Rubicon Models
Rubicon Models => Work In Progress => Topic started by: Rubicon Models on February 17, 2016, 10:29:52 pm
-
There had been a lot of discussions about the M4 Sherman in this forum, particularly with her long list of variants. Most members in the forum know we had been on-and-off updating our technical drawings of our existing M4A3 kit whenever new information is available. The action stopped short of an update plastic kit because we needed to sell enough to make the money back for the original moulds. These continuous updates is meant for future use when we have the chance to create more M4 variants and using that opportunity to update the existing M4A3 kit as well.
We are still not to the point where we are breaking-even on the M4A3 moulds, but it is soon on the horizon! It is also time to start a new M4 project. Before doing so, we would like to get some feedback from forum members as to what is best for the community in terms of usefulness for gaming and modeling. Here is a breakdown on what is being produced historically:
M4 / 6,784 produced / Jul 42 – Jan 44
M4(105) / 6,281 produced / Feb 42 – Dec 43
M4A1(76)W / 3,246 produced / Jan 44 – Jul 45
M4A2 / 8,053 produced / Apr 42 – May 44
M4A2(76)W / 2,915 produced / Apr 44 – May 45
M4A3 / 1,690 produced / Jun 42 – Sep 43
M4A3(105) / 500 produced / May 44 – Jun 45
M4A3(75)W / 3,071 produced / Feb 44 – Mar 45
M4A3(76)W / 254 produced / Jun 44 – Jul 44
M4A3E8(76) / 3,142 produced / Aug 44
M4A3E8(105) / 2,539 produced / Sep 44
M4A4 / 7,499 produced / Jul 42 – Nov 43
M4A6 / 75 produced / Oct 43 – Feb 44
Basically, all M4 shared two basic turrets (with some variants) and three guns (75 / 76 / 105). It was extensively supplied through Lend-Lease to Britain, the Soviet Union and the Free French. Britain received 17,287 Shermans of various models. The Soviet Union received 4,035 M4A2 Shermans. The Free French was the third largest recipient, taking 657 Shermans 1943-1944. 57 Shermans were delivered to other nations.
We would like some comments as to what is the best variant to do next? Of course, we have some ideas, but more input are welcome!
NOTE: This list is not meant to be "the" complete listing, just an indication on what had been produced during the time period.
;)
-
That's going to take some thinking . IRC the M4A4 was mostly issued as Lend Lease , while the A3 was a US only issue .But IRC the UK did get some 105 gunned A3slate in the war . The USSR got A2s , about 2000 each of the 75mm and 76mm gun types . A M4A1 composite kit would probably be popular with both US and UK tank fans if you included Firefly parts
-
Your list is missing the first model of Sherman tank to be manufactured, sent via Lend Lease to the U.K., and to equip the U.S. armored divisions, the M4A1 Sherman with the 75mm gun.
-
There's also the M4A3E2 "Jumbo" - 254 manufactured from May to July 1944. Not numerically significant, but effective in its intended role as a heavy assault tank. It's a useful vehicle for wargamers and an interesting modelling subject. The existing M4A3 hull would only require additional side and front plates to replicate the Jumbo's heavier armour. But it would need a new turret and tracks with extended end connectors. This would probably be my first choice for the next Rubicon Sherman. The downside would be that there is little scope for options - other than providing both the 75mm and 76mm guns.
My other choices would be:
Composite (late) M4 with parts to build Sherman Ic Hybrid Firefly. I think the Firefly is the coolest looking Sherman, and the Hybrid variant was the coolest looking Firefly. The basic Composite M4 saw service with the Allies in Normandy and with the US Army in the Pacific, but admittedly not in large numbers. In that regard it's perhaps a less useful kit.
M4A3E8. Arguably the best looking Sherman, and also likely to appeal to both modellers and wargamers. The drawback would be that, again, there aren't any significant variants apart from the 105mm version - although the kit could potentially include a set of sandbag armour.
-
My vote would be for the M4A1 Sherman with the earlier small hatch cast hull and 75mm gun. It would work for early war thru late war for the U.S. and U.K. But honestly , you could make a early welded hull, include a choice of plates for engine access hatches, like you did with your M-10/M-36 kit,a choice of rear hull plates and exausts,and a few choices for front upper glasius sections, and you could have one kit that could make either a early M4 dv hull, a M4, a early M4A2dv hull and a M4A2. That should satisfy everyones needs be it either U.S. Army, U.S.M.C, British, French and Soviet. Of course you could include additional parts for a Firefly.
I know that Warlord has a M4 already, but NOT with any options but for a M4.
-
dear rubicon
I have to say that as I have a vested interest in seeing variants I can do conversions on, but I would say this:-
1) m4a4, easy to make 2 main versions, 75mm and firefly, used by the british, French, poles and the usa as a flail and late war dd.
I can then make the crab flail, arv and various other conversion parts, hopefully making you sell more of them to people who want conversions.
2 )m4 hybrid, 75mm and firefly variants used by usa, gb, poles and French,
3) m4a1 early hull for desert (although the bogies are m3 type) and used by usa, gb, poles and French.
4) m4a2 early hull, used by the Russians, gb and usmc in the pacific and some conversion potential like dd, barv and some crab flails.
doing an early m4 like italeri/warlord is not imho, a good thing as it is just duplicating what is out and it is not a bad kit again imho, although getting supplies for my webshop is getting harder from italeri!
so that is my opinions on the matter for what they are worth.
I hope that helps
-
Knowing that we can count on your guys on input. A good number of resourceful advice too! At this point, we are basically looking at options trying to improve our existing M4A3 kit, and then add on new components (hull / transmission / exhaust / hatches / road wheels & suspension / boogies / etc) to become new variants.
A lot of these components had already been done or half-finish, and it is time to look for the next step... Keep feeding us what you think is good. We will screen through all your comments and come up with something that will match our production criteria; and hopefully create an even better product than the M4A3 & M10 kit.
Here is a good example of things that we have done behind the scene...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M2%203rd%20Revision%20160218-1_zps82oa9qer.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M2%203rd%20Revision%20160218-2_zpsa4hf1gps.jpg)
Another example is the 76mm turret. Remember the one we had updated earlier? We now have a 3rd generation 3D drawing based on actual blueprints & photos. Will post that up for comments later on!
Thanks again!!
-
looks and sounds goo, btw, email sent
-
looks and sounds goo, btw, email sent
Thanks Shaun, got your email. It's 1am, so not going to reply until our production meeting towards the end of the week.
Being a small design studio with all the necessary equipment enable us to explore different aspects of design throughout the whole manufacturing process. This also enable us to make last minute changes to drawings as well as to the actual mould (if required) before commercial production started.
Customer feedback (even from a handful few) is important to us. Thanks!
-
1am, working late then
the lengths we go to to make these models
will look forward to your reply
I am now off gaming tonight,
thanks
shaun
-
I think looking at the market the M4A3 E8 would be the next best choice...
-
The reinforced .50 cal looks very promising. I have been pushing for something like this for a while, because I find the 'true scale' machine gun barrels very fragile for gaming purposes. I also think it's more appealing visually - there's something satisfying about a chunky machine gun, but maybe that's too many years of WH40k speaking!
Aside from the 76mm turret, the Rubicon M4A3 is a good kit. The detail is sharp, and it looks 'right'. There are a couple of issues, like the design of the exhaust deflector (and the omission of a second blower from the 105mm turret), but they very minor. It's a very solid basis for spin-off kits, like an M4A3E8. Are you looking at actually revising the M4A3 kit?
Is the Panzer III going to get similar treatment? It's the weakest of your range by far, and when it's compared to your superb new Jagdpanzer 38t, it looks like it was produced by a different company!
-
The reinforced .50 cal looks very promising. I have been pushing for something like this for a while, because I find the 'true scale' machine gun barrels very fragile for gaming purposes. I also think it's more appealing visually - there's something satisfying about a chunky machine gun, but maybe that's too many years of WH40k speaking!
Besides your bombardment on reinforcing the .50 cal, we are gamers and modelers ourselves, and could see improvements when we see one! But in the manufacturing world, it takes time and efforts to change a design. Most importantly is too keep both old and new design look similar when placed closed to each other. That's why the long delay.
Aside from the 76mm turret, the Rubicon M4A3 is a good kit. The detail is sharp, and it looks 'right'. There are a couple of issues, like the design of the exhaust deflector (and the omission of a second blower from the 105mm turret), but they very minor. It's a very solid basis for spin-off kits, like an M4A3E8. Are you looking at actually revising the M4A3 kit?
We are not overhauling the M4A3 kit, but there are "things" that we think need attention... historical accuracy on the kit that normal gamers would not noticed. Not major changes to the mould, except for the T23 turret. The Easy Eight is something we are looking into with interest.
Is the Panzer III going to get similar treatment? It's the weakest of your range by far, and when it's compared to your superb new Jagdpanzer 38t, it looks like it was produced by a different company!
The Panzer III is one of our earliest kits, and of course will need revision as our product range moves forward; probably after the various M4 Sherman releases. If the Panzer III is going to get her face lift, it will be a major overhaul which will include more variants - early to mid war!
;)
-
For me, I would only be really interested in Shermans used by British forces.
The multi engine option described above would be really useful, I did wonder about a conversion of Warlord M4 with an M10 deck plate, but have not looked for pictures to see if it is workable.
Of course I do want one more M4A3 for a post war Yugoslavian film star to go with the Artisan figures.
-
For me, I would only be really interested in Shermans used by British forces.
For us, it is the same... we do need to give the Brits some love!
The multi engine option described above would be really useful, I did wonder about a conversion of Warlord M4 with an M10 deck plate, but have not looked for pictures to see if it is workable.
Don't think it will work. We have also looked into this, but the Sherman hull design and shape is quite different from the M10. We probably will have to provide different layout hulls for a multi-variant M4 kit.
Of course I do want one more M4A3 for a post war Yugoslavian film star to go with the Artisan figures.
No comments on that 8)
-
Of course I do want one more M4A3 for a post war Yugoslavian film star to go with the Artisan figures.
This film star?
http://oi59.tinypic.com/2zibrzq.jpg
-
Of course I do want one more M4A3 for a post war Yugoslavian film star to go with the Artisan figures.
This film star?
http://oi59.tinypic.com/2zibrzq.jpg
If it is the one in here:
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/m4a3e4/m4a3e4.html
Then yes.
Company B do the decals, but where can I get a milk churn and the tannoy? It will have to wait for the allied stowage for the spare track.
-
That's it - I can't post images at the moment (no idea why).
That's a cool idea. I hadn't known Oddball's tank was an M4A3E4 until I saw it on the Shadock site. Hunnicutt says this conversion was done in Japan prior to the Korean War, and doesn't refer to the "M4A3E4" designation, but the Shadock site is presumably more accurate on this.
The tannoy is tricky. You're good with greenstuff - maybe sculpt it? Its was pretty beaten up in the film.
-
The milk can should be easy to build using a couple of sizes of Plastruct tubing , a little Green Stuff and some file work or maybe you could find one in a O scale model railroad shop . The loud speaker - scratched out of thin plastic sheet , kit bashed out of a 1/35 scale rocket or missile nose cone or IRC , someone ( ? ) makes one that's included with their resin / white metal Oddball tank crew .
-
I wondered about cake decorations.
-
With good intention to revise the T23 (76mm) turret on our M4A3 Sherman kit had turned this tiny update into a monster of her own!
Now it has an early and a late turret variant... plus some minor update & additions to the M4A3 itself! Can you spot the changes?
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A3%20Revision%20160310-0_zpsvtue0avv.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A3%20Revision%20160310-3_zpsjy6hzmib.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A3%20Revision%20160310-2_zps4noxp2l9.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A3%20Revision%20160310-1_zpsg1hev18z.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A3%20Revision%20160310-4_zpsv4lhcn8u.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Nice work!! Although it isn't turret related, I definetly noticed the extended end connectors on the tracks.Nice!! Are you going to add these and re-do the rubber pads and add the chevrons as in the picture?
-
Nice work!! Although it isn't turret related, I definetly noticed the extended end connectors on the tracks.Nice!! Are you going to add these and re-do the rubber pads and add the chevrons as in the picture?
We have many plans for the M4 Sherman components... basically the only chassis you needed for the US (and her Allies) throughout the war!
We are also exploring different manufacturing techniques to improve our product quality without sacrificing the "easy-to-assemble" objective!
;)
-
Superb - that totally captures the look of the M4A3 (76mm). The extended end connectors are a great addition - they were very common in late 1944. And you'd then have the basis for an M4A3E2 Jumbo as well. Maybe re-do this kit as a late war M4A3, with parts for the Jumbo instead of the 75mm turret? I guess that's asking too much. But you could then do a separate kit of a 75mm and 105mm Sherman
Are you going to fix the exhaust deflector? It's not quite the right configuration.
-
@Pinky, time will tell.
We are currently quite tie up with all these open-end projects. Need to finish them off before starting new ones.
We also just ordered two new Digital Sculpting Workstations for month end delivery... feeling excited!
:D
-
Some more thoughts on this unseeming monstrous M4 project:
1. Will eventually cover all M4 variants – M4 / M4A1 / M4A2 / M4A3.
2. Will not cover the M4A4 (need a new hull – will eventually do one as a new project).
3. Will cover Commonwealth variants for these M4 variants when appropriate.
4. Will cover land lease variants for other Allies when appropriate.
5. Will include all bogie suspensions – VVSS (early & mid) & HVSS.
6. Will include all transmission housing (differential covers) – 3 variants.
7. Will include both small and large hatch for the various hulls.
8. Will include various rear engine back doors & filter systems (most common ones).
9. Will include 75/76 mm and 105 mm turrets (and variations) when applicable.
10. Will include “extra” armour plates for the M4 when applicable.
11. Will include both “standard” and “duckbill” tracks when applicable.
12. Will include different engine decks for various variants.
13. Will look into openable driver and co-driver hatches.
14. Will include tank crew whenever is possible.
15. Will include a new waterslide decal sheet to cover this new project.
There is no definite release date for this project as it will cover at least 4 to 5 different plastic kits at the end.
This is a proposal only at this point. Work will commence when our studio have the resources to start it – that includes $$$. Buy more of our kits, people!
;)
-
This is very ambitious and exciting, but it's not quite clear what you're thinking. Will be it a range of Sherman versions with interchangeable parts? Or upgrade sets? I realise that you can't make an individual Sherman kit too big, because in the end it's just one tank.
-
This is very ambitious and exciting, but it's not quite clear what you're thinking. Will be it a range of Sherman versions with interchangeable parts? Or upgrade sets? I realise that you can't make an individual Sherman kit too big, because in the end it's just one tank.
Very true indeed. Our objective is to create a 1/56 M4 Sherman digital library of various parts and components where we can readily assemble any M4 variants with minimal effort to create a plastic kit for release. Each kit will still be 3 sprue at most but with the subtle details that represent each variant.
Basically is for us to create products in a more efficient manner. These parts are also compatible with many US armoured vehicles, including the M3, M7, and the M4A4.
;)
-
Sounds like a well thought out plan.
-
looking forward to it all
-
We have moved this topic from "General Discussion" to "Work in Progress" as the "M4 Sherman T23 Turret" project had been approved for production!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20M4A3%20Turret%20160325-1_zpstxoxcnl4.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20M4A3%20Turret%20160325-2_zpsjuijgqse.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20M4A3%20Turret%20160325-3_zpsyfjtx0pd.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20M4A3%20Turret%20160325-4_zpsntj251wk.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20M4A3%20Turret%20160325-5_zpsdssacp1n.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20M4A3%20Turret%20160325-6_zpscj6nbp8q.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
I didn't expect to see this in prototype form...
Everything looks good. What's the plan for making this into a kit?
-
I didn't expect to see this in prototype form...
Everything looks good. What's the plan for making this into a kit?
No plan for a new kit YET... still a lot of fiddling around before deciding what to do with all these lovely parts.
So many Sherman variants could be done... except for the M4A4 (for now)! ;)
-
So many Sherman variants could be done... except for the M4A4 (for now)! ;)
But that is the one we want ^___^!
-
The M4A4 is not difficult to draw, just take a lot of extra time and effort to redraw the lower hull and tracks!
The positioning of each individual track takes a long time to do, not something we can afford right now...
:(
-
But that is the one we want ^___^!
M4A3E2 Jumbo, baby. I bet WL have a plastic M4A4 in the works (if only as a scaled up PSC kit).
Actually, WL already have a resin Jumbo in development. But a plastic one from Rubicon would be much better...
-
The M4A4 is not difficult to draw, just take a lot of extra time and effort to redraw the lower hull and tracks!
The positioning of each individual track takes a long time to do, not something we can afford right now...
:(
I quite understand, it would just mean that there was a British used tank that could do more than scuff the paint of late War Germans, besides the Coldstream Guards' Cuckoo of course.
-
M4A3E2 Jumbo, baby. I bet WL have a plastic M4A4 in the works (if only as a scaled up PSC kit).
Actually, WL already have a resin Jumbo in development. But a plastic one from Rubicon would be much better...
True, but possibly it would need a revised underframe to simulate the additional weight, there is a nice side view in the Osprey 76mm Sherman modelling book showing the effect on the bogies of the additional weight.
-
True, but possibly it would need a revised underframe to simulate the additional weight, there is a nice side view in the Osprey 76mm Sherman modelling book showing the effect on the bogies of the additional weight.
I wouldn't expect Rubicon to go that far! Providing the extended end connectors on the tracks would be enough for me as far as the running gear is concerned.
-
I often wonder if we might be a little to picky about companies getting every thing perfect in this scale . How much lower would the Jumbo sit than a vanilla M4 , a couple of millimeters ? Or would we notice the wheel spacing and six inch shorter lower hull if Rubicon made a M4A4 body to fit the M4A3 hull ? Ok , yes we would ::) .Personally , to get the versions of vehicles I want , I would not be bothered if Rubicon fudged some of the details . I mean both Rubicon and Warlord have omitted things and simplified parts already . The gamers I know , don' know or don't care . As a modeler , if it bothers me , I'll replace it or scratch build the part . Thoughts ?
-
As Pinky said, for me the extended connectors would be okay, but the M4A4 would require a new chassis.
-
I think Rubicon is on the right Track....get it right the first time ....is better to wait a little while longer rather than have to go back and fix it latter...
-
(http://s10.postimg.org/vdsbeb3hx/Sherman_Tank08.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/vdsbeb3hx/)
What about the Hull? The M4A1? Is this coming?
-
And publication date warning, but as hinted a Sherman V is on pre-order from Nottingham, though the Firefly appears to be a separate kit.
Once we get them though, we might start asking again ^___^.
So, Sherman 2 or 3?
-
I would like a Sherman v as I can then do more conversions on it, the arv conversion, already made, would fit the new tank easily.
maybe a crab flail for instance.
I do not think just doing a new upper hull to fit the shorter running gear is not an option, rubicon would get slammed for it.
it needs to be done right.
-
As UVS said, Warlord have said they are releasing a plastic Sherman V (with a Firefly hinted at as well). It looks quite good too - it includes a blanket box on the turret, spare wheels and tracks, and a commander. There's no real incentive for Rubicon to do one now.
-
Warlord have it available for pre-order on their website, with an April release date
-
Warlord have it available for pre-order on their website, with an April release date
I wonder if they will have it on offer (like they did with the M4) at Salute?
Back on subject, so models of a small number of shiny tanks (jumbo or easy eight) or lots of dull lend lease?
-
Don't really worried about who is releasing what products. We do have our own production schedule and everything is on time as planned.
The WLG plastic Sherman V is again a PSC scaled up (slightly modified) kit. The figure on the turret had gave it away...
:P
-
Then it's going to be a very average kit. In fact, looking at the photo of the built and painted model, I can now see that it must be a scaled up PSC kit. This means the dimensions and some of the details look a bit off - what looks fine in 15mm can look rather less so in 28mm. Strangely, however, the commander is the reverse of the 15mm version.
-
We still believe building a digital library of M4 components is the way to go!
When completed, we can build almost any M4 variants we wanted as need arises... and it is about 60% completed!
Here is a rare look of the duckbill extender fresh from the 3D printer!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Duckbill%20Extenders%20160402-1_zpsc5gln0dc.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
They look awesome. And you've managed to improve the tread pattern!
-
Excellent.
Probably does not fit in with my army building but I am always tempted by shiny stuff.
-
They look awesome. And you've managed to improve the tread pattern!
Is a relatively expensive investment to get these tread pattern done! :(
-
Is a relatively expensive investment to get these tread pattern done! :(
It requires slide moulding - right?
The problem is, once you've shown it can be done, you're not going to want to go back...
-
I didn't notice it in your earlier drawings,but your 3D prototype has the steel cleat track. If this is for the upgrade to your M4A3 kit, I would suggest that you use the rubber cleated T-48 track instead. It was the most common type on U.S. Shermans in NW Europe
-
Food for thoughts for those who are interested.
Would like to compile a list of key features for each variant for future references...
M4 / 6,784 produced / Jul 42 – Jan 44
- 75mm gun
- have a composite production variant
- both small and large hatches
M4(105) / 6,281 produced / Feb 42 – Dec 43
- 105mm gun on large hatch only
M4A1(76)W / 3,246 produced / Jan 44 – Jul 45
- 75mm & 76mm gun
- both small and large hatches
M4A2 / 8,053 produced / Apr 42 – May 44
- 75mm gun
- small hatch
M4A2(76)W / 2,915 produced / Apr 44 – May 45
- 76mm gun
- large hatch
M4A3 and so on...
-
I am not sure if there was a large hatch welded M4 75mm, the M4 composite appears to have used a large hatch M4A1 style front.
The large hatch M4 105mm looks completely different to a normal M4.
Single source warning, but this has pictures: http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/
-
How 'granular' do you want to go?
For instance:
Very early production M4s, M4A1s and M4A2s had M3 bogies and a bolted transmission housing. The M3 bogies were quickly superseded by M4 bogies (of which there was an early and late version). The bolted transmission cover was replaced soon after (again there was an early, rounded version and a later 'sharper' version). All M4A3s had a cast transmission housing and M4 bogies. All M4A4s had M4 bogies and a bolted transmission housing).
All early production M4s, M4A1s, M4A2s, M4A3s and M4A4s also had direct vision ports for the driver and co-driver and the narrow mantlet. The direct vision ports and narrow mantlet were replaced on all marks by periscopes, resulting in better armoured 'hoods' for the driver and co-driver. The narrow mantlet was also replaced by the wider M34A1 mantlet in late 1942.
It gets more complicated as the number of variants proliferates. For instance, the pistol port in the turret side was eliminated in 1943 then reintroduced in 1944. Appliqué armour was added, both during production and in field workshops (a lot of upgrading was done in the UK ahead of D-Day). It wasn't uniformly fitted to all marks.
And so on...
-
What we are looking for are "standard" features on various variants for quick references. We understand there are many minor details and differences, but those are not our key concerns.
What we basically wanted for each variant is:
1) Early war features
2) Late war changes
more or less of a "must have" list for each variant!
;)
-
[I will edit these in order to expand on the information and correct any errors. Please point out anything that's wrong!]
Starting with the M4A1,this was the first Sherman variant to be designed. Its had cast hull, which was a relatively advanced feature at the time. Its high profile was dictated by the use of a 9 cylinder radial aircraft engine, which sat higher than a 'normal' engine (there being no dedicated tank power plant available at the time). The M4A1 went though 4 distinct phases during its production history (these are not official designations):
Initial production: M3 bogies, bolted transmission housing, direct vision ports and narrow M34 mantlet. This was the first Sherman type to see active service, and was used by the British 8th Army (as the Sherman II) and by the US Army in North Africa. A few survived to serve through the Italian campaign. In British service in North Africa, the M4A1 was equipped with sand shields, brackets and rails for the sunshield device and a blanket box on the turret.
Early production: M4 bogies, cast transmission housing (early rounded type - although some still had the bolted transmission housing), periscopes instead of direct vision ports and narrow M34 mantlet. This version was introduced during the North African campaign, again with both the British 8th Army and the US Army. Some also saw service with the US Army in the Pacific.
Mid production: M4 bogies, cast transmission housing (early rounded type then later 'sharp-edged' type), periscopes instead of direct vision ports, wide M34A1 mantlet and appliqué armour on the hull sides and right turret cheek. This is the version that saw service with both the US Army in the Normandy campaign; together with with the M4 it was the principal Sherman variant used by the US Army until the introduction of the preferred M4A3 during 1944. Some M4A1s were also used by the British in Normandy, although it was one of the less common Sherman types in service with the British. This version also saw service with the US Army in the Pacific.
Late production: M4 bogies (final production versions had HVSS, although none of these saw service in WW2), cast transmission housing (later 'sharp-edged' type), revised hull with large hatches, 'wet' stowage, and 76mm turret (initially the early type with circular loader's hatch and no muzzle brake, later with the oval loader's hatch and muzzle brake), and sand shields. The 76mm version saw service with the US Army in the latter phase of the Normandy campaign, and with both the British Army (as the Sherman IIa) and the US Army in Italy; it was gradually replaced in US service by the M4A3 (76mm). The initial batch of large hatch M4A1s had the 75mm turret, and most if not all of these seem to have been converted into DD tanks.
Distinguishing features: distinctive cast hull (which can be confused with M4 Composite from the front).
As with all Sherman types, there were numerous detail changes throughout production, and features like roadwheels and drive sprockets were interchangeable. A number of tanks were also rebuilt, so that later features were often added to earlier vehicles.
-
Thanks Pinky. Something like that is more than perfect!
This will give our studio guys a quick reference guide to look for specific features in each variant, then compare with notes and photos that they have on hand.
Sometime it is difficult to work on drawings just based on our research material (even if they are incorrect). Definitely will speed up our work without the need to make corrections later on!
The "Sherman Minutia" website is a good "single source" reference, but our staff's English is limited and many times made errors during translation...
BTW, take your time, no rush!
-
You might pick up the Haynes Sherman Tank book . It gives a overall view of the various production types and changes . Not as good as the Hunicutt book but , at least $150 dollars cheaper :) I find with the Haynes book and the Sherman website , I can figure most major types . It can be difficult sometimes to figure out , as some versions were built by 4 or 5 different plants . They might be large enough to make all their own smaller cast parts , ie Drivers hoods , antenna pot or the hull lift rings , or they might get a variety of small parts from a bigger factory ( a lot like the Russian 's T-34 production ) . I don't think you want to down that road ::)
-
The M4's development largely tracked the M4A1's, as they were automotively identical, up until the introduction of the 76mm turret. The M4 was not fitted with the 76mm gun, but it was fitted with the 105mm howitzer (the M4A1 wasn't). The M4 production history is quite complex, with numerous differences between manufacturers, so the following represents the principal production types.
Initial production: M3 bogies, bolted transmission housing, direct vision ports and narrow M34 mantlet. This version was used by the US Army in North Africa; as with the initial version of the M4A1, a few survived to serve through the Italian campaign. The M4 did not see service with the British Army in North Africa - early production Shermans in British service identified as Sherman Is are usually actually Sherman IIIs.
Early production: M4 bogies, cast transmission housing (early rounded type - but some still had the bolted transmission housing), periscopes instead of direct vision ports and narrow M34 mantlet. This version was introduced into service with the US Army during the North African campaign. It was also used in the Pacific. This version seems to have been relatively rare in British service.
