weight further. Perhaps they just experimented with it?
I think these vehicles are in France in 1942. On close inspection, only the first one is an Ausf F1.
(https://s11.postimg.org/44ef74izz/IMG_0073.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/44ef74izz/)
-
It's a shame we don't appear to know when this extra armour first appeared. It would give a clue when it arrived on the production line and therefore on which variant. That is assuming it wasn't only a retrofit.
I wonder if it was considered worthwhile for tanks intended for employment in urban areas where the extra weight (poorly distributed) was less important than when travelling cross country. Pure speculation on my part. I note when the L43 weapon appeared the 'vorpanzer' extra pieces seem to have disappeared. The extra weight of the new weapon probably put an end to the idea.
My guess is it first appeared on Ausf E, Lasted until Ausf F1 and possibly retrofitted to Ausf D. However the paucity of photographic evidence suggests it was never common.
-
The Vorpanzer term also includes just the extra bolted on hull armor as seen on D& E versions . From what I can find out from searching Missing Lynx and various kit reviews , mostly D & E got the turret armor ( numbers unknown, - the thought on ML is that they all were sent to one unit in Russia ) , there is a picture of one C and those 2 F1 s Pinky posted ( in Russia ) , with the turret armor . If other C s and F1 s got it , no other pictures have been found . Never say never with German stuff , but it seems that the up armored hull , turret and longer gun came out and the vorpanzer add ons were no longer needed .
-
"Vorpanzer" means "fore-armour" - spaced armour.
One caption I found for the photo above says the Vorpanzer on the Ausf F1 glacis is as fitted to the Panzer III Ausf L.
-
The bolted on hull armor was spaced , like on the IV D as well as the Panzer III . It was the hull side and nose armor that was bolted with no spacing .
-
Here is our Wire Mesh Side Skirt test for the Ausf J...
Still have not decided on how to produce it, awaiting
additional tests to decide!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%2015Mar17-1_zpsmsn0pmni.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
That would be some plastic moulding ^__^
Photo etch nickel silver or stainless steel?
-
That would be some plastic moulding ^__^
Photo etch nickel silver or stainless steel?
We have not decide yet. This drawing is for plastic moulding - which we know our mould maker will probably kill us!
Looking into several solutions... too early to decide.
-
I certainly admire you for trying to make this work. I personally don't think it's worth it, but kudos if you can manage this in plastic.
-
I certainly admire you for trying to make this work. I personally don't thin it's worth it, but kudos if you can manage this in plastic.
We are still building up on our digital library. Towards the end of phase 1 (technical drawings), we will need to gauge what we have done so far and then decide on what to do with the various drawings. Still too early to say what will go into production. We know there are some technical limitations, but you don't know the possibilities if you don't try!
;)
-
In a good mood today, how about some 3D prototyping?
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170315-1_zpsbvtaktwl.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Nice work on the turret side hatches, a useful addition to the modelling options.
As to the mesh skirts for the J, as primarily a gamer nowadays, I realise that there's often going to be a degree of compromise necessary to make a model for gaming & this is a prime case in point. I'd imagine any attempt at mesh schurzen would have to be overscale (& I'm absolutely ok with that) & pretty difficult to render effectively in plastic. My own attempts in the past have used the fine steel mesh found in cooking splatter-guards & that in fine plastic (PVC?) sieves (I believe others on the forum have already suggested it) with plasticard frames. They are, of course, compromises - any smaller & it gets difficult to not block the mesh with paint, defeating the object - but I'm glad you're continuing to search for a viable way of producing it, good luck!
-
I know that Pinky has expressed reservations on photo etch, but that might be a solution for the mesh, and perhaps for a nearer scale sheet skirt.
The cunning part would be how to integrate the photo etch and the plastic mouldings.
-
I know that Pinky has expressed reservations on photo etch, but that might be a solution for the mesh, and perhaps for a nearer scale sheet skirt.
The cunning part would be how to integrate the photo etch and the plastic mouldings.
There are now multi-layer photo-etching techniques that are not available before. Production cost is relatively high but results are quite acceptable. We have devised a simple way to assembly the side skirts, but need to test it out later before putting it to action.
-
Nice work on the turret doors , saves me the trouble ::) . And I think you are heading in the right direction in designing the Thoma Skirts , at this scale they are always going to be over scale to look right . . IRC most mesh skirts had a tube / pipe for the top full length support , not a bar like the plate skirts ( see pictures I posted page 8 this thread ) Also your turret side door is shown up side down , the vision slit is located at the bottom , and the pistol port door hinge at the top . I think you used the right side doors not the left for your example . I built a 1/35 scale kit like that once , many years ago :-
(https://s16.postimg.org/5g7woux3l/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101_I_312_0998_27_Monte_Cassino.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/5g7woux3l/)
Also the interior vision block is too flat , they stick out quite a bit
(https://s29.postimg.org/j61w9zb8z/PW16_07_IMG_0002.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/j61w9zb8z/)
And it looks like the turret side doors lost their vision ports on the late J s - note no port
(https://s29.postimg.org/b85x06fhv/Panzer_IV_towing_eyes_zpsprjmbr45.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/b85x06fhv/)
-
Nice work on the turret doors , saves me the trouble ::) . And I think you are heading in the right direction in designing the Thoma Skirts , at this scale they are always going to be over scale to look right . . IRC most mesh skirts had a tube / pipe for the top full length support , not a bar like the plate skirts ( see pictures I posted page 8 this thread ) Also your turret side door is shown up side down , the vision slit is located at the bottom , and the pistol port door hinge at the top . I think you used the right side doors not the left for your example . I built a 1/35 scale kit like that once , many years ago :-
We know. The bar is for plate skirt because of the weight. We have not done the pipe version yet... also it sat much higher as the wire-mesh was "hanging" on the pipe. We also found that out on the side door "after" we took the picture... it was a snapshot, so did not bother to take it again. Just wanted to show you guys what we are in progress!
-
No worries . I'm starting to think a J kit is going to be a 3 sprue kit all by itself with so many variations in parts . And we want to model them all ! ::) .
-
Apparently the Panzer IV crews were none too happy with the modifications made to the Ausf J in order to simplify production. The lack of powered turret traverse, loss of vision ports and mesh Schurzen (which wasn't effective against bazookas) all degraded the tank's effectiveness. There were also issues with the quality of German armour plate by late 1944, which is why you see knocked out Panzers with large chunks missing from their armour.
-
I can see removing the vision ports , you couldn't see any thing because of the turret and hull skirting . Plus it probably saved time in manufacture and some money as well . Funny they didn't add a Stug type all round vision cupola or some roof mounted periscopes like on the Jagdpanther . Made them an easy target for enemy troops shooting from cover .
-
This was supposed to be posted earlier, but Photobucket had problem with their
upload service for the past two days...
This is the "revised" one-piece track for the Panzer IV. Each production variant
will have their own drive sprocket and rear idler wheel...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170315-2_zps09k1ztvk.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Hiya, that looks really good.
Will you be doing the 3 idler wheel track for use with the ausf J?
Cheers
Tim
-
Looks great . Don't forget the A - D had different hub caps than the E - J .
(https://s7.postimg.org/3zpesunkn/wheels21.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/3zpesunkn/)
-
Looks great . Don't forget the A - D had different hub caps than the E - J .
We had discussed this at the studio, will probably ignore the differences as "D" is the only one with the earlier hub cap.
-
I had only just made this discovery myself.
Unfortunately from my point of view I've also discovered Ausf A thru C had quite different drive wheel sprockets than later ones. There is secondary evidence to the contrary with, for example, box art depicting Ausf D with C sprockets but I suspect this is wrong.
-
Now I'm not so sure. I am seeing elaborate models Of Ausf D with drive wheel sprockets that look like C's and pictures purporting to be D's that also look like they have C's sprockets rather than the later version. Does someone know the truth of this.
-
@tyroflyer - Ausf A to C (and in some cases, Ausf D) are evolving prototypes of the Panzer IV. Many parts were gradually replaced or upgraded. You simply cannot look at some photos to decide what is "correct" for which variant. We read a lot from reference books and historical blueprints, and pick the "most common" for our final 3D drawings.
-AND- don't use museum exhibits for reference; most of them are incorrect. We use them only for measurement and scale!
-
Looks great . Don't forget the A - D had different hub caps than the E - J .
We had discussed this at the studio, will probably ignore the differences as "D" is the only one with the earlier hub cap.
I can live with this. I think it's more important to have the right sprocket and idler designs for the different versions.
-
Rubicon. No museum exhibits had been referred to. I take your point it's just an example where the driving wheel sprocket can't be used as an identifying feature of an Ausf D. Perhaps the evolution with the road wheels was more clear cut on the transition from D to E. It appears likely both the earlier sprocket fitted to Ausf A to C and the later version were used on the production line for D's.
I don't know why Panzer IV's earlier than Ausf E are described as prototypes. Evolving yes, but prototypes. 134 C's, 229 D's and 223 E's produced. Are the 175 F2's and 25 F2 conversions prototypes for the following 1687 G's? I think these production numbers put them well beyond prototype status and down plays the importance of the earlier variants at the time of the Panzer IV's greatest success.
I have a lot of confidence in you in getting a top notch product to market. The effort you are putting in to the Panzer IV and the Sherman is outstanding.
-
Most German tanks are a mix of various parts from the different marks , just look a the variations on the Pzr IV J . There are pictures of Pzr IV D s with both early and late hub caps , some times a mix of both on the vehicle . The more you think you've got it all figured out , the more you realize how much you don't know . ::)
-
Well said ripley. I think I've gone from knowing very little on this subject to almost nothing. Interesting nonetheless.
-
Again, a prototype of the Panzer IV hull top. Still a work-in-progress
as we are continuing changing the design to accommodate additional
features added to the digital library.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170315-3_zpsew4xzxcl.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looks great!
-
Definitely on the right track.
-
Some of the tools and the jack look too shallow in detail ( CAD limitations ?) , but looking good non the less . Lots of potential for other Pzr IV based kits , Stug IV and Brumbar
-
3D prototypes of our version of Panzer IV Ausf D / Ausf E / Ausf F1:
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-01_zpsw8chxe85.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-02_zpslox1bpkv.jpg)
Panzer IV Ausf D
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-03_zps5c1kmwqq.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-04_zps0mtdzlgz.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-05_zpser42pz1x.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-06_zpsrwk4tjum.jpg)
Panzer IV Ausf E
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-07_zpsgvkpxvvm.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-08_zpsg1zdnyok.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-09_zpsxbgsojkp.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-10_zps6h6qnxyk.jpg)
Panzer IV Ausf D & Ausf E Side-by-Side
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-11_zpsk8yte6hl.jpg)
Panzer IV Ausf F1
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-12_zpsdyneed6x.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-13_zps3eo9pd96.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-14_zpsyv30u0s6.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-15_zpseewnhgz0.jpg)
Panzer IV Ausf D/E/F1 Group
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Prototype%20170322-16_zpskposlnxk.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
WOW ! looking fantastic . Love the D & E . The F driver's visor looks a little weird though , everything else is good though
-
They look very good.
-
Very exciting to see these in 3-D form. You seem to have gotten some additional detail onto the outer surface of the tracks - they look good. The casting on the tools etc looks fine to me.
Only 2 comments:
- would it be possible to have the upper hull in 2 separate pieces so the engine deck with raised louvres can also be used with the Ausf E?
- the Ausf E doesn't seem to have the bolted-on armour on the upper hull sides.
I hope you can find space on the sprues for stowage.
-
WOW ! looking fantastic . Love the D & E . The F driver's visor looks a little weird though , everything else is good though
It hasn't been attached properly. It's the same design as the visor in their previous (discontinued) Panzer IV.
-
I am very impressed with these. I note Rubicon has chosen to use the earlier drive sprocket on the Ausf D which would reduce the number of changes required to modify it to the earlier versions. You are setting a very high standard Rubicon.
-
Pinky's suggestion of doing the upper hull in 2 pieces to enable flexibility is worthy of consideration subject to practical limitations.
By the way I think the last individual photo of the D has been accidentally labelled as an E.
-
Can I suggest having another look at the hinges on the hatches on the left and right of the glacis for the Ausf D. The pictures I'm seeing of the original vehicles at the time (and of other models) suggest a couple of distinctly separate hinges rather than what I am seeing on the images here.
-
tyroflyer is right , 2 part hinges .
(https://s9.postimg.org/5eypizjqz/Pz_IV_Damp_E_01s_zpsmsdesprt.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/5eypizjqz/)
Pzr IV D drawing by H.L. Doyle ( the complete drawing compares the D to the E hence the actual picture title , I just cropped the D )
-
It was an overlook when we swapped files (and parts) during 3D printing...
