Proposed Q4/15 New Releases...

[Rubicon Models]

For those who are interested... Now that our Q3/15 new releases are just around the corner, we are already starting work on our proposed Q4/15 projects! Not all will be on-time for Christmas, but we surely hope a majority of these projects will make it! As for our Q1/16 list... Any suggestions?



Comments or suggestions?

[Pinky]

That's a very solid line-up of releases for Q4.  Not so keen on the Hetzer (sneakily buried at the bottom of the list), but it looks as though a lot of people want one.

It seems to me that, apart from a truck, the Americans will be quite well covered by the end of the year.  German subjects will inevitably dominate.  But the Brits and Soviets are a bit lacking (even with that very nice looking Studebaker/Katyusha in the works).

Suggestions for Q1/2016 (trying to get a good spread of subjects)

- German Panzer III Ausf F/G/H, with parts to build a command version, and optional parts for the topicalised version used by the Afrika Korps. 

- German SdKfz 231/232 8-wheeler, with parts to build the basic version, the "Funk" version with the bedstead arial, and (if possible) the SdKfz 233 "Stummel" version.

- British Humber armoured car (the Daimler is arguably better looking vehicle, but the Humber saw wider service).  With parts to build a Mk II, III and IV.

- British Sherman VC Firefly (on an M4A4 chassis, with parts to build a basic M4A4).  Maybe include some British-style stowage, like extra tracks and spare wheels, stowage boxes etc.

- Soviet SU-122/SU-85 (or, alternatively, an SU-152).  An IS-2 would be nice, but