Mid production: M4 bogies, cast transmission housing (early rounded type then later 'sharp' type), periscopes instead of direct vision ports, wide M34A1 mantlet, appliqué armour on the hull sides, glacis and right turret cheek, gun travel lock and sand shields. This version saw service with the British Army and the US Army in the Normandy campaign (and in the latter part of the Italian campaign); together with with the M4A1 it was the principal Sherman variant used by the US Army until the introduction of the preferred M4A3 later in 1944. This version was also used in the Pacific.
Late production: M4 bogies, cast transmission housing (later 'sharp' type), composite cast/welded hull with large hatches, gun travel lock and sand shields. During production, the turret type transitioned from the 'low bustle' to the 'high bustle' with oval loader's hatch. This version saw service with the British Army and the US Army in Normandy, and quite a few were also used by the US Army in the Pacific (particularly in the Philippines and on Okinawa).
M4 (105mm): M4 bogies (late production vehicles had HVSS), 47 degree glacis with large hatches, 'high bustle' turret with 105mm mount (some turrets had a second blower on the bustle; later production vehicles had a commander's cupola instead of split hatch, and .50 cal relocated to a pintle mount), gun travel lock and sand shields. This version saw service with the US Army in Europe and in the latter stages of the Pacific war (principally the Philippines and Okinawa), and a few were issued to the British (as the Sherman 1B).
Distinguishing features: vertical rear hull with cutaway and distinctive circular air cleaners mounted underneath (on the large hatch hull the rear was sloped and lacked the cutaway); very difficult to distinguish from M4 and M4A3 from the front.
-
Very useful Pinky, keep up the good work.
From my reading of the Sherman site, it sounds like M4A1s were built at the end of the war with HVSS but probably did not reach the front (YMMV) - a bit like Centurions.
Apologies to our Gracious Hosts, but any idea where the BA Sherman 1 fits?
Thanks for the recommendation Ripley, I have seen the book but was not sure how good it was.
-
Apologies to our Gracious Hosts, but any idea where the BA Sherman 1 fits?
It's a 'mid production' M4, as per my post above. Consistent with the fact that the Normandy campaign is one of the most popular with WW2 wargamers, it's a Normandy era vehicle, as used by the British and US Army.
-
Apologies to our Gracious Hosts, but any idea where the BA Sherman 1 fits?
It's a 'mid production' M4, as per my post above. Consistent with the fact that the Normandy campaign is one of the most popular with WW2 wargamers, it's a Normandy era vehicle, as used by the British and US Army.
Cool, thanks.
-
The diesel-engined M4A2 was actually the first welded version of the Sherman that went into production. Other than a very brief period following the heavy losses in Tunisia (when M4A2s intended for the British were redirected to the US 1st Armoured Division), it never saw active service with the US Army. This was due to a decision to use gasoline-powered tanks, although the M10 Tank Destroyer (which saw widespread US service) was based on the M4A2 chassis. The M4A2 was used by the British Army (as the Sherman III), the Red Army (where it was known unofficially as the "Emcha"), the Canadians and the USMC.
Initial production: M3 bogies, bolted transmission housing, direct vision ports and narrow M34 mantlet. This version saw service with the British 8th Army in North Africa from October 1942, eventually becoming the most numerous Sherman type in British service until the introduction of the M4A4. British Shermans in North Africa were equipped with sand shields, brackets for the sunshield device and a blanket box on the turret. Some of these early M4A2s may also have made it to the Soviet Union.
Early production: M4 bogies, cast transmission housing (early rounded type - but some still had the bolted transmission housing), periscopes instead of direct vision ports and narrow M34 mantlet. This version also saw service with the British and Canadians in North Africa, Sicily and Italy, and with the Red Army. M4A2s supplied to the Red Army were unmodified, but the Soviets preferred the steel cleat track as it provided better traction in snow and ice.
Mid production: M4 bogies, cast transmission housing (early rounded type then later 'sharp' type), periscopes instead of direct vision ports, wide M34A1 mantlet, appliqué armour on the hull sides and glacis (and sometimes the right turret cheek), and gun travel lock. However, there were numerous variations, including different 'hood' designs. This version served with the British Army in Italy and NW Europe, the Red Army and with the USMC (where they were first used on Tarawa).
Late production: M4 bogies (late production vehicles had HVSS), cast transmission housing (later 'sharp' type), 47 degree glacis with large hatches and sand shields. The initial batch had 'dry' stowage (and thus still had applique armour on the hull sides) and the 75mm 'high bustle' turret (with oval loader's hatch), but in May 1944 production of the M4A2 with the 76mm turret and 'wet' stowage began. The 76mm turret design evolved the same way as with other Sherman marks. Virtually all of these late production M4A2s were delivered to the Red Army, and the M4A2 (76mm)s tended to be allocated to Guards units. However, some late production M4A2 (75mm)s equipped USMC units in the later battles of the Pacific war, including Iwo Jima and Okinawa.
Distinguishing features: sloping rear hull with diesel exhaust, later often concealed by deflector; small grill on engine deck; late production version with large hatch hull is easily confused with large hatch M4A3
-
Thanks for the info... much appreciated!
Had been a busy week for us at the studio! We have just "officially" completed NINE working projects, and had send all the files to our mould maker for sprue layout!
These were all the 250/251 expansion sets (with our digital sculpts). Hopefully, there will be no amendments required!
Next week will be the preparation of new box arts, decals, and assembly instructions for the upcoming new releases!
;)
-
@Pinky, this is really interesting.
I understand the idea of wet stowage, but is there an external indication of Wet or Dry stowage on the hull?
-
No real indication from the outside that a Sherman is wet stowage . BUT - wet stowage tanks ( mostly ) did not get the extra welded on armored panels on the hull sides . Four types got the new ammo storage system - M4A1 (76 mm ) W , M4A2 (76 mm ) W , M4A3 (75 mm ) W , and M4A3 ( 76 mm ) W .
-
Right - it's hard to tell, and even experts get it wrong. Zaloga seems to have misidentified late production M4A2s as having wet stowage in one of his titles. The M4 (105mm) and M4A3 (105mm) didn't have wet stowage either.
I also realised that the M4 didn't see service in the desert - I had thought there were some there, but 'The New Breed' says that there were none, just Sherman IIs and IIIs.
-
On to the M4A3. This variant was chosen by the US Army as its preferred type, principally because of the virtues of its Ford V8 gasoline engine. Virtually all of the M4A3 production was reserved for use by the US Army (although some were also issued to the USMC). The M4A3 didn't see any significant service until 1944, when it began to replace the M4 and M4A1 in US service in NW Europe.
Early production: M4 bogies, cast transmission housing (early rounded type - all M4A3s had the cast transmission housing), direct vision ports and narrow M34 mantlet. These were only used for training.
Mid production: M4 bogies, cast transmission housing (early rounded type then later 'sharp' type), periscopes instead of direct vision ports, wide M34A1 mantlet, appliqué armour on the hull sides, glacis and (often but not always) on the right turret cheek, sand shields and gun travel lock. Some were subsequently rebuilt with features like appliqué armour and sand shields if they weren't fitted in the factory. There were variations in detail depending on the manufacturer, including different 'hood' designs. This version served with the US Army (principally in the Normandy campaign), and a few also saw service in the Pacific.
Late production: M4 bogies (very late production vehicles had HVSS), cast transmission housing (later 'sharp' type), 47 degree glacis with large hatches and 'wet' stowage', and sand shields. The initial batch had the 75mm 'high bustle' turret (with oval loader's hatch), and were designated M4A3 (75mm)W. In March 1944 production of the M4A3 (76mm) began. The 76mm turret design evolved the same way as with other Sherman types, so that the final version had the oval loader's hatch and muzzle brake. The M4A3 (75mm)W saw service with the US Army in NW Europe from about July 1944; the M4A3 (76mm)W went into service in August 1944, and the M4A3 (76mm) W HVSS went into service in December 1944. The M4A3 (76mm)W also saw service in Italy (this seems to have been the first M4A3 variant that saw service there). Some USMC units on Okinawa and Iwo Jima were also equipped with the M4A3 (75mm)W. USMC tanks were heavily modified with wooden planks on the sides, sandbags, mesh and welded-on bolts in order to counter Japanese close-range anti-tank tactics.
M4A3 (105mm): M4 bogies (very late production vehicles had HVSS), 47 degree glacis with large hatches, 'high bustle' turret with 105mm mount (some turrets had a second blower on the bustle; later production vehicles had a commander's cupola instead of split hatch, and .50 cal relocated to a pintle mount), gun travel lock and sand shields. This version saw service with the US Army in NW Europe and in the latter stages of the Pacific war (principally the Philippines and Okinawa).
M4A3E2: 250 M4A3s were built with heavier hull armour, a more heavily armoured turret (based on the T23 turret) with a thicker mantlet and a reinforced transmission housing. Extended end connectors were standard. The M4A3E2 was built with a 75mm gun, but about half were were refitted with a 76mm gun in 1945. This vehicle saw service in NW Europe.
Distinguishing features: long rear hull with twin exhausts underneath; large grill on engine deck
-
Right - it's hard to tell, and even experts get it wrong. Zaloga seems to have misidentified late production M4A2s as having wet stowage in one of his titles. The M4 (105mm) and M4A3 (105mm) didn't have wet stowage either.
I also realised that the M4 didn't see service in the desert - I had thought there were some there, but 'The New Breed' says that there were none, just Sherman IIs and IIIs.
The M-4 did see service in North Africa. The paperback book, ' Under The Gun 2, First Blood. U.S.1st. Armored Division in Tunisia' ,printed by The Oliver Publishing Group, shows German Propaganda pictures taken mid to late February 1943 of destroyed M-4A1 and M-4 Sherman tanks.
The Concord Publications book, US. Tank Battles in North Africa and Italy 1943-45 shows a pair of knocked out M-4's. southwest of Siding Salem from February 15th 1943
-
The M-4 did see service in North Africa. The paperback book, ' Under The Gun 2, First Blood. U.S.1st. Armored Division in Tunisia' ,printed by The Oliver Publishing Group, shows German Propaganda pictures taken mid to late February 1943 of destroyed M-4A1 and M-4 Sherman tanks.
Sorry, Hoffman - I meant that it didn't see service with the British in the desert. See my summary of the M4 further up. I have both the books you mention which show US M4s in Tunisia.
-
Excellent.
There is a picture of the M4A4 engine here:http://ultravanillasmurf.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/frankenengine.html
-
Finally, the M4A4. It was powered by 5 6-cylinder engines bolted together, which necessitated extending the hull. The M4A4 therefore had a noticably longer profile than the other types. This type was not used operationally as a gun tank by the US Army (which regarded the power plant as unsatisfactory), but it was used for training in the US. It was widely used by the Allies - principally the British (as the Sherman V), but also the Canadians, Free French and Free Poles in NW Europe and Italy. A small number were also used by the British and the Chinese 1st Provisional Tank Group in Burma.
Distinguishing features: elongated hull with additional space between bogies, radiator bulge behind turret, sloping rear hull without visible exhaust, 'low bustle' turret.
Early production: M4 bogies, bolted transmission housing (all M4A4s had the bolted transmission housing), direct vision ports and narrow M34 mantlet.
Mid production: M4 bogies, bolted transmission housing, periscopes instead of direct vision ports, narrow M34 mantlet (transitioning to wider M34A1 mantlet during production). Many were rebuilt to late production standard in 1944.
Late production: M4 bogies, bolted transmission housing, periscopes instead of direct vision ports, wide M34A1 mantlet, appliqué armour on the hull sides, glacis and (depending on when the turret was produced) on the right turret cheek, sand shields and gun travel lock.
-
Excellent. I can understand the US Army concern having seen the engine at Duxford (see above link).
-
the usa did us 2 variants of the m4a4, a few crab flails and some dd's later in new, but not as a gun tank.
they even had come Churchill avre's (inc an sbg) in Italy and southern france
-
According to Fletcher's book on the Sherman DD, the Americans used a few M4A4 and M4A2 DDs for the Rhine crossing (although he doesn't mention the M4 Composite DD at all). In his book on the Sherman Crab, he says the Americans rejected the Crab, although some British Crabs were seconded to US units and a few of them (presumably M4A4s) ended up with the 739th Tank Battalion. I'm sure there will be other obscure exceptions (like British use of the M3A3), but the idea of this was to set out an overview of the development and employment gun tank types.
-
Just a quick note about M4A2 Shermans, some of them had fabricated drivers hoods.
The Shaddock site states that they have not seen non Fisher produced M4A2 tanks in USMC photographs and they used fabricated hoods (it is not clear if that all USMC tanks had fabricated hoods).
It might be a feature to include in any model.
-
Driver's hoods ? Do you mean the canvas and glass hood used in the rain , stored in a box on the transmission cover ? IRC a lot of US vehicles had these , I've seen M5 Stuarts and Chaffees with them on . Word is they leaked and weren't worth the hassle of setting them up or storing them when wet . Not to mention trying to close the hatch in a hurry under fire !
-
Ripley - we're using "hood" to mean the raised cowling around the driver and co-driver's hatches. Maybe "cowling" is a better word...
-
@Ripley,
As Pinky said, these parts of the Shermans:
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/hoods_hatches/hoods_hatches.html
I suppose they are distinctly "hood" shaped on the 57° glacis.
Though it might be from a foreign language where hood means bonnet (of a car) ^______^.
-
The cast driver hoods , I got it . Some cast rounded , some cast squared off , and some actually welded together , depending which company supplied them . Its the same with the antenna pot beside the MG , how it looks depends on which smaller company made it . And various types can be seen on the one factories tanks . Gets very confusing , even with the shaddrack site to figure out a tanks manufacturer from a war time picture ???
-
Guys, anything about something like this?There are some word on the side of this tank which would be good as decals...
(http://s23.postimg.org/8yb87krlz/20160306_100032.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/8yb87krlz/)
-
War time shipping label painted on tank . Length , width , height , and weight , standard stuff needed to ship large vehicles by rail . IRC , all US lend lease and Canadian stuff shipped to UK / Russia had these so it was easier to place on flatcars and ships to get the load balanced .( Also late war German stuff had this kind of stenciling as well ). Would be nice to have this as a decal , but should be vehicle specific if your really an anorak ::) . North American trains have this kind of stenciling on most freight cars dating from the 20s . I've used N or HO scale decals to represent this , too small to read for the most part :)
-
I agree that it would be nice to have these shipping labels in decal form. Sometimes there were markings in chalk as well.
-
Had a very productive day at the studio. We have a special meeting on the M4 project.
Here are some features put forth regarding the lower hull components for your feedback:
1) VVSS Bogie & Return Roller - We will be using the most common bogie assembly with the "offset roller" and skid. These will be used on M4A1 / M4A2 / M4A3 variants.
2) VVSS Roadwheel - The type will depends on the variant, but will tend to use the two types found on our Allied Stowage Set 1.
3) VVSS Sprocket - Also depends on the variants, will research on factory production data.
4) VVSS Idler Wheels - Also depends on the variants, will be "paired" with the sprocket.
5) VVSS Tracks - On our existing M4A3, we have a slightly distorted T56E1 track. We have also finished drawings on a T54 with duckbill track. What other tracks do you want to see? We are looking at doing ONE more...
6) HVSS Suspension - Basically not much of a variant to choose from, is pretty standard.
7) HVSS Tracks - This is important as we can only do ONE set with HVSS suspension. The T66 (first track type for HVSS) is out of the question because of incompatible mould angle on our one piece track design. We are fixed on a T80 / T80E5 track at the moment.
Any comments welcome!
;)
-
It looks like you've made up your mind on most of the features of your Sherman project. On feature choice number five, I'd suggest the T-48 rubber chevron track. It was the most used track in Europe. The T-54E1 that you talked about is the most common steel track. The easiest to mold would be either the T-41 or T-51, as the rubber pads are plain.
On choice number seven, you only leave two choices, unfortunately. Really, only one, as I believe the T80E5 was made postwar. Have you considered etched brass for the face of the T-66 tracks? Maybe not the entire track, but just the cast pattern detail that meets the ground? I seem to remember a company that made etched brass track for the Roco Minitanks years ago. Maybe something like that?
-
It looks like you've made up your mind on most of the features of your Sherman project. On feature choice number five, I'd suggest the T-48 rubber chevron track. It was the most used track in Europe. The T-54E1 that you talked about is the most common steel track. The easiest to mold would be either the T-41 or T-51, as the rubber pads are plain.
Nothing is final until we start the project. Right now is data collection, that's why we posted what we think we will do... subject to comments and feedback.
Because of the one piece track design, there are limitations on how the track pattern will show up on a two-part mould. Consider the scale of the model, there is no signification differences on the T48 and T54E1 with our current design method. Being that said, we are now switching to side-sliding moulds (3 part mould) to create track patterns on the front end of the track - about 4 to 8 tracks with patterns in the front will be visible. The rest of the tracks (upper and lower, plus back side) will remain the same as current one piece track - Our thinking is basically only the front is visible, other views/areas will be blocked by the upper hull anyway.
On choice number seven, you only leave two choices, unfortunately. Really, only one, as I believe the T80E5 was made postwar. Have you considered etched brass for the face of the T-66 tracks? Maybe not the entire track, but just the cast pattern detail that meets the ground? I seem to remember a company that made etched brass track for the Roco Minitanks years ago. Maybe something like that?
Even with the three-part mould method, the T80 pattern will not be very noticeable in our scale. We are thinking of a resin upgrade kit (with T66 tracks) later when the HVSS option is available.
-
With the slide mold, could you do the same with the back side of the tracks as you plan on doing with the front ? You are correct in that the top or bottom of the track would not be visible.
That would be great if you offered a resin set of T-66 tracks in the future. You could sell them, and with the HVSS suspension as an optional replacement for your current M4A3 kit's suspension
-
I didn't notice it in your earlier drawings,but your 3D prototype has the steel cleat track. If this is for the upgrade to your M4A3 kit, I would suggest that you use the rubber cleated T-48 track instead. It was the most common type on U.S. Shermans in NW Europe
Uh.....my mistake. The T-54E1 track WAS used on the M4A1 and M4A3 later in WW2. I made the comment while at work, and when I got home i checked my references, specifically Military Miniatures in Review's Modelers Guide to the Sherman.
Next time, I won't comment until I can check my facts.
Sorry....
-
Great to hear you're switching to slide moulds for the Sherman tracks - and it'll be fine to just deal with the front and rear track sections.
I don't have much to add on this; it sounds like a solid list of key components. It looks as though you're basically focusing on mid-late war variants.
I would prefer that Rubicon not start adding any brass or resin components to their kits. But separate upgrade sets would be nice, in due course.
-
Great to hear you're switching to slide moulds for the Sherman tracks - and it'll be fine to just deal with the front and rear track sections.
Unfortunately, our standard length of the sprue and the tracks didn't match, thus only the front detail is possible.
-
Oh, I missed the fact that it's just the front of the tracks...
-
Great to hear you're switching to slide moulds for the Sherman tracks - and it'll be fine to just deal with the front and rear track sections.
Unfortunately, our standard length of the sprue and the tracks didn't match, thus only the front detail is possible.
We will just have to cover the back end of the track with mud....
-
More work had been done on our M4 Sherman project...
This time drawing of the rear exhaust... with and without grille!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Exhaust%20160507-1_zpspe5vfcue.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Had been almost two weeks without any updates on the M4 project.
This is part of the new 3D Drawings from our ongoing M4 Sherman components project -
T48 tread links with rubber chevron pattern. Still pretty much a work-in-progress stage...
but taking shape!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/T48%20Tread%20Links%20160523-1_zps25osim0w.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
The 3D drawing looks great. I can't wait to see the 3D prototype, or to see the updates on the M4A3!!
-
The 3D drawing looks great. I can't wait to see the 3D prototype, or to see the updates on the M4A3!!
This is going to be a long process! We would like to get all the key components done before
the final update or create any new variants for the M4 war machine!
;)
-
Have to do it right the first time! Bogie assembly, Horizontal Volute Spring System (HVSS) suspension...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20E8%20Track%20160609-1_zpszzxqigcf.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Excellent.
-
More work done on our M4 Digital Library...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Sprocket%20160624-1_zpsr0qw0cvq.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
More studio news regarding our M4 Digital Library project - Tracks & Suspension are done!
By combining different sprockets, rear idler wheels, tracks and suspension, we can now have
different configurations for various Sherman variants anytime we need one!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Tracks%20160625-1_zps4nuw39lv.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
A single piece plastic M4 Track with VVSS and T54E1 chevron steel tread, with duckbill extenders mounted.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20T54E1%20160625-01_zpsu94x5sd7.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20T54E1%20160625-02_zpsh53fvzds.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20T54E1%20160625-03_zpsjtz2gs07.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20T54E1%20160625-04_zpsufq2wkmx.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Wow, that's extraordinarily well done! Great work getting so much detail - and depth - onto a single piece moulding. Are we getting an all-new late model Sherman?
-
Excellent.
Looking forward to the HVSS version.
-
Cool...like everyone else I really want at least one set of these !
(https://s31.postimg.org/ll1152t6f/tank_iwo_jima_021915.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/ll1152t6f/)
-
While showing off our upcoming SdKfz 250/251 expansion set sprues on our
FB official page, here is an exclusive PIP picture of the all new T23 turret from
our M4 Sherman digital library project. Will post more after painting is done!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20T23%20Turrets%20160629-1_zpsg6mvv9hg.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
They look good (PMMV ^_______^). It would be nice if both turrets were buildable from one kit, then on could go on an M4A3, the other on the new kit (same as the M10/36 kit).
How is the HVSS design going?
Is the plan that the short M4Ax chassis models will have swappable suspension units like the T34 or is that not possible?
-
Are the two turrets the same size? The later version looks a bit bigger, but it might just be the photo.
The .50 cal mount should be part of the split ring hatch. It looks as though it's attached to the turret roof - although again that might just be the photo.
UVS - these components should all be compatible with the existing M4A3 hull, as the hull didn't change with the upgraded turret and suspension. I am wondering where Rubicon are going with all these new components though.
-
July 4th - a good day to post this up!
Mind you this is still NOT a product yet! This is just the beginning of a long-term project
- to create a digital library of various M4 Sherman major components so that we can
create any M4 variants any time we wanted - US and Commonwealth with options!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20T23%20Turrets%20160630-01_zpsenycecrk.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20T23%20Turrets%20160630-02_zpsuqr6elks.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20T23%20Turrets%20160630-03_zps7bgvza96.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20T23%20Turrets%20160630-04_zps8xg1filb.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20T23%20Turrets%20160630-05_zpslx8xnazd.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20T23%20Turrets%20160630-06_zpsjf1tksq5.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20T23%20Turrets%20160630-07_zpssusujkfn.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20T23%20Turrets%20160630-08_zpsin1fslht.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20T23%20Turrets%20160630-09_zpspk7zdrac.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/FB%20New%20T23%20Turrets%20160630-10_zpsa1pkuo94.jpg)
Comments?
;)
-
You can never have enough Sherman's!
-
The late model 76mm version with extended end connectors looks fantastic. The tracks are the best you've done yet for any kit.
I raised a couple of points in my earlier post. I've also noticed that the late version of the turret has what looks like a moulding seam above the mantlet, while the earlier version doesn't. Is that intended?
It's a very small point, but it would be nice if the periscope on the split hatch also had the moulded-on periscope guard, like the hull hatches do.
-
Someone had asked us why are we wasting time to update
an existing product and not creating a new variant?
To some manufacturers, it might be the case; but as a studio,
we think it is equally important to take care of old products as
well as developing new ones; otherwise there will be a noticeable
difference in terms of detail quality when you put these releases
side by side on the tabletop.
Using a software developer's phrase, we would say "to make
them upward compatible"! We had done this to our T-34 range,
now doing the M4 range, and eventually will cover all earlier
ranges as well! ;)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A3%20New%20Hull%20160706-1_zpsb8vl0yy6.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A3%20New%20Hull%20160706-2_zpsedklgj1d.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A3%20New%20Hull%20160706-3_zps80gagl7b.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A3%20New%20Hull%20160706-4_zpsidqmv3c2.jpg)
C&C welcome!
;)
-
Well I think it's great that you're taking the time and trouble to improve the M4A3. It's an important vehicle, and worth the effort - especially if that means has the same high standard of detail and accuracy as your latest kits. Hopefully the Panzer III will get the same treatment.
The exhaust deflector should not have angled slats on the top row. They were all straight - there is a very clear photo of one on the Shadock site (note that the vertical bits aren't symetrical). Also, what is that vent-like pattern on the engine wall above the exhausts? I don't recall seeing that on the M4A3.
-
Nice to see an updated hull.
I did notice the cover over the ventilator between the driver and machine gunner hatches. Earlier models had no cover, if there was space on the sprue, could the cover be a separate piece?
Any chance of the hull lift rings being separate pieces?
Will you be doing the mud guard extensions that project horizontally from the hull for the wider track variants?
-
Well I think it's great that you're taking the time and trouble to improve the M4A3. It's an important vehicle, and worth the effort - especially if that means has the same high standard of detail and accuracy as your latest kits. Hopefully the Panzer III will get the same treatment.
Both the Panzer III & IV will wait for their turns... will be "true" multi-variant this time!
The exhaust deflector should not have angled slats on the top row. They were all straight - there is a very clear photo of one on the Shadock site (note that the vertical bits aren't symetrical). Also, what is that vent-like pattern on the engine wall above the exhausts? I don't recall seeing that on the M4A3.
This is a mould related issue, plus you won't be able to see the top as it will be hidden from view.
The vent-like pattern are the grille for air intake... won't see that as well. Both will be hidden from
view by the engine deck.
-
I did notice the cover over the ventilator between the driver and machine gunner hatches. Earlier models had no cover, if there was space on the sprue, could the cover be a separate piece?
Some of the details are not etched on the mould yet. This is only TS1 of the plastic sprue.
Several features are missing or should not be there, and needed to be resolve. We just painted
them up for you all to see! ;)
Any chance of the hull lift rings being separate pieces?
The rings will be too small for an average gamer to tackle. A lot of these gamers are already
complaining about Italeri kits are too complicated. We are trying to keep each model's part
number to be around 50 and a under 60 minute build time.
Seasoned modelers can always make our kits better anytime!
Will you be doing the mud guard extensions that project horizontally from the hull for the wider track variants?
If we give you a definite answer, that will give our Easter Eggs away! ;)
-
I can`t get over the quality of your projects. The ability to obtain so much history of this vehicle from WW2 through the 50`s, and your thinking of crew for diorama or modelling. Not just a table top piece but a true "Kit" brilliant, your range get even better.
-
Both the Panzer III & IV will wait for their turns... will be "true" multi-variant this time!
That's good news. I'm quite fond of the Panzer IV - it was a very good first step for you, and there are only a few details that need rectifying. I think it looks much more accurate than Warlord's upscaled PSC version.
This is a mould related issue, plus you won't be able to see the top as it will be hidden from view.
The vent-like pattern are the grille for air intake... won't see that as well. Both will be hidden from
view by the engine deck.
Maybe I wasn't clear - it should be possible to mould it correctly. Here's what it should look like (photo taken from the Shadock site):
(https://s32.postimg.org/i5fmbxubl/deflector.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/i5fmbxubl/)
-
Slowly progressing with our Sherman digital library project... Here's an update!
Some details had not been added or updated, but the basic shape and features
are there. Any ideas what is this variant?