Had everything marked and checked... lol!!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-DampE-01s_zpsko110bha.jpg)
-
These look great, I look forward to the finished articles.
-
Hi,
just catching up on this. I went looking for the Panzer IV kit and found it has been retired. I'm glad to see these updates coming along.
I scanned through this thread and didn't see either of these asked, but I may have missed it.
Do you have a target release date for the early Panzer IVs?
Do you plan to do a version of the later Panzer IVs with zimmerit?
thanks,
-a
-
Do you have a target release date for the early Panzer IVs?
We have to finish all technical drawings for the Panzer IV before they are pass to mould making. There are at least two plastic kits planned, but we will not know until all drawings are done.
Do you plan to do a version of the later Panzer IVs with zimmerit?
No, there will be no plastic Panzer IV with zimmerit. We might have an upgrade kit later.
-
I know someone has mentioned this elsewhere, but adding a cupola to a stowage/add on kit would be useful (possibly a whole new T34 turret top plates to match) for T34s in German service.
-
Great minds think alike smurf , but I can't wait so I cast my own
(https://s13.postimg.org/p6vjnutqr/IMG_20170516_184346031.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/p6vjnutqr/)
-
That also reminds me about turret bins (Osprey have an illustration of a Panzer III or IV with a second turret bin on the rear deck.
-
That's a WIP , I have the bin left over from my Whirbelwind / Pzr IV turm conversions , so I thought to use it on the Beute 34 . Looking at pictures , the Germans just seemed to weld it on any old way , some are crooked , so glueing it should work out ok
-
Not update anything since late March... Some eye candy for you!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PE-Pz4J%20170423-1_zpsvc4t7tj7.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Interesting, how do you intend to attach them to the plastic?
-
Interesting, how do you intend to attach them to the plastic?
After evaluation and several test fittings, we tend to decide on a standalone piece being a better solution. We will try to use a thicker metal piece - either brass or stainless steel.
If fitted on a plastic frame, fitting and assembly would be quite complicated for an average gamer; and a waste of sprue space too!
-
Looks good , and you included the mesh that goes flat over the fenders , well done . Most companies forget about those :)
-
Interesting, how do you intend to attach them to the plastic?
After evaluation and several test fittings, we tend to decide on a standalone piece being a better solution. We will try to use a thicker metal piece - either brass or stainless steel.
If fitted on a plastic frame, fitting and assembly would be quite complicated for an average gamer; and a waste of sprue space too!
Nickel Silver is popular for etched chassis construction for model railway modellers.
-
They look very nice :)
Interesting, how do you intend to attach them to the plastic?
- I suppose that might depend to a degree as to what they're eventually made from - PE on 1/72 & 1/35 models will sometimes be fine using plastic cement - the plastic melts enough to hold the PE in place, but for gaming models it's likely that superglue is going to be necessary & it's still likely to be more fragile than the rest of the kit.
-
Don't think I would use a kit with these type skirts in a game situation , some guys have real heavy fingers ::) OOPS !
-
While acknowledging that it's likely that the attachment points for schurzen in different materials is going to be a little fragile, I'm very happy to see Rubicon having a go at them.
I think that a strip of plastic card attached to the back of the skirts, matching up with the attachment points on the model could provide a better weld with the kit, holding them on more robustly.
-
Got to call it how I see it and not a fan of mixed material, much prefer the skirts were in plastic.
-
Don't think I would use a kit with these type skirts in a game situation , some guys have real heavy fingers ::) OOPS !
Possibly not for long ^___^.
-
After 4 months without a proper update on this Panzer IV project, we are now getting somewhere... after our Q3/17 rush!
This is a Photo-Etched plate that we just got back from the factory this morning!
Probably the "first" PE part ever produced for 1/56 scale in the industry!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PE-PzIV-J%20171027-1_zpsbpbrpl0c.jpg)[/URL]
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looks good.
Certainly for WW2.
Old Crow used photo etched parts for the turret basket and splinter shields for their 25/28mm Hammers Slammers Panzer and Blower models (bodies in resin, other bits in white metal).
Ground Zero Games had etched brass parts on the 25mm Knight Sabres figures (white metal).
-
Well, I admire the quality of this, but shudder at the introduction of photo-etched metal parts. Photo-etched stuff has always bugged me - they're meant to be plastic kits, after all. And this kind of component does not look very suitable for wargaming. At some point, providing this kind of level of 'realism' conflicts with the policy of making kits which are robust and relatively easy to assemble. You can no longer have one-piece tracks because the simplified track detail is too obvious next to finely detailed photo-etched parts.
-
Did you make slits for the bends on those etches?
Otherwise they will be really difficult to bend in the right place.
Sven who also builds model railways in etched brass.
-
Did you make slits for the bends on those etches?
Otherwise they will be really difficult to bend in the right place.
Sven who also builds model railways in etched brass.
if you look at the solid bars on the turret armour, you can see half etched lines which I guess are the bend points.
Traditionally on model railway etches, the etched bend is on the inside (I will check that).
Have you thought about adding a tool or turret bustle box or mounting brackets to the etch, there is quite a bit of empty space?
-
Well, I admire the quality of this, but shudder at the introduction of photo-etched metal parts. Photo-etched stuff has always bugged me - they're meant to be plastic kits, after all. And this kind of component does not look very suitable for wargaming. At some point, providing this kind of level of 'realism' conflicts with the policy of making kits which are robust and relatively easy to assemble. You can no longer have one-piece tracks because the simplified track detail is too obvious next to finely detailed photo-etched parts.
We still prefer plastic, pewter, or resin over photo-etched parts. They are very expensive to produce and must be in volume to make them viable to be included in a product. The only reason we added this is because we are not able to make this part strong and thin enough in any other material. The assembly is extremely easy as we had gone an extra step to make sure it is a one-step assembly without the super-glue mess. The one-piece track now has fine details on the front of the tracks which we think is good enough to go with the photo-etched parts.
-
If you look at the solid bars on the turret armour, you can see half etched lines which I guess are the bend points.
Part no 2 & 3 are not schurzen for the turret, but top mesh that appeared on both the left and right-hand side of the hull as shown below:
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/l_DRA6575_MFU1_zps3skfmeaa.jpg)
Have you thought about adding a tool or turret bustle box or mounting brackets to the etch, there is quite a bit of empty space?
That will depend on what the designers wanted. Will pass the comment to them.
-
While the Thoma side skirts will be welcome , I for one do not want to try and fold photo etch to make a square box never mind multi bends to make turret stowage box . I admit it , photo etch scares me :-[
-
It would have been easy for Rubicon to put these in the too hard basket. I'm pleased they haven't. However Pinky's point about high detail in one area and not another is valid. Perhaps when Panzer IV kits get another upgrade in the years to come the tracks will get looked at again.
-
I must admit the tracks on that prototype look pretty good.
-
I must admit the tracks on that prototype look pretty good.
The image right above is from a 1/35 unknown manufacturer, probably Dragon, with after-market PE add-on... not ours! ;D
-
Haha! I waslooking at the tracks wondering how you'd done that in one piece. I'd also had 3 glasses of wine. Don't I feel stupid... :o
-
After several trials and error for different thickness and production method for the photo-etched (PE) plates, we finally get it right!
This is going to be the most straight-forward assembly for the use of PE parts with a plastic model kit!
The support frame is a two-piece plastic that you can mount on to the side of the Panzer IV "with" or "without" the PE mesh armour.
Mounting the PE is basically snipping the parts off from the PE plate with a sharp cutter and then "snap" it onto the support frame. Finishing it off by adding a few drops of superglue to a few contact points. The final product should be fairly solid even being handled on the gaming table.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-J%20Mesh%20171113-1_zpscqj5ecqb.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looks really good :D
-
Fantastic, even better than I expected, I look forward to getting my hands on some.
-
Looks good.
-
This is the final 3D drawing for the Panzer IV Ausf J. This signified the completion of our Panzer IV Digital Library project. Will start moving into the mould making phase.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-J%20Final%20171119-01_zpsvao1pmzu.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-J%20Final%20171119-02_zpscxwjnmvp.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV-J%20Final%20171119-03_zpsqea0ek2j.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
I'm not keen on the etched metal sideskirts, but I think I'm in a minority there.
There are some mistakes on the turret:
- the turret roof should have a splash-guard around the cupola, and the vain sight in front of the cupola should omitted.
- the turret roof is also missing the Pilzen - the 3 sockets for mounting a frame to remove the engine.
- the rectangular piece on top of the turret ventilator is presumably meant to be a poison gas detection panel. If this was fitted there would also be a similar fitting on top of the main gun recuperator housing. They were raised, not flat.
-
And there should be no vision or pistol ports on the turret doors , sides and rear , I assume the picture is just a CAD reuse and you knew that ;D
-
Well spotted - I didn't see the vision ports were still there.
Rubicon said these were "final". Hopefully it's not too late to fix these errors.
-
I still think Its just reusing the CAD . That's what they did when they showed of one of the redesigned Sherman kits . The actual plastic was right .
-
There might be some compromise because the turret will be used for multiple variants (from Ausf G to J) complicated by sprue space. But we will look into further updates as long as the changes are minor.
;)
-
IRC , it was the removal of the aux motor for the turret ( no small exhaust ) , and the longer L48 gun that make it a J model . The removal of vision / pistol ports , the dual exhaust , one piece commanders hatch , etc were all design changes to save assembly time and money witch started before the J came out . You see some of these changes on Gs & Hs . As well some Js still had ports , split commanders hatch , even old large exhaust (but no small ) , really a mishmash of parts which goes along with the German doctrine of using up old parts on newer models of vehicles . Maybe Rubicon could give us 2 set of turret doors ,one with , one without ports . The ports on the turret side and rear could be easily removed by the modeller if so inclined
-
I think these details are pretty important. No point giving so much attention to things like sideskirts then skimping on the accuracy of the turret. Features like Pilsen can be moulded on, so they can be sliced off for earlier version. I guess the cupola splash guard would be a separate piece.
-
@Pinky, mind you if you can post some references here. We can discuss further with our designers over the final production meeting on the Panzer IV tomorrow! ;)
From what I could recall, these were discussed at earlier meetings; and as @ripley stated, many of these features actually was present or missing on earlier variants as well.
-
None of the ( few ) books I have that include info on the IV J actually show a picture of a 100 % J version . It should have the cast idler wheel , 3 not 4 return rollers ,some had the all steel road wheels ( like Brumbar ) vertical dual exhausts , the extended hull side with the hole for the towing shackles , the close defence weapon ( smoke launcher ) on the roof as well as the already mentioned deleted vision ports etc . and of course the steel mesh Schurzen . Seems to me its a full kit all on its own , IMO it might not be a profitable model to produce as way too many things will be needed to back date a pure 100 % J to other versions and its the multi version kits that seem to be a favorite with the gamers as well as the model guys , at least in my area . I know I can get by without a full J version , I already have 7 panzer IV G/H s :-[ You can find pictures of preserved IV Js in the Saumur Museum, as well as the Armour Museum in Israel ( captured from Syrians ) but again both have some but not all features ::)
-
I confess to some amusement. I think Pz IV Ausf J is a desirable weapon on the wargames table. However you can fight any period of the war without it. It's a pity the same can't be said for Panzer IV Ausf C, a vital and missing variant early in the war Rubicon don't appear interested in. I'll crawl back in my box now!
-
@Pinky, mind you if you can post some references here. We can discuss further with our designers over the final production meeting on the Panzer IV tomorrow! ;)
From what I could recall, these were discussed at earlier meetings; and as @ripley stated, many of these features actually was present or missing on earlier variants as well.
I think you have some of the references, such as Spielberger's "Panzer IV and its Variants". On pages 69 and 70 are photos of Ausf Js which clearly show the Pilzen and cupola splash guard, as well as the lack of vision ports.
Ripley' point was that the vision ports were eliminated before the Ausf J started production, so most if not all Ausf Js would not have them. Spielberger says (page 66) that these changes were made pre-Ausf J, and there are photos of Ausf Hs without the vision ports (and with the splash guard). Remember also that the mesh sideskirts were a late feature, so vehicles fitted with these would normally have the other late features (including the reduced number of return rollers, although that's not a big deal).
The rectangular panel on the ventilator cover just seems unnecessary. I can't find any photos of actual tanks with this feature, and it will be a pain to have to carve it off. Apparently this cover was larger on the Ausf J, which is why there is a semi-circular section cut out of it to make room for the Nahverteidigungswaffe.
-
- the turret roof should have a splash-guard around the cupola, and the vain sight in front of the cupola should omitted.
- the turret roof is also missing the Pilzen - the 3 sockets for mounting a frame to remove the engine.
These two omissions had been fixed in the 3D drawing. The splash guard is particularly tricky because it distorted the shape of the copula design of the model. Still need some fiddling to get it looks right at this scale.
- the rectangular piece on top of the turret ventilator is presumably meant to be a poison gas detection panel. If this was fitted there would also be a similar fitting on top of the main gun recuperator housing. They were raised, not flat.
This we are not sure... Have checked all our reference drawings, could not identify the location!
We used several references to the Ausf J, main ones as follow:
1) Panzer Tracts No 4 - Panzerkampfwagen IV
2) Squadron / Signal Publication - PzKpfw IV in action
3) Spielberger - Panzer IV & Its Variants
-
Okay, so how will you handle the removal of the vision ports? Will these be separate/optional parts?
This we are not sure... Have checked all our reference drawings, could not identify the location!
The photos of actual vehicles available are very murky. Here is a WiP model by Tom Cockle which shows the gas detection panels (white plastic card) on the ventilator cover and recuperator housing. Again, I'd suggest just eliminating this.
(https://s18.postimg.org/w1pobd6lx/Ausf_J.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/w1pobd6lx/)
-
These are some of the blueprints we used for the Ausf J... they are from Panzer Tracts No 4.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20Tracts%204%20PzIV-1_zpsyjiuro6g.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20Tracts%204%20PzIV-3_zps5nauo9vj.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20Tracts%204%20PzIV-2_zps04l5wxfp.jpg)
Our 3D drawings should be very close to these!
-
Your design is indeed very close - but your 3-D designers obviously missed the Pilzen and splash guard, which are clearly shown in the blueprint. They've also included all of the vision ports, even though these are clearly omitted in the blueprints.
As with all blueprints, these are ultimately just someone's best depiction of the subject based on what they had. I've explained the feature on the ventilator cover (possibly the artist who made the blueprint didn't know what it was - I didn't either until I spent some time checking). Very few photos of Ausf Js show anything there, so why include it? Anyway, it's up to you.
-
Well that's strange , both Tom's model and the blue print show the commander's hatch would open to the right , while most pictures I've seen show it opening to the left side . The more you think you know.. ...no wonder it's difficult to get a handle on the J model
-
The cupola rotated, at least on late production versions. That may explain the different hatch position.[edit: incorrect - see below]
-
I thought the Germans had problems making ball bearings , even replacing them with wooden balls bearings . Many of the Stugs which are supposed to have the commader's hatch rotate ( for the scissors periscope ) were bolted in one position , forward . And just why would the IV need the hatch cover to rotate , no scissors periscope to give the commander a 360 " view . Nothing like adding more parts and complicated assembly as your country goes down in flames , those crazy Germans ::)
-
Sorry, I read a bad translation. The late version hatch lid pivoted (like the Panther cupola hatch), rather than being hinged. Hence the different attachment.
According to Doyle and Jentz's Osprey book on the Ausf G, H and J:
- the vision ports were eliminated from May 1944 onwards, but not from all vehicles;
- the Flammentoter (the 2 exhaust mufflers) replaced the single cylindrical muffler in August 1944;
- the mesh sideskirts were introduced from September 1944, when Zimmerit was discontinued;
- the hull sides were extended in October 1944, so that the towing points were integral;
- the return rollers were reduced to 3 on each side in December 1944.
So Rubicon's Ausf J is (or should be) a very late model.
-
Very interesting. I suspect Rubicon are planning on 4 return rollers. In which case we are looking at a late 1944 tank rather than 1945. Not that there is anything wrong with that. Hopefully when the final product is produced and incorporates advice from Pinky, among others, it will get great reviews.
-
Some other Pzr IV based vehicles had the 3 return rollers ( Jagdpanzer IV /70 V and I think late Stug IV & Brumbar ) , maybe Rubicon could add an extra hull tub to their kit , like they add the extra upper hull to the Sherman . To get a late /late version ( of everything ) would be ok in my book . Again weather or not its going to be profitable to produce said kits is another story , and if not I understand completely , I'll just have to kit bash my own ... like I have time to k bash everything I want :D
-
Getting away from the Ausf J debates for a while until our design staff had the references sorted out!
Stowage that we had planned for the Panzer IV...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Stowage%20171123-01_zpscihumy4r.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Stowage%20171123-02_zpsupplrbyq.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Stowage%20171123-03_zps6diac8wj.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz%20IV%20Stowage%20171123-04_zpsb87spwcn.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Well that's a good start . Not a good idea to have the camo nets draped over the turret doors , crews didn't put anything over their escape hatches . Try bailing out of a tank on fire and getting all tangled in net , not good . Some tanks with the turret skirting added wire mesh to the space behind the turret doors , making it like the baskets seen on 1970s Brit and US tanks . And while the canteen and mess kit would work I don't think I've ever seen tank troops with the so called bread bags hanging on their tanks , that's more an Infantry piece of equipment . And IRC internal stowage diagrams show specific bins/ compartments that food and water was stored in .
(https://s2.postimg.org/5rdqum4ut/panzer4j_tamiya_148_hoeltge_1_LI.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/5rdqum4ut/)
I know its a model but you get the idea :)
-
A good idea.
Ripley makes some good points.
Water bottles seemed popular in groups.
I will dig out the photograph reference in the Osprey book
-
Are these resin? Or just prototypes?
I agree with Ripley's comments. The turret stowage looks weird - what are these items attached to? The folds on the blanket rolls don't look natural either. I think I've seen the bread bags on Afrika Korps Panzers though.
It looks as though some of these items were based on this:
(https://s8.postimg.org/mexaa50bl/IMG_0120.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/mexaa50bl/)
-
Lets think about stuff stowed on tanks - you don't want to stop the turret from turning or the gun from elevating / depressing so no stuff blocking it or the bow mg . Now the German heading into Russia during the early part of the war had all sorts of stuff covering the engine deck inhibiting the turret ( fuel cans , ammo , etc ) , but that was because they had no opposition and were outrunning their supply train , the Allies did the same pushing through Germany in 45 . If you are in contact , all that extra stuff gets dumped ! You don't cover the vision ports , you got to see whats going on around you , again , heading into Russian , lots of wooden boxes , crates on the fenders blocking the vision slits , but these are ( mostly ) gone when in combat . You also don't block your escape hatches , the crew has to get out in an emergency . A new tank you can get but a well trained crew to use that tank is priceless . And last , you don't cover the air intake / out lets on your engine deck , tanks run hot , engines have to cool , IRC the panzer IV sucked air in through the engine deck and expelled it through the side vents over the fenders , don't block them with a lot of kit . That being said , tankers carried a lot of extra gear , best to check wartime pictures for placement , and not pictures of knocked out vehicles as kit has been disturbed by the explosion , by the crew exiting in a hurry or by folks looking for souveniers or plunder . Rubicon has some nice pieces of kit planned ( the tarps I don't like , sorry ), I would just use them in more logical ( to me ) places .
-
I imagine the tanks could be heavily camouflaged without concern for the hatches/intakes being covered when the main concern was attack from the air and the vehicle's crew not in it. However this doesn't seem the likely situation on the gaming table.
-
Heavy camouflage ,like a Tiger in the haystack ? In ambush , tanks might be totally covered , but once they fired a couple of rounds they usually moved loosing most of the camo. If they're parked , they might be totally covered in branches and netting to hide from aircraft , but again most of those are gone when they are in motion . Just look at pictures of German tanks in Normandy , they look like mobile shubbery ,but you can still make out its a vehicle
(https://s2.postimg.org/ovp0xtjk5/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101_I-738-0275-10_Bei_Villers-_Bocage_getarnte.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/ovp0xtjk5/)
(https://s2.postimg.org/63d5uaklx/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101_I-301-1955-17_A_Nordfrankreich_Panzer_V_P.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/63d5uaklx/)
-
Not much update since late November last year...
With the Panzer IV Digital Library basically completed, we are now readying the files for mould making. At the same time, we are already making expansion sets... A Wirbelwind turret that will replace the original Panzer IV one on a late production model...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20180115-01_zpsd1flgnep.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20180115-02_zps4trcl52z.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20180115-04_zpsvqfzjtso.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20180115-03_zpspxpj8kfo.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20180115-05_zpsilaes3bv.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
I hope the turret armour and the quad can be painted separately and then assembled later, even with the top section removed it would be difficult to paint the quad.
-
I hope the turret armour and the quad can be painted separately and then assembled later, even with the top section removed it would be difficult to paint the quad.
The Flakvierling is a single piece (after assembly) and can be painted separately before glueing it down to the turret (together with the gun crew if you wanted). The upper turret piece should be a snap fit to the bottom piece with ease after painting the interior. Then you can cover the interior with masking material (towel, masking tape, sponge etc) for the outer surface paint job! ;)
-
Good planning.
-
Looks very nice . Good to see you remembered to add the spare barrel boxes ( engine deck sides ) and remove the small turret motor muffler ( not needed as these thing turned by hand ! ) , the Warlord crew just put their resin turret on a standard tank hull ::)
-
Looks very nice. Good to see you remembered to add the spare barrel boxes ( engine deck sides ) and remove the small turret motor muffler ( not needed as these thing turned by hand !), the Warlord crew just put their resin turret on a standard tank hull ::)
Attention to details is what we are good at... and we are not WLG! Don't like the comparison, lol. ;)
-
Well you can't avoid the comparisons with WG. It comes with the territory!
Have the errors in the Ausf J design been fixed? I'd like to see the basic Panzer IV types on their way before the specialised variants.
-
Have the errors in the Ausf J design been fixed? I'd like to see the basic Panzer IV types on their way before the specialised variants.
All had been taken care of, sir!
The specialised variants are something that is quick to do with whatever drawings are on hand... and had to do them "before" the project went lukewarm. Restarting older projects have a lot of preparation work to do.
-
Wirbelwind turret would be a neat option. Didn't know about the small details the WLG one is missing, will skip that and wait for Rubicon then!
Just curious have you looked at the Ostwind etc as well? Probably being a bit optimistic on what would fit sprue wise but an expansion box like your half track ones with Wirbelwind and Ostwind turrets would be ace.
-
I suspect a Ostwind would be an option after Rubicon add the 37mm Flak 43 to their library (also used on the SDKFZ 7 http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=514.msg7342#msg7342 (http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=514.msg7342#msg7342)).
[Edit- l will blame autocorrect for swappiing Ost for Wirbel ]
-
Printed prototype of the 88mm FlaK 36 auf PzKpfw IV Ausf H...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/FlaK%2036%20PzIV-H%20180127-1_zpseeohp9xx.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/FlaK%2036%20PzIV-H%20180127-2_zpsqfaps6ez.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looks good.
-
I have one of the WLG Wirblewinds on the paint table right now.
As others have said, the hull is a bog standard resin panzer IV ausf.H and includes gun cleaning tubes for the 75mm and left the motor gear housing on the rear.
There was quite a lot of work to get the hull looking right, but overall, now correct, it is still very basic detail.
The Wirblewind and the Jagdpanther are the 2 models i am now most looking forward to.
Having said that I am also wanting 3 decent Panzer IV ausf J which should (I hope) be available soon.
Cheers
Tim
-
Finally get the Wirbelwind prototype completed...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20Prototype%20180212-01_zps2eindmvm.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20Prototype%20180212-02_zpsuriuf5cz.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20Prototype%20180212-03_zpsrw6qj6oh.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20Prototype%20180212-04_zpsxnzk7jhj.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20Prototype%20180212-05_zpszhlmekcf.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20Prototype%20180212-06_zpsw4ylor8q.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20Prototype%20180212-07_zpsn0dnfgvr.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
That is looking very good.
The forward planning on the new Panzer IV is really paying off.
-
Looking good . Just so you know , you've got the jack block on the Whirbel mounted up side down , and the driver hatches should probably not have the round signal port hatch on them , IRC that was phased out in the E version . Aside from that , turrets looking great
-
Oh my!
When may I get these?
An 88 on a Pzkw IV chassis would be a nice one off, cool objective but a Flakpanzer Wirbelwind, what a dream come true.
It looks to be a fantastic kit.
I don't want to wait until 2019. I hope it's available soon.
SOON!