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Sherman%20160812-1_zpsfkmwljjj.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Its sort of a mix . Standard M4 engine deck , but the rear plate looks to be M4A2 . Are you messin' with us ? :D
-
Its sort of a mix . Standard M4 engine deck , but the rear plate looks to be M2 . Are you messin' with us ? :D
I thought it was Sherman I deck, small hatch, but as you say the rear plate looks like a III.
-
Is it meant to be an M4A2? If so, it should have a small grille on the engine deck.
-
Found a picture on the Sherman Minutia site , its a M4A4T. That's a 1950s re engined French M4A4 . Hopefully Rubicon is just pulling our legs :-\
-
Found a picture on the Sherman Minutia site , its a M4A4T. That's a 1950s re engined French M4A4 . Hopefully Rubicon is just pulling our legs :-\
Hint: You will not find a match on the Sherman Minutia site... ;)
-
is it a grizzly?
-
is it a grizzly?
nope!
-
is it a grizzly?
nope!
Grizzlies have a cast hull.
http://ultravanillasmurf.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/grizzling-m4a5-grizzly.html
-
Found a picture on the Sherman Minutia site , its a M4A4T. That's a 1950s re engined French M4A4 . Hopefully Rubicon is just pulling our legs :-\
Hint: You will not find a match on the Sherman Minutia site... ;)
The IDF had a re-engine programme to standardise their mixed Sherman fleet, could it be an M4A3 with an M4/M4A1 type radial engine?
-
The IDF had a re-engine programme to standardise their mixed Sherman fleet, could it be an M4A3 with an M4/M4A1 type radial engine?
We are still focused on WW2, no post-war Shermans!
-
For those who have Facebook access, we have also posted this
image for discussion. May be comments there could inspire you
guys a little bit... Here is the link:
https://www.facebook.com/rubiconmodels/
;)
-
looks like a larger rear plated m4 (sherman 1) only m4 and m4a1 had that engine deck, the same vehicle that italeri/warlord do, except the rear plate.
-
The Facebook comments don't help.
- It can't be an M4, as the M4 didn't have the extended rear panel. But the large armoured radiator cover (behind the turret ring) is an M4 feature.
- It can't be an M4A2, because of that armoured radiator cover (so my first guess was wrong). It also lacks the small engine deck vent and the fuel caps aren't in the right position.
- It could be intended to be a mid-production M4A3, but it lacks the characteristic large engine deck vent and the M4A3 didn't have the armoured radiator cover.
- It can't be an M4A4 because of the armoured radiator cover again - the M4A4 had a "bulge" instead.
When it comes to Shermans, the details are important, so if there are details missing from this image then it's rather difficult pinning down which version it's mean to be. For instance, it has a mid-production glacis, but it has the locating points for the folding rear rack, which was a late production feature.
-
I'm thinking the green is the M4A3 cad ( check the kit plans ), and the grey is the new stuff . So they have completed the upper engine deck, solid grey ( M4 ) , and the driver's area and glacis plate are still being worked on . As they redesign and add the new pieces , it changes the original cad drawing . So Rubicon is going to produce a M4 ! Or not :o my brain hurts ...
-
So the consensus is that the engine deck is for the radial engines marks but the rest is a from an M4A3?
This is where those of a certain age and background have a That's Life moment.
-
Good guesses guys! This is indeed a Sherman Ic which can also be a standard M4...
We are still working on the details and need to change some of the layout, but the
general parts are there!
This is definitely a WIP drawing, and we are still working on this project slowly when
we have spare time.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Bradford%20IC_zpsxchol1qj.jpg)
;)
-
So the design was still halfway between an M4A3 and and M4...
Anyway, I welcome a Rubicon Firefly. As I've said a few times, a Hybrid Firefly would be even better, as it was (IMO) the best looking Firefly type. While this would duplicate the recent Warlord Sherman Vc, I think there's room for Rubicon to do it better. I picked up Warlord's Firefly recently, and it's very much a scaled up 15m model, with quite heavy-handed detail. It will probably paint up well, but it verges on WH40k levels of chunkiness. It's a very complete model, however, with spare tracks, spare wheels, a jerrycan, a choice of 2 commander half-figures (which are also obviously scaled-up from 15mm and look a bit odd) and even sand skirts and a Cullin hedgegrow device. So it's a good wargaming model, but a mediocre scale model. I'm sure Rubicon's will be more accurate, and better detailed. But Rubicon will also need to provide at least the same level of extras. Hopefully by then crew figures will be standard in Rubicon kits.
-
so i was right it is am M4, but the rear plate is not the same as the one in the drawings so making it harder to guess!
pity it duplicates the itaerli/warlord one and m4a2 would have been better as it could be used by gb, russia and the french.
-
... m4a2 would have been better as it could be used by gb, russia and the french.
And if you get the right version the USMC
-
I am assuming that the different colored parts of the hull in your post are seperate parts to make different versions of Sherman tanks. I suggest that the rear upper hull be a seperate piece, or at least have grooves on the underside showing where to cut if an M4, M4A2 or M4A3 version is required. I really l like where you have the upper hull seperated, so that a direct vision hull could be built from the same kit. With where the front upper hull is seperate, you could even make a M4 composite hull option , with measurements or grooves on where to cut. Rubicon, you've done a great job at researching this project/future Sherman kit.
-
Not the best of pictures without proper lighting! A quick snapshot from
the studio today... Seen anything familiar?
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Hull%20Body%20160822-1_zps5bvntpfm.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
late m4a2 on the left
-
late m4a2 on the left
So that is Soviets and US Marines modellers happy.
-
late m4a2 on the left
So that is Soviets and US Marines modellers happy.
are we gamers ever happy 8)
-
late m4a2 on the left
So that is Soviets and US Marines modellers happy.
are we gamers ever happy 8)
Okay, that is Soviet and US Marine modellers happy for a given value of happy ^___^.
-
Looking good . Really like that all your crew hatches are now able to positioned open or closed . Now I have to find some more tank crews :)
-
More work being done on our M4 Digital Library project!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20160907-1_zpstspraemp.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20160907-2_zpsunsq7tar.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looks as though the glacis, engine deck and rear are going to be optional.
if this is a Firefly (the gun travel lock on the engine deck is for the Firefly and not a standard M4) then the hull MG should be blanked off.
-
Looks as though the glacis, engine deck and rear are going to be optional.
if this is a Firefly (the gun travel lock on the engine deck is for the Firefly and not a standard M4) then the hull MG should be blanked off.
The things you've seen in the diagram is a combination of all parts that is possible... ;)
-
More work being done on our M4 Digital Library project!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20160907-1_zpstspraemp.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20160907-2_zpsunsq7tar.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
Interesting picture, so I have quoted across to this page.
Is the rear travel lock going to be separate, just as a modelling option rather than a wargaming model?
The colouring to me indicates the enemy aiming point panels (sorry the protective armour welded to the hull) are separate, which would leave an option for early versions.
-
The colouring to me indicates the enemy aiming point panels (sorry the protective armour welded to the hull) are separate, which would leave an option for early versions.
It's amazing that they would place applique armour in such way as to provide clear aiming points. Then, to ensure there was no room for error, they painted white stars on them...
-
The colouring to me indicates the enemy aiming point panels (sorry the protective armour welded to the hull) are separate, which would leave an option for early versions.
It's amazing that they would place applique armour in such way as to provide clear aiming points. Then, to ensure there was no room for error, they painted white stars on them...
The first is an engineering solution, we need to add armour over vulnerable points but weight is an issue so we just add it "where needed" even though it highlights "where it is needed", whereas a little thought would have suggested two identical panels on the hillside, cheaper to cut just two identical rather than three different pieces (of course you need more plate which weighs more). Saying that, I have never seen examples of any disguised panels, unlike the painted over stars.
For complexity, try the M4A1 applique armour.
-
This is the new 75mm/105mm turret for our M4 Digital Library Project.
With a change of guns and mantlets, this turret will be able to provide
you with firepower from a US or British Sherman!
Just wonder which M4 hull we are going to put this? C&C welcome!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/New%2075-105%20Turret%20160924-1_zpsvbi8irbp.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/New%2075-105%20Turret%20160924-2_zpslh4pdhaw.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/New%2075-105%20Turret%20160924-3_zpsrqmqb0r1.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/New%2075-105%20Turret%20160924-4_zpsfrw1wz9b.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/New%2075-105%20Turret%20160924-5_zpsm6oqdp2i.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/New%2075-105%20Turret%20160924-6_zpszqrgq8cb.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/New%2075-105%20Turret%20160924-7_zps5i1pkkkz.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looks great....Please produce M4A1 cast hull :-)
-
Looks great....Please produce M4A1 cast hull :-)
Now that we are looking into redoing the Panzer III and Panzer IV, seems like the
M4A1 will come later due to heavy workload. Probably Q3/17 or after.
-
Were 105 turrets used on anything other than the "unique" M4(105) hull and the the M4A3 hull?
I would suspect that the M4(105) is unlikely unless an "ultimate" 47° hull can be dressed up to match (I do not know if welded large hatch Shermans are the same basic shape with engine deck variations).
The 105 turret is missing its distinctive second ventilator.
The Firefly turret looks great, my army needs something to scratch the paint of Panzers.
A small hatch M4 with a Firefly option would be my hope.
-
105 turrets were only on late m4 and m4a3.
the only real difference is the cutout on the rear plate and engine decks.
looks good though
-
We are just putting various guns & mantlets to show the possibilities.
When we paired the turret with a hull, we will then "customise" them
to make them become a "valid" variant. Right now, just for show...
-
Remember when you're dealing with turrets that earlier types had the 'low bustle' turret. You're very unlikely to get the early mantlet on a 'high bustle' turret with leader's hatch. When it comes to the Firefly, most were converted using the 'low bustle' turret.
As UVS mentioned, most 105mm turrets had a second ventilator on the bustle. They'd also normally have the later cupola rather than the split hatch. Something to keep in mind when it comes to designing the actual kits.
If I was designing the Sherman range, it would be something like this:
M4 - both mid-production welded hull and late (composite) hull, 'low bustle' 75mm turret (with narrow and later mantlet) and optional parts for a Firefly. This would cover the Commonwealth and US Army.
M4A2 - both mid and late production hulls, 'low bustle' 75mm turret and early 76mm turret. This would cover the Commonwealth, Red Army and US Marines
M4A3 - late production hull, optional tracks with extended end connectors, late 75mm turret and late 76mm turret, optional parts for 105mm turret (i.e. basically the same as the discontinued kit, which had an excellent choice of variants). This would be exclusively US Army
For interchangeability, the engine decks would be separate, so that (for instance) the late M4A3 hull can be used with the M4 to make an M4 (75mm) - which would leave enough parts for a mid-production M4A3.
-
i think leaving engine decks as a separate part or parts would be ideal, could make m4, m4a2 and m4a3 from same early or late hulls
-
On the subject regarding the 105mm turret, we already have included
a rear ventilation with the newer vision cupola option but not shown
previously. We are also in discussion about a separate turret without
the loader hatch for earlier (British?) 75mm gun turret too!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/New%2075-105%20Turret%20160924-8_zpskaasezij.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/New%2075-105%20Turret%20160924-9_zpsazdeayqr.jpg)
Further comments?
;)
-
The 105mm turret looks right now.
The loader's hatch was a late production turret feature. So you'll see the turret without that hatch on all early and mid-production Shermans. Some late Fireflies also had it, instead of the British-designed hatch that was unique to the Firefly.
-
Looks good.
Just noticed the inclusion of the smoke bomb port, so much easier than trying to drill it out (you might notice the absence on my Shermans - tested drilling on the spare M4A3 turret, it did not end well but the blood cleaned up okay ^___^).
-
More turrets!
This is an important step towards the second phase of our M4 Digital Library project.
First phase being focusing on the lower hull, transmission housing, road wheels & tracks.
With the T23 Turret being completed (with plastic sprue), we are working hard to get
the M4 75mm Turret done before the end of 2016. Hopefully we will be able to fit all
components onto a single sprue!
M4 75mm Turret features:
• 75mm / 105mm / 17 pdr gun options
• Choice of mantlets (late or early)
• Choice of high or low bustle turret
• Choice of split hatch or vision cupola
• With or without loader hatch
• With or without cheek applique armour
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/New%2075-105%20Turret%20161001-1_zpsinj1cu5h.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Is one of those turrets for Pinky?
You might want to mention that you have both loader's hatches as well.
Looking forward to seeing them on Shermans suitable for HM's armed forces.
-
Is one of those turrets for Pinky?
Probably, will call it the "Pinky Special", lol!!
Looking forward to seeing them on Shermans suitable for HM's armed forces.
UVS, there is at least one Sherman Firefly IC and one Sherman Mk III coming... soon!! ;)
-
Looking forward to seeing them on Shermans suitable for HM's armed forces.
UVS, there is at least one Sherman Firefly IC and one Sherman Mk III coming... soon!! ;)
Looking forward to those (I think you have shown a large hatch Sherman III, but I think we only used small hatch except perhaps for DD versions).
On the subject of Sherman IIIs, here is a challenge, a Duplex Drive version, with floatation screen up, down, removed and a "waterline" version. ^___^
-
On the subject of Sherman IIIs, here is a challenge, a Duplex Drive version, with floatation screen up, down, removed and a "waterline" version. ^___^
I am afraid you have to kit-bash it! But for your small hatch Sherman III, we can take care of it for you!
-
But for your small hatch Sherman III, we can take care of it for you!
Yay!
-
BTW, it was such an honour to have Military Modelling magazine (on their Facebook page) to share our M4 Turrets post and "literally" support us! We are thrilled!
https://www.facebook.com/MilitaryModelling/
;)
-
Looking forward to those (I think you have shown a large hatch Sherman III, but I think we only used small hatch except perhaps for DD versions).
Only the small hatch version went to the British and Commonwealth forces. By the time the revised hull was introduced, virtually all M4A2s were earmarked for the Red Army. Large hatch M4A1s were used as DDs by the US Army.
-
Fantastic line-up of turrets. How are you going to sell these - by including them all in every kit?
-
Fantastic line-up of turrets. How are you going to sell these - by including them all in every kit?
Of course NOT the case! Depending on which variants, some Sherman kits will have the
T23 turret and some will have the 75mm version. However, all kits are cross-platform
compatible, meaning that you can swap turrets and configurations with each other.
That's also true for road wheels & tracks and transmission housing too!
This is why this M4 Sherman project took so long to complete! The "skeleton" structure
and key component parts had to be specially designed to be compatible with various hulls
and parts that are not yet designed.
Hopefully, we should see three kits being able to get released before Q1/17, namely,
M4 / M4A2 / M4A3 plus some of their variants too! As for M4A1, it had to be sometime
next year; and M4A4 will be much later!
-
If Rubicon can get one or two of the more common ones on a sprue they could sell them separately, having to buy a full kit just for the turret would be slightly annoying (I find kit builds in books and magazines where the builder says that he used parts 14 and 23 of a kit then dumped the rest very annoying). On the other hand I can understand needing the whole package price to make development financially worthwhile.
I would understand the Firefly turret only coming in a full kit, if you want to build a US 17 pounder, then it would be two full kits, but if the M4A3 kit comes only with 76mm turrets then an expansion kit with the ability to build one of the suitable 75mm options would (I think) be well received.
[Note Rubicon post above not read before this post]
-
Of course NOT the case!
I was just picking up on your earlier comment: "Hopefully we will be able to fit all components onto a single sprue!". It seemed quite ambitious.
-
Smurf , a lot of 1/35 Companies sell single sprues . Asuka , Tamiya , AFV , Trumpeter and even Italeri Germany sell single sprues . Great if you want a turret , HVSS wheel set or those detail bits to soup up a old 70s classic kit . It would be nice if Rubicon sold their sprues as well . I could see a Crusader AA turret / Cromwell hull kit bash in my future :) . I suppose when Rubicon has been around for a few years ( 40 plus like Tamiya ), the ability to pull and pack single sprues for shipping would be a lot easier than it would be now . Also a redesign of kits might have to be done , as some kits have turret parts spread over the 3 kit sprues at the moment . I hope when Rubicon redesign their kits ( Sherman , Pz III & IV ) they re think the sprue layouts .
-
I suppose when Rubicon has been around for a few years (40 plus like Tamiya),
the ability to pull and pack single sprues for shipping would be a lot easier than
it would be now.
We are still a very young company (2 years in business) compared to others.
We simply do not have the human resources to manage so many tasks,
particularly splitting up sprues into a single product code... that will take us
a while!
I hope when Rubicon redesign their kits (Sherman, Pz III & IV) they re think the sprue layouts .
We had already discontinued our Sherman kit, and a new replacement will be on
the horizon before year end. The Panzer IV and Panzer III will be next!
;)
-
Further to our discussion on the new M4A3/M4A3E8 Anniversary Box,
here is a brief proposed feature list...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A3E8%20T80-T23%20Late%20161010-1_zpsynhpdljt.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A3E8%20T80-T23%20Late%20161010-2_zpsroencaqw.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A3E8%20T80-T23%20Late%20161010-3jpg_zps0ws15dwn.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A3E8%20T80-T23%20Late%20161010-4_zpsnjwaxmi3.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A3E8%20T80-T23%20Late%20161010-5_zpsdi9umia5.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
The "Easy Eight' version is very welcome. If you're also providing the tracks with extended end connectors, they will be useful for fitting to (for instance) an M36.
Will it include both the early and late production 76mm turret? Very few M4A3s had the early 76mm turret, as I mentioned before. If you left out the early turret, and one set of tracks, there's almost enough parts for 2 complete tanks...
-
Great!
-
People had been asking where we are going to include the 75/105mm turret?
There are a lot of M4 variants that we can incorporate the new turret...
More on the subject later!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4-M4A2%20161001-2_zpsfnufttea.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4-M4A2%20161001-3_zpst1ecsgkl.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4-M4A2%20161001-5_zpsfnri5v0z.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4-M4A2%20161001-4_zps6ugaatri.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4-M4A2%20161001-6_zpsvjyw6jc7.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Nice to see the M4A4 make an appearance. I hope you're going to do the hull with bow MG too?
The Sherman III you has a 75mm turret, I believe, not the 76mm as you noted.
Any thoughts on the early & late production M4A1s with cast hulls?
-
Nice selection of Shermans . About the Sherman III , those added on pieces on the rear engine deck are actually the upside down fr fender extension / sand shield , removed and welded to the rear deck as stowage holders . If used there should be no full fender / and shield . Seen quite a lot in North Africa , IRC when the veteran units arrived in Normandy with new tanks they welded them back on the rear decks . Picture in British Tanks In Normandy by Ludovic Fortin , page-42 , 44 , 138 ( Histoire & Collections ) . I also realize these pictures are just cad renderings , actual production will be different , just thought to give you a heads up in case you didn't know what they were .
-
Nice to see the M4A4 make an appearance. I hope you're going to do the hull with bow MG too?
WLG already (sort of) had a M4A4, hence not on our priority list right now.
The Sherman III you has a 75mm turret, I believe, not the 76mm as you noted.
Yes, that was a typo... sorry for the confusion!
Any thoughts on the early & late production M4A1s with cast hulls?
What do you think? ;)
-
Nice selection of Shermans . About the Sherman III , those added on pieces on the rear engine deck are actually the upside down fr fender extension / sand shield , removed and welded to the rear deck as stowage holders . If used there should be no full fender / and shield . Seen quite a lot in North Africa , IRC when the veteran units arrived in Normandy with new tanks they welded them back on the rear decks . Picture in British Tanks In Normandy by Ludovic Fortin , page-42 , 44 , 138 ( Histoire & Collections ) . I also realize these pictures are just cad renderings , actual production will be different , just thought to give you a heads up in case you didn't know what they were .
We are aware of this. We just put most of the options that are possible in the drawings to show you what is available.
-
Nice to see the M4A4 make an appearance.
There are no M4A4s in this group. The Firefly is based on the M4.
The M4A2 with applique armour was a relatively rare version outside the Red Army. By the time applique armour began to appear, most M4A2 production had been earmarked for the Red Army. Some examples of this variant saw service with the US Marines, and with the 8th Army in Italy. It only saw limited service in the NW European theatre - apparently only with 8th Armoured Brigade.
The earlier M4A2/Sherman III below the M4 was much more common in the British Army - the British received large numbers of these in 1943, and most served in the Mediterranean theatre. It would be nice if you provided an optional bolted transmission cover for this variant.
None of these variants mounted the 105mm turret, which only appeared on the late (large hatch) M4 and M4A3 hulls.
-
Pinky: We are aware of the applique armour on the M4A2. These 3D drawings are earlier renders, we have removed it from the M4A2 hull, but those on the M4 will remain.
Here is a 3D print from the 3D drawing...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4-M4A2%20Prototype%20161012-1_zpsbh3nge4k.jpg)
Enjoy! ;)
-
Any thoughts on the early & late production M4A1s with cast hulls?
What do you think? ;)
You'll be rushing them out, because you're wonderful lovely people.
As it goes, my mid-war lists are currently on hold, so no rush.
It's just great you're doing a set of Shermans with interchangeable bits.
There are no M4A4s in this group. The Firefly is based on the M4.
My mistake, I saw Firefly and thought Vc, not Ic. Bloody Dyslexia kicks in again.
Either way, a Ic would be useful for me (as would the M4A4s hint hint).
-
Pinky: We are aware of the applique armour on the M4A2. These 3D drawings are earlier renders, we have removed it from the M4A2 hull, but those on the M4 will remain.
It wasn't inaccurate - just a relatively minor variant.
It's exciting to see the 3-D renders for the M4 and M4A2 (I'm assuming that the late production turret on the M4A2 is just a stand-in). With the inclusion of crew, they look like the next generation of Rubicon AFV.
-
It wasn't inaccurate - just a relatively minor variant.
We know. Applique armour on the M4A2 is mostly used during the Sicily campaign.
With the release of the M4A2, we will include a template for the extra applique armour so that customers can use plastic sheets to create them if needed.
-
We know. Applique armour on the M4A2 is mostly used during the Sicily campaign.
Later - in Italy. Your earlier M4A2 is almost perfect for the Sicily campaign. He's a typical M4A2 landing in Sicily - I think it has the initial British-manufactured sand shields (rather than the later factory-installed type on your kit) and early pattern track, but otherwise it's the same.
(https://s11.postimg.org/692lhv3cf/sherman_iii_early_conversion_set_313_p.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/692lhv3cf/)
-
The front upper hull on this M4A2 has the direct vision ports,not the built up armor around the driver and radio operator's small hatches, that Rubicon shows in their 3-D drawings.
That would be great if Rubicon made the direct vision ports as an option in their upcoming new M-4 kits,as well with the ones that they show in their 3-D drawings. Even as just an alternate front upper hull piece with the direct vision ports
-
The front upper hull on this M4A2 has the direct vision ports,not the built up armor around the driver and radio operator's small hatches, that Rubicon shows in their 3-D drawings.
That would be great if Rubicon made the direct vision ports as an option in their upcoming new M-4 kits,as well with the ones that they show in their 3-D drawings. Even as just an alternate front upper hull piece with the direct vision ports
True, and well spotted. I agree it would be great if Rubicon could provide an alternative glacis with direct vision ports.
-
The front upper hull on this M4A2 has the direct vision ports,not the built up armor around the driver and radio operator's small hatches, that Rubicon shows in their 3-D drawings.
That would be great if Rubicon made the direct vision ports as an option in their upcoming new M-4 kits,as well with the ones that they show in their 3-D drawings. Even as just an alternate front upper hull piece with the direct vision ports
True, and well spotted. The direct vision ports were being superseded by this time, so you see both types hull hatches in photos. I agree it would be great if Rubicon could provide an alternative glacis with direct vision ports. As well as a bolted transmission cover.
-
I agree with you ,Pinky. I would like to see the three piece bolted transmission cover as an option as well.
-
Our M4 Sherman with Large Hatch, VVSS or HVSS suspension, revised 75/105mm turret...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%2075-105%20161029-1_zpshtottryr.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Were there any large hatch M4s with a 75mm gun?
-
Were there any large hatch M4s with a 75mm gun?
Yes, but they switched to the cast/rolled hull for the late 75mm M4.
-
Were there any large hatch M4s with a 75mm gun?
Yes, but they switched to the cast/rolled hull for the late 75mm M4.
Were all large hatch M4 75mm composite/hybrid hulls?
-
The cast / rolled hull predated the 76mm turret. So late production 75mm M4s had the hybrid hull. For some reason, when the M4 hull was subsequently upgraded to the all-welded large hatch version, it was only used for the 105mm turret. The US Army had decided to standardise the M4A3 for its own use by then, so it seems strange they'd bother continuing production of the M4 just for the 105mm version. Maybe it was because there were never enough M4A3s.
-
The cast / rolled hull predated the 76mm turret. So late production 75mm M4s had the hybrid hull. For some reason, when the M4 hull was subsequently upgraded to the all-welded large hatch version, it was only used for the 105mm turret. The US Army had decided to standardise the M4A3 for its own use by then, so it seems strange they'd bother continuing production of the M4 just for the 105mm version. Maybe it was because there were never enough M4A3s.
My guess is engine availability/cost. Is the large hatch Chrysler M4 hull identical to the large hatch Chrysler M4A3 hull with the exception of the engine deck and other engine related details (such as the scoops behind the lifting rings)?
-
On the topic of Sherman production cost, I come across this...
During the production life of the Sherman, the US government spend almost $250 billion on building Sherman tanks, and the contracted price for each tank depended on the variant, the supplier and the date.
The problem became sufficiently serious that in May 1943 the US Bureau of the Budget raised fundamental questions regarding the discrepancies between the various plants. For example, although the average 1945 price paid by the US government was $49,793, against a projected cost of $42,400, tanks produced by the Detroit Tank Arsenal consistently came in at well below this figure... indeed, in September 1943 Chrysler told the US government it would reduce the price of various tanks being constructed after the end of June 1944 by almost $11 million due to economics and efficiencies.
At the other end of the scale, construction of the Sherman at the Fisher Tank Arsenal in 1942 alone saw General Motors invoice the US government for $256,918,000 and the company was subsequently forced to reconsider its unit price of $67,173. Federal Machine & Welder received a whopping $70,000 for each M4A2 that they constructed. Both GM and Federal Machine & Welder were working on fixed-price contracts that, in practice, turned out to be little more than estimates.
Would like one for the price of a luxury mid-size car today ;)
-
Interesting that the tanks which were mostly sent to the Soviets were the most expensive...
-
Interesting that the tanks which were mostly sent to the Soviets were the most expensive...
Maybe they thought Stalin would repay the lend-lease fees (in addition to be materials that were brought back in payment).
Our last cash payment was in 2006 (plus all the tech and access).
-
Some more work done on the various M4 hulls...
Several more hulls needed to be done, including M4 composite and M4A1...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Hulls%20161119-1_zpswmrzyrm9.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looking good.
The Firefly hull could have the blanked-off machine gun position moulded on. No need to make the armoured 'plug' a separate piece - assuming that hull is solely intended for the Firefly.
-
Excellent.
It could be M4/Firefly.
-
It could be M4/Firefly.
Yes, but unlike the others it has the co-driver's hatch moulded shut.
-
Good point.
The print is dated 11 October, so it might be an older print (there is also something across the driver's hatch.
-
Good point.