-
Here's a picture taken from the Friday EBay Auction thread on Missing Lynx , our old friend the Panzer IV with 88mm gun
(https://s9.postimg.org/bugju9h1n/Pzr_IV_-_88.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/bugju9h1n/)
-
A glimpse of what you will be expecting from our brand new Panzer IV plastic kits... test shot details from one of the Panzer IV turrets!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz4%20Early%20-%20Hatch%20Details%20180310-1_zpsnamy0mmw.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
That looks really good . I would swear that was a larger scale model , the parts are so well detailed. Well done Rubicon
-
Yeah, this looks great. Can't wait to see the rest!
-
Excellent. You are going to spoil Ripley's fun though, no hatches to open out ^__^.
Of course, there is always the detail inside the turret.
Will we get crew to hang out of the open hatches?
-
Some guys sitting in the turret doors would be great , can always use more crew figures ;D .
-
Somebody has probably got a better reference than me but I've been counting rivets! My Chamberlain and Doyle shows a picture of Ausf D turret with two rivets above and below the forward side vision port. Not the triangular pattern above it shown here. Perhaps there is another explanation, different suppliers of the turret maybe. Quick search gives me images of Ausf E with both variants but haven't come across any D's with the triangular pattern. No big deal I think Rubicon have done a good job and something the pedantic can address (if it is wrong for a D)
-
According to Spielberg, that's correct. It looks as though the triangular bolt pattern is a feature of the revised turret from the Ausf E onwards.
-
Squadron/Signal Panzer IV shows 3 bolts in triangle pattern above the gunners solid side visor , and 4 on the loaders slit visor , 2 above , 2 below . It's shown like that on all turrets with side visors A - G . Can't find any pictures with 3 on the loaders side in any of my books
(https://s9.postimg.org/o3inzhyrf/Panzer_IV_Aberdeen_Proving_Grounds_LI.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/o3inzhyrf/)
(https://s9.postimg.org/c1na5cx8r/800px-_Aberdean_proving_grounds_016_LI.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/c1na5cx8r/)
Aberdeen Proving Ground Panzer IV D
-
It is time to post details of our TS1 for the early production Panzer IV... still lots of engineering revisions had to be done on the individual parts, but we have seen an overall quality improvement from our original Panzer IV kit. We have included over 10 stowages as extra so that you can customise your ZUG and make them look different!
BTW, some parts are not used with this kit, so no need to make wild guesses! LOL!!!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180309-01_zpsopy3btqi.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180309-02_zpsietkaiyw.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180309-03_zpshwsvi4ba.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180309-04_zpshcqptma7.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180309-05_zpsjspde8aj.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180309-06_zpsxa1lfbdz.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180309-07_zpsyxgw0bys.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180309-08_zpsf1rparub.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180309-09_zpswnuimu8n.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180309-10_zpsv7r97ibn.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180309-11_zpskgwuwmae.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180309-12_zpstmpcu8zf.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Nice.
Have you a set of water bottles in the stowage?
-
Think you've cleared up the three/four bolt issue ripley. However I see pictures of Ausf C with a flat plate on the port (gunners) side without obvious bolts. This isn't relevant to Rubicon's kit.
It does, as you say, indicate all variants should have four bolts on the starboard (loaders) side.
-
This is a great looking kit. It could be even better with the option of having the engine compartment open,with separate doors,including the slotted vented tropical doors as an option.
The detail on the kit is great!! It's not far from going to the next level, from a wargamers kit to a true scale kit in the quality of the molding. It's been brought up about the lack of detail on the outside section of the rear track in the past,with the molding limitations. But couldn't you just make the rear section of track a separate detailed piece,with the same level of detail as the front??
It seems a shame that such a nice kit couldn't be taken up a notch to the next level with just two additional pieces
-
@ripley
- we will double check on the 3L/4R bolt issue.
@hoffmn
- re: engine hatches - that would be difficult because of the "extra" thickness of the plastic wall to make the model more durable.
- re: track details - we will not move away from a single piece track design but will continue to explore different manufacturing methods.
-
Work in progress of test assembling the Panzer IV sprues, not perfect and some parts still need tweaking but getting there!
Will try to get this painted too!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz4%20Early%20-%20Hatch%20Details%20180310-2_zpsq3hkypjz.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz4%20Early%20-%20Hatch%20Details%20180310-3_zpsdve1hguw.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz4%20Early%20-%20Hatch%20Details%20180310-5_zpsh5wk9xb4.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Pz4%20Early%20-%20Hatch%20Details%20180310-4_zpsr7smmpvp.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Its looking good guys . Like the added stowage , not that I don't have enough of my own , but more is MORE ! ;D The only things that jump out at me , and to be fair , lots of companies get it wrong ( or totally miss it ) , and its stuff that's easy for a modeller to fix so , to me its not a deal breaker .as mentioned the 3 bolts on the loaders side and the gunner's side should be a solid flap , no vision slit ( Pzr III was the same ) . From what I can find only early A' s had vision slit on both sides ( pre production ) . Like the choice of wheel hubs as there are pictures of tanks with both , nice option
-
What a beautiful kit! Not quite early-war enough to serve in Poland, but close enough to make me very happy!
-
Looking good.
-
With the debate about 3 versus 4 bolts and flat plate versus vision slit I neglected to add my congratulations to Rubicon. You've done well.
@EWG - The Ausf D wouldn't need too many changes to make a C to attack Poland. I hope Rubicon will give us those parts one day. Not that I've got anything against Poland!
-
i looked into my copy of The Panzerkampfwagen IV Book 2 from Schiffer by Spielberger, Doyle and Jenz.
On pages 143 and 144 you see the interior of the turret how the Sehklappe (vision ports) are mounted with 3 bolts on the left and four on the right, 2 top, 2 bottom..
But in Spielberger's earlier book, Panzer IV and its variants, on page 37 there is an overhead view of a Ausf. E turret with 3 bolts over both vision port covers.
-
i looked into my copy of The Panzerkampfwagen IV Book 2 from Schiffer by Spielberger, Doyle and Jenz.
On pages 143 and 144 you see the interior of the turret how the Sehklappe (vision ports) are mounted with 3 bolts on the left and four on the right, 2 top, 2 bottom..
But in Spielberger's earlier book, Panzer IV and its variants, on page 37 there is an overhead view of a Ausf. E turret with 3 bolts over both vision port covers.
We are using Spielberger's earlier book "Panzer IV and its variants" as one of the references too. We will continue to look at the 3L/4R bolt issue. No worries!
-
I continue to be impressed with Rubicon's willingness to revisit projects that are so advanced. The T-26 is another example.
-
The TS1 plastic Panzer IV had been test-assembled...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180313-01_zps4r5bskwa.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180313-02_zpskudkgmfm.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180313-03_zpsr8ib0rpx.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180313-04_zpswgzbjrfs.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
That looks good.
-
Wow !
(https://s9.postimg.org/pnhkecw7v/2_thumbs_up.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/pnhkecw7v/)
-
Wonderful!
To repeat an earlier request - is the engine deck separate? I would want to be able to use the louvered deck for an Ausf E.
-
Rubicon answered this on a March 11th post. Third post from the bottom of the previous page,page 18. :(
-
To repeat an earlier request - is the engine deck separate? I would want to be able to use the louvered deck for an Ausf E.
There is just not enough room to place such a large part onto the sprue. Instead, we will release a resin version of the louvred upper deck when the kit is released.
-
Rubicon answered this on a March 11th post. Third post from the bottom of the previous page,page 18. :(
I think that was a different question.
I'd suggest the louvred deck is more useful than some of the stowage items that have been included, but I guess that ship has sailed. This looks otherwise like a great kit.
-
Quite some time ago I made the following suggestion. I'm sure Pinky would prefer plastic to resin. Although resin is far better than nothing. I can imagine a game with a Tauchpanzer looming out of a river somewhere on the Russian front.
I'd like consideration to be given to including these items in an expansion kit. There appears to be a lot of items that could supplement a basic Panzer IV kit.
- raised louvers (DAK) variant
- Pz Bef Wg/Pz Beob Wg
- Tauchpanzer IV
- components to create earlier Pz IV's :)
- Pz IV spare wheels, tracks etc
-
Yeah, I think most of that would be more useful than stowage items (I love stowage, but large items are best supplied in a separate set).
Never mind - we will soon have a high-quality plastic kit of 2 early Panzer IV variants. These are good for 1940-42 (earlier if you're not too fussy), and cover France, North Africa and Russia. Not too shabby...
Presumably there will be 3 Panzer IV kits, with the 2nd one being the Ausf F to Ausf G?
-
Panzer IV Ausf E TS1 plastic test assembled and being painted.
Also included a model comparison between the old Panzer IV with this new one!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180320-01_zpsuywdzqur.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180320-02_zpsj5wlk89v.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180320-04_zpsy7ywpsp4.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180320-03_zpsa0urcppl.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180320-05_zpsqjw4dzex.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180320-06_zps1raohjyr.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180320-07_zpscoa7fwsd.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180320-08_zpsa3ta2zon.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180320-09_zpsngykv5fb.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180320-10_zps1jlgamxc.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180320-11_zpsc8urnokt.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180320-12_zpsmoajkxwx.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Early%20TS1%20180320-13_zps1oc4k5z8.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Very nice indeed :)
-
Very nice indeed :)
Yes, very nice.
-
Looking really nice , lots of crisp detail on the bolts , rivets and tools . Still need to fix ( if possible ) the loader's and gunner's side vision ports on the turret ,gunner's no slit , loaders , slit and 4 not 3 bolts . Also fix the jack , it is not a flat piece gear as molded on the fender
(https://s9.postimg.org/st36ibotn/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101_I-175-1266-05_A_Griechenland_Panzer_IV_LI.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/st36ibotn/)
(https://s9.postimg.org/nufo3t0gb/german-panzer-iv-travelling-over-a-bridge-built-accross-a-britis.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/nufo3t0gb/)
(https://s9.postimg.org/gr7so72qj/pz_IV_J_LI.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/gr7so72qj/)
-
Looking really nice, lots of crisp detail on the bolts, rivets and tools. Still need to fix (if possible) the loader's and gunner's side vision ports on the turret, gunner's no slit, loaders, slit and 4 not 3 bolts.
That was being addressed as we speak, so no worries.
Also fix the jack, it is not a flat piece gear as molded on the fender
This might be a problem that we can't fix at this stage. Will discuss with design team on our next meeting.
-
On Warlord's Panzer IV , the jack looks like yours as its molded on the fender ( limitations of the molding I guess ) ,on their Panzer III , its a individual part which looks correct . You've got all the other fender mounted tools looking great , pity to have a crap looking jack , a separate piece might be the way to go ?
-
On Warlord's Panzer IV, the jack looks like yours as its molded on the fender (limitations of the molding I guess), on their Panzer III, its a individual part which looks correct. You've got all the other fender mounted tools looking great, pity to have a crap looking jack, a separate piece might be the way to go?
Don't think WLG or our Panzer IV has a jack on the right fender...
-
I don't think it's a jack on the right mudguard - it looks like it's meant to be a mallet or some other kind of tool. I think the point is that there should be a jack in that position on the Panzer IV, and it's worth making it a separate part.
The kit otherwise looks very fine. The details are sharp - especially the non-slip pattern on the mudguards, the tools and the bolt detail - and the lines look right. Excellent paint job too. I'm not entirely sold on the figures, but the commander from the forthcoming Panzer crew sprue looks good.
I'm not sure about the stowage. It looks rather stiff and unnatural - designing this on a computer still isn't quite working. It's also not really typical of Panzer IV stowage, which tended to feature boxes, crates and jerrycans rather than soft stowage like this. And, increasingly, lots of spare tracks.
I think it was mentioned earlier that the roadwheels on the Ausf D and Ausf E were slightly different (the Ausf D didn't have the extra dimples on the hub), but it's not going to matter in this scale.
Really looking forward to this kit, along with the early Panzer III. But I think the original Rubicon Panzer IV still looks good - it's certainly nothing to be ashamed of!
-
It might look like some kind of hammer , but it's supposed to be a jack . Who ever designed the kit got it partly right , its got the base ( foot ) towards the front of the tank , and the crown ( the ] shaped piece ) towards the rear , its the stuff in the middle both Rubicon and Warlord messed up
(https://s7.postimg.org/rvm22joyf/Rubicon_Pzr_IV_LI.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/rvm22joyf/)
(https://s7.postimg.org/e1xpdir87/Warlord_Pzr_IV_LI.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/e1xpdir87/)
All Panzer IVs have a jack installed in this spot , hopefully there is still time to add one to the kit , I'm tired of having to make my own . ::) Here are some variations of the German AFV jack , IRC the 20 ton long jack , for the Tiger II , weights in at around 65 kilos , so these things had some heft , and the kit part should reflect that
(https://s7.postimg.org/4u5gx4293/jackdraw-01.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/4u5gx4293/)
-
Our Panzer IV is getting the same treatment as our Tiger I... detailed resin track links!
The one shown here is for late-war. We are planning to create two more sets - early war and one with ice cleat. All of these will get released when the Panzer IV plastic kit becomes available.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%20Tracks%20180328-01_zpsgrwq9lyu.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%20Tracks%20180328-02_zpslmzsf1yl.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%20Tracks%20180328-03_zpspbnrddj5.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%20Tracks%20180328-04_zpskm2wshhp.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%20Tracks%20180328-05_zpsnbi9usxf.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%20Tracks%20180328-06_zps4qcfsvsq.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Slightly confused, the resin track is shown with plastic road wheels or uses plastic road wheels?
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%20Tracks%20180328-06_zps4qcfsvsq.jpg)
My assumption is that that shows a one piece resin moulding, you use the supplied plastic wheels to complete.
-
Slightly confused, the resin track is shown with plastic road wheels or uses plastic road wheels?
My assumption is that that shows a one piece resin moulding, you use the supplied plastic wheels to complete.
Correct, the resin parts simply "replace" its plastic counterpart. The rest of the plastic assembly (idling wheel, sprockets, front roadwheels) will go in place as usual.
-
I might get some of these. I don't much like resin models, but resin add-ons are fine. And the track detail does look good.
-
More work is done on the detailed track links for our various tanks!
This time winter tracks with cleats for the upcoming Panzer IV...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20TrackLinks%20180409-01_zpso67evndt.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20TrackLinks%20180409-02_zpsjy2m3hm6.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20TrackLinks%20180409-03_zpsdy4wobsx.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20TrackLinks%20180409-04_zpsh1ym8xoe.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
These are Winterketten, not cleats. They were basically extensions to the tracks. Cleats attach to the face of the track. These are appropriate for 1942-43.
Anyway, another good idea. I hope they are reasonably robust though.
-
These are Winterketten, not cleats. They were basically extensions to the tracks. Cleats attach to the face of the track. These are appropriate for 1942-43.
Anyway, another good idea. I hope they are reasonably robust though.
Pinky is correct. They are Winterketten and not cleats/grousers. On American tanks these would be called "Track Extenders" but also nicknamed "Duckbills" for obvious reasons.
-
These are Winterketten, not cleats. They were basically extensions to the tracks. Cleats attach to the face of the track. These are appropriate for 1942-43.
If you looked carefully, you will see the H-shape cleats on the tracks... ;D
-
The Germans had 2 types of winter track , WinterKetten and OstKetten . The WK was developed first , and while it worked , the extensions , ( which were part of the track link not add-ons like duck bills ) tended to snap off on hard turns . OstKetten which was a much more robust track link , almost shaped like a Tiger track link . The Germans also had add on ice cleats , in fact most modern tanks have them in a bin or like the German Leopard , mounted on the hull
(https://s7.postimg.org/4qrwx04ev/vordluspilt.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/4qrwx04ev/)
(https://s7.postimg.org/4194knjav/Winter_Ketten.jpg)[
[url=https://postimg.org/image/suiolcclz/](https://s7.postimg.org/suiolcclz/Pzr_II_tack_with_Ice_Clest.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/4194knjav/)
-
I can't see the cleats, but then I'm old and using a small screen to view this site.
I'm interested in whether these resin Winterketten will 'snap off on hard turns'. They will obviously be great for modellers, but are they up to the rigours of the wargaming table? Maybe I'll wait for the Ostketten.
-
If they did snap of it would be very realistic . most photos show missing ends on well used tracks , just like Sherman Duckbills
-
Thought someone was asking for this...
This piece is just too large to fit onto the plastic sprue, but should be an excellent upgrade piece in resin!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Chassis%20180421-1_zps5b8pfgfb.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Or could you possibly make the two vented rear air intakes as separate pieces ,and add them onto your plastic spruce?? That shouldn't take up much space at all.
-
Or could you possibly make the two vented rear air intakes as separate pieces ,and add them onto your plastic spruce?? That shouldn't take up much space at all.
Too late to do that now as all the plastic sprues for the early Panzer IV had been done. We had looked into something similar to your idea but felt the structure would be too weak as a wargaming kit.
-
Too late to do that now as all the plastic sprues for the early Panzer IV had been done. We had looked into something similar to your idea but felt the structure would be too weak as a wargaming kit.
You’ve done exactly the same thing very successfully before (like the engine deck insert in the M10/M36 kit). And this option was suggested a while ago...
-
The final version of our photo-etch Thoma wire-mesh hull side armour skirts for the Panzer IV Ausf J...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Thoma%20Wire-Mesh%20Skirts%20180427-1_zpsty9li2en.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
I did not get to see them in detail at Salute, are they stainless steel?
-
They look fantastic, please tell me I'll be able to get my hands on them soon (along with the resin tracks) :)
-
They look fantastic
-
Moving these post back to the correct topic...
I am right there with you tyroflyer! Would love to have a proper Pz IV suitable for the invasion of Poland in 1939.
The difference being, with the BA armored cards, they already have the turret for the BA-3 and BA-6. Looks like they could add 12 tires to the T-26 sprue (along with that turret). So they may be one "body" sprue away from having a kit that does double-duty (if they allow for the slight differences in those three locations. One sprue, and they have a kit that serves for two vehicles.
The early Pz IVs are a bit more problematic. The same hull would mostly do for all four early models (Pz IV A thru D). But there are enough differences that they would likely need multiple sprues to cover the turret and superstructure changes:
Pz IV A = Angled front plate for driver and gunner. wider superstructure, two-piece hatches for driver and gunner, circular bullet-splash ring around turret base, rectangular ports on turret front and rear,
Px IV B = Straight front plate, no MG, narrower superstructure, single-piece hatches for driver and gunner, angular bullet splash ring around turret base, rectangular ports on turret rear, circular ports on turret front and rear, cupola changes
Pz IV C = Straight front plate, no MG, narrower superstructure, single-piece hatches for driver and gunner, angular bullet splash ring around turret base, circular ports on turret front and rear,
Pz IV D = angled front plate, with MG, narrower superstructure, single-piece hatches for driver and gunner, angular bullet splash ring around turret base, circular ports on turret front and rear, gun mantlet changes, rear deck side changes
Looks to me like it would take three different turrets (one for A, one for B and C, and a third for D models). Also three different front plates (again, one for A, one for B and C, and a third for D models). Probably two different muffler-area configurations (one for A, one for B, C and D models), three different sets of track guards (one for A, one for B and C, and one for D models).
And as I look back over having typed up all of that (after a close examination of the blueprints and notes I have taken of the first four models), I am struck by the idea that the B and C models were very, very close in appearance. The A has different track guards, a wider superstructure, a different enough turret (hatches, gun ports and cupola) to require its own, and a slightly different muffler area.
So I can easily see making a B/C kit easy. I can even see making a B/C and D kit. But to make an A/B/C/D kit would require a lot of effort, with many sprues to cover all the changed bits that the Model A has all by itself.
I would be super happy to have a B/C kit. Both models served in Poland (as did the A). The D did not, but it served in France (as did the A, B and C models). In terms of numbers made, we are looking at 35 As, 42 Bs, 134 Cs and 232 Ds.
It was the Pz IV Model D that had 48 converted to Tauchpanzers (submersible) versions, for the planned invasion of England. Also, many of these early models (A, B, C and D) were later converted (back-fitted) with improved weaponry, and sent off to places like North Africa. So in terms of optional pieces, I can see the sprues needing different turret weapons thus increasing the usability of the kit.
Buy one and build for Poland, another to paint for France, and a third to serve in North Africa. All from one kit!
I don't want to hijack the BA-6 topic so will keep this short. EWG, your list includes many commonalities between the C and D Pz IV variants and Rubicon are going to give us a D. I remain to be convinced the differences can't be overcome with relatively few resin parts. The case for the C revolves around it's importance in the Polish campaign where it can't be substituted for without the use of a time traveller. In the WWII context the BA-3 is not so important as the BA-6 is a legitimate non time travelling alternative.
Nothing against the BA-3 though.
Indeed, the C and D are very similar to each other. Other than what appear to be mostly small differences, the main big difference is that front panel. It is straight across on the C, and the driver and radio operator hatches line up on top. There is no MG for the radio operator to use. On the D, the front panel is "crooked" for lack of a better word, with the driver still forward (same spot) but the front plate then angles back a bit before continuing across where the radio operator sits. The two hatches do not line up on top. And on the D model the front MG returns.
Could Rubicon give us a kit that covers C and D models? Without needing many new parts? I think they could. And the B and C models are nearly identical, so really, if they give us a C they might as well give us the B as well. Which would give us a B/C/D combo kit.
It is the A model I don't think we will ever see. Lots of parts are different between the A and the other three models.
-
Thanks for the input, we have split the Panzer IV project into 3 plastic products:
(1) Panzer IV Ausf D/E
(2) Panzer IV Ausf F1/F2/G/H
(3) Panzer IV Ausf J
The splitting is based on the major features of the upper hull and the turret.
RE: Ausf C & D Design Notes
It might be true about the minor feature differences quoted by EWG regarding the C and D:
Pz IV C = Straight front plate, no MG, narrower superstructure, single-piece hatches for driver and gunner, angular bullet splash ring around turret base, circular ports on turret front and rear
Pz IV D = angled front plate, with MG, narrower superstructure, single-piece hatches for driver and gunner, angular bullet splash ring around turret base, circular ports on turret front and rear, gun mantlet changes, rear deck side changes
The main reason for not including the C into the D/E product is the difference between the "straight" and "angled" front plate. This will require two different upper hulls being included in the sprue, taking away valuable space for other smaller parts. Design and cost efficiency is very important in our trade, one extra mould would mean a big difference in our breakeven calculation. This is why we spend so much time to "design" common sprues for each project.
Mind you we also have to consider the parts layout of the "common" sprues for the other two Panzer IV kits. Taking away the Ausf C will make the design process much easier for us to handle this project. BUT that does not mean we will not tackle the Ausf C at a later stage given the differences are so minor. The grouping of these Panzer IV variants is based on small feature differences. The major shape of the chassis, hull, and turret had to remain roughly the same in order for our design to work.
We already have a plan for the Ausf C, so don't be disappointed. ;)
-
Sounds very promising.
-
I will already make this prediction. That is, the Panzer IV.D will be the most popular kit. Not because more Ds were produced than the A, B, C, and E, but the D also saw combat in
Poland 1939, France 1940, Soviet Union 1941, and North Africa. Also, the D is depicted as one of the primary early war Panzer IVs in many board and miniature games.
If I had to only pick one early Panzer IV to make into a model kit, I would choose the D/E over the A, B, or C. To make a long story short, I think Rubicon's choice of 3 (listed above) is a good for most modellers and gamers. Rated from one to five, with five being best choice, I would say:
:) :) :) :) :) (1) Panzer IV Ausf D/E
:) :) :) (2) Panzer IV Ausf F1/F2/G/H
:) (3) Panzer IV Ausf J
Correction [Edit]:
The Panzer IV Ausf D did not see action in 1939 during the invasion of Poland, so that has been crossed out in the above paragraph.
-
Tracks. I'm sure you are wrong about Poland. I don't think games are much of a reference source.
-
According to my sources, production of the Ausf D began in September or October 1939, which is too late to have participated in the Polish campaign. So it didn't see active service until the invasion of France. However, only the most pedantic war gamer would have a problem with Ausf Ds appearing in a Polish campaign German force (although it did have slightly better armour than the earlier versions). The Ausf D may have missed Poland, but it served in France, the Balkans, North Africa and Russia.
I would bet that the most popular Panzer IV kit will be the Ausf J. Late war Panzers are the Space Marines of WW2 gaming. But I'll definitely be picking up the kits of the earlier versions.
-
I have a couple of sources that nominate Ausf D production commencing in October 1939. One has the following sentence 'Krupp continued to turn out PzKpfw IV at a strangely lethargic pace: none in September, 20 in October, 11 in November, 14 in December. I found a Wikipedia entry that also nominates 45 as the quantity of Pz IV's produced between the commencement of hostilities and the end of 1939.
My preferred rule set is Chain of Command. In it the lack of a hull mounted machine gun in the Ausf C is a distinctive and important feature. I can't comment on Bolt Action.