The print is dated 11 October, so it might be an older print (there is also something across the driver's hatch.
It's a U.S. driver figure.They're just test shots. I doubt that the M-4 hull will be molded that way
-
This is the first time we are showing off this TS plastic sprue which differs from our
normal layout design.
Not able to show you the intricate details on this sprue right away, but this will be our
"breakout of the box" approach to a more creative and effective way to manufacture
even better quality products at a competitive price. Can you figure out what this sprue
contains?
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/15975173_1817726665147360_454524483220068805_o_zpspyslymqx.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Both the intermediate and late M4A2 hulls,optional sand shields or regular fenders,rear section of sand shields, front and rear lower hull with exhausts and shield,frontal armor for over the small hatch protrusions on the hull. I cannot tell what the lower center section on the sprue is supposed to be,maybe upper torsos and heads for crew figures?
I hope that you include three hull options for the M4A1 kit that you have listed as an upcoming project
-
Yay!
First usable Sherman (Sherman III small hatch), assuming a 75mm turret.
-
Usable Sherman?? The turret with the 76mm gun wouldn't be used on the small hatch hull, so yes, a 75mm gun and turret should be included in their M4A2 kit.I can't wait to see their M4A1 prototype and options
-
Usable Sherman?? The turret with the 76mm gun wouldn't be used on the small hatch hull, so yes, a 75mm gun and turret should be included in their M4A2 kit.I can't wait to see their M4A1 prototype and options
Me too (Sherman II).
-
Looks like Hoffman identified all the parts.
It looks as though Rubicon are including the initial British-pattern sand shields in sections so that the rear sections can be attached to the rear deck to hold stowage (some units did this, especially in the Mediterranean). If so, that's very ingenious.
The kit seems to include a late version of the exhaust deflector, but I can't see the earlier version (i.e. the same as the M10 has). I hope it's going to be on another sprue. It's also unclear whether the hull is the early production version with direct vision slots in the glacis, or the mid-production version without.
Hopefully the kit will include both 75mm and 76mm turrets - and the 75mm turret will include the initial M34 gun mount with the narrow gun shield. The late 'large hatch' hull would also require the later 'high bustle' 75mm turret - which would mean including 3 turrets! As 75mm-armed M4A2s didn't have 'wet' stowage, it should also have (optional, not moulded-on) hull appliqué armour.
A lot of M4A2s (especially Soviet vehicles) had steel cleat tracks. It would be good if the kit came with these. It may be easier to mould the tread detail too.
Potentially, the options are:
- Sherman III, as used by the British Army in Tunisia (but only if it has the early hull and M34 gun mount) as well as Sicily and Italy. The mid-production hull was used in Sicily and Italy - many still had the M34 gun mount. The mid-production version was also used by the British 8th Armoured Brigade and 27th Armoured Brigade in NW Europe.
- M4A2 ('small hatch'), as used by the US Marines (from November 1943) and the Red Army. Most if not all of these were mid-production vehicles.
- M4A2 ('large hatch'), as used by the US Marines (in small numbers) and the Red Army (the British don't seem to have used them).
- M4A2(76mm)(W), as used exclusively by the Red Army.
However, that seems over-ambitious - I can't see Rubicon being able to squeeze so much into a single box. If I were Rubicon, I'd only include the early 75mm turret and the 76mm turret, as the 75mm 'large hatch' version is the least important/useful M4A2 variant.
-
It sort of looks like it is not, unfortunately, the early hull with the direct vision flaps. It looks like the slots in front of the driver hatches are periscopes. The direct vision slots would be positioned a little lower, and the would be a little wider than the rectagles in the image
-
It sort of looks like it is not, unfortunately, the early hull with the direct vision flaps. It looks like the slots in front of the driver hatches are periscopes. The direct vision slots would be positioned a little lower, and the would be a little wider than the rectagles in the image
Your eyes are better than mine, HOffman!
I did some more research. It looks as though the Soviets didn't get the early production M4A2 with direct vision slots; deliveries began with the mid-production version. Most of the 75mm-armed M4A2 production went to the British and Commonwealth.
The 'large hatch' hull on 75mm-armed M4A2s should have appliqué armour plates on the sides, as it didn't have so-called 'wet' ammunition stowage. Wet stowage was only introduced with the 76mm-armed version (which therefore didn't have the appliqué armour).
I've edited my earlier post.
-
There is a lot of good educated guesses on such a blurred images. We can't post
a clear image of the sprue until all the related TS1 sprues are ready.
If you look at the creation date of this post, it was Feb 17, 2016. We had achieved
a lot for the last eleven months! A quick review...
1) M4A3/M4A3E8 4-sprue kit almost done
2) M4A2 US/British - hull sprue done
3) 75/105mm turret - mould almost done
4) M4 US/British - mould almost done
5) M4A1 US/British - digital drawing in progress
Not bad for such a complicated project! We will try to post more images when
the plastic sprues become available.
PS: That does not include the various tracks and suspensions that were done
relating to these production models.
-
Excellent.
A lot of good work.
-
Hopefully the kit will include both 75mm and 76mm turrets - and the 75mm turret
will include the initial M34 gun mount with the narrow gun shield. The late 'large
hatch' hull would also require the later 'high bustle' 75mm turret - which would
mean including 3 turrets! As 75mm-armed M4A2s didn't have 'wet' stowage, it
should also have (optional, not moulded-on) hull appliqué armour.
We have decided not to include both 75mm and 76mm turrets in a single product.
BUT we might include them in two separate product codes.
Here is a brief preview for the 75mm turret:
- includes both high and low bustle turrets
- includes both 75mm & 105mm gun - 4 gun barrels in total
- 4 mantlet choices
- flamethrower options
- two complete turrets
We cannot include all possible choices or options, but we have make both turret
designs to be as common as possible. We have plans to release special "resin"
versions in the near future too!
-
So there will be a 'standard' 75mm turret sprue? It makes sense, I guess, but in the case of the M4A2 you end up with (as I tried to explain) a relatively unimportant variant and exclude an important one. You'll have a similar issue with the M4A1.
I hope you remembered the extra ventilator for the 105mm turret...
-
Have you ( Rubicon ) , given thought to selling single sprue turret or wheel and track kits for the Sherman ? The various detail kits for the German 250/251 are a fantastic addition to your line up , especially for those of us who like to kit bash model kits . I think various track/ wheel and turret/ gun combo kits would appeal to model builders as well . There's a weird early / late war Frakentank Sherman at one of the local Veteran Associations here in Canada I would love to build ( looks to have Israeli stowage boxes on it !)
-
Have you ( Rubicon ) , given thought to selling single sprue turret or wheel and track kits for the Sherman ? The various detail kits for the German 250/251 are a fantastic addition to your line up , especially for those of us who like to kit bash model kits . I think various track/ wheel and turret/ gun combo kits would appeal to model builders as well . There's a weird early / late war Frakentank Sherman at one of the local Veteran Associations here in Canada I would love to build ( looks to have Israeli stowage boxes on it !)
Think is still too early to say. We preferred not to sell individual sprues because of manpower issues. We are a design studio and simply do not have the facility to handle that.
-
The perks of being on our forum... first to see new stuff being posted outside of the studio!
This is our new WIP M4A2 variants - Sherman Mk III... in 3d prototype!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A2%20Mk%20III%20170117-02_zps4cp2sakh.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A2%20Mk%20III%20170117-01_zpspn0pwcuc.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A2%20Mk%20III%20170117-04_zpsphnxp7bl.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A2%20Mk%20III%20170117-03_zpspexs74er.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looks fine.
-
Excellent, though one of their colleagues will complain they have stolen their sand Shields and welded them on as a storage solution ^__^.
On a related subject, how does it look without fitted sand shields?
-
Great to see the M4A2 taking shape.
The notches in the top of the rear plate were for the stowage 'shelf' that wasn't fitted to this model of the M4A2. The rear plate also had 2 rows of bolts arranged in a 'T' shape. There should also be a track-tensioning device and a mallet fixed to the rear plate.
The sharp-edged 'hoods' for the driver and co-driver's hatches are a nice touch, and help to distinguish the (Fisher-built) M4A2. I think there should be a weld seam between the hoods, but it's not a big deal. This hull is therefore really a relatively early M4A2.
The use of sand shield sections to retain stowage was common on 3rd County of London Yeomanry Shermans.
-
This is something everyone is looking forward to!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%2075-105%20Turret%20Sprue%20170119-01_zps1mwrlcbn.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%2075-105%20Turret%20Sprue%20170119-02_zpsmzzqsonh.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%2075-105%20Turret%20Sprue%20170119-03_zps56amszax.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%2075-105%20Turret%20Sprue%20170119-04_zpsdd20rkww.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%2075-105%20Turret%20Sprue%20170119-05_zpsuxnoq2gr.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Wow, that's really nice. So many cool bits on one sprue!
-
Very good.
-
Is the Firefly hatch a surface mount or do you remove the material from the underside of the turret top?
Looks great.
Having the appliqué Armour separate s great as well.
I must compare the turrets to the M4A3 Firefly in the Osprey modelling 76mm Sherman book. Something for Weird War Americans?
-
Is the Firefly hatch a surface mount or do you remove the material from the underside of the turret top?
We have two hidden notches on the underside of the turret that you can drilled open before attaching the Firefly hatch to the turret.
Having the appliqué Armour separate s great as well.
We think so too. This will enable you to create variety throughout the turret production cycle. We have put in a lot of thoughts in the initial design stage... flipping through stacks of reference material!
-
Excellent, just spotted the smoke bomb thrower on the turret roof.
-
Is it a statistical anomaly that only British Shermans with the right bustle aerial fitting in use were photographed or was that standard for British tanks.
I have drilled and fitted a stub on all my models.
-
Is it a statistical anomaly that only British Shermans with the right bustle aerial fitting in use were photographed or was that standard for British tanks.
At least from photos, a majority (closeup images) had them disregard of Sherman types.
-
A couple of photos (of Red Army vehicles) to illustrate my earlier comments about the M4A2.
The rear plate on a late production 75mm M4A2. You can see the tool stowage, and the bolts. Also the steel cleat tracks.
(https://s24.postimg.org/k1ahjizm9/IMG_0011.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/k1ahjizm9/)
A side view of a late production 75mm M4A2. The hull appliqué armour is visible. Nearly all of this variant had appliqué armour because (despite having the revised glacis and large hatches) 'wet' stowage wasn't installed until the upgrade to the 76mm version. This should be included in the kit. This version also usually ( but not always) had the folding 'shelf' on the rear plate.
(https://s29.postimg.org/y4xy4fblf/IMG_0013.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/y4xy4fblf/)
-
The rear plate on a late production 75mm M4A2. You can see the tool stowage, and the bolts. Also the steel cleat tracks.
Think we have the tool stowage on the late models as well . Not going to do the steel cleat tracks as is difficult to mimic with a single track design. We might do a resin version later on.
A side view of a late production 75mm M4A2. The hull appliqué armour is visible. Nearly all of this variant had appliqué armour because (despite having the revised glacis and large hatches) 'wet' stowage wasn't installed until the upgrade to the 76mm version. This should be included in the kit. This version also usually (but not always) had the folding 'shelf' on the rear plate.
The 75/105mm turret sprue is universal for ALL M4 production variants, thus the applique armour is separate... just in case!
-
Think we have the tool stowage on the late models as well.
I didn't see it on that murky sprue photo or the 3-D prototype mid-production Sherman III above.
The 75/105mm turret sprue is universal for ALL M4 production variants, thus the applique armour is separate... just in case!
Yes, the turret sprue is beautifully designed - and the separate turret appliqué armour is great because the late production M4A2 didn't have it. But have you included the hull appliqué armour for the late production M4A2?
-
But have you included the hull appliqué armour for the late production M4A2?
Of course! Will post detail pics of sprue later. Had been extremely busy going back and forth our China factory because of the Chinese New Year holidays. Need to get as much new TS sprues from them for test fitting and samples painting. Otherwise will have 3 full weeks of idling at our HK studio for some of our guys!
;)
-
Cool.
Now we just need the second edition army lists to reflect the actual vehicles rather than some progression.
-
The turret mounted bomb thrower and 2nd aerial mount were modification the Brits had made to their Lend Lease Shermans . They also required the radio moved to the turret ,instead of being mounted beside the bow gunner which was the way the US had their tanks set up . The Antenna pot , mounted just above and to the side of the mg was used for extra radios in command tanks . The later style hulls deleated it
(https://s29.postimg.org/6m0543cg3/SH00_LI.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/6m0543cg3/)
(https://s29.postimg.org/7cx6wlssj/t6_18.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/7cx6wlssj/)
Very early Sherman with the rotary gunner's sight ,short 75 with counter weight and twin fixed bow machine guns ( Very cool IMO )
-
More M4A2 prototype goodies...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A2%20Large%20170117-01_zpsfqxgbule.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A2%20Large%20170117-02_zpsbcgurk7u.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A2%20Large%20170117-03_zps8snbp7j8.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A2%20Large%20170117-04_zps3pgc5g5w.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Not enough? Here's more!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A2%20Small%20170117-01_zpswd1s4rjs.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A2%20Small%20170117-02_zpsiyxjbnpc.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A2%20Small%20170117-03_zpsqi4zypdv.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A2%20Small%20170117-04_zps3r0ouprx.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A2%20Small%20170117-05_zpsxhkykcfs.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Finally! I've been waiting to see the M4A2(76mm). The muzzle brake looks soft - is that just a mock-up? Was the M4A2 (76mm) fitted with extended end connectors? It looks great, but I've never seen a photo of one, and they were in short supply even for the British and US Shermans in NW Europe. I didn't think the Soviets (who were the sole users of the M4A2(76mm)) got any.
The mid-production M4A2(75mm) looks great too. Same point as before regarding the rear plate and tools.
-
Finally! I've been waiting to see the M4A2(76mm). The muzzle brake looks soft - is that just a mock-up? Was the M4A2 (76mm) fitted with extended end connectors? It looks great, but I've never seen a photo of one, and they were in short supply even for the British and US Shermans in NW Europe. I didn't think the Soviets (who were the sole users of the M4A2(76mm)) got any.
These are 3D prototypes, and we just mustered whatever spare parts are available to build them. Getting parts printed are very expensive.
-
Just out of interest, what are these 3-D prototypes made of? It looks like resin, but I assume it's not the resin we normally see. The finish is very sharp and clean, although I noticed some finger prints, so presumably it is soft when it's just been printed.
-
Just out of interest, what are these 3-D prototypes made of? It looks like resin, but I assume it's not the resin we normally see. The finish is very sharp and clean, although I noticed some finger prints, so presumably it is soft when it's just been printed.
We printed separate parts from a 3D printer using a resin-type solution. We still have to clean the parts up before assembly, but because they are from a digital file, they are an exact image of the 3D drawing. Those "fingerprints" are actually step lines from the printer, an artifact you would expected from a 3D printer (for now).
-
Very interesting. I'd love to see these actual prototypes some time.
Anyway, the M4A2 is shaping up really well. It's great to see the humble Sherman getting this kind of attention.
-
Very interesting. I'd love to see these actual prototypes some time.
We are going to have an open house for the studio soon! Interested?
;)
Anyway, the M4A2 is shaping up really well. It's great to see the humble Sherman getting this kind of attention.
We are very proud at what we've done so far! Looking forward to get the M4A1 done, and if we've the resources, will get the M4A4 finished too!
-
, and if we've the resources, will get the M4A4 finished too!
Yippee!
-
The M4A2 looks great.
-
@Ripley: I meant the mount on the right side of the turret bustle:
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-EBCjD31-F1I/WFwnrfXCVaI/AAAAAAAABrQ/IxRpT2By2UQ86paBat1gBfb6X8qCvj7MwCLcB/s1600/IMG_8579.JPG)
This example in the IWM only has a stub of the aerial.
The aerial mount on the glacis is shown here.
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ErRifaFvrPk/WFwntsP_i0I/AAAAAAAABrc/qtCwjicFNaIIQpydis9hK8JTbWwnI60BQCLcB/s1600/IMG_8582.JPG)
-
Just out of interest, what are these 3-D prototypes made of? It looks like resin, but I assume it's not the resin we normally see. The finish is very sharp and clean, although I noticed some finger prints, so presumably it is soft when it's just been printed.
We printed separate parts from a 3D printer using a resin-type solution. We still have to clean the parts up before assembly, but because they are from a digital file, they are an exact image of the 3D drawing. Those "fingerprints" are actually step lines from the printer, an artifact you would expected from a 3D printer (for now).
I noticed the lines on the high bustle turret between the aerial mounts on the sprue.
http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=395.msg5997#msg5997
I assumed this would be cleaned up on the final mould.
-
Not going to do the steel cleat tracks as is difficult to mimic with a single track design. We might do a resin version later on.
You could always look at a reverse PSC and try a multi-part track?
-
With the various M4A2 prototypes done, we'd moved onto the M4 Sherman!
This is the large hatch version, with the 75mm turret.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Large%20Hatch%20170122-01_zpsgmehzzxd.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Large%20Hatch%20170122-02_zpsmt9uxmdb.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Large%20Hatch%20170122-03_zpscmilbfz7.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Large%20Hatch%20170122-04_zpsbewy3eg1.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Because of the extend for each M4 variant is getting increasingly more in contents,
with 3D drawings, prototypes, and starting to see some TS plastics; we have decided
to split them up into new topics so that people can follow them much easier!
NOTE: Common sprues, like the road wheels, tracks, suspension, and turrets will
still be posted under here!
;)
-
Unfortunately, the 75mm-armed large hatch M4 was only produced with the composite hull, not this all-welded hull. This M4 hull was only built with the 105mm gun.
Also - the high bustle turret didn't have appliqué armour.
-
Unfortunately, the 75mm-armed large hatch M4 was only produced with the composite hull, not this all-welded hull.
This M4 hull was only built with the 105mm gun. Also - the high bustle turret didn't have appliqué armour.
Thanks, will take note. The M4 (large hatch) will come with the 75/105 turret sprue, so is not a problem for the final product.
;)
-
Here is a summary of a list of M4 Sherman variants & sub-types (based on US M4) that we intended to do:
- Not all but major ones, with swappable components to create variants/sub-types by users themselves from the list below.
M4 in progress
- Continental radial engine
- Welded hull
- 75mm barrel cannon
- Users: US, Britain, Poland, France
M4(105) - Upgraded with 105mm M4 Howitzer, designed for infantry support and assault, sacrificing anti-armour capability.
M4(105) HVSS - M4(105) with HVSS.
M4A1 not start
- Continental radial engine
- One-piece cast hull
- 75mm barrel cannon
- Users: US, Britain, South Africa, Poland (M4A1(76)W), France (small numbers), China
M4A1E4 / M4A1(76)W - Upgraded with 76mm M1 gun.
M4A1E8 / M4A1(76)W HVSS - Upgraded with wide-track Horizontal Volute Spring Suspension (HVSS), fitted with the 76mm M1 gun.
M4A1E9 - Late war remanufacturing, applique armor, new vision cupola and oval loader’s hatch on the turret roof, spaced out VVSS suspension, extended end connectors on both sides of the tracks, but retaining the old 75mm M3 gun. Users: Chile
M4A2 in progress
- Diesel-powered with General Motors 6046 using powertrain from earlier M3A3/M3A5
- First model manufactured with welded hull
- 75mm cannon
- Users: USSR, Britain, France, Poland, US
- No US Army combat use except for DD conversions for the Omaha landings
M4A2E4 - Upgraded with Torsion Bar suspension; never put into production.
M4A2E8 / M4A2(76)W HVSS - Upgraded with wide-track Horizontal Volute Spring Suspension (HVSS), fitted with the 76mm M1 gun.
M4A3 in progress
- Ford GAA V-8 engine
- Welded hull
- Both 75mm and 76mm cannons used
- Users: US, France (small numbers), Nicaragua (small numbers)
- The M4A3 was the preferred US Army vehicle.
M4A3(75) - M4A3 with 75mm M3 gun.
M4A3(105) - M4A3 with 105mm howitzer used for infantry support rather than anti-armour.
M4A3E2 Assault Tank - postwar nickname “Jumbo” - extra armour (including 1 inch on front), vertical sided turret, but about 3-4 mph slower. Built with 75mm gun but frequently re-armed by the using units with 76mm guns. Grousers fitted to the tracks. Users: US, France (one vehicle)
M4A3E4 / M4A3(76)W - M4A3 with 76mm M1 gun.
M4A3E8 / M4A3(76)W HVSS (Easy Eight) - Upgraded with wide-track Horizontal Volute Spring Suspension (HVSS), fitted with the 76mm High Velocity cannon.
M4A3E9 / M4A3(105) HVSS - Upgraded with wide-track Horizontal Volute Spring Suspension (HVSS)
M4A4 not started
- Chrysler A57 engine
- Welded & lengthened hull
- 75mm gun only as-built
- Users: Britain, France, China, Lebanon (Firefly), Nicaragua (small numbers)
Sherman Firefly / Sherman Vc - About 2,000 were re-armed by the British with their 17-pounder (76.2mm) guns as the Sherman Firefly. (It should be noted that the Firefly variant wasn’t exclusive to M4A4/Sherman V subtype, as 17-pounder gun was mounted on more Sherman subtypes.)
-
Excellent.
The 17 pounder was only fitted to the Sherman I and V as the cast Sherman II hull was not deemed compatible with the ammo storage (the Canadians apparently managed it on their Grizzly example).
The only missing Sherman is the M4 Sherman I composite or hybrid. As it uses the same front hull shape as the M4A1 Sherman II attached to a welded M4 Sherman I hull it is probably something for after the Sherman II.
-
M4:
As UVS said, there is also the composite hull M4, and the M4-based Firefly (built on both the earlier welded hull and the composite hull).
M4A1:
I don't think China got any M4A1s - just M4A4s; Britain also received the M4A1(76mm), and used them in Italy. The US Marines also used the 75mm-armed M4A1.
M4A1E8 / M4A1(76)W HVSS - Upgraded with wide-track Horizontal Volute Spring Suspension (HVSS), fitted with the 76mm M1 gun:
Doesn't seem to have seen service in WW2.
M4A2:
Also M4A2(76mm), used by the USSR.
M4A2E8 / M4A2(76)W HVSS - Upgraded with wide-track Horizontal Volute Spring Suspension (HVSS), fitted with the 76mm M1 gun:
Only used by USSR.
M4A3E2 Assault Tank - postwar nickname “Jumbo” - extra armour (including 1 inch on front), vertical sided turret, but about 3-4 mph slower. Built with 75mm gun but frequently re-armed by the using units with 76mm guns. Grousers fitted to the tracks. Users: US, France (one vehicle):
Please do one of these!!!
-
I must say the collaboration going into getting the Sherman variants right is terrific. There is obviously a treasure trove of knowledge from a number of people here. I think Rubicon are going to be setting the benchmark very high on this one. The Sherman family tree makes the Panzer IV look simple by comparison. At first glance anyway.
-
The Sherman family tree makes the Panzer IV look simple by comparison. At first glance anyway.
The more you look, the more complicated it gets.
This is worth a look: http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/
Normal single source warnings apply.
-
With not much of an update on the M4 Sherman project, here is our WIP of the M4 hybrid/composite hull:
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Hull%20Test%20170314-1_zpshqcecl3f.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Good to see some work on this, though technically it is an M4 hybrid or composite..
Great for the Firefly turret.
-
Good to see some work on this, though technically it is an M4 hybrid or composite..
Yes, it was my mistake. Should be a M4 hybrid... :(
-
I'm very pleased to see this hull is in the works. It means we're one step closer to a Hybrid Firefly.
I remember trying to convert a Hybrid hull from the old 1/72 scale ESCI M4A1 'large hatch' hull. It did not go well...
-
I'm very pleased to see this hull is in the works. It means we're one step closer to a Hybrid Firefly.
To us, it is not only a Hybrid Firefly, but eventually a complete M4A1 hull.
I remember trying to convert a Hybrid hull from the old 1/72 scale ESCI M4A1 'large hatch' hull. It did not go well...
The drawing you see here is already our 3rd version. This is extremely difficult to draw even with all the reference blueprints, line drawings, and reference images on hand.
-
These was supposed to be posted earlier, but Photobucket had an upload issue...
Anyway, here it is - two version of the M4 Hybrid!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Hybrid%20170318-1_zpszkpoj6pb.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Hybrid%20170318-2_zpswtbuffpu.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
It is difficult to see the "curves" of the hull with line drawings,
here is a rendered image of the Firefly IC for your review.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Hybrid%20170318-3_zpss2a3r3zw.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looks great! For some reason, this is the best looking Firefly, and probably one of my favourite Sherman types - even though the hybrid hull seems like a bit of a stupid idea.
-
Looks good.
The appliqué on the other side is more complicated as it is across the join.
The reasons for the hybrid sort of makes sense, the casting was quicker than the complicated welded front (the fully cast hull was even quicker but required larger casting facilities).
Of course the large hatch welded hull was a lot easier to make.
-
@UVS - more images on the Sherman I Hybrid Firefly to answer your question!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Hybrid%20170318-4_zpswrnjiats.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Hybrid%20170318-5_zpsmhhxdv04.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Excellent
-
On your 3D drawing of the M4 composite Sherman, you show different parts color coded. On the track units,you have the track pads around the front sprocket a different color than the rest of the track unit. Does this signify that it is a seperate piece,having detail on the front of the track,as opposed to no detail,as in a one piece continuous track unit?
-
I wondered the same thing as Hoffman, but I'm guessing the track design is the same as the M4A3's, with slide-moulded detail on the front of the tracks but not the back.
-
On your 3D drawing of the M4 composite Sherman, you show different parts color coded. On the track units,you have the track pads around the front sprocket a different color than the rest of the track unit. Does this signify that it is a seperate piece,having detail on the front of the track,as opposed to no detail,as in a one piece continuous track unit?
The part is an one piece track with details on the front but not the rear.
Other coloured parts, in most cases, indicate a separate component.
-
This is the US standard version with 75mm turret:
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Hybrid%20170318-6_zpsp3kqfk38.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
All good - this range is really taking shape. Hopefully there'll be a Jumbo soon.
It would be worth trying to address the point UVS made about the hull appliqué armour having additional components. [Edit - whoops, wrong version. Ignore this]
-
It would be worth trying to address the point UVS made about the hull appliqué armour having additional components.
Does this relate to the hybrid? The other side picture shows the join running through the appliqué in a similar manner to the photographs of the real thing (only on the right side of the hull, the left side is a one piece plate as shown).
When Rubicon gets to the M4A1, the appliqué goes all crazy paving.
-
You're right - I was thinking of the M4A1. This one looks fine.
-
Also remember , some applique armor was available in kit form to be field installed by the Field Workshop Unit , so the position could vary . The plates installed at point of manufactor would be all the same . It would add to the parts count , but I would like these plates as iduvidual pieces for ease of building specific tanks from wartime pictures
-
First test shot for the M4/M4Hybrid Sherman... Note our new layout for the plastic sprue too!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20TS2%20Sprue%20170822-1_zpsqeaiyase.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Intriguing.
So there is an M4, M4 hybrid, M4 105 and something else.
My thought would be an M4A1 hull (assuming there is a blanking plate for the hull MG for the Firefly).
-
It's possible. Both the M4 hybrid and M4A1 are listed as Work in progress/3D prototyping in their production schedule.