-
I can't see it being cost effective for Rubicon to produce every version of every tank , no matter how much we would like them to . The gamers I know really don't mind proxying vehicles if they don't have the exact vehicle . If you can only use one or two tanks in a game , why buy a vehicle for every theater and time . A Panzer IV D will work for early war Poland as well as Afrika even if you leave it Panzer grey , its not exact but it looks the part . And I don't think 28mm model builders are going to want to build every mark and sub mark of tank like the 1/35 guys do , I'm sure a few of us might but the majority , probably not . Rubicon have to judge the market as to what they can get a good return on and what might not sell so they end up loosing money . I think a D will sell like hot cakes , the A - C versions , not so much .
-
I am very happy with the D & E kit. The D served in France, and being an early war gamer, that makes me happy. Will I sub it for the C in Poland? Sure. Will I consider getting a second kit (once I have the first kit in hand) and making my own changes, to produce my own C as best as possible? Absolutely.
If Rubicon share a bit more of their plans for the C, I might hold off on getting another D and making my own changes.
While I certainly don't "need" to have every variant, I like models that come close to what they represent. If for no other reason that the paint job, I would like one Pz IV for Poland, one for France, and very likely a third for North Africa (have not begun a German force for NA ... but I know it is on the horizon). Could these three tanks all be the same kit, just painted differently? Sure.
Decisions will get made when I have one kit in hand, and can really scope out what changes I would need to make to turn a D into a reasonable looking C.
-
Tracks. I'm sure you are wrong about Poland. I don't think games are much of a reference source.
Confirmed. The D did not invade Poland in 1939.
That is the problem when writing a response to a post without double checking the details.
That being said, if someone did not have a Panzer IV Ausf A or B and wanted to proxy this with an Ausf D, I would not have a problem since it still looks the part. To quote EWG,
I am very happy with the D & E kit. The D served in France, and being an early war gamer, that makes me happy. Will I sub it for the C in Poland? Sure. Will I consider getting a second kit (once I have the first kit in hand) and making my own changes, to produce my own C as best as possible? Absolutely.
How hard could it be to modify the Panzer IV D/E kit into something earlier like a Panzer IV A, B, or C.
-
Its lots of little things to remove / replace . Less armored covers on vision ports , different style drivers visor IRC , front hatches on the nose had different hinges and IRC might not be inset in nose like later models , no slats on engine deck, tools might be rearranged , etc etc . Like I said lots of little things , that in this scale only a rivet counter would give you grief on . . Just give it a flat drivers front plate with a vision port mo bow gun and, no turret box , looks like a C to me ;D
-
As Rubicon have plans for a C I will be waiting. I'm sure they will provide something far better than I can with my skill level.
Plenty of other models to make while I'm waiting.
-
How hard could it be to modify the Panzer IV D/E kit into something earlier like a Panzer IV A, B, or C.
The Pz IV B and C are very similar beasts. If you had a kit for one, you just about have a kit for the other.
- Same hull, from the treads to the track guards. Nearly identical placement of tools and spares on the guards as well. Same turret (except the coaxial MG has an armored sleeve surrounding the barrel on the C model). Same driver and radio operator hatches (they line up, because both models have a straight front armor panel). Nearly identical rear deck (the locking mechanism on the deck hatches was modified from round on the B, to rectangle on the C).
And the "cool bit" is that only 42 Bs were made. The first 5 used the A hull, and the last 30 used the C hull. So really, only 7 B models were built using the B hull. So if you had a C model kit, and replaced the shrouded coaxial MG sleeve with a regular coaxial barrel, you would have 30 of the 42 B models!
Production of the B ran May to October 1938. A feature of later models that was added retr0-fitting was the welded rain guard over the driver vision portal. That started in Spring of 1939. The C model was built October 1938 to October 1939, and here, too, they started retro-fitting that welded rain guard to earlier produced models in Spring 1939.
So even that subtle difference between a B and C (when first built) is gone by Spring 1939, when earlier models were retro-fitted with the rain guard.
The D model has the angled front plate, which changes the upper deck hatch placement. So there would be work there, changing the right-front portion of the superstructure, cutting and then moving forward the radio oerator side so the hatches line up as in the B and C models. I think re-working the front plate to make a flat plate would be easy.
But placement of tools and such on the track guards changed, and you pretty much just have to live with what comes molded on whatever kit you use. No way are you filing down axes and spanners and pry bars, and then modelling them elsewhere. So your B/C would have tool placement of the D. There are differences regarding the side hull and turret hatches. And the sides of the rear deck are a bit different. Do you fiddle with those bits? Or is changing the front hull to have a flat front plate, lined up hatches, and no MG enough of a visual change to call it good?
The Pz IV A is rather a different beast. The superstructure was wider, coming out to the edge of the track guards, so there is work there making it narrower. The good news is, taking a D and making an A means you already have the angled front plate. The bad news is, the hatches are different. And there are hull and turret hatch differences as well.
I think making an A model from a D would be a lot more work than making a B/C from a D. And you will need to compromise on a lot more things that should be different (like tool placement on track guards) that would be hard to make different.
-
EWG I found your info on Ausf B particularly interesting. I think I read something similar on a website but can't remember what it was. Can you share your source?
Being a perverse so and so I quite like the idea of including a B among the C's.
Only one small correction. My info suggests the last C was built immediately before the war in August.
-
None of the Panzer IVs A - J had the radio ops hatch in line with the drivers , all were set back. Check the over head scale drawings in Squadron/ Signal Panzer IV . ( really a great book for the casual builder at a low $15 - $ 20 price tag ) So thats one fix you don't have to worry about . The turret gun internal style gun mount and the 2nd version of the commanders cupola might be another story ,
-
EWG I found your info on Ausf B particularly interesting. ... Can you share your source?
Only one small correction. My info suggests the last C was built immediately before the war in August.
Source: Panzer Tracts #4 Panzerkampfwagon IV (T. Jentz & H. Doyle), Page 20. paragraph 5 (of six on that page):
"The 42 Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.B were completed and accepted from May to October 1938. Major changes that occurred during production included completing five of the first 12 Ausf.B with Ausf.A armor hulls and the last 30 Ausf.B with Ausf.C armor hulls, and adding an N.K.A.V. (smoke candle discharge rack) in July 1938."
The next paragraph goes on to cover modifications that were backfitted. For example, the smoke discharger was added to production in July 1938. Since production started in May, that means whatever Ausf Bs were produced in May, June and perhaps some of July did not have the smoke dischargers. Paragraph 6 says that starting in August, earlier versions of the Ausf B were backfitted with those smoke dischargers.
And while the initial Ausf B design did not have a rain guard over the drivers visor, this was welded on to Ausf B models starting in the Spring of 1939.
Whereas tail lights were not part of the initial design, and those were added starting in Spring 1940. So for Poland, there would be no tail lights, but for France, there could be.
Anyway, the few Panzer Tracts I have are pure gold for this sort of detail.
And my bad regarding the C production dates. I have 134 built between October 1938 to August 1939. Another fun tidbit from Jentz, there was an order for 140 Cs and 140 were actually built. But ... six of the hulls built in June 1939 were set aside for conversion into bridge layers.
-
Thank you sir!
-
None of the Panzer IVs A - J had the radio ops hatch in line with the drivers , all were set back.
Are we talking about different hatches?
Here is a link to Pz IV Ausf B "blueprints". The top view shows the hatch over the drivers compartment, and the hatch over the guy who sits to his right perfectly lines up on the top of the superstructure. Isn't that the radio operator position? Sometimes referred to as the hull MG position?
https://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/tanks/ww2-tanks-germany-2/72454/view/sd_kfz_161_pz_kpfw_iv_ausf_b/
I love Squadron publications (I love Osprey too for that matter). But anyone can get their hands on wrong information. I don't know if Jentz is any more reliable than any other tank author. But if I find two different drawings, and they do not agree, I tend to side with Jentz. His material just seems more detailed, and I am more willing to trust his drawings.
And for all we both know, Jentz has the original blueprint drawings, and Squadron has a mid-production drawing. They could both be right. I am surprised though, that the Jentz book doesn't say "Mid production changes included moving the radio operators hatch rearward to make room for the (x)".
-
Of all the early war Panzer IVs, I'm really glad Rubicon Models will focus on the D/E. It was the more important one of all the ones from A to E, and more D/E were built than A to C.
A = 35 October 1937 – March 1938
B = 42 April 1938 – September 1938
C = 134 September 1938 – August 1939
Total = 211
D – 229 October 1939 – Mary 1941
E = 223 September 1940 – April 1941
Total = 452,
or more than twice as many as all that came before. Also the D/E saw more action than the A/B/C making it more useful for the normal gamer.
Like many others here on this forum, I too will not lose sleep over the idea of using a D/E for a A/B/C in a game of BGWW2, CoC or BA.
-
Nothing wrong with your point of view Tracks.
For me more important than the 211/452 comparison is 'C' equals Poland onwards, 'D' equals France onwards.
I certainly wouldn't object to anyone using a substitute in a game I was playing in or lose any sleep over it.
I should add the 'D' is coming. No one is trying to take it away.
-
For me more important than the 211/452 comparison is 'C' equals Poland onwards, 'D' equals France onwards.
Good point tyroflyer and I agree, but I was also thinking about longevity. I have found data showing that the D/Es were kept in combat all the way up until 1944, but it seems that the A, B, and C were very short lived. However, tank training schools used older tanks, so it is possible that any remaining Cs could have been pushed into combat in 1945.
The main reason for my post was to eagerly support RM's decision on their three choices. However, we have to face reality, and that is we may not see these great kits for sometime.
...we have split the Panzer IV project into 3 plastic products:
(1) Panzer IV Ausf D/E
(2) Panzer IV Ausf F1/F2/G/H
(3) Panzer IV Ausf J
-
My Chamberlain and Doyle reference says the 'C' variant remained active until 1943. I remember Pinky posting pictures of 'B's in Normandy 1944. Obviously in very small numbers by then but historically correct on the wargame table for a long time.
Anyway RM have indicated their intention to do something about the C. With EWG pointing out the difference between the C and B being tiny perhaps that could be included as well.
-
However, we have to face reality, and that is we may not see these great kits for sometime.
Reality sometimes in good for everyone... How about Q3 and Q4 releases? We do want to spend the time to start the Panzer III Digital Library Project asap! ;)
-
All drawings , from various sources show the bow mg / radio op hatch set back farther than the driver . Its only about 3 inches but it very noticeable if looking at pictures when both hatches are open , folded forward . Bow mg or radio op , its the same guy :D . Considering the radio was mounted in the hull over the transmission , I would think his main job was to man the radio , the B & C didn't have bow guns so he wasn't neededfor that . Funny even the later Maus and those paper panzer types kept the radio and operator in the hull but did away with the bow gun , I wonder why ?
-
My suspicion is that wrangling the wireless was a full time job.
My assumption was that British radios were viewed as reliable* enough not to require a dedicated crewman and having it next to the commander was viewed as a greater advantage.
* Reliability is of course relative ^__^
-
Not to mention radio in hull would take away space needed for water tank and hot plate for brewing tea :D
-
Not to mention radio in hull would take away space needed for water tank and hot plate for brewing tea :D
The only problem was having to pop over to the Bradleys to get the milk out of the fridge ^__^.
-
However, we have to face reality, and that is we may not see these great kits for sometime.
Reality sometimes in good for everyone... How about Q3 and Q4 releases? We do want to spend the time to start the Panzer III Digital Library Project asap! ;)
Yes please on the PzIII!! ;D
-
We do indeed need a decent Pzr III, the BA plastic kit makes a nice late J , L & N if you know what parts you need ( plus a M Flam if you change the barrel ) , but would really love some early short 37mm , twin co ax mg types for early war France & Russia
-
Let's not forget Poland! Pz III E onwards please.
I think these posts are about to get moved if this doesn't stop!
-
Very much looking forward to the new PzIV J (& hope it's one of those Q3/4 releases - preferably the former).
As to the III, I tend to agree with Tyroflyer, an Ausf E would be very useful - since it bridges the 37mm/50mm armed vehicles & could be built with either.
-
While we are putting the finishing touches on our NEW Panzer IV kits, conversion projects are close behind... This is our first test shot single plastic sprue for the Wirbelwind turret. It comes with four late-war gun crew and extra stowage.
Looking at the interior of the turret and you will be amazed at how spacious it is with our human proportional figures together with our true-scale 1/56 plastic kits. There is just no comparison!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20TS1%20180626-01_zpsy3ezipoa.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20TS1%20180626-02_zpscghohalu.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20TS1%20180626-03_zpswtawfcn0.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20TS1%20180626-04_zpspkas6xtp.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20TS1%20180626-05_zpsqb2m1dgv.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20TS1%20180626-06_zpsvdo27ycr.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20TS1%20180626-07_zps9fqwu3gk.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Wirbelwind%20TS1%20180626-08_zpsgmef3cv7.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
That looks awesome
-
Nice.
The stowage looks useful.
-
Just a question , this is just the turret right , no gun ? I don't see gun parts , so you would need to buy a pzr IV , a quad 20mm flak and the turret kit . ouch
-
Just a question, this is just the turret right, no gun? I don't see gun parts, so you would need to buy a pzr IV, a quad 20mm flak and the turret kit. ouch
Since we already have a Flakvierling 38 sprue, there is no reason to incorporate all the parts onto this turret sprue again. We will have a final decision as to what to get bundled into this kit.
The turret is swappable between a mid-war Panzer IV (most often an Ausf H) and the Wirbelwind, so this product might be a two sprue kit (turret+gun).
;)
-
Two sprue kit makes much more sense . I know a lot guys who are quite happy with their old so - so ( crap IMO ) resin tanks , but who would love some plastic add ons / up grades .
-
Gorgeous, I like the included stowage :)
-
From the Panzer IV Digital Library Project comes our first product - Early War Panzer IVs.
Choice of either an Ausf D or E assembly. Working hard to get this released in Q4/18.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-D%20180711-1_zpsloqg4lsq.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-D%20180711-2_zpsynx2z1kf.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-D%20180711-3_zpscxoarbwb.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-D%20180711-4_zpsr7hjzgye.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-E%20180711-1_zpsmoks7q8c.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-E%20180711-2_zpsmsdjfffj.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-E%20180711-3_zpsimk0ilby.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-E%20180711-4_zpsxorj4ykn.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Good to see this kit so close to release.
I think the captions have been reversed. The grey vehicle is an Ausf E, while the sand-coloured vehicle is an Ausf D. Although all Ausf Ds serving in the desert had turret stowage bins and ventilators cut into the engine decks.
-
They look nice.
-
Only thing that jumps at me is the very poor detail on the jack . It should look like this -
(https://s33.postimg.cc/5ozokf20b/12_LI.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/5ozokf20b/)
( Dragon 1/35 Panzer IV D ) And , to repeat what Pinky said , if sent to North Africa , these panzers would have had the vents in the engine deck hatches . I hope they are in the kit
-
The right side of the turret is correct too. I like it.
-
From our Panzer IV Digital Library Project comes our second product - Mid-war Panzer IVs; choice of either an Ausf F, G or H variant.
Comes with removable schürzen, this time with more details, yet easy to assemble!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-G%20180717-01_zpsisabr9j0.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-G%20180717-02_zpsgmjldaj5.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-G%20180717-03_zps2o7e88vn.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-G%20180717-04_zpszv3izxot.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-G%20180717-05_zpsrxstvksu.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-G%20180717-06_zpsty18qbm0.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-G%20180717-07_zpsuquxdfdq.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-G%20180717-08_zpsyewqvsct.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-G%20180717-09_zpsyvc4uvku.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
...and this is the Ausf H!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-H%20180717-1_zpstjuvaq8h.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-H%20180717-2_zpspxf067no.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-H%20180717-3_zpsftdswgyu.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-H%20180717-4_zpsiiihdu64.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
It's good to see the return of the Panzer IV. I always liked your old kit, even if it had issues. This one looks much better, of course - the details look sharp. The Schurzen seems to have been thinned down. And I like the inclusion of the antenna guard below the gun barrel. Presumably there is a separate barrel for the Ausf F?
It seems to be missing the big engine filters that were fitted on most Ausf H's. The shape of the muzzle brake also looks a bit odd.
-
Very nice, can I have one now? (I've got some Kugelblitz turrets that have been waiting a while):) Nice fading on the paintjob too.
-
Is it the paint job or the lighting , but the turret details ( side doors / vision ports ) on the G/ H aren't as crisp as the ones on the D/E ? Aside from that , awesome looking
-
Last of the Panzer IV kit from our Panzer IV Digital Library project... an Ausf J!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-J%20180717-01_zpsqyzcrm9n.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-J%20180717-02_zpsvqeunahd.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-J%20180717-03_zpscoxl2es8.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-J%20180717-04_zpswgthniyx.jpg)
Just a recap of what the standalone Thoma wire-mesh armour looks like:
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-J%20180717-05_zpskwk1ms0l.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
This looks very good - it could almost pass for a larger scale model. I see that you kept the poison gas detection panel on the turret ventilator. That's a bit annoying, as it will have to be carved off.
-
I see that you kept the poison gas detection panel on the turret ventilator.
This is also present in the technical drawings in the Spielberger book, as well as on most 1/35 model kits. We keep it there just in case people wanted it; otherwise, as you stated, can be carved off easily.
-
The turret roof also seems to be missing the 3 Pilze sockets which were standard on the Ausf J. There is something there, but it doesn't seem to be the right shape. These are clearly shown in the blueprints you seem to be relying on so heavily.
-
Fourth product from our Panzer IV Digital Library project... a resin conversion kit merging two plastic kits into a new vehicle (also a conversion in real-life) - the 88mm Flak 36 auf PzKpfw IV Ausf H.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Flak%2036%20auf%20PzKpfw%20IV%20Ausf%20H%20180720-1_zpsqimzrth1.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Flak%2036%20auf%20PzKpfw%20IV%20Ausf%20H%20180720-2_zpstv5iz9fb.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Flak%2036%20auf%20PzKpfw%20IV%20Ausf%20H%20180720-3_zpslxlrmv7m.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Flak%2036%20auf%20PzKpfw%20IV%20Ausf%20H%20180720-4_zpsb6tll1i4.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Nice.
Will they be released as three kits (tank, 88 and resin hull)?
-
Will they be released as three kits (tank, 88 and resin hull)?
No idea yet. Probably as a bundle on our own webstore when they are available.
-
Panzer IV Ausf F1 TS2 painted for display! Also, included the fore-armour as options.
The fore-armour added 20mm thick armour plates set in front of the turret and body armour for added protection.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-F1%20180728-01_zpsaf2orp5a.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-F1%20180728-02_zpsutgfwp1b.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-F1%20180728-03_zpsonqj9xu6.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-F1%20180728-04_zpsoxma52vh.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-F1%20180728-05_zpsg6wrqly6.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-F1%20180728-06_zpsencpquof.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-F1%20180728-07_zpstiiijsvl.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-F1%20180728-08_zps1aypdnef.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-F1%20180728-09_zpsul6n3axi.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV-F1%20180728-10_zpsvwo5lrab.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Very nice
-
Yes, very nice!
Most excited for the "D" so I can have the right one rolling through France in 1940. But the "E" and the "F1" are welcome too!
-
Nice.
-
Lovely 8) I guess I'm doing early war as well now then...
-
I will definitely get a couple of these.
Rubicon - could you suggest that your painters cut down on the mad chipping effects? It's become really distracting, and doesn't look anything like real weathering. This one looks as though it's been peppered with small arms fire.
-
We always think "out-of-the-box" to create the most enjoyable kit for modellers and gamers alike.
No more frustrating assembly with those tiny schürzen frames on the Panzer IV (and on the Panzer III too).
We have designed and created an ONE PIECE schürzen frame and assembly tool that will make schürzen assembly a breeze, yet with all the fine details intact!
BTW, true to our original Panzer IV kit, the schürzen is STILL removable too!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Schurzen%20180925-1_zpse07aqw9q.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Schurzen%20180925-3_zps3s6pcvwn.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Schurzen%20180925-2_zpsud6mbjib.jpg)
Besides the side schürzen, the turret schürzen also have a jig to ease assembly too!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Turret%20Schurzen%20181007-1_zpsbnqgrbw5.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
The turret jig is a great idea and I like the fact the side rails have the option of using that very thick bottom strip to mount them on the tank . That will help noobs get a good fit and a great looking kit when done . Nothing more discouraging to a new model builder than effing up your 1st couple of kits because the build is difficult / confusing .
-
Nice, that should make things easier.
-
We have not had any updates on the Panzer IV project since early October last year... Finally, something worth showing!
Here is the layout preview of the EIGHT plastic sprue contents for our new Panzer IV:
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Sprues%20190308-01_zpsmxbsorkv.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Sprues%20190308-02_zps9blagxq2.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Sprues%20190308-03_zpsjz6njj5b.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Sprues%20190308-04_zpsuukd03qt.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Sprues%20190308-05_zpswrhphlv8.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looks great, any chance of it being available at Salute (if the resin tracks are too all the better)?
-
Looks great, any chance of it being available at Salute (if the resin tracks are too all the better)?
We will be showing the sprue but not actually selling it until early June. We still need final QC approval from the studio team before commercial run can commence. Also, the pre-production work... that is, box art, assembly instruction, and decal sheet.
-
Nice. I look forward to seeing them at Salute.
-
WOW !
-
Super impressive! I will certainly be getting multiples of this kit!
-
June!?!?
*internal screaming intensifies*
-
Our technical staff are now working feverishly to get all EIGHT Panzer IV plastic sprues to get QC approved! Meanwhile, our art department is working around the clock to get pre-release material such as assembly instructions, box art, and decal sheet ready for our commercial production run... Here is what you can expect to build once all the Panzer IV products are released.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Preview%20190314-1_zpsxyudrdbl.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Nice.
-
After posting on FB all the Panzer IV variants that we are going to release together with the extra "detailed tracks", people started asking us for details on the add-on.
Two versions are available - normal Panzer IV tracks, and one with cleats for winter and mud use. Here are some close-up images and comparison photo between the detailed tracks and their plastic counterpart.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Tracks%20Preview%20190314-01_zpsuebt2jdt.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Tracks%20Preview%20190314-02_zps4rugxkme.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Tracks%20Preview%20190314-03_zpspouxdkos.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Tracks%20Preview%20190314-04_zpsnnmquewb.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Tracks%20Preview%20190314-05_zpsmpwcpelm.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Tracks%20Preview%20190314-06_zpse0ltuvst.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Tracks%20Preview%20190314-07_zps0vghsmoq.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
They look nice, not sure if I would want to go to the additional expense and effort for them (YMMV).
-
They look very good. I would consider buying these, as long as they didn't require much cleanup.
-
Those high-detail resin tracks look very nice.
That being said, I'm probably not going to get any - that is if and when I can find a new source to get Rubicon Models. The main reason is that I'm mostly a miniature gamer than a modeller. Rubicon Models already makes very good plastic model kits for us gamers/modellers, and even though some of the kits lack track details because of Rubicon's mold making process to give us one piece tracks for easier assembly, this is not an issue for me because they are still very good gaming miniatures (when assembled and painted).
I still have a new in the box Rubicon Models Tiger I kit, but I do not have the high-detail resin tracks for this kit. Would they look so much nicer? Sure, and that is why I was tempted to get a set, but in the end I opted not to get them because I plan to assemble and paint this model kit as a gaming miniature.
Instead of using the funds to buy the new resin tracks for the Tiger I, I instead bought another plastic Rubicon Models kit. I will most likely end up doing the same for the Panzer IV resin tracks. However, the tracks with the cleats is very tempting to get.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Tracks%20Preview%20190314-05_zpsmpwcpelm.jpg)
-
There are no gimmicks from us at Rubicon Models. We'd launched our Panzer IV digital library project back on Jan 4, 2017... after two years of hard work comes fruition!
The project had churned out SEVEN plastic sprues plus a few support components to create all major Panzer IV variants from Ausf D to Ausf J; all with their distinctive features accurately reproduced. We will continue to work on other Panzer IV variants based on these plastic sprues for our hobby community.
Rubicon Models will be releasing the THREE key products together with our first expansion over the next few months. More to follow... Enjoy!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%20Roadmap%20190328-1_zpsxrzoizri.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Would be nice seeing a Sherman version of this once you’re done (e4, e6, e8, etc).
Would make a nice poster too...
-
Lovely diagram of which models are included in which boxes!
-
Lovely diagram of which models are included in which boxes!
Agreed.
I predict that 280076 will be their best seller at first, followed by 280077.
For gamers (especially CoC players), I worry about how popular 20079 will be, but for modelers it will sell well.
I noticed that for 290077 it shows two of the tanks with MGs. Will RM be doing the same thing they did with the Sherman kit? That is, include both a gamer and a modeler version of the MG.
-
Useful diagram.
A Sherman version would be good.
I am not expecting to buy them at Salute, but will you have examples there?
-
I am not expecting to buy them at Salute, but will you have examples there?