I would hope that the 'not for your eyes....yet' sprue would be related to the M4, maybe a early direct vision hull or turret.
I don't think Rubicon will include
a M4A1 hull on to this sprue, they had stated earlier on their M4A2 post that they were going to include the three piece bolted transmission cover and early M-3 type suspension in their upcoming M4A1 kit.
-
Maybe a M3 Lee / Grant hull .... he said hopefully :D Better yet a Ram hull
-
I noticed a blanking-off piece for the hull MG on the Hybrid sprue. So the mystery component (which is the presumably another hull, judging from the size) isn't for a Firefly. Intriguing...
-
Maybe a M3 Lee / Grant hull .... he said hopefully :D Better yet a Ram hull
That would go better with the M3 suspension (Ram gets my vote).
-
Had not been updating this for a whole month due to busy schedule with our Q3/17 releases.
These are the two favours of the Firefly IC using our new 75mm turret sprue!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20IC%20170928-1_zpslaskfuww.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20IC%20170928-2_zpsus95hshe.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20IC%20170928-3_zpshbkjktqm.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Fantastic , going to have to build one of each as I can't decide on a favourite
-
Great to see the Hybrid Firefly. The hull shape looks very good.
The applique armour on the right side of the turret was very rare on Fireflies and doesn't seem to feature at all on Hybrids (Warlord got this wrong on theirs). I hope it's optional. I also wish you'd fix the radio box (the protruding boltheads are wrong on this type), since you've got the other details right.
-
Nice.
The driver's hood appliqué looks slightly chewed, is that intentional?
-
The driver's hood appliqué looks slightly chewed, is that intentional?
I think that's just the chipping. It's a discussion for another time, but you'd be hard-pressed to find a photo of a WW2 tank with this kind of chipped paint (although Rubicon's painter has been more restrained than many you see). It's a technique that European modellers pioneered a while ago, and which is now endemic (it came late to WH40k). Everyone thinks it's realistic, but it's not - except perhaps on vehicles which have been overpainted for desert use or whitewashed.
-
I just paint mine factory fresh with a wash. Can't be arsed with all the extra effort ;)
-
They look very good & I'll happily take one over the WG offering.
As for 'chipping', while it's a viable technique for adding interest to a paintjob, (I've certainly used it) it is very easy to overdo (not that it is on these examples). In fairness, most of the established 'weathering' painters in print (such as Mig Jimenez, Reuben Torregrosa or Adam Wilder) do all they can to state 'less is more', short of printing it all caps. Unlike scratches, which could conceivably occur on almost any surface of the vehicle, 'chipping' - intense localised wear, should only be applied on 'high traffic' areas of the hull/turret where many boots, hard edged kit or objects in the enviroment regularly rub (& exhausts where I suppose it could be better refered to as blistering/flaking).
-
For years, there is only ONE M4 Sherman plastic tank
You will soon have a new CHOICE which provides you with multiple build variants in a SINGLE plastic kit!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Sherman%20TS1%20Painted%20171103-1_zpsze8oedsr.jpg)
...just two choices from the various possible builds!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Sherman%20TS1%20Painted%20171103-1_zpswfrnfa4d.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Excellent.
I might have to use my remaining four Warlord ones as other things (Kangaroos, BARV etc.).
-
If you love what you see on the M4 Sherman post earlier, you might love this even more!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Sherman%20TS1%20Painted%20171103-3_zps8ftsmwwq.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Sherman%20TS1%20Painted%20171103-4_zps5h7dv8dq.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Excellent.
The lift rings and the lamp/siren brush guards are the only thing that detract from the model, the former is fixable (drill or replace), the latter are more difficult.
My only problem is what do I get?
-
One of each? And every variant? No? Just me?
-
One of each? And every variant? No? Just me?
I was thinking a three or four tank platoon of Sherman II tanks, a replacement platoon of Sherman I tanks and a couple of Sherman ICs, one hybrid, one standard.
-
My plan is a US brigade.. just need Rubicon to do Chaffees to finish it off though.
Then do one of each variant on top of that.
-
Well it looks as though the Warlord Fireflies I bought are going in the bin - the Hybrid Firefly wins over those on every level.
I need to pick up some of the latest releases too.
-
Well it looks as though the Warlord Fireflies I bought are going in the bin - the Hybrid Firefly wins over those on every level.
It depends on what theatre and period you are modelling, until Rubicon deliver a Sherman V I am stuck with the Warlord ones.
Admittedly I have a platoon of Warlord M4s painted as Guards, which did not have M4s (but no other Shermans were available).
The Rubicon ones will be finished as members of units that had them.
-
DO YOU KNOW... For the same retail price of a 2-sprue kit, this is what you are getting from Rubicon Models... Multiple build choices and options in a box full of goodness! Not to mention a robust waterslide decal sheet plus a detailed assembly instruction is included. What are you waiting for?
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A2%20Sprues%20FB%20171113-1_zpsouonjf3a.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looks good, enough bits to make two complete turrets then...? No crew though?
Incidentally, are you guys planning to do the M4A4 / Sherman V or not?
-
Jimmy , the small sprue in the bottom right hand corner ( above the copyright ) is the figure sprue . IRC , Rubicon posted a picture of it full size showing the figures ( both 3 Yanks & 3 Brits ) on one of the ( many ) Sherman threads . Someones bound to remember what thread and when posted , I don't I'm afraid :-[ Sprue shown in Assembly Instructions Sherman M4A2 / Sherman III & M4A2 76mm tank . I found it ! ;D
-
Jimmy , the small sprue in the bottom right hand corner ( above the copyright ) is the figure sprue . IRC , Rubicon posted a picture of it full size showing the figures ( both 3 Yanks & 3 Brits ) on one of the ( many ) Sherman threads . Someones bound to remember what thread and when posted , I don't I'm afraid :-[ Sprue shown in Assembly Instructions Sherman M4A2 / Sherman III & M4A2 76mm tank . I found it ! ;D
Ah okay, thanks!
Yank crews and no Russians is a bit of a shame for the A2 though. I assume it's the same sprue with the other Shermans?
-
Rubicon are also working on stand alone crew figure kits , German and Russians if IRC . I seem to recall the Germans have 4 upper torsos with I think about 8 heads and a whole bunch of arms . Something like 60 variations of ways to build them . As your fairly new here , do you self a favor and read all the Work In Progress threads , Rubicon have lots of ideas for vehicle and figure kits , some they follow through on , others get back burnered for another time . The Digital Sculpts thread ( about 6 threads down in WIP ) shows some figure sets Rubicon is thinking about or actually working on
-
Yeah, considering that the US only took delivery of six M4A2 76(w), it did seem strange to have US crew. That said, they would needed to have created a brand new spruce for the Russians and I understand the costs and stuff.
-
Yeah, considering that the US only took delivery of six M4A2 76(w), it did seem strange to have US crew. That said, they would needed to have created a brand new spruce for the Russians and I understand the costs and stuff.
The Russian Tank Crew blister will soon be available, so there will be no shortage of Soviet tank crews in the very near future! A recap if you have seen them yet...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Digital%20Sculpt/Soviet%20Tank%20Crew%20160930-2_zpszb67gdos.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Digital%20Sculpt/Soviet%20Tank%20Crew%20160930-1_zpsa8r4nlcu.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Yeah, considering that the US only took delivery of six M4A2 76(w), it did seem strange to have US crew. That said, they would needed to have created a brand new spruce for the Russians and I understand the costs and stuff.
The Russian Tank Crew blister will soon be available, so there will be no shortage of Soviet tank crews in the very near future! A recap if you have seen them yet...
Fair enough, they do look good! How soon is soon though? :P
-
WIP waterslide decals for the M4 Sherman and Firefly IC...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Decal%20171113-1_zpsftux4avu.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Decal%20171113-2_zpsm6g64kku.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Hmmm, I would want the M4 as tanks, but then would need the Sherman IC sheet for the decals.
-
What do you need smurf ? A paticuler Division sign , Tac sign , or Registration ( T ) number ? Both Rubicon's Aliled decal sheets have a good variety of these ( need more Tac numbers IMO ) . Or maybe one of us could find some in our spares boxes and send them off to you
-
If there are no more comments, will send them off to the printer over the weekend. There are some minor cosmetic changes, other than that, the layout will remain the same.
;)
-
This is the M4 Composite, right? If so, the US Army markings look pretty good (any chance if some more variants on the dice markings?). But the Commonwealth markings include quite a lot of inappropriate stuff, bearing in mind the late stage of the war in which the M4 Composite entered service. A lot of them are 1943- period markings. Also - I don't have my references handy, but I don't think the Free French used this type. They certainly didn't use the Firefly.
-
Thanks Ripley.
My comment was just general, the M4 was used by Commonwealth forces but there are no markings for them. I understand that it is impossible to cover everything. As an aside, I have seven sets of Warlord M4 decal sheets unused, I used a couple of numbers off one sheet on the flame fougasse markers.
I have not done the research on who was using M4s in Normandy (not the Guards tank division which is how my Warlord M4s are marked).
Probably there will be suitable division and tactical signs on the Sherman III sheets.
I have a Warlord registration number sheet I am working my way through.
-
Also - I don't have my references handy, but I don't think the Free French used this type. They certainly didn't use the Firefly.
We have two reference books on the Free French. Both 501 RCC and 12 Cuir had M4 and M4 Composite.
-
Last minute research - Sherman I June 1944 Normandy.
The Oliver book states 79th Armoured Division (First Army Tank Brigade), 33rd Armoured Brigade and the ARG.
On the other hand there were just two Sherman ICs listed in the Oliver book but I am sure there are some amongst the plates in the Fortin book.
-
The Sherman III sheet has the 33rd Armoured Brigade Diablo and the First Northamptonshire Yeomanry tactical sign (up to August 1944). With some judicious application of mud (or a steady hand and some white paint) it will also get you the two RAC regiments.
So I will have to buy as many Sherman IIIs as Sherman Is. Cunning marketing ^__^.
-
This is the waterslide decal sheets that you will be getting for our upcoming "M4 Sherman / Firefly IC" plastic kit. You get not one, but TWO decal sheets - one for the American and one for the Allies... talking about value for money (cartoon and graffiti humour included)!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Decal%20Sheets%20171202-1_zpswtvxpymr.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Yay!
Thanks.
-
The Sherman III sheet has the 33rd Armoured Brigade Diablo and the First Northamptonshire Yeomanry tactical sign (up to August 1944). With some judicious application of mud (or a steady hand and some white paint) it will also get you the two RAC regiments.
So I will have to buy as many Sherman IIIs as Sherman Is. Cunning marketing ^__^.
Maybe they’ll release them in blister packs like the German ones?
-
The Sherman III sheet has the 33rd Armoured Brigade Diablo and the First Northamptonshire Yeomanry tactical sign (up to August 1944). With some judicious application of mud (or a steady hand and some white paint) it will also get you the two RAC regiments.
So I will have to buy as many Sherman IIIs as Sherman Is. Cunning marketing ^__^.
Maybe they’ll release them in blister packs like the German ones?
They are supplying both sheets in the M4 box!
Most excellent!
-
From feedback, we have revised the Allies sheet with the inclusion of the Guards and added "gun sight calibration markings" to the design.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Decal%20Sheets%20171202-2_zpsafwexgjv.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Was working on the upcoming M4 Sherman & M4 Composite supporting material, and come up with this... Useful info if you are not aware of what our M4 Sherman Digital Project can do!
Just imagine what M4 Sherman tank variants you can build with several basic M4 kits from us? All interchangeable...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%2075mm%20Turret%20Sprue%20171205-01_zps5lgqalev.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%2075mm%20Turret%20Sprue%20171205-02_zps1muyvwfa.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Just in case you are not aware what M4 variants you can do, here is a possible list from our current M4 offerings... The M4A1 was put on hold due to our busy schedule, work will resume soon!
M4 - 280060
M4(105) - 280060
M4(105) HVSS - 280060 + 280042
M4 Composite - 280061
M4A1 - WIP
M4A1(76)W - WIP
M4A1(76)W HVSS - WIP
M4A2 - 280055
M4A2(76)W - 280054
M4A2(76)W HVSS - 280054 + 280042
M4A3 - 280042
M4A3(75)W - 280042
M4A3(75)W HVSS - 280042
M4A3(76)W - 280042
M4A3(76)W HVSS - 280042
M4A3E8 - 280042
M4A3(105) - 280042 + 280060
M4A3(105) HVSS - 280042 + 280060
;)
-
Thanks for letting us know and for allowing the build of both turrets.
Is F08 the hatch for the Firefly?
-
Is F08 the hatch for the Firefly?
Quite correct!
-
Further on the subject of possible M4 variants, here is a list...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Combinations%20171206-1_zpsuh0gemnk.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
M4A1
M4A1(76)W
M4A1(76)W HVSS
Because no one else offers the M4A1 in plastic, I know a couple of wargamers that are looking forward to seeing these release (me included). However, with a code of "280xx", I guess it will be sometime before we will see them on the market.
When the list is finished, you will be able to offer the die-hard wargamer a wide variety of M4 variants!
-
Just got the test print of the M4 Sherman decal sheets from the printer for approval.
Not bad for the first try! Really close to the original design... Mind you these were like 7.5mm and 8.5mm in height!
You get TWO decal sheets instead of just one for our latest Sherman kit!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Test%20Decal%20Print%20171215-1_zps0y85sead.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Test%20Decal%20Print%20171215-2_zps8fhou7fu.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
While thinking about another M3 derived vehicle, I was reminded of the Canadian Grizzly. Similar to a US built M4A1, there are a few differences.
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a1mlw/grizzly.html (http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a1mlw/grizzly.html)
Not sure if they could be added to the M4A1 kit.
Need to Re -edit this: [ur]http://ultravanillasmurf.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/grizzling-m4a5-grizzly.html[/url], the M4A5 is the Ram II.
I have photographs of the example at Southsea somewhere.
-
While thinking about another M3 derived vehicle, I was reminded of the Canadian Grizzly. Similar to a US built M4A1, there are a few differences.
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a1mlw/grizzly.html (http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a1mlw/grizzly.html)
Not sure if they could be added to the M4A1 kit.
Need to Re -edit this: [ur]http://ultravanillasmurf.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/grizzling-m4a5-grizzly.html[/url], the M4A5 is the Ram II.
I have photographs of the example at Southsea somewhere.
Lots of differences between the A1 and the ram I’m afraid. I’d be surprised if they could do it in one kit.
Different hull, tracks, headlights, turret, front sprocket.
-
I am so very excite to see the M4A1 (75 and 76mm) version of the Hull Kit.
Will you have the option to build the three piece and single Transmission covers?
What is the release date of this Multi-Kit?
Cheers,
Mike
-
ftp://
While thinking about another M3 derived vehicle, I was reminded of the Canadian Grizzly. Similar to a US built M4A1, there are a few differences.
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a1mlw/grizzly.html (http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a1mlw/grizzly.html)
Not sure if they could be added to the M4A1 kit.
Need to Re -edit this: [ur]http://ultravanillasmurf.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/grizzling-m4a5-grizzly.html[/url], the M4A5 is the Ram II.
I have photographs of the example at Southsea somewhere.
Lots of differences between the A1 and the ram I’m afraid. I’d be surprised if they could do it in one kit.
Different hull, tracks, headlights, turret, front sprocket.
I was not expecting the Ram or Ram II, though the M3 would provide the chassis. I was talking about the Grizzly. The link is to photographs of the Grizzly formerly at Duxford.
I would like Rams for Kangaroo purposes.
-
I am so very excite to see the M4A1 (75 and 76mm) version of the Hull Kit.
Will you have the option to build the three piece and single Transmission covers?
What is the release date of this Multi-Kit?
Cheers,
Mike
Earlier in the thread we were told that the three part transmission cover was included in the M4A1 kit. It was also mentioned that an earlier (M3 type) chassis was to be an option.
There would appear to be two kits, one for small hatch with 75mm turret and large with 76mm turret. No 3d work has been shown so we will have to wait.
In the meantime we will have to build some Sherman Is and IIIs.
-
Will you be doing E9 tracks in either resin or plastic?
-
Development work continues with the M4 Sherman Digital Library. This is the preliminary drawings for the T34 Calliope...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/T34%20Calliope%20180106-03_zpsqbzgzenj.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/T34%20Calliope%20180106-01_zpsqreg2bdu.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/T34%20Calliope%20180106-02_zpsum9nohxj.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Very nice - you do like your rockets, don't you!
Still hoping for a recovery vehicle - maybe an M32?
-
...and a Jumbo!
-
Early m4a3 56 deg hull, the m32 could be a conversion set
-
...and a Jumbo!
Yes, though modified suspension might be too much to ask.
-
M32.. yes please!,
How about a whizbang?
-
Make some design revision to the T34 Calliope. Now two possible variants, and the final expansion kit will include drilling fixture for the turret to secure the T34 onto it too!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/T34%20Calliope%20180113-01_zpstpahwetp.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/T34%20Calliope%20180113-02_zpshtsluyxp.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/T34%20Calliope%20180113-03_zpsjhrrtrlj.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/T34%20Calliope%20180113-04_zpsdgo6fgun.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Very nice . And 2 big thumbs up for including a accurate way to mount this item . Don't really need one , but I guess I'm going to have to get one . Been a favorite vehicle of mine since I built the 1/32 Monogram Calliope back in '73 ( ? )
(https://s9.postimg.org/650wm770r/Monogram_4200_Shermsle.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/650wm770r/)
-
Thanks ripley for the complements. With Hobbico going under, wonder what will happen to Monogram and Revel...
-
Training excerise for new staff continues...
These are just 3D drawings that are not yet ready for prototyping, still need refinement, but the basic shapes are done!
Quite happy with the results... As for the final product, a special "adaptor" base-plate for all different M4 production models accompanied by the universal deep-wading trunks!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Deep%20Wading%20Trunk%20180113-00_zpsberifcfi.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Deep%20Wading%20Trunk%20180113-01_zpssz7yf0w2.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Deep%20Wading%20Trunk%20180113-02_zpsqessa3gu.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Deep%20Wading%20Trunk%20180113-03_zpswkgv945c.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Deep%20Wading%20Trunk%20180113-04_zpsutmb9raf.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Deep%20Wading%20Trunk%20180113-05_zpseadjamcl.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Deep%20Wading%20Trunk%20180113-06_zpsajhnpxyr.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
I have seen photographs of tanks wandering around the Normandy countryside with the bottom half of the rear trunk still in place (I will need to check what it was).
I have read (comment not source material) that there are differences between British and US trunks, will you be covering British style ones (assuming there is a difference).
I have seen some 1/35 scale add ons that are open topped with bracing between them.
-
I have seen photographs of tanks wandering around the Normandy countryside with the bottom half of the rear trunk still in place (I will need to check what it was).
I have read (comment not source material) that there are differences between British and US trunks, will you be covering British style ones (assuming there is a difference).
I have seen some 1/35 scale add ons that are open topped with bracing between them.
We simply cannot cover all the variants and we do not foresee a large volume being sold. There are subtle differences and we will continue to refine the design until it is ready for production based on additional photos and information. ;)
-
I have seen photographs of tanks wandering around the Normandy countryside with the bottom half of the rear trunk still in place (I will need to check what it was).
IIRC Some had explosive bolts and were designed to jettison the top half after landing or the crews just removed the easier part.
-
IRC the tanks that landed in Sicily/Italy had an early version , as well the Marines had their own style , some using 45 gallon steel drums . I think its going to get complicated to satisfy everybody . You guys at Rubicon are really shaking things up by producing add on detail kits for your vehicles , a lot of larger scale modellers ( 1/35 ) I know , wish some of the kits they build had such options available
-
UVS - I've seen those pictures too, and of M10s attached to 29th Division with the lower part of the wading trunk attached even during the taking of Saint Lo. Made me want to build one!
Give the very limited numbers who might buy these is there a case for making such curiosities in resin?
EC
-
A little secret about our deep wading trunks... there are options too!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Deep%20Wading%20Trunk%20180113-07_zpsswatejod.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
These are a useful addition to your range - and a good compliment to the forthcoming LVTseries. Is there any interest in going further, and providing a full accessory set for US Marines Shermans and Stuarts?
-
Our M4 Sherman add-on resin kit - The T34 Calliope Tank Mounted Multiple Rocket Launcher (MRL). The T34 comes with two choices - early and late production variants. It also comes with a hole drilling fixture for the turret as well.
If you looked at the T34 closely, you will find our resin design integrate seamlessly with our plastic kit. Quality & detail is our priority when it comes to our "Rubicon Models" name!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/T34%20Calliope%20180213-01_zpsx72ug70q.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/T34%20Calliope%20180213-02_zpsxgsiizpi.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/T34%20Calliope%20180213-03_zps2nicp1vl.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/T34%20Calliope%20180213-04_zps41imlufy.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/T34%20Calliope%20180213-05_zpsqwewyvwy.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Nice.
So the barrel is an additional part on the early variant?
-
So the barrel is an additional part on the early variant?
Correct, that's because the mounting ring is on the gun barrel, and getting the ring onto the existing plastic barrel will look awkward.
-
Oh nice.
Will the resin kits be following the same release schedules as the tank kits (Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4)?
Would like to see some dozer blades too
-
Looks good . ( note to self - have expansion / add on kit and base kit in hand before building anything ! ) Don't ask :-[
-
Following the T34 Calliope MRL from yesterday is our resin deep wading trunk for all M4 variants. All trunks have interior details so that you can model them with -or- without the trunk itself! Enjoy!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Deep%20Wading%20Trunk%20180213-01_zpsjiqyluq9.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Deep%20Wading%20Trunk%20180213-02_zpsef0zbo8m.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Deep%20Wading%20Trunk%20180213-03_zpsgbszcgxw.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Deep%20Wading%20Trunk%20180213-04_zpsuwlao3re.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Deep%20Wading%20Trunk%20180213-05_zpshbs9apkb.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Deep%20Wading%20Trunk%20180213-06_zpsj3a9rn3x.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Very nice .
-
Will you be doing the canvas screen for the M4 (deployed/undeployed) as well?
(http://cdn-6.olive-drab.com/images/id_m4_sherman_dd_02_700.jpg)
(http://cdn-0.olive-drab.com/images/id_m4_sherman_dd_05_700.jpg)
-
Let's wait for the M4A1 ^__^
-
DD Sherman needs modifications to the lower hull, so it’s not an easy a job as it sounds.
Plus they were on M4A1 and M4A4, neither of which are produced yet.
Would be so cool though.
-
We have not forgotten... work continues... slowly!!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Chassis%20180322-1_zps63bfbl0d.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Large hatch hull (no cut out on rear plate)?
Lots of complex curves.
-
Coming along nicely .
-
Would be nice to get a small and large hatch version
-
Would be nice to get a small and large hatch version
You are a spoiled kid... by us, lol.
-
Yep!
-
Would be nice to get a small and large hatch version
You are a spoiled kid... by us, lol.
You know us so well...
-
And the same request when you get around to doing the M4A3 (75) too..
-
Rubicon have indicated that they are doing the parts for an early M4A1 (vertical bogies, bolted transmission housing), so we could be looking at different M4A1 hulls - early small hatch with direct vision ports, later small hatch, perhaps with applique armour, and large hatch (76mm) version. If there is an early M4A1 in the works, I would hope it also includes the British pattern sandshields, although that might be asking for too much...
-
Would the sand shields be the same as on the SF sprue that's found in the M4 and M4 hybrid kit ? If so its just an easy add to the M4A1 kit . Really looking forward to the A1 , my fav version of the Sherman . Got an urge to build one with the twin bow machine guns
(https://s7.postimg.cc/y4nqnnw47/59aee771a127d41f777a1f63461feb18.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/y4nqnnw47/)
-
They were different (I can't post photos so I can't put up an example). But now you mention it, it looks as though the sandshields fabricated by the British for the Sherman were fairly quickly replaced by the factory installed type (i.e. the ones on the Rubicon sprue). So I guess there's no real need for another set of sandshields in an early M4A1 kit.
-
Would they have had the REME guys copy the ones from the Grant ? The Brits were pretty good at fabricating stuff they found they needed in combat , the sun shield fake canvas / steel truck body for tanks , the NA 75 Churchill and the Firefly conversion late war to name 3
-
Same pattern as the Grant. Here's an example:
(https://s31.postimg.cc/ewfrmi913/IMG_0131.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/ewfrmi913/)
-
We'll just wait for the Rubicon Lee / Grant then ....they going to make one soon I hope :) Actually I want one now ! ::)
-
After almost 2 weeks of travelling with our marketing team, finally had a chance to update our work desks with new progress on the Sherman project...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Boggie%20Teaser%20180609-1_zpsyjelrt8c.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Boggie%20Teaser%20180609-2_zps6cf7icnh.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
On the lower picture the teeth seem to be missing from the inside of the track links. Is it that they are not present on the existing track and I have not noticed?
-
There is a new article on French Shermans on the Minutiae site.
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/french_shermans/french_shermans.html (http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/french_shermans/french_shermans.html)
-
On the lower picture the teeth seem to be missing from the inside of the track links. Is it that they are not present on the existing track and I have not noticed?
They were never there. Otherwise the tracks would need to be cast in 2 pieces.
Good to see the early features taking shape.
-
They were never there. Otherwise the tracks would need to be cast in 2 pieces.
I did think that after I wrote it and I do not have access to my models.
My tablet is stuck in portrait mode and the inside of the track is the only part that shows on the picture so it was very obvious.
-
Quick question:
Is that line running down the rubber track blocks by designed, or is it simply the visuals showing possible mold lines and or part seams?
The lines on the rubber blocks match those of the wheels on the bogies, so I would guess this is showing possible mold lines and or part seams, but I wanted to double check and also to say it is good to see progress because I suspect that these parts are for the M4A1.
Could that same track part(s) be used for a M3 Medium tank model kit? ;)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Boggie%20Teaser%20180609-1_zpsyjelrt8c.jpg)
-
My assumption has always been that is the mould line
-
The early vvss suspension and three piece bolted transmission cover look very nice. One suggestion for the early .vvss suspension arms, to which the wheels are attached . The upper portion of the arm is not a channel looking arm, but a flat solid arm
-
The last of the M4 Sherman Digital Library (excluding the M4A4)...
The M4A1 is most anticipated because of its 3 piece transmission housing and the early bogie.
Both parts open up possibilities like the M3 Lee/Grant and the M7 Priest as future projects.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20180612-01_zpsshd42urc.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20180612-02_zpsdu9pwf5k.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20180612-03_zpsbm7kecf9.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20180612-04_zpsqupnk7dk.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
It's great to see this reaching the prototype stage.
As has been discussed previously, the intial version of the M4A1 with M3-style bogies also had direct vision ports in the hull front. The M3 bogies were replaced quite early in production, so an M4A1 with these would not have applique armour. In other words, this M4A1 hull should have the later M4 bogies.
The bulges around the front hatches also seem to be too pronounced, but maybe it's just the digital image.
Very few of the early Shermans with M3-style bogies survived past 1943, but there were a couple still in service in Italy in 1945. These early Shermans mostly served with the British, and the US Army in Tunisia. Here's a 'classic' early M4A1 (Sherman II) in British service in late 1942:
(https://s33.postimg.cc/s93jh6d2j/Early_M4_A1.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/s93jh6d2j/)
-
The M4A1 is most anticipated because of its 3 piece transmission housing and the early bogie.
Both parts open up possibilities like the M3 Lee/Grant and the M7 Priest as future projects.
(http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/US/Medium/M3/M3_Lee_NA2.png)
Now we are talking! Not so much for the M7 Priest, but for the M3 Lee/Grant (Medium Tank M3).
Because the Lee/Grant saw action in the Pacific, Africa, and Europe, and was used by several countries including the Americans, Australians, British, Canadians, and Soviets, I think a Rubicon Models plastic M3 Lee/Grant will be a very good seller! Also, no one else makes a 1:56 (28mm) scale plastic model kit of the M3 Lee/Grant, and Rubicon Models has a reputation of making great kits.
I just hope Rubicon Models jumps on this M3 Lee/Grant project before someone else does! - hint, hint. ;)
-
The old M3 style wheels show up on a knocked out Sherman at one of the big stadiums in Nurnberg Germany May 45 . IRC it was with a unit that came from the Italian theatre . Either way a M4A1 with either style wheels is OK by me . Limitations in the one piece molding process will result in mold lines , sometimes in places you wish they weren't ( track pads ) , but a little sanding , liquid green stuff or some mud and problem solved .
(https://s22.postimg.cc/f70op30v1/13227408_1755573851355270_1195809134611470785_o-edit-1.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/f70op30v1/)
-
All the tracks are interchangeable anyway.
-
Hood shape:
This is the Grizzly formerly at IWM Duxford.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ttYxWAcVGkM/VrI5dQHDRvI/AAAAAAAABQU/u3zJe7sCCi8/s1600/IMG_8809.JPG)
I have some photographs of the Grizzly at Southsea somewhere.
-
Rubicon, if you are going to take the effort to make the M3 type suspension for the M4A1, you really should make the early version hull with the direct vision ports in the hull. As Pinky said, a majority of the M4A1 with the M-3 type suspension would have been with the direct vision ports in the hull.
Also, no one else have attempted to make a 1/56 with direct vision ports, except for a horrible attempt by Warlord on a undersized Sherman mk.III hull.
Again, the M-3 type upper suspension arms are flat, not with raised edges, or channel shaped as you show in your drawings. Both of the pictures posted by Ripley and Pinky show the upper suspension arms a flat piece.
I know the channel shaped upper suspension arms could be filled in with putty, but why not make them correctly to begin with??
-
Again, the M-3 type upper suspension arms are flat, not with raised edges, or channel shaped as you show in your drawings. Both of the pictures posted by Ripley and Pinky show the upper suspension arms a flat piece.
Michael also has flat upper suspension arms.
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/the_oldest_sherman/index.html (http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/the_oldest_sherman/index.html)
Have a look at photograph three.
-
Could be flat or channel . I found a picture of a late M3 with both styles of upper arms . Now weather it was a different suppler of cast parts or an upgrade for strength might also be a way to save steel , I not sure . The Sherman went into production using Lee parts ( some had the 3 piece nose with the cut out on the 75mm gun side ) , so it makes sense the early Sherman would have the later Lee parts , Notice 1st and 2nd wheel sets have different upper bars . I'm going to give Rubicon a pass on this one :) From Squadron/ Signal M3 Lee/Grant Walk Around #5712 pg 5
(https://s22.postimg.cc/3mjge1hy5/IMG_20180612_180328944.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/3mjge1hy5/)
-
Looking through Military Miniatures In Review's Modeler's Guide to the Sherman, it states that the channel shaped upper suspension arm , called levers in this book , was common to all type 2 bogie trucks, the later bogie trucks with the rear positioned return roller and skid. It also states ' Keep in mind,that many of the bogie truck details shown can be mixed and matched to other units so additional variations are to be expected ' .
The channel shaped 'lever' could be a replacement part.
-
Eye candy for our M4A1 small hatch prototypes which include early, mid and late variants.
We are also working on other M4A1 models as well... so don't panic!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Prototype%20180619-01_zpshjmsvf2h.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Prototype%20180619-02_zps6k7zhpjv.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Prototype%20180619-03_zpsucm9boij.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Prototype%20180619-04_zpssetvhdkc.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
For the reasons explained, the model on the right can't be a "early to mid production" vehicle. The M3 suspension disappeared quite quickly.
That point aside, they certainly look good. Although I'm not entirely sure the hoods are right - they should have a softer curve rather than jutting out of the glacis. Look at the lines on this M4A1:
(https://s8.postimg.cc/ei7j0y98h/M4_A1.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/ei7j0y98h/)
-
For the reasons explained, the model on the right can't be a "early to mid production" vehicle. The M3 suspension disappeared quite quickly.
Maybe "early to mid production" hull with early suspension?
Not looking forward to adding the applique armour, having seen the crazy paving on some hulls.
I still need to so out my Grizzly photographs.
-
For the reasons explained, the model on the right can't be a "early to mid production" vehicle. The M3 suspension disappeared quite quickly.
We are only going to include the "early" bogie with the M4A1 kits. Anyone who wanted to build different variants using different bogie design will have to use spare parts from other RM kits to build their own variant. That's the principle idea behind the M4 Digital Library Project.
That point aside, they certainly look good. I'm not entirely sure the hoods are right - they should have a softer curve rather than jutting out of the glacis:
When we draw the hull, we have compared with blueprints plus several 1/35 and 1/48 model kits to make sure it is correct. Ours are quite comparable with any model kits currently in the market.
-
Shouldn't " early hull " come with the direct vision ports in front of the driver and bow gunner ? Then I thought they welded them closed , then deleted them altogether to make a mid . The change in wheel sets is another timeline as well . So is change from 3 piece to cast nose ( IRC one factory used 3 piece nose on M4A4 till end of war ) .
-
Nice!
This will finish off the Sherman line of kits?
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Prototype%20180619-01_zpshjmsvf2h.jpg)
-
This link argues both sides. http://www.theshermantank.com/wp-content/uploads/m4a1pcf_51.jpg
The Marines used the M4A1 in the Cape Gloucester campaign and the picture shows no DV ports.
But a picture of Early M4A1 Sherman from the 9th Queen’s Royal Lancers, gathered up just before the start of Operation Lightfoot, the second battle of El Alamein. There are DV ports.
In an Army training film, Security on the March, the M4A1 filmed does not have DV ports.
So after a brief search for information it appears that in North Africa some M4A1s had DV ports but in Italy and France they mostly did not.
-
Jaeger - the Marines in Cape Gloucester didn't use the early production M4A1. My point is that most if not all the M4A1s in North Africa had direct vision ports.
I'll try and explain the point another way. The Shermans with M3-style bogies were the initial production run, most of which was rushed to North Africa (the British got 200 of them). The M3-style bogies were replaced at a very early stage in production - they were inadequate for the weight of the M4. They disappeared before the direct vision ports were eliminated. A couple of the early M4s with 1st Armoured Division in Tunisia in early 1943 already featured the M4-style bogies (the cast transmission housing was appearing by that time as well). Most of the early Shermans with M3-style bogies were knocked out in 1942/43 - the Americans lost a lot of them in their initial encounters with the Afrika Korps.
So, unless the M4A1 kit includes the hull with direct vision ports, the tracks with M3-style bogies are largely irrelevant (to anyone who cares about historical accuracy). If I've understood Rubicon's last post correctly, and their M4A1 kit will only include M3-style bogies, the kit will represent an extremely rare vehicle.
Without the hull with direct vision ports, it won't be possible to build an accurate version of the Shermans that fought at Alamein or with the US 1st Armoured in Tunisia in late 1942/early 1943. Which, I would have thought, was the whole point of including the M3-style bogies in the first place.
-
(https://s33.postimg.cc/a1pmtd99n/13227408_1755573851355270_1195809134611470785_o-edit-1.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/a1pmtd99n/)
Or to model this tank , knocked out in Nurnberg Apr/May 45 . Notice direct vision ports behind the applique armor , early 3 piece nose and wheel sets . IRC this was a replacement tank which came from Italy .Looks to have a frame on the left side ( extra sand bag armor ? ) right side frame gone . Now how would you model the burnt track pads ?
-
(https://s33.postimg.cc/a1pmtd99n/13227408_1755573851355270_1195809134611470785_o-edit-1.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/a1pmtd99n/)
Interesting photograph.
It also has an M34A1 gun mount and extended track. Very much a hybrid.
There is debris on the right side (our left) that looks like a sand bag frame, but no visible penetration.
-
Excuse me peeps - I've probably missed something though I have tried to check ... is there a planned Sherman V + VC variant planned, along the line, as part of this awesome Shermjan project?
EC
-
Excuse me peeps - I've probably missed something though I have tried to check ... is there a planned Sherman V + VC variant planned, along the line, as part of this awesome Shermjan project?
EC
The problem with the Sherman V is that it only reuses the the turret, nearly everything else currently moulded will need to be redrawn (yes the bogies are the same but the one piece track units will need to be redrawn etc).
I hope so (but then I also would like a Sexton as well) as they seem to be the most used in North West Europe and the currently available models are a bit rubbish.
-
Cheers UV,
That's a shame - and I'm only too aware that Rubicon can't satisfy the clamour on all sides for so many different models. I'd assumed the Sherman V had more widespread use, for example in Italy, and with a number of different armies. But it's clearly got to be some way back down the queue with so many other projects...
EC
-
Plus they have to weigh it against the fact that there’s already a Sherman V in plastic available, so that would lower the priority.
-
Plus they have to weigh it against the fact that there’s already a Sherman V in plastic available, so that would lower the priority.
There are a number in Pinky's bin ^__^.
-
Cheers UV,
That's a shame - and I'm only too aware that Rubicon can't satisfy the clamour on all sides for so many different models. I'd assumed the Sherman V had more widespread use, for example in Italy, and with a number of different armies. But it's clearly got to be some way back down the queue with so many other projects...
EC
YMMV but users appear to be Britain (and those we supplied to French forces) and China.
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/sherman_types/m4a4/m4a4.html (http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/sherman_types/m4a4/m4a4.html)
Report of Medium Tank, M4A4, With Chrysler Multibank Engines," dated December 15, 1942, the AFB recommended that "The Chrysler Multibank engine be considered unsatisfactory as a power plant for medium tanks and its production discontinued at the earliest possible date."
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uXBEKI0hJro/WFwnxH5f7yI/AAAAAAAABr0/ElCJHJKokVEQ25jtTq76eKyPApUDbAVCgCLcB/s1600/IMG_8742.JPG)
So we got the lot.
"At 7167 units, the M4A4 or "Sherman V" in British parlance, was the most numerous of the M4 series received by the British Empire as Lend Lease. Even after production had ceased in September, 1943, the British agreed to accept remanufactured M4A4s as part of their 1944 Lend Lease requirements, and would have taken more, had they been available, in lieu of radial engined Shermans.[
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a4/m4a4_variants.html (http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a4/m4a4_variants.html)
There are probably better sources out there.
I would love a Rubicon class M4A4 (I would live with an Italeri class one) but I am currently stuck with the Warlord one.
http://ultravanillasmurf.blogspot.com/2017/01/compare-sherman-gun-mantlet.html (http://ultravanillasmurf.blogspot.com/2017/01/compare-sherman-gun-mantlet.html)
I will redo the above page when I start on my three Rubicon M4s.
-
The M4A1s seen above were photographed on the Pacific Car Test Track in the Fall of 1942. As evidenced by the unit on the left, these tanks were built at the transition point where direct vision gave way to hulls featuring the elongated drivers' hoods. However, note that the later hull Sherman "still" has the M3 type bogies, a fairly uncommon combination, but further evidence of the transitional nature of the introduction of changes. PCF began production using the T41 rubber block tracks that can be seen on these tanks.
(https://s33.postimg.cc/scr5tfuob/m4a1pcf_43.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/scr5tfuob/)
The image and quote are reversed, but it provides further proof that Rubicon's upcoming M4A1 would be a very rare vehicle, released the way it has been shown on the forum.
Rubicon, I know that you've posted that you have additional versions of the M4A1 planned for release, but does that include the early M4A1 hull with the direct vision slots??
-
The quote and picture are taken from the Sherman Minutia page under the M4A1 Pacific Car page
-
The image and quote are reversed, but it provides further proof that Rubicon's upcoming M4A1 would be a very rare vehicle, released the way it has been shown on the forum.
Rubicon, I know that you've posted that you have additional versions of the M4A1 planned for release, but does that include the early M4A1 hull with the direct vision slots??
There's no doubt about this. We just have to hope they went back to the drawing board on the M4A1.
-
(https://s33.postimg.cc/scr5tfuob/m4a1pcf_43.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/scr5tfuob/)
The image and quote are reversed, but it provides further proof that Rubicon's upcoming M4A1 would be a very rare vehicle, released the way it has been shown on the forum.
Rubicon, I know that you've posted that you have additional versions of the M4A1 planned for release, but does that include the early M4A1 hull with the direct vision slots??
That is a great picture. Three M4A1s with the older hull (direct vision) and one with a newer hull, but all four have the older M3 bogie sets! I agree with everyone that it is possible for the combination, but it would be a rare beast indeed!
It would be great if Rubicon can figure out how to issue the kit with the option to have or not have the direct vision ports. Would it be asking too much for both the older and newer bogie sets? After all, the M4A3 kit gave you the option for three different bogie sets!!!
-
It would be great if Rubicon can figure out how to issue the kit with the option to have or not have the direct vision ports. Would it be asking too much for both the older and newer bogie sets? After all, the M4A3 kit gave you the option for three different bogie sets!!!
There is only one turret in the 76mm kits and the M4A3 has everything on large sprues.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Assembly%20Instructions/280055%20M4A2%20170830-p1_zpsgctxlmrj.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Assembly%20Instructions/280054%20M4A276W%20170830-p1_zpsmbp1lq5g.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Assembly%20Instructions/280042%20M4A3-M4A3E8%20170125-p1_zpsc6o4jiwo.jpg)
I assume the current plan has the M3 bogie set replacing sprue A.
-
I am hoping that Rubicon could give us a definitive answer as to their plans for the components that will make up their upcoming M4A1 kit.
-
First they have to be convinced that their research is wrong. Then it's case of how far advanced the project is - if they're too far down the track it's hard to modify the kit. The thing is that this point was discussed at an early stage (before the Sherman project got underway).
-
Never say never n the weird world of Shermans . here's a M4A1 small hatch hybrid , ( late as no vision port , but early before large hull hatches ) only 50 made according to the guys on Missing Lynx
(https://s33.postimg.cc/443zhidmz/m4_composite2.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/443zhidmz/)
Might be a do able conversion , just need a M4 and M4A1 to cut up
-
It's not a case of "never", but a case of "hardly ever".
-
First they have to be convinced that their research is wrong. Then it's case of how far advanced the project is - if they're too far down the track it's hard to modify the kit. The thing is that this point was discussed at an early stage (before the Sherman project got underway).
My thoughts are (and Our Gracious Hosts can correct me) is that they are convinced, and it is your second point that is occupying their time at the moment.
From my limited knowledge, they would have the following options depending upon how far advanced the tooling is.
If the tooling is still virtual, then we have to wait and see if they do the direct vision hull or drop the M3 bogie sprue.
If the tooling is cut then:
Behave in an un-Rubicon manner and bluff it out.
Keep the hull and either drop the M3 bogie from the kit and replace with existing sprue A or add sprue A to the box (the M3 bogie sprue could be combined with an earlier hull at a later date - possibly in resin).
-
Or Rubicon might just drop the M4A1 project altogether and move onto something else. If they are to the point where they could not fix what is wrong, instead of throwing more time and money on the project, they just might start something new instead.
If its not too late, maybe they can just change the hull to fit the older model of M4A1. Not sure if its even possible to even make the hull so it can be either the older or newer version. The latter could get messy.
-
Seems like there is a lot of concerns about us making the wrong M4A1 lately. Think this is a good thing because everyone here is very serious about what we did. As you all understand from our past projects, we usually would put together whatever components we had designed to do a mockup of a vehicle, in this case, a valid small hatch M4A1. That does not mean we are going to release one (small hatch with early boggie) "as is". The M4A1 is nowhere near completion... probably less than a quarter is done; this is why we don't even have a 3D printed prototype yet.
Currently, we are really busy with getting all the Q3 & Q4 releases ready and we just don't have the time to work on the M4A1, that's also one of the reasons why we don't have any updates on the project. Hopefully, this will change soon!
-
So plenty of time to get things all figured out and fixed up.
-
Certainly not my favourite shape of sherman. But I'd gladly buy one.
I don't really get what is wrong with it as I don't know 90% of the stuff people are on about.
I just wanna paint toy tanks.
-
I don't really get what is wrong with it as I don't know 90% of the stuff people are on about.
Quick précis: because (*).
In slightly more detail, the initial batch of M4A1 tanks had M3 style bogies with central return rollers and vision slits n the hoods over the driver and co-driver. Rubicon's current work in progress model has M3 bogies but no vision slits, a set up that only matches a few examples, hence the discussion.
* - HHGG reference.
-
Quick précis: because (*).
* - HHGG reference
Don't understand sorry.
In slightly more detail, the initial batch of M4A1 tanks had M3 style bogies with central return rollers and vision slits n the hoods over the driver and co-driver. Rubicon's current work in progress model has M3 bogies but no vision slits, a set up that only matches a few examples, hence the discussion.
Oh...so nothing too major. Well that's OK. I thought it was something noticeable
-
It's major. It changed the shape of the front upper cast hull.
-
Quick précis: because (*).
* - HHGG reference
Don't understand sorry.
Don't Panic!
-
...so nothing too major. Well that's OK. I thought it was something noticeable
It's major. It changed the shape of the front upper cast hull.
To see what is being discussed have a look here.
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/hoods_hatches/hoods_hatches.html (http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/hoods_hatches/hoods_hatches.html)
-
Thanks for that link Ultra. I am not nearly as well versed in US vehicles as I am in German, Polish and Japanese. That was an illuminating site, and I better appreciate now the issues.
-
We always have multiple hulls for each M4 variants, it is just a matter of priority on how drawings are being done!
We always put whatever is valid and with whatever parts on-hand (no matter it is common or rare) to show our progress.
We always take comments seriously. The M4A1 small hatch is a valid build and so is M4A1 large hatch...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20DV%20180809-1_zps2zkwy0ds.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
We always have multiple hulls for each M4 variants, it is just a matter of priority on how drawings are being done!
We always put whatever is valid and with whatever parts on-hand (no matter it is common or rare) to show our progress.
We always take comments seriously. The M4A1 small hatch is a valid build and so is M4A1 large hatch...
To quote Oddball from Kelly's Heroes, Crazy… I mean like, so many positive waves… maybe we can’t lose, you’re on!
With no DVP
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20180612-01_zpsshd42urc.jpg)
With DVP
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20DV%20180809-1_zps2zkwy0ds.jpg)
Its a beautiful thing! :)
-
That's a nice looking 3D drawing. I have two suggestions, though. The driver and co-driver's hatch should not have the guards over the periscope, those weren't put on Shermans until later in 1943. Also, the armor over and behind the hull mg mount should be thicker and wider than what is shown.
I'm glad that you guys are going forward with the early dv M4A1 hull option. Not that I won't be buying the later M4A1 small hatch hull, I definitely will, but it will be great to have options to cover the entire course of the conflict
-
Neat job on the DVP..
I would assume there will be multiple hatches with and without periscopes (and guards).
-
Another observation, the rear hull has the cut out/channel on the top rear of it. This cut out was typical of upper hulls cast and manufactured by General Steel. General Steel did not produce any cast hulls with direct vision ports.
This is from Sherman Minutia, under small hatch production variants, under the Pressed Steel Car section, about half way down the page.
-
Does that mean we may also see the small hatch M4A3 at some point too?
-
I would assume there will be multiple hatches with and without periscopes (and guards).
Not necessarily. This detail was missed on the M4A2, which should also have both types of hatch.
-
I would assume there will be multiple hatches with and without periscopes (and guards).
Not necessarily. This detail was missed on the M4A2, which should also have both types of hatch.
I've noticed that too, and I haven't built my M4A2 kit yet. For me its more a gaming model than a diorama model, so little things like this do not bother me. I would rather see a very good Rubicon plastic model kit with a few overlooked details than none at all.
-
It didn't bother me that much either, but it means my Sherman IIIs are not quite accurate as 1943-era vehicles.
-
It didn't bother me that much either, but it means my Sherman IIIs are not quite accurate as 1943-era vehicles.
No worries Pinky, because most miniature gamers will not even notice this little detail.
If anyone does notice and makes a big deal out of it, then be very worried about them. ;)
-
The periscopes are easy to make , its soldering that very thin wire to make the guards that drives you mental
-
The periscopes are easy to make , its soldering that very thin wire to make the guards that drives you mental
I passed that point years ago.
-
What drove you over the edge Tracks ? The paint fumes , the uncooperative super glue , or soldering 1 mm fine wire ?
-
Work on our M4A1 had finally resumed... not only did we revised the small hatch hull, but we had also finished the direct vision port variant as well.
One more variant to go before prototyping.
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A175DV%20181123-1_zpsowfrmrel.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A175DV%20181123-2_zpsutzqcsts.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A175DV%20181123-3_zpsadfa3grl.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A175DV%20181123-4_zpsip2u0qhk.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A175SH%20181123-1_zpsrq1rnokj.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A175SH%20181123-2_zpsycf0y0as.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A175SH%20181123-3_zpsyyuzs1yq.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A175SH%20181123-4_zpsbvfxxxwb.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
The direct vision hoods look great.
Any chance of a side view of the later hoods similar to:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ttYxWAcVGkM/VrI5dQHDRvI/AAAAAAAABQU/u3zJe7sCCi8/s1600/IMG_8809.JPG)
Will the hull applique be supplied or like the others be plastic card?
And a final question, will the glacis have the caster's mark?
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-vacbW4DEJLw/VrI5dRuTZTI/AAAAAAAABQQ/aggGtanh7lc/s1600/IMG_8810.JPG)
I must go back and rewrite (correct) my original post and add the photographs of the Grizzly at Southsea (and Michael).
-
Casting marks:
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/data/Sherman_Foundry_Symbols_and_Trademarks.pdf (http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/data/Sherman_Foundry_Symbols_and_Trademarks.pdf)
Searching for "hulls" indicates General Steel (as above) and Continnental Foundry.
[edit] looking through the survivors, there are some with the General Steel mark, but not many.
Contemporary photographs might be a better guide.
-
More on casting marks.
"Starting in early 1943, General Steel began to cast their logo (1) on the front of the hulls they produced. If it can be seen in a period photo, the "G in a shield" logo can be considered a recognition feature of an M4A1 made by Pressed Steel, or one of the 188 Grizzlies made by Montreal Locomotive. "
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a1psc/m4a1_psc.html (http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a1psc/m4a1_psc.html)
So not on DV hulls.
-
Very,very nice work! I can't wait for these to be released.
Also, in your side note in the first picture,the early M4A2 Sherman hull also had direct vision ports.
-
I'm so glad you went back and re-thought this kit. These new designs look great. I assume the kit includes both types of suspension. I hope the applique armour is optional, so we can build an 'interim' version (before the upgrade in 1943/44).
-
I am so looking forward to this version of the Sherman tank.
-
I just lost my virginity
-
I know that this is probably a ways off, but when you start planning the decal sheet for the M4A1 DV kit, I have a couple requests. Could you plan to make a few sets of blue drab vehicle numbers, yellow turret stars ,stripes and company geometric bars and dots, and the mailed gauntlet with lightning bolts from G and H company 1st armored division?
-
I'm so glad you went back and re-thought this kit. These new designs look great. I assume the kit includes both types of suspension. I hope the applique armour is optional, so we can build an 'interim' version (before the upgrade in 1943/44).
I had not noticed the different suspension. Excellent.
I hope the applique is separate as I think the Americanns altered the moulds later.
-
I'm so glad you went back and re-thought this kit. These new designs look great. I assume the kit includes both types of suspension. I hope the applique armour is optional, so we can build an 'interim' version (before the upgrade in 1943/44).
These are not a new design but a work in progress, the old illustration was just a "put together" to show our ongoing work.
As for the applique armour, it will depend on how much sprue space there are, still too early to decide.
;)
-
The last of the M4A1 Sherman technical drawings are finally COMPLETED!
This will be followed by 3D prototyping and minor revision to existing drawings if required.
Hopefully becoming a plastic product before the year end!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20LH%20190304-1_zpsfhzpa1cp.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20LH%20190304-2_zpsyv8jnfsw.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20LH%20190304-3_zpsg3xarren.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Nice.
Good to see progress on what has turned out to be a very complicated project. I am sure it is going to be worth it.
-
Even though ordering more Rubicon Models is currently outside my reach, I'm still curious about one thing.
Will the new M4A1 large hatch kit come with both the 75mm and 76mm turrets, or will these be two separate kits? That is, the small hatch kit will have the 75 gun turret and the large hatch kit will have the 76 gun turret.
Now I have to pull out my Sherman books to see if the 76 gun turret was installed on the small hatch hull, and if the 75 gun turret was used on the large hatch hull. I'm think the latter is true, but not sure about the other.
-
I know for sure that the 76mm gun was not used on the small hatch hull,a side from a prototype or two. Maybe check Sherman minutia on the 75mm gun on the large hatch hull M4A1. People have commented on other pages/forums that the 1/72 Esci M4A1 large hatch with a 75mm gun never existed. But I think they did as the basis of a few duplex drive Shermans
-
According to a lot of my books on the Sherman, the 75mm gun turret (with the new M34A1 mantlet) might have been used on the M4A1 large hatch hull, but evidence is not conclusive. For certain, the 76mm gun turret doesn't seem to have been used on the M4A1 small hatch hull.
-
The 75mm turret was fitted to some large hatch M4A1s. They are sometimes confused with the M4 Composite hull, but there are several photos that clearly show the large hatch M4A1 hull. As Hoffman said, they were used as DD tanks; in fact nearly all the photos I've seen are the DD version. Here is what the Shadock site says:
The first M4A1s with large hatches were equipped with 75mm guns, and were manufactured by Pressed Steel Car in December 1943. They retained the "dry stowage" of the original design, where the 75mm ammunition bins were mounted in vulnerable positions on the sponsons. In the right side photo above, we've pointed out what we informally label "cast in appliqué." These "bumps" were incorporated into the hull casting in the area of the sponson mounted ammo bins, thus eliminating the need for welding on the one inch armor plates that were mandated to be factory installed or retrofitted on dry stowage Shermans starting in the Summer of 1943. It is thought that only Montreal Locomotive and Pressed Steel Car produced M4A1(75)s with "cast in appliqué" hulls. They appear on the last 75 or so Grizzlies (all small hatch), as well as the last 500 or so PSC built M4A1(75)s (approximately 400 small hatch units and 100 large hatch). Many of the large hatch M4A1(75)s were converted to Duplex Drive Swimming Tanks, and a couple of these DDs are on display in France and Great Britain.
-
Grizzly at Southsea with cast in applique.
(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-eNn2WB78h70/XIfqJQpvpGI/AAAAAAAAFB4/Xi51JJQDGoUL7b0V_z0WSSwXYE9Rxr5OgCLcBGAs/s1600/IMG_9360.JPG)
-
After days of German armour, it is time for some Allies one... The prototype for the last M4A1 variant - with large hatch - is done!
In short, the M4A1 will have THREE variants - small hatch, small hatch with direct vision (DV), and large hatch. Once we polish up all the M4A1 drawings, we will send them to the factory for sprue layout, then mould making!
(https://oi1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Prototype%20190402-01_zpsemj3v98y.jpg)
(https://oi1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Prototype%20190402-02_zps8oamctuo.jpg)
(https://oi1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Prototype%20190402-03_zpsaayxm69h.jpg)
(https://oi1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Prototype%20190402-04_zpsaafvcnqe.jpg)
(https://oi1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Prototype%20190402-05_zps1oncpfhc.jpg)
(https://oi1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Prototype%20190402-06_zpsizx44h26.jpg)
(https://oi1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Prototype%20190402-07_zpsky7sjvgz.jpg)
(https://oi1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Prototype%20190402-08_zpsee571dbi.jpg)
(https://oi1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20Prototype%20190402-09_zpslj7spzlv.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Nice, though not sure what I would do with one.
-
Nice, though not sure what I would do with one.
Buy one or three and put them in your stash... the usual routine! ;D
-
Nice, though not sure what I would do with one.
Buy one or three and put them in your stash... the usual routine! ;D
Rumbled....
-
Sad , but true ...
-
Will all this be in one plastic model kit?
Or will it be two different kits? - (1) small hatch w/wo DV, and (2) large hatch.
Or will it be three different kits? - (1) small hatch, (2) small hatch with DV, and (3) large hatch.
Will both the original turret (75mm gun) and T23 turret (76mm gun) be included?
Looking forward to seeing and hearing more details.
Sad , but true ...
Yep.
(https://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints-depot/tanks/ww2-tanks-us/m4a1-sherman.gif)
-
Will all this be in one plastic model kit?
Or will it be two different kits? - (1) small hatch w/wo DV, and (2) large hatch.
Or will it be three different kits? - (1) small hatch, (2) small hatch with DV, and (3) large hatch.
Will both the original turret (75mm gun) and T23 turret (76mm gun) be included?
Don't know yet. Will depend on the number of sprues. At present, looking at two products:
1) Small hatch + small hatch with DV + original turret & 75mm gun
2) Large hatch + T23 turret & 76mm gun
Seems logical with that arrangement.
-
That arrangement makes sense.
-
Do you still plan on including the earlier M-3 type suspension with the upcoming M4A1 small hatch DV hulled Sherman??
-
Do you still plan on including the earlier M-3 type suspension with the upcoming M4A1 small hatch DV hulled Sherman??
Of course, the early M3 type suspension will be included. That's the whole point of this project. We had to re-design the complete lower hull AND add the 3-pc transmission housing so that they can be used for future M3 and M7 projects. That's why it took us so long to complete the M4A1 3d drawings. A lot of sweat and sleepless nights for our designer!
-
Great !!!! I can't wait for that to come out
-
Buy one or three and put them in your stash... the usual routine! ;D
3? Pffft.. amateurs ;)
-
Will all this be in one plastic model kit?
Or will it be two different kits? - (1) small hatch w/wo DV, and (2) large hatch.
Or will it be three different kits? - (1) small hatch, (2) small hatch with DV, and (3) large hatch.
Will both the original turret (75mm gun) and T23 turret (76mm gun) be included?
Don't know yet. Will depend on the number of sprues. At present, looking at two products:
1) Small hatch + small hatch with DV + original turret & 75mm gun
2) Large hatch + T23 turret & 76mm gun
Seems logical with that arrangement.
I agree, that does seem the most logical because it would be difficult to cover every specific option.
A Quiz Challenge
How many M4A1 tanks with the large hatch were produced with the 75mm gun turret?
(http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/turret_types/drawing1.JPG)
(http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/turret_types/drawing2.JPG)
-
Around 100
-
Around 100
And how many were DD versions?
-
For those who are interested in the question asked by Tracks, here is our answer:
(https://oi1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/c976a601-c601-43d6-9f80-4b0741808fa4_zpslj3fyeve.jpg)
HTH!
;)
-
Around 100
And how many were DD versions?
Most of them is what I've read. I don't know the exact number
-
With reference to the pistol port:
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vIaP-8VUxbQ/XJKi7U6eF1I/AAAAAAAAFHo/wHScZMtamkwV57Bab4Y7wh9ZyEI8dntiQCLcBGAs/s1600/m4h-1-9.png)
That is the full delete (4) rather than the fit and weld up. 33 Armoured Brigade seems to have had a lot of Sherman Is with them.
-
Many had requested an M4 roadmap diagram similar to the Panzer IV, here it is...
Over 20 variants can be built with our M4 plastic kits!
(https://oi1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4%20Roadmap%20190413-1_zps6ovazcyu.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Thanks!
You’re missing the POA-CWS-H5 from your M4A3 section though.
-
Hopefully Rubicon will release those weird flame thrower add on bits ( both turret and hull versions ) as a Resin / Pewter detail kit , much like the bull dozer kit . Pity they're not going to release a M4A4 , the Warlord plastic kit is lacking , to be diplomatic
-
Most flamethrower versions just look like a 75mm or 105mm Sherman. New kits wouldn’t be needed.
The only exceptions would be the periscope mounted one, bow mounted one and the crocodile.
Can I be less diplomatic on “Warlord’s” (plastic soldier company’s) A4? ;)
-
While its true most were mounted in the gun barrel or bow MG mount , there were a few oddities . M4A1 with POA-CWS 75-H2 , that had the flame tube mounted to the side so the main gun was still usable (in Pacific theatre )
(https://i.postimg.cc/DWv1zWzG/M4-A1-flame-thrower.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/DWv1zWzG)
Easy enough to kit bash I suppose ….
-
While its true most were mounted in the gun barrel or bow MG mount , there were a few oddities . M4A1 with POA-CWS 75-H2 , that had the flame tube mounted to the side so the main gun was still usable (in Pacific theatre )
Easy enough to kit bash I suppose ….
Not sure if everyone knew, the flamer "barrel" is included in the 75mm turret sprue. ;)
Assembly instruction can be found on the M4 instruction sheet, page 4, step 14.
-
So it is . I stand corrected .
-
While its true most were mounted in the gun barrel or bow MG mount , there were a few oddities . M4A1 with POA-CWS 75-H2 , that had the flame tube mounted to the side so the main gun was still usable (in Pacific theatre )
(https://i.postimg.cc/DWv1zWzG/M4-A1-flame-thrower.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/DWv1zWzG)
Easy enough to kit bash I suppose ….
They were sent to the Pacific theatre, but war ended before any were issued to units. Any pics of them in action would be from the Korean War.
-
Something on our M4 Sherman roadmap had changed...
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/47977116753_ba7e93e7d7_o.jpg)
Our new project for the month of June comes the last variant for our M4 Sherman Digital Library... The Commonwealth Firefly VC and the Sherman V (M4A4)!
We understand a lot of our customers had been pushing us for this one and we had been resisting up until now; then why we do it?
As you all know our M4A1 Sherman project had been putting on the delayed list for so many times because of various reasons, now that it is underway, we found ourselves without enough parts to fill up a sprue (again)... the M4A4 had become yet another filler project for the M4A1. Lucky you!
To go inline with our existing M4 range, there are options like front hatch guards, spare tracks, guns and turrets.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/47977113607_d89c319995_b.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/47977166196_58ce9705ed_b.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/47977166156_bcce7baeaf_o.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/47977166126_acee5147fc_b.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
That’s really good news.
Would be nice to have a 75mm M4A3 kit too, since the M4A1 and M4A2 have both the 75mm and 76mm versions.
I know you can kit bash with spare turrets, but it does also mean there’s no small hatch M4A3 hull available.
-
Yes!
I will still finish off my existing Warlord Sherman V platoon, just in time to replace them with the new and much shinier Rubicon ones.
-
Front hatch guard ? You mean the applique armor panels in front of driver position , right ? I'm sure glad I didn't get any of those other guy's A4s . These look great
-
Front hatch guard ? You mean the applique armor panels in front of driver position , right ? I'm sure glad I didn't get any of those other guy's A4s . These look great
I assume they mean the plates leaning on the hoods as well.
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-rD_w2x4anXg/WFwntOK8XVI/AAAAAAAABrY/dwNQeaK4R0QgEZ1v5vL-BExI_dZxuP5jwCLcB/s1600/IMG_8581.JPG)
-
Probably something lost in translation , then again a lot of original names of things on tanks came from the Brit Navy types who crewed them in WW 1 . Mind you , one of my buddies calls them appliance panels , so it's still confusing people today
-
Front hatch guard? You mean the applique armor panels in front of driver position, right? I'm sure glad I didn't get any of those other guy's A4s . These look great
We find both phrases on our multi-source references. Felt "front hatch guard" seems more appropriate... ;)
-
Very happy to see a Sherman V & will doubtless pick up a few.
-
A full line of 1:56 scale plastic kits of the iconic M4 Medium (AKA Sherman) from Rubicon Models. Just amazing!
Most gamers would have just been happy to get the M4, M4A1 and M4A3, but now they have a full range to choose from.
Once the M4A1 and M4A4 kits are released, and with some mixing and matching, I think a modeler will be able to make every possible common M4 Medium variant that rolled off the production line.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/47977116753_ba7e93e7d7_o.jpg)
-
Today is D-Day plus 1... The Allies gets reinforcement by means of testshot plastic and 3D printed prototypes of M4A1 and M4A4 Shermans. The final two M4 variants are coming along nicely!
We do have the M4A1 large hatch as a product, still under mould making.
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20amp%20M4A4%20Prototype%20190606-1_zpsm68mfnm0.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20amp%20M4A4%20Prototype%20190606-2_zpsmt3vymih.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Both of the testshot plastic M4A1 hulls are very nice.I ,for one, am glad to see that these are now closer to being released. The only issues that I have with the direct vision hull are that around the hull mg mount, it looks like it is sitting on a flat plate, and the steel casting above the mg mount should be a bit flatter and wider. The driver and mg gunner hoods above the direct vision ports were not completely round. But, these are all small things that can be easily converted, if they were to be released as-is.
I am glad to see a choice of hull hatches, both with or without the periscope guards.
-
Great to see the M4A4/Sherman V progressing.
-
Prototypes of the Sherman V (M4A4) and Firefly VC are finally completed; now awaiting approval before moving to the mould making queue.
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A4%20Prototype%20190612-1_zpsq9g29lff.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A4%20Prototype%20190612-2_zpsn0ww1bsa.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Yay!
My guess is that you will have released them before I finish my existing Warlord ones ^___^.
Excellent progress.
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/B8f2NkTt/M4-A1-amp-M4-A4-Prototype-190606-1-zpsm68mfnm0.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/B8f2NkTt)
The mg mount on your testshot of the M4A1 hulls look a little off. If it's not too late, here are some images of the shape of the mount
(https://i.postimg.cc/yDy0QnvP/M4-A1-75-2-JPG.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/yDy0QnvP)
(https://i.postimg.cc/64BX0W3z/m4a1pcf-37-JPG.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/64BX0W3z)
(https://i.postimg.cc/F7WfnRSY/m4a1pcf-35-JPG.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/F7WfnRSY)
-
The mg mount on your testshot of the M4A1 hulls look a little off.
(https://flyingheritage.org/getattachment/8ef6cdea-483d-455c-b9a1-cc789a049460/attachment.aspx)
-
Considering 3 factories made the M4A1 hull and that each made various changes and tweaks to the casting on each production run , I think the bow gun mount looks pretty good . Personally , I would add putty or green stuff to the turret and hull any way and stipple it to get the correct texture of the real cast hull vehicle I'm using as inspiration for my model . In fact I do that for all my tank kits that have cast parts ( lots of rough cast bits on T-34s ) . Unless Rubicon decide to depict a specific factory's product , giving month and day of manufacture , I'm willing to give them some slack on fidelity of details .
-
Unless Rubicon decide to depict a specific factory's product , giving month and day of manufacture , I'm willing to give them some slack on fidelity of details .
[/quote]
But wouldn't it be nice if they released a kit that didn't have to be converted to look correct? Yes, I can live with and correct any minor inaccurate details, but it would be nice to build an accurate kit out of the box.
-
After reading to HOffmn's comment and further research & inspection on more historical photos, plus measurement from other model kits, we found our designs are more or less correct... except a minor issue with the MG mount area. we've decided to modify it to make it looks more "pleasant" and natural.
Our factory might not like it and might push back mould making for a week or two... anyway, thanks for the input!
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Hull%20Changes%20190613-2_zpsjk3q9dgq.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Hull%20Changes%20190613-1_zps7ctpmyts.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Thank you, Rubicon. Hopefully it won't be pushed back too far
-
Thank you for your dillegence.
-
Looking good.
Good work.
-
These are the two basic sprues (1st test-shots) plus the 17pdr/75mm gun sprue for the upcoming Firefly VC and M4A4 (Sherman V) kit.
We will post the test assembled tanks later. Also, the M4A1 moulds are in the works... don't worry!
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Sprue%20190804-01_zpsietvh2gz.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Sprue%20190804-02_zpso8o4bolg.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Sprue%20190804-03_zpswibvekun.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Sprue%20190804-04_zps6nplnywc.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Nice work.
Interesting that you have gone for a separate glacis, neat solution.
Good to hear about the M4A1.
-
Interesting that you have gone for a separate glacis, neat solution.
The gun lock hinge is in the way and a separate glacis is a better and clean solution.
Good to hear about the M4A1.
The delay is due to the recent change on the hull curvature, plus mould design issue with the M4A1 track links. Need to fix it before we can move forward.
-
Looking good . I take it the loader's square hatch for the Firefly is a separate piece ?
-
Both M4A3E8 HVSS models (76mm gun and 105mm gun) saw extensive combat in Korean war. Looking forward to starting my KW vehicle collection with these two tanks!
Have not checked the 35 pages of posts on the Sherman ... but is there an M1A1 dozer blade option available?
-
Looking good . I take it the loader's square hatch for the Firefly is a separate piece ?
I am assuming the turret sprue is the one we know and love.
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-x-LZ_g85yZs/XJe5yGmY17I/AAAAAAAAFIc/zwma-0ECKEg90so_YTe_u9JMzOmayrvxgCLcBGAs/s1600/m4h-1-18.png)
In which case, yes. Part F08.
-
Thanks . Guess I should have taken a closer look at the turret sprue picture ,
-
Have not checked the 35 pages of posts on the Sherman ... but is there an M1A1 dozer blade option available?
Yes, we do... is queuing up for resin production now!
-
I'll definitely want a couple of these beauties
-
Excellent news about the dozer blades!!
-
Test assembly of the Firefly VC / M4A4 (Sherman V) plastic test-shots...
This new 1/56 scale kit is made up of two new sprues combined with the existing 75mm gun turret sprue, plus a tank crew mini-sprue.
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Primed%20190804-01_zps8y7cu05x.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Primed%20190804-02_zpsjqhfbhfn.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Primed%20190804-03_zpsjd7sd4xn.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Primed%20190804-04_zpswkukp17c.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Primed%20190804-05_zps4a1ltefx.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Primed%20190804-06_zpspvmwf7aq.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Primed%20190804-07_zpsptxfn9n2.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Primed%20190804-08_zpsgykttz08.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Primed%20190804-09_zpsj0u9uh3h.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Primed%20190804-10_zpsaxvhzcin.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Nice.
-
Looking good. This will be greatly superior to Warlord's clunky M4A4.
-
Looking good. This will be greatly superior to Warlord's clunky M4A4.
Definitely.
-
Painted samples from our assembled TS1 plastic...
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Painted%20190808-01_zpsrrs7dqwm.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Painted%20190808-02_zpshunsligw.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Painted%20190808-03_zpsnkt7wsfb.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Painted%20190808-04_zpsuyvwyqzg.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Painted%20190808-05_zpswpwvrze7.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Painted%20190808-07_zpsujopijo6.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Painted%20190808-06_zpstmk8pozm.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Painted%20190808-08_zpszcdkimbg.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Painted%20190808-09_zpsayevwgew.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Painted%20190808-10_zpsaempfhmv.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Painted%20190808-11_zpswi2l3es9.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/Firefly%20VC%20amp%20M4A4%20TS1%20Painted%20190808-12_zpsnklr2czf.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Both looking really great . Just an FYI , you painted the Mattock ( pick ) handle a metal color !
(https://i.postimg.cc/LnzCMs31/Firefly-VC-Stowage-front.jpg)[/url
[url=https://postimg.cc/jLK6P4yD](https://i.postimg.cc/jLK6P4yD/Firefly-VC-Stowage-front-2-LI.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/LnzCMs31)
-
Good spot.
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-yF32007xuXw/WFwnnATfbQI/AAAAAAAABq4/UPJlX7qIiucZq0pBrnPbTRaDOIWDTIkRACLcB/s1600/IMG_8573.JPG)
Though museum example colours can be slightly odd.
(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jc970UhtPa8/XER9xw6pPzI/AAAAAAAAEpU/ik1zzZ0sCTs3DUr4E6S1HVU90Xnp_dW0wCLcBGAs/s1600/IMG_5196.JPG)
-
The item molded on the kit hull looked to small in diameter ( like a pry bar ) than a wooden shaft .. so it stood out . Mind you , most kit developers probably don't know what half the stuff on the tank are supposed to be , never mind figuring out what goes in the empty clamps on museum vehicles . You can find a lot ( but not all ) Brit Stowage Sketches on the net , a real god send showing what goes where , and what "should " be stored in the numerous turret and hull bins . It should be an easy fix . remove and add a thicker plastic rod . The Warlord M4 needed the same fix
-
The long-awaited M4A1 plastic test shots finally arrived on our desk at the studio.
When these two sprues are done, our M4 Sherman project will be completed... then we might be able to start the M3 and M7 projects. Hmmm...
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Sprue%20190821-01_zpsmg2zba5v.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Sprue%20190821-02_zpsn8l5dn3h.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Sprue%20190821-03_zpsjscqb181.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Just a question about box contents for the M4A1 (75mm). The box will contain Sprue G (early running gear); small hatch DV and non DV upper hulls and the twin 75mm turrets? Will it also contain later running gear?
With the new lower hull design is there still the same plug and socket arrangement found in previous Shermans?
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8el7LMat6OA/VM5Ix1It-tI/AAAAAAAAA3A/yjfn1MZLi00/s1600/m4a3bits.png)
-
Just a question about box contents for the M4A1 (75mm). The box will contain Sprue G (early running gear); small hatch DV and non DV upper hulls and the twin 75mm turrets? Will it also contain later running gear?
With the new lower hull design is there still the same plug and socket arrangement found in previous Shermans?
To my best knowledge, the "roadwheel & tracks" are still all plug-n-play compatible; even though we need to create a new lower hull for the M4A1 and future M3/M7 projects.
-
Very cool to see the early M4A1 components at last. Finally I can do some Alamein-era British Shermans.
This will come with a turret sprue and a sprue with the later tracks, right?
-
This will come with a turret sprue and a sprue with the later tracks, right?
Correct!
-
Sprue G: Will be used as the lower chassis for the M3 Lee/Grant and M7 Priest.
We are one sprue closer to a M3 Lee/Grant kit.
Along with many others, I have plans for these.
Keep up the good work!
-
These sprues look very nice, Rubicon. I look forward to your M4A1 releases.
-
This will come with a turret sprue and a sprue with the later tracks, right?
Correct!
Excellent.
-
Test assembled M4A1s from our plastic test-shot done!
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Primed%20190825-01_zps9xfcqb2b.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Primed%20190825-02_zpszvwil8rp.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Primed%20190825-03_zpsobrltbm9.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Primed%20190825-04_zpsqb1xuo9h.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Primed%20190825-05_zpsmppo3r0o.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Primed%20190825-06_zpslpaggn9h.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Primed%20190825-07_zps7hqvoxyr.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
They look great. :)
-
So pretty. Soon I’ll be able to finish off my battalion.
-
Very, very nice Rubicon. I can't wait until you release them!!!
-
Excellent.
-
The early M4A1 looks superb. I appreciate the fact that Rubicon produce so many kits with options like this.
If I have a minor criticism it’s the one piece light guards but I can live with that.
-
So.. I know I’ve asked this many times (on here and in person) and I was told it probably won’t happen. And I know after the A1 and A4 is released, some people will be glad to see the back of Sherman’s.. but..
Can we please have an M3A3(75) kit? Preferably with small and large hatch versions?
I know they can be kit bashed from other kits, but the A3 is the odd one out by not having its own 75mm and 76mm kits.
If you don’t have the small hatch hull, it’s just a “simple” job of box art and boxes, as all the frames exist already (although I’m aware that boxes and box art isn’t cheap as people think).
Pretty please?
-
Our M4 Digital Library project is almost drawing to a close soon... Both M4A1 and M4A4 are close to releasing!
Anyone who has special request(s) on the decal sheet for the upcoming M4A1/M4A1(76) and M4A4/Firefly VC can drop your comment below.
If you have ARTWORK that you would like to include on the sheet, please attach references for us to review. Enjoy the fun!
;)
-
Of course, keep the standard white stars and markings (serial numbers and what not), but maybe a few yellow stars and markings wouldn't hurt. For something like US Sherman tanks in North Africa for example.
Unfortunately, yellow is sometimes a difficult color to work with at times, this includes decals.
(https://www.team-yankee.com/Portals/0/all_images/FightingFirst/Store/UBX55-07.png)
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/w1n4GKjj/20200511-173802.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/w1n4GKjj)
If you could, please add a mailed fist surrounded by lightning bolts like this, in addition to the yellow stars ,yellow company insignia,yellow identification stripe, and maybe some blue drab registration numbers.
-
Still very much a WIP for the M4A1 decal sheet, this is NOT FINAL!
The printer might not like it because they are tightly packed, might need to take away some for printing.
Tried something new to include "boxes" to group things together for single-vehicle (historical-wise) use.
What do you think?
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/53/e6/69esTlXG_t.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
WOW!!! That is a great sheet. Hopefully you can keep a lot of it. Great work, Rubicon!
-
Looks great . That should keep the early war US modelers happy
-
Still very much a WIP for the M4A1 decal sheet, this is NOT FINAL!
The printer might not like it because they are tightly packed, might need to take away some for printing.
Tried something new to include "boxes" to group things together for single-vehicle (historical-wise) use.
Understood.
What do you think?
Its a beautiful thing.
-
Looks nice, what about other users though?
-
The printer replied about the "boxing" issue... cannot be done -AND- too crowded! Now going back to the drawing board!
Looks nice, what about other users though?
Still needed to add Commonwealth and Allies onto the sheet... that portion had not been done yet.
:(
-
You could eliminate a few of the decals and still have a decent early war American decal sheet -
1) The armored division signs, the red yellow blue triangles with associated numbers. I don't remember seeing too many pictures of those on vehicles in combat.
2) The company decals, the yellow bar with small circle, 'A' thru 'I'
listed on your sheet,are all the same decals , just printed at different angles. You could just print ,for example, the decals 'D,E and F' ,and turn them at angles, or cut to make the ends shorter, if needed,
to use on the kit for different companys.
3) I've only seen pictures of the 'mailed fist with lightening bolts' insignia in color, not outlined in white. You could include the outlined in white fist , but you only need one of each, as I've only seen pictures of those painted on the upper hull, and have never seen more than one per tank.
Since you have to go back to the beginning on the sheet, could you make the names on Wardaddy, Honky Tonk and Dixie Bell in yellow instead of white? The 1/35th decal sets and color profiles that I have seen of M4A1's in North Africa are in yellow. Also,please add a yellow stripe to go around the turrets in the same yellow as the star insignia. Yellow decal sheets aren't always the same tint of yellow from different decal manufacturers. The yellow stars and stripes would probably have painted at the same time, from the same can of paint, so it would be nice if they were the same tint of yellow.
Thanks
-
Thanks Hoffmn, will look into that after the M4A4/Firefly VC decal sheet is done.
;)
-
Preliminary design of the decal sheet for M4A4 / Firefly VC had been completed.
Had included 6 to 7 individual tanks from UK and NZ, plus a Chinese M4A4.
Should cover most divisions with M4A4 or Firefly for UK, Canada, NZ, North Africa and Poland. Comments?
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/27/01/CdvAM3Z8_t.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
If the other decal sheet got tagged "boxing" issue... cannot be done -AND- too crowded because of crowding, I have a strong feeling that this one may suffer some similar issues. But it looks good.
-
If the other decal sheet got tagged "boxing" issue... cannot be done -AND- too crowded because of crowding, I have a strong feeling that this one may suffer some similar issues. But it looks good.
The "boxing" issue was that the ink will not stay (dry) on the backing paper. To do so, we need those lines to be treated like any other decals.
As for spacing between decals, as long as we keep the standard that the printer agreed, we should be okay.
-
That decal sheet looks great!
A few thoughts about the British tactical signs ...
1. You have the red and white 7th Armoured Division desert rat, but the 1944 NWE armoured brigade regiment numbers (50,51, 52, 53. That's a problem because the armoured regiments of that division used Cromwells not Shermans during that campaign. There were a few Shermans in 7th Armd during that campaign but they were things like artillery observation tanks with dummy guns and Royal Artillery regiment numbers (not those white on red armoured regiment ones). 7th Armd did use Shermans in North Africa and Italy but you would have different regiment numbers for 1942-43: 40, 86 and 67 (also in white on a red background) for back then.
2. Of course the numbers 50, 51, 52, and 53 work for the 11th Armoured and Guards Armoured Division during the NWE campaign, since their armoured regiments were equipped with Shermans. But the 40, 86, and 67 would still be useful for people modelling Sherman equipped armoured divisions in North Africa and Italy.
3. I'm not sure the 45 on green over blue is of any use. That's the armoured recce regiment of an armoured division from 1944 onwards, since the 7th, 11th, and Guards armoured divisions ALL had Cromwells in that role not Shermans. I don't think the 45 was used for that role 1943/4 in Italy but would have to double check. It's niche even if it was!
-
Thanks, Eclaireur. We will look into this and might make some changes if needed. With the extra numbers, we might have to take away some other designs. Being that said, we just try to make this sheet as generic as possible with a few specific tank designs.
-
With the extra numbers, we might have to take away some other designs
yes indeed - understand completely. hence I was nominating the 45 for the chop, since I'm not sure it's usable on a Sherman. I would argue also that the 40 (an HQ tac sign) is probably superfluous. I'm not sure what formation sign the yellow triangle is, and maybe a Canadian brigade sign too many?
That would make room for the 40, 86, and 67 which were pretty widely used in North Africa and early days of Italy. Almost all decal sheets seem to have the 50-53 numbers which are correct if you're doing D-Day onwards but then inevitably appear on people's 1943 or 1942 models, for which they are not correct. Or to put it another way ... if you don't put those other tac signs on you're not really giving people the option of accurately decorating a pre-DDay tank from a British armoured division.
EC
-
p.s.
the 40, 86 and 67 tactical signs are correct between the autumn of 1942 and the conclusion of the north African campaign. However I think a different numbering scheme may have been used for armoured regiments in armoured divisions in Italy. Will look into it.
EC
-
Revised decal for M4A1... now double-size our normal decal sheet.
Still a WIP with some minor changes that we would like to amend, but we like the current selections.
Will probably remove the scorpions and replace them with some British vehicle numbers.
With this sheet, we will have US, UK, Canada, New Zealand, Free French, and Polish.
What do you think?
PS: Going to keep the tank "names" white and not yellow as all the reference illustrations from our books are white.
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/1d/a8/ocHsVh93_t.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
PS: Going to keep the tank "names" white and not yellow as all the reference illustrations from our books are white.
While there are very few books on markings for M4A1 tanks in North Africa, Under the Gun 2 'First Blood, US 1st Armored Division in Tunisia' from Firefly Collection by the Oliver Publishing Group show the tank names of 'War Daddy II', 'Dixie Belle' and 'Honky Tank' as being in Yellow, not White.
The Star decal 1/35 sheet also shows 'War Daddy II' in Yellow as well. I did not say 'all' tank names were in Yellow, just those three that you show on your upcoming Sherman decal sheet from the US 1st Armored Division, 1st Armored Regiment.
'Elowee', 'Hannible' 'Eternity'and 'Electric' are all in White.
-
This is from "The Sherman at War" book by Steven Zaloga published by Concord, 2000.
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/d1/42/qkwtA48j_t.jpg) (http://imgbox.com/qkwtA48j)
As for "Dixie Belle", the decal sheet from Asuka Model is white, and for "Honky Tong", the Dragon decal sheet is white too.
Anyway, we will look more into this issue before we finalise anything before sending the file to print next week.
-
I don't have the 1/35 Dragon or the 1/35 Asuka kits to reference.Thanks for checking into it,like you said before, it is difficult to tell dirty white from yellow, along with red from black in black and white pictures
-
I don't have the 1/35 Dragon or the 1/35 Asuka kits to reference.Thanks for checking into it,like you said before, it is difficult to tell dirty white from yellow, along with red from black in black and white pictures
That's very true, particularly all the historical B&W pictures for "Honky Tong" was different angles of the burnt tank, not much to follow regarding colour. However, "War Daddy II" is a different story. It was captured by the Germans, and they had sprayed "white" letterings on the M4A1 hull just above the "War Daddy II" name. The name was definitely of a "different" white; was it "yellow" or just "white with dust" is another story. We will continue to look into this before we send the decal to the printer.
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/w7Dkbvkq/tac35025-9-1.png) (https://postimg.cc/w7Dkbvkq)
I don't collect or build 1/35 scale kits, but while looking up the Asuka kit that you referenced, I found an image of the 1/35 Tasca M4A1 kit that had decals in both white and yellow for War Daddy and Dixie Belle
I guess that they weren't sure either, so printed them in both colors.
-
As our M4A1 and M4A4 new releases are drawing near, you can do some planning for your M4 collection based on the information we are providing here... We hope you find these useful!
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/cc/ee/mVgwJl0t_t.jpg)
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/3f/31/RnLHeSQQ_t.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
I don't collect or build 1/35 scale kits, but while looking up the Asuka kit that you referenced, I found an image of the 1/35 Tasca M4A1 kit that had decals in both white and yellow for War Daddy and Dixie Belle
I guess that they weren't sure either, so printed them in both colors.
We do understand getting the colour right is what we should be doing, but we also had to consider making the decals to be useful for others who are not so concerned about history but rather they can use these "names" for just their tabletop tank for any period. Hence, "white" seems to be a more logical choice for us.
-
The final version of the M4A1 and M4A4 decal sheet... Need to send them to the printer soon to meet our deadline!
Any more comments?
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/2f/ef/wV9NWWJg_t.jpg)
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/c3/0b/sG9r2Spg_t.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
That production timeline is very useful.
-
The final version of the M4A1 and M4A4 decal sheet... Need to send them to the printer soon to meet our deadline!
Any more comments?
Not sure what the deadline is, but this coming weekend when I have more time I will take a closer look. However, I am no expert on British markings (I have a few really good books on the topic), so my focus will be on the American and Soviet markings... oops, no Soviet decals. ;)
No worries, I have lots of leftover soviet decals from other Rubicon Models kits. :D
Except for the yellow verses white issue discussed earlier, everything looks good so far. I will look at these with more interest this coming weekend, and if I find any major issues or critical errors, I will post it here on Sunday.
Why only just two stars? :(
What I can't understand is why you (Rubicon Models) did not include three stars - at least for the 8mm and 6mm stars. Believe it or not, having three stars is more useful for a wider range of typical/historical markings. This is only a problem with the stars that have the white circles. If someone just needs plain white stars (no circle), a good knife/scalpel and a steady hand is all you need to get more plain stars.
For an example of seeing too many stars, I should scan and send this wartime photo in one of my books that shows some Sherman tanks each with five (and maybe six) white starts. Granted, this was far from the norm.
-
I see a few changes on the Commonwealth sheet - well done!
The red 67 tactical sign allows the modeller to mark the tank for the later phase of the north African campaign (eg 5 RTR in 7th Armoured Division) and the 86 was one of the regimental signs used during the early part of the Italian campaign. Also some decals for the NZ armoured brigade in Italy. And of course the standard armoured divisional numbers (51-53) for NWE and latter phase of the Italian campaign. The 3 digit regimental numbers allow you to model 4th (121 etc), 8th (993+) and 33rd (172+) Armoured Brigades in NWE.
Very nice!
EC
-
Would you have more than two stars the same size?
-
Looking at wartime pictures , yes . Some tanks seen with same size stars on hull sides , front and engine deck . Some seen with 2 foot (?) stars on hull . a smaller ( 10 inch ? ) star on front and rear and a large star on engine deck or turret top . Some had solid circle , some broken circle , some no circle , sometimes a mix on the same tank !!! Best to check references to see what the unit you want to depict did and when . If you need extra stars let us on the site know , probably someone will have ones they don't need . Personally I really don't like to use the stars or if I use them I tend to paint over them as the troops did . Big white star - aiming point for German guns !!!
-
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/3f/31/RnLHeSQQ_t.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
Inspired by this I made my own version as a google sheet that also covers suspension variants and the composites (which always get rolled into M4 which is a shame as it’s my favourite version). No prod numbers but there to visualise how when the main visual changes went in and out of production.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15LoHxJSpfJaXGSgc0EqDeUSmu9oHbkKRulAO4xE1Cbk/edit
(https://i.postimg.cc/FkLBTfXJ/C5346-D38-76-F7-4-DED-8-DCA-A9-C6-FE4-D79-F8.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/FkLBTfXJ)
-
Nice one RFT!!!
-
Nice work RFT, and the additional information about the VVSS and HVSS with small or large hatches should be helpful for those that need more information in determining which model kits to get to make any specific version.
Because the M4A1 kit will offer tracks with the early boggie, it also might be helpful to some to note when they switched from the early to the later boggie. Note however, that the early boggie can be still found on combat M4 Medium tanks long after they stopped installing them at the factory.
(https://i.postimg.cc/FkLBTfXJ/C5346-D38-76-F7-4-DED-8-DCA-A9-C6-FE4-D79-F8.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/FkLBTfXJ)
-
Updated with M3 track info and DV hulls as well.
(https://i.postimg.cc/0KyrGzWG/Sherman.png) (https://postimg.cc/0KyrGzWG)
-
And those older models served till the end of the war . Here's that M4A1 VVSS knocked out in Nuremberg 1945 as noted in RFT's last post
(https://i.postimg.cc/D8Hf2HqV/R9UkW5s.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/D8Hf2HqV)
-
So, a thought occurred to me relating to our friend in Nuremberg up there. Is there any possibility that the 3-part bolted differential cover might be made available as a separate resin part/pack? As it stands the only way to get it will be to buy an M4A4 kit (and using the diff cover from that renders the rest of the kit unbuildable as an accurate M4A4 as they all had the 3-part cover).
Basically I’m hugely looking forward to getting an M4A1 kit so I’ll be able to have all the major US Army variants covered in my collection but it’d like to build it like the one in the picture. I’d happily pay a few pounds for a part but not a whole kit I’d end up mostly trashing.
-
Test assembled M4A1s from our plastic test-shot done!
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Primed%20190825-01_zps9xfcqb2b.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Primed%20190825-02_zpszvwil8rp.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Primed%20190825-03_zpsobrltbm9.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Primed%20190825-04_zpsqb1xuo9h.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Primed%20190825-05_zpsmppo3r0o.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Primed%20190825-06_zpslpaggn9h.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Primed%20190825-07_zps7hqvoxyr.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
Rubicon had posted test shots of the M4A1 last year
-
The long-awaited M4A1 plastic test shots finally arrived on our desk at the studio.
When these two sprues are done, our M4 Sherman project will be completed... then we might be able to start the M3 and M7 projects. Hmmm...
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Sprue%20190821-01_zpsmg2zba5v.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Sprue%20190821-02_zpsn8l5dn3h.jpg)
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/M4A3%20Sherman/M4A1%20TS1%20Sprue%20190821-03_zpsjscqb181.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
Yeah but the shots of the M4A1 sprues don’t have it. (Unless I’m missing it or it’ll be on another sprue we’ve not seen yet). It’s on the M4A4 Hull sprue.
(Edit) ooh is K05 a 76mm gun for use with small turrets?
-
The test shot spruces don't show the later M-4 suspension units,either. Maybe they didn't include all of the sprues in their post?
-
I thought it was going to have both types of early ( non E8 ) type wheels . or was that another M4 version ? Also , no turret shown so maybe 3 piece nose on that sprue
-
sorry to return us to the M4A$ decal sheet ;)
but I've been checking all the Britain and Commonwealth ones using the standard references such as Hodges, online, etc. The yellow and green triangle I can now see is the 6th South African Armoured Div.
The 171-3 numbers on the brown and blue background had me stumped for a long time. But I see now they are for 1 Canadian Armoured Brigade in Italy. Are you thinking of including a key for all those different tactical signs and which ones being with each other? It's a complex area. Would be happy to write one in return for some models ;D
cheers
EC
-
Seems like there is some confusion as to what sprues are there in the upcoming M4A1 and M4A4 kits.
Here is some basic info... Hope this will clarify some questions.
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/ea/4b/KtnmgJB3_t.jpg)
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/37/2e/ck9RmvCH_t.jpg)
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/d1/1e/30ymxkPh_t.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
That clears things up , thanks
-
Sweet!
Can't wait to get my hands on it now.
-
I realise how late this is but having just got to the point of adding decals to my new Sherman II in 4th Independent Armoured Brigade markings, I've realised the unit flashes for them aren't on the decal sheet.
Obviously this is a niche area to focus on but it seems that adding the 4th AB logo was focused only on the 1940-43 iteration which consisted completely different regiments to the later war.
The relevant numbers for the 1944-45 4th Armoured Brigade units being;
Royal Scots Greys - 122
3rd County of London Yeomanry - 123
44th Battalion Royal Tank Regiment - 124
I see these are on the M4A4 decal sheet so I can easily get that kit for the correct numbers, but something worth considering perhaps?
-
@Feldwebel - It had always been a struggle to include all possible insignias and markings onto a decal sheet for a model kit. This is particularly true when the kit can be used with the Commonwealth, US, or any other lend-lease allies.
In most instances, on the forum (and sometimes on Facebook), we would post our decal sheet design a few days before we send them to print. With feedback and some additional research, we might update the design for more comprehensive coverage of "everything" in general.
TBH, being modellers ourselves, our decal sheet does cover a lot of ground for each kit when compared to other manufacturers on any scale. Don't you agree? ;)
-
Feldwebel , why don't you ask in forum if somebody has those decals to trade or give away ? I'm sure someone on here could mail them to you if they didn't need them . A M4A4 isn't on my to buy list at the moment but will be in a couple of months . And as I only model Canadians or Poles I can let you have them if you still need them then
-
Feldwebel - I can probably sort you out with 4th Armoured Brigade. DM me for what you need.
EC
-
@Feldwebel - It had always been a struggle to include all possible insignias and markings onto a decal sheet for a model kit. This is particularly true when the kit can be used with the Commonwealth, US, or any other lend-lease allies.
In most instances, on the forum (and sometimes on Facebook), we would post our decal sheet design a few days before we send them to print. With feedback and some additional research, we might update the design for more comprehensive coverage of "everything" in general.
TBH, being modellers ourselves, our decal sheet does cover a lot of ground for each kit when compared to other manufacturers on any scale. Don't you agree? ;)
I absolutely agree, and please don't feel like my comment was an attack in any way. The new kits are incredible, and the decal sheet does cover so much.
The lengths you guys go to on feedback is unparalleled and my comment was I think more of frustration that I realised the only correct decal I had right now is made by that other company and thus glossy and oversized.
Basically I was upset that what I had wasn't made by yourselves! ;D
-
@Feldwebel - Not to worry. We always take comments & feedback in a positive manner!
The community here is very helpful as you can see. Feel free to visit as frequently as you can, and enjoy! ;)
-
And those older models served till the end of the war . Here's that M4A1 VVSS knocked out in Nuremberg 1945 as noted in RFT's last post
(https://i.postimg.cc/D8Hf2HqV/R9UkW5s.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/D8Hf2HqV)
Has anyone built this tank with the new M4A1 kit?
I believe the new kit has most everything you need to male this except the steel cages for the sand bag armor. You may also have to source the extended connector track from another kit.
-
The extended track comes as extras in the M4A1(76mm) & M4A3(E8) kits . Only problem is you would have to change the molded in wheel sets as they are the later HVSS type . I don't have any Rubicon Shermans at to check , but their T-34s ( 3 wheel types) matched each other as to placement of track teeth so it was easy to swap them around , hopefully the Shermans are the same
(https://i.postimg.cc/SXKTwYTM/Rubicon-T-34-wheel-swaps.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/SXKTwYTM)
-
The extended track comes as extras in the M4A1(76mm) & M4A3(E8) kits . Only problem is you would have to change the molded in wheel sets as they are the later HVSS type . I don't have any Rubicon Shermans at to check , but their T-34s ( 3 wheel types) matched each other as to placement of track teeth so it was easy to swap them around , hopefully the Shermans are the same
(https://i.postimg.cc/SXKTwYTM/Rubicon-T-34-wheel-swaps.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/SXKTwYTM)
You are correct, it wouldn’t work, the Nuremberg wreck had M3 style bogies. It would be a matter of scratch building the extended end connectors onto the track set provided :0
I just don’t see how I’d be able to swap the boggie units out without damaging the track. If I end up building it I’ll probably just skip the extend end connectors. these tanks also had some remnant features from the north African campaign, like a rack over the engine deck and the welded plates over the air filters.
-
Maybe see if anyone in the Rubicon community has a track set with connecters they don't want , then you can cut them off and super glue them to the early track set . A lot of the connecters are missing ,so it would save you some work . Notice the turret has a late vision commanders hatch , does it also have a loaders hatch ? Wonder if there are other photos of this tank ? The tricky part will be the fire damaged rubber wheels and track pads , maybe build it pre fire ? The bow MG is gone so maybe set on fire after it got knocked out
(https://i.postimg.cc/Cz4L7dR8/R9-Uk-W5s-LI.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/Cz4L7dR8)
-
Maybe see if anyone in the Rubicon community has a track set with connecters they don't want , then you can cut them off and super glue them to the early track set.
Instead of super glue (cyanoacrylate), I would recommend using a good plastic model glue for attaching the bits. Remember, Rubicon Models uses a different and better quality of plastic.
Have a look at this old thread about what glues/cements to use for Rubicon Models.
http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=707.0
When building a RM kit, Tenax-7R is one of my favorites, but I also like Tamiya Extra Thin.
I have not tried it, but I hear Plastic Magic works too.
-
Maybe see if anyone in the Rubicon community has a track set with connecters they don't want , then you can cut them off and super glue them to the early track set . A lot of the connecters are missing ,so it would save you some work . Notice the turret has a late vision commanders hatch , does it also have a loaders hatch ? Wonder if there are other photos of this tank ? The tricky part will be the fire damaged rubber wheels and track pads , maybe build it pre fire ? The bow MG is gone so maybe set on fire after it got knocked out
(https://i.postimg.cc/Cz4L7dR8/R9-Uk-W5s-LI.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/Cz4L7dR8)
Ripley, there are tons of photos of this vehicle online. Apparently the tank lay wrecked there for a long time and was moved around a couple times to accommodate a victory parade event. It was a curiosity to the GIs in that area so many people took pictures on it and around it. In the pictures as time passed, the vehicle degraded as it was moved around, probably with bulldozers and also maybe even scavengers took things off of it? I think nowadays as a modeling subject it fascinates people to think a survivor from north africa could've made it all the way to germany.
The tank had some fascinating features too. It still had the African mods but the early low bustle it came with had been refurbished with the late shield and mantlet, cheek armor, and the late cupola. Interestingly tho the hull add on armor was not kit issue, it looks like it was a “homemade” custom job. The cages for the sand bag armor had similar construction as other tanks from the 756TB.
A wrecked version would be very challenging for me without help from AM stuff. I’d be happy to build it pre-wreck. Unfortunately, my PC crashed years ago and I lost the file I had on the tank with all it’s information and all the images I had collected a lot of images of it. I had it backed up on a memory stick but I think that’s gone missing :(
Once I found a german modeling forum that had a big thread on it, including a snapshot of a dead german soldier some 30-40 yards off to the right of the tank. I presume he may have destroyed the tank at the cost of his life. The image shoes him covered with a blanket and the tank in the background the turret had started turning in his direction but didn’t make it all the way around so presumably someones else shot the panzerfaust wielding german but not soon enough. I wish I could find the thread again there were tons of images collected there of the tank.
-
Maybe see if anyone in the Rubicon community has a track set with connecters they don't want , then you can cut them off and super glue them to the early track set.
Instead of super glue (cyanoacrylate), I would recommend using a good plastic model glue for attaching the bits. Remember, Rubicon Models uses a different and better quality of plastic.
Have a look at this old thread about what glues/cements to use for Rubicon Models.
http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=707.0
When building a RM kit, Tenax-7R is one of my favorites, but I also like Tamiya Extra Thin.
I have not tried it, but I hear Plastic Magic works too.
Thanks tracks,
I recently built the M4A1 and it’s an excellent beautiful little kit, the tamiya super thin worked great, almost too great. Super glue occasionally allows me to snap things off whole without breaking them off when I make a mistake but that tamiya bonds the RM plastic so well that you can’t separate parts after proper glueing and bonding, they seem welded.
I chose the A1 kit because there is no compromise on rear track detail. It’s surprising RM didn’t release T51 tracks as those would also require no compromise in detail and there are tons of images of different sherman variants using them (including M4A3E2) during the war.
-
Interesting text here: http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a1mlw/grizzly.html (http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a1mlw/grizzly.html)
Montreal Locomotive (or its subcontractor) used standard rolled armor appliqué plates made to fit welded hull Shermans. They were then cut to fit the contours of the Grizzly. With 5 sections, the plate on the right front (1) seems rather elaborate, but is what is most commonly seen on surviving examples. Number 59 on display in Poland is the single unit we have encountered with a "record" 7 section plate.
(http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a1mlw/Grizzly_27.JPG)
-
Wonder if there are other photos of this tank ?
(https://i.postimg.cc/Cz4L7dR8/R9-Uk-W5s-LI.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/Cz4L7dR8)
Here you go Ripley, enjoy:)
(https://i.postimg.cc/VScN9LSB/2-BC8-AA06-0254-45-C7-86-CD-8-BFCD43522-D3.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/VScN9LSB)
(https://i.postimg.cc/K1TzggY8/4-D58-D6-F4-CB15-418-B-8875-4757-C2039-D51.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/K1TzggY8)
(https://i.postimg.cc/2VV3rtRv/7096-E875-7-EAE-4910-A006-7-F124-A383096.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/2VV3rtRv)
(https://i.postimg.cc/mtJkDSBn/DB41-ADF5-9-FC6-47-DA-AEF2-76633-DE99947.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/mtJkDSBn)
-
Very nice , a couple there I hadn't seen before . That 1st picture gives a nice turret top view which when blown up shows it didn't have a loader's hatch, at least that's what I see . I would think the dead guy had no part in the destruction of the tank , unless he was killed by another tank / troops while running away , he's way out of Pfaust range for that Sherman . Might have build the tank in 1/35 as Bronco and a couple of other companies have single link track sets that would work as fire damaged , in 1/56 , not a chance ::)
-
Very nice , a couple there I hadn't seen before . That 1st picture gives a nice turret top view which when blown up shows it didn't have a loader's hatch, at least that's what I see . I would think the dead guy had no part in the destruction of the tank , unless he was killed by another tank / troops while running away , he's way out of Pfaust range for that Sherman . Might have build the tank in 1/35 as Bronco and a couple of other companies have single link track sets that would work as fire damaged , in 1/56 , not a chance ::)
Ripley, I apologize for not being clear about your hatch question in my earlier post, yes, the tank had no loader hatch, it was a remanufactured early turret. There was some debate on the old missing lynx site as to whether the pistol port was welded shut too.
About the dead guy, there is a concrete or stone ledge he may have been hiding behind up ahead and then tried to run back across and behind the ledge using it for cover before bolting away from the area and behind the stands. But someone hit him from behind and he fell backwards after being hit? On the last picture if you look at the ledge below the standing GIs it certainly appears high enough for someone to take cover behind it, maybe 2-3 foot high? He/she lays about 50 yards from tank and the maximum listed range for the panzerfaust was 100 meters. Also, judging by the thin forearm, (the boots don’t look very big) my guess is this German soldier was very young, like a teenager or very thin from malnutrition. The forearm just looks so thin almost feminine.
The tank was hit on the right rear directly behind the gas tanks (very small hole) but appears to have burned all the way to the front. My theory (a lot of theories and speculation here) is that the tank caught fire and the crew managed to bail out. Then the tank then burned for a long time and completely after the ammunition lit up. I think the right sponson floor directly under the ammo racks is blown downwards too but hard to tell from the photos, it could just be a shadow. According to someone on missing lynx there was color film footage (british pathe documentary?) of the wreck and that most of the olive drab had been burned clean off the tank creating a very rusty range of colors on the bare metal.
This tank would not have had wet stowage even with the remanufacturing of the turret and add-on armor. The sand bags were blown clean off the right side as they took the brunt of the blast the jet then penetrated thru all that and entered the engine compartment. The co-driver hatch appears partially opened but was directly under the gun so hopefully the co-driver found another way out. On the right side hull only a couple pieces of sand bag frame remain welded on the vehicles side. A large section of the frame sits right next to the tank on the grass. On the left the tank burned as well causing the sand to fall to the ground next to the suspension as the sand bags were consumed in the blaze. But the sand armor brackets look intact on that side. The tank features North African style rack over the engine deck and air filter armor covers. It clearly had rubber block track, my guess either T48 or T51
-
After the tank was moved and who knows how much time passed before it was finally removed. The tank also appears to have an old Ammo crate welded on the rear hull top behind the engine deck rack. Probably used as crew or tool storage. If you pay attention to the brush guards on the rear lights, they were a very odd type that flared out in a circular fashion. The guys on missing lynx were able to pinpoint the exact factory that the tank was manufactured in just by that detail. Sorry, didn’t save the thread and it’s been years, I don’t remember the finer details :( Everything I’ve written here is from memory things that stood out from that thread.
Steven Zaloga has speculated that this tank belonged to the 756TB because they were in the area in 1945 and because of the style of cages for the sand bags. Unfortunately no one seems to have any information about an after action report involving a Sherman being destroyed at Zeppelin field nurnburg Germany 1945. I would love to know the details about this tanks demise. It’s kind tragic that a 2 year combat survivor initial production M4A1 DV would be lost in the last few days of the war after making thru North Africa, Sicily?, Italy?, Southern France, Hurtgen Forest area, and into Germany only to then be destroyed. Zaloga also speculated it might’ve been a HQ tank which would explain the long journey.
(https://i.postimg.cc/QKVkNgSk/2-C0-A5-E3-F-5903-4-A33-955-E-C1882-BBC1572.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/QKVkNgSk)
(https://i.postimg.cc/DJxPKpQw/D9-C9-E685-D42-B-46-B6-9-D21-CBE0-F585-AB95.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/DJxPKpQw)
(https://i.postimg.cc/cvhtvgjv/49-A90673-5520-48-F3-B4-F0-022338473444.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/cvhtvgjv)
(https://i.postimg.cc/yggDpfNR/C0-A00-C62-F775-4-F0-B-8-B17-D5892794-F9-F2.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/yggDpfNR)
(https://i.postimg.cc/94fRZX5J/DDDCDFDC-223-E-42-C9-9255-5175746-A2-F69.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/94fRZX5J)
-
For people who are not sure how to fit the 3-piece Different Housing onto other M4 Sherman kits, we have created a step-by-step document for you to follow through... plus an overview M4 Sherman guide for ease of references.
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/ee/32/Ypykdr2l_t.jpg)
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/b6/b9/lkRgS4cf_t.jpg)
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/45/19/4IBRrBpH_t.jpg)
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/36/f5/g3hroApw_t.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
By popular demand and requests, we are bringing you a new release soon... M4A3(75)W / M4A3(105) Sherman.
This should fill in the missing link in our M4 Sherman range without using our "Mix & Match" arrangement.
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/3c/1c/0xYPxC8o_t.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
great.
Is it possible to have the mud pare for the HVSS one in this release ?
-
Cool.
-
Can we have the VVSS with different wheels this time. The new M4A1 kit with the early cast wheels was promising but you kept the old VVSS from the other kits with the stamped wheels.
It would be nice too have VVSS with the cast wheels and even the late disc type as this will be the last Sherman RM will do.
...... and who has not got plenty of spare tracks from the M4A3 kits.
-
This is essentially a repackaged M4A3 with the 75/105 turret. There are no new moulds involved.
However, with this new release, you can build 5 US M4A3 variants and 3 British versions:
- M4A3(75)W
- M4A3(105)
- M4A3(75)W HVSS
- M4A3(105) HVSS
- M4A3(105) Flamethrower PCA-CWS-HS
- Sherman IV
- Sherman IVB
- Sherman IVBY
Enjoy!
;)
-
Hi Rubicon peeps,
if you want variants of the Sherman how about the Israeli variants especially the M-50, M-51, this would make the middle east wars more accessable to gamers (mod kits for the half track could also be done) and would give your T-55s another potential foe and give modellers more subjects.
-
By popular demand and requests, we are bringing you a new release soon... M4A3(75)W / M4A3(105) Sherman.
This should fill in the missing link in our M4 Sherman range without using our "Mix & Match" arrangement.
(https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/3c/1c/0xYPxC8o_t.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
This is nice because now you can build a late 75mm M4A3 from the ETO without buying two kits. Also this kit will build the late war M4A3E8 105mm that the marines used in the pacific very late in WW2.
Unfortunately part D22 (the sharp nose FDA) is missing here. That final drive cover is only offered on the 76mm turret sprue. ALL large hatch shermans received the final FDA casting, the M4 hybrid, the large hatch M4, and these late M4A3s that still featured the 75mm or the 105mm guns. Even some mid production hull shermans were getting that final FDA before they switched to large hatch hulls. Part D22 should have been included as an option on most of the sherman kits.
A resin version of part D22 is sorely needed to accurately build many of your wonderful sherman kits. If I knew how to cast resin I would invest in making my own just to complete these tanks. Please consider making a resin version of part D22 so that folks like me that want the correct part on their late war shermans can purchase it to complete those kits, thanks rubicon!
-
Hi All,
Not sure where to put this so I thought here was most likely to get visibility.
I'm after a set of tracks with extended end connectors - "duckbill tracks" - and I hoped someone might have a spare (or even two) I could procure?
Apologies if this is out of line; Mods delete if so...
Dave