Yes, all the Panzer IVs plus sprues will be on display at Salute! See you there!
-
This is the preliminary design for the Panzer IV decal sheet. If no comments. we will send it to the printer coming Monday!
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Waterslide%20Decals/Panzer%20IV%20Decal%20190330-1_zpsqhx6dzth.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Could you possibly make the 21st Panzer division insignia in white instead of yellow? And possibly a pair of decals for each divisional decal that you put on the decal sheet?
-
We have slightly updated the decal sheet based on feedback from Facebook and on the forum. Please continue to comment before we send this off to the printer tomorrow.
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Waterslide%20Decals/Panzer%20IV%20Decal%20190330-2_zps5gutc4wy.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
I would say you've pretty much got it covered decal wise . Are there things you could add ,yes , but that's getting into specific Panzer Division order of battle stuff , and for a genic set to use on a half dozen versions of the Panzer IV ( 1940 -1945 ) , the sheet looks great . Certain units had just white out lined numbers , both solid and broken line stencil . Some had companies numbered 1 to 4 , some 5 to 8 , as well there were variations in the numbering of command tanks , some with letters or roman numerals , both red or black . You can't cover it all on one sheet , so you might make mention of your various German single sheet decal sets on the kit box for those who want to model a specific unit .
-
Ripley makes a good point.
Saying that my Germans get numbers and balkenkreus, DAK get palm trees. So mine are covered.
Though the mention of your other decal sheets does remind me to check if you have some numbers for my Bundeswehr M113A3G.
-
For a basic generic decal sheet for these kits, I think you got it covered, and more. Could you add more? Sure, but for the average gamer you have already included more than enough. For the average modeler, well, you can please some of the modelers some of the time, but never all the modelers all the time. There will be those that will say why you didn't add such-and-such decal.
Will this decal sheet be included in all the Panzer IV kits (280076, 280077, 280078, 280079)? That would be the most logical and economical way to do it, but people sometimes don't think, so be prepared to hear, "There were no Wirbelwind or Panzer Ausf.Js in North Africa, so way are there AK markings?"
-
What ? No panzer IV J or Whirbels in Afrika tracks ? Sure there were , they served along side the Panther .
(https://i.postimg.cc/yJ9Dm41R/maxresdefault.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/yJ9Dm41R)
Its shown on a kit box top so it must be true …..
-
...and the Wespe:
(https://i.postimg.cc/qtyKVH06/s-l1600.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/qtyKVH06)
-
...and the Elefant:
(https://i.postimg.cc/BXRtq7mT/79629-SDC13730.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/BXRtq7mT)
-
And don't forget what television and the movies have taught us about vehicles used in North Africa , and throughout World War 2. M-47's were used by the both the axis and allies , with different paint jobs. They must have had really thin armor, if two jeeps in the desert with .50 caliber machine guns could wreak havoc upon them
-
There is sand and there are palm trees in other places besides North Africa.
But there was an movie about an Italian elite unit that according to the story saved the Afrika Korp at El Alamein. The various vehicles used in the movie include M-47s , M113s and many others appearing on both sides of the battle.
It could be a lot to ask for individual sheets targeted to specific years: 39 - 42, 43 - 45 and North Afrika.
-
Well , Rubicon already have 3 Panzer Division sets , 1 SS set , 2 Heavy Tank unit sets as well as a AK set and turret number set , so a rethink and reissue might be a good idea now that the original decal run is almost out of stock . Personally except for the turret number set lacking red or black inside the white lines , I find all the sets they have now work well for me . If anyone needs a specific Panzer div insignia , just let me know, I'm sure I can spare a few
-
There is sand and there are palm trees in other places besides North Africa.
Like Devon and Cornwall?
^___^
-
I said on Facebook so I'll say here that in conjunction with this kit I still strongly feel like a generic "Axis" decal sheet would be awesome. Though sold separately for ease.
Romania.
Hungary.
Finland.
Etc
Allot did use the Panzer IV in some guise or another.
And it seems only fair since Sherman has Poland. France. Britain. America and Russia.
-
While our Q2/19 new releases are still in their final production phase, our studio staff are fortunate enough to get hold of a few Panzer IV sprues. With some creativeness, they are working on several Panzer IV variants with minor conversions... Here is a DAK Panzer IV Ausf D before painting!
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20D%20WIP%20190508-1_zps7srstggb.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
I noticed the engine doors.
A good start.
-
Nice!
-
This would be one of the first Panzer IVs I attempt. There are some nice touches on this - another defining feature of DAK Panzers is that they tended to be festooned with spare tracks.
-
- another defining feature of DAK Panzers is that they tended to be festooned with spare tracks.
And water bottles...
-
Here is an early preview from our upcoming new Panzer IV plastic kits. Just look at our attention to the refined details...
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%20D-E%20190521-1_zps5hk363hn.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Panzer%20IV%20D-E%20190521-2_zpsl8chkhgw.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Nice.
I can certainly see the practical application for that.
-
This is our Tauchpanzer IV with betriebsstoffanhänger conversion using our upcoming Panzer IV Ausf D/E kit (280076) and kitbashing the fuel trailer. Tank crew are also converted using our plastic Panzer Crew set (284041). Enjoy!
Background History
The Tauchpanzer IV (literally “dipping tank”) was a version of the Panzer IV designed to be driven underwater. It was developed for use in the early stages in the planned invasion of Britain in an attempt to provide armour for the first vital stages of the landing.
A number of Panzer IIIs and Panzer IVs were turned into underwater vehicles. The idea was they would be carried most of the way across the English Channel before being lowered to the seabed. They would then drive across the sea floor and emerge onto the British beaches.
To achieve this the Tauchpanzers were made waterproof. Every opening on the tank was sealed with a waterproof compound. The cupola, the mantlet for the main gun and the hull mounted machine gun were covered with rubber sheeting which could be blown away once the tank had landed. The turret ring was sealed with an inflatable rubber ring, which could be deflated one ashore. Air was provided through a long hose connected to a float on the surface of the sea.
The Tauchpanzer IV was a successful design, but the cancellation of Operation Sea Lion left them without a purpose. They were instead issued to the 18th and 3rd Panzer Divisions, where they operated as normal tanks. The Tauchpanzers did operate underwater on one occasion, when on 22 June 1941 volunteer crews from the 18th Panzer Division used them to cross the River Bug underwater early in the German invasion of Russia.
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Truachpanzer%20190521-00_zpsqgyzoo84.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Truachpanzer%20190521-01_zpsisyxd28p.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Truachpanzer%20190521-02_zpsb8edgru7.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Truachpanzer%20190521-03_zpsrre1tqh6.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Truachpanzer%20190521-04_zpsi86nhqbg.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Truachpanzer%20190521-05_zpsfo5i9g9a.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Truachpanzer%20190521-06_zpszpm3e6mk.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Truachpanzer%20190521-07_zpss0rmc4ol.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Truachpanzer%20190521-08_zpsrycywpwf.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Truachpanzer%20190521-09_zps8nk1txmf.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Truachpanzer%20190521-10_zps8zybiifd.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Very nice work.
I cannot remember where I saw a film of them being demonstrated in what looked like a swimming pool.
-
A slightly converted Panzer IV Ausf G based on our new release Panzer IV Ausf F/F2/G/H (280077) plastic kit.
The tank was painted depicting a PzIV Ausf G from Regiment 3 of the 2nd Panzer Division near Kursk, Russia in 1943.
Note that the whole Schürzen support is a SINGLE piece design so that you don't need to fiddle around with small bits of plastic, trying to attach and align them onto the Schürzen.
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20G%20190531-01_zpsm61g5f61.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20G%20190531-02_zpsyxco9cqr.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20G%20190531-03_zpstmgsr49w.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Very nice.
-
Very nice (I have some Ausf J's coming from UKGE and I'd like to add the resin tracks, maybe the winterketten - when will they be released?)
-
It's D-Day plus 2, a Panzer IV Ausf J roaming through a village side street somewhere in Normandy, France, June 1944.
Note the fine details on the photo-etch Thoma wire-mesh hull side armour skits on the Ausf J.
The tank crew is from our Jagdpanther kit (280064).
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20J%20190608-01_zpslfnzzbyc.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20J%20190608-02_zps8ry5l08a.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20J%20190608-03_zpsp6alwgbn.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20J%20190608-04_zpsyghq5otp.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20J%20190608-05_zpsbk9pimsu.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20J%20190608-06_zpstffwvu9x.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20J%20190608-07_zpsrr9lybwk.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Very nice :)
-
These Panzer IVs look like winners.
-
Very nice.
-
In less than two weeks after the announcement, we have finally added the L/48 gun barrel back onto the Panzer IV Sprue A. Now under QC, once approved, we will replace all our stock (280077 & 280078) with this new sprue!
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Sprue%20A%20190730-01_zpsmpsf7da8.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/Sprue%20A%20190730-02_zpsbmxdt2vi.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looks good (and I look forward to getting the replacement barrels). Is there any news on the progress of the resin PzIV tracks?
-
Looks good (and I look forward to getting the replacement barrels).
Stay tuned, more good news coming!
Is there any news on the progress of the resin PzIV tracks?
The first and second production batches got rejected due to substandard QC. Seems like the tracks are quite difficult to reproduce than we originally anticipated despite several revisions to the original design. :(
-
Unfortunately,I am not a fan of resin tracks due to casting quality and needing two types of glue to complete a model as well as sticking my fingers together. I like the Link`n` Length tracks in the Revell 1/72 and the Tamiya 1/48 tanks.
I have not got any RM tanks at the moment but looking at some pictures you only need to see the track detail around the drive and rear sprockets. Tamiya tracks are made up of two track links together with a slight curve so four parts fit around the drive sprocket so RM could do a few parts to upgrade a Sherman/Panzer IV without the need to make resin tracks.
The only real problem I have is what version of panzer IV i like best.....choices choices.....
-
just sent my email in regards to barrels.
might be too late since I've glued them in but you never know when you need more guns.
-
Rubicon Models is proud to announce the launching of our all-new METAL gun barrel range - the first being an L/48 Gun Barrel with Muzzle Brake for the Panzer IV Ausf H & Ausf J.
This is a FIRST for any metal gun barrel products to be available in 1/56 scale. Looking forward to releasing more similar products in the near future.
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20Metal%20Gun%20Barrel%20noBG%20190805-1_zpsueqgh4wd.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20L48%20Blister%20190808-1_zpsgscksbn7.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Interesting development. I will have a look at them.
I did suggest something similar for the flak cannons.
-
Interesting development. I will have a look at them.
This is something that we had planned even before the missing L/48 surfaced. The incident just pushes the date earlier.
I did suggest something similar for the flak cannons.
The FlaK barrels were the first for us to try out, but at this scale, the quality that we demanded are not there. We are looking into alternatives for a solution. ;)
-
Very cool, (I'm tempted to say about time someone produced turned metal barrels at this scale) 8)
-
Interesting development. I will have a look at them.
This is something that we had planned even before the missing L/48 surfaced. The incident just pushes the date earlier.
I had not even thought of that.
Very cool, (I'm tempted to say about time someone produced turned metal barrels at this scale) 8)
I agree. Items like gun barrels push plastic injection moulding to the limit, getting a perfect circular cross section is difficult.
-
If you do figure out how to make the 20 / 37 mm flak barrels in metal , will it mean a retool so the metal barrels slide into a hole in the redesigned kit part or will it be up to the modeler to cut off the plastic barrel , drill a hole dead center and add part ? Not much fun trying to drill holes dead center in small plastic bits never mind getting a 4 even on the 20mm
-
@Ripley: I suspect for the flak models a replacement receiver assembly would be required for each barrel.
-
Your probably right . I wonder if Rubicon could make the barrels out of hollow brass tube ( like the stuff you can find in hobby / model RR shops ) and make the muzzle cones ( 20 / 37 mm flak ) out of resin ? Some of the larger AM guys do that for 1/35 kits
-
To wrap off the whole L/48 saga, here is a Panzer IV Ausf H (280077) with the new L/48 metal gun barrel & muzzle brake (284075) accompanied by the soon-to-be release resin track with cleats painted (by Rico Chia) with a winter whitewash...
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20H%20Painted%20190815-01_zpsjsb4e6pr.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20H%20Painted%20190815-02_zps8hj0w8kv.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20H%20Painted%20190815-03_zpscfamqv1z.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20H%20Painted%20190815-04_zpsgoifqtmr.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Panzer%20IV/PzIV%20H%20Painted%20190815-05_zps9m1ootxy.jpg)
Enjpy!
;)
-
That is a nice paint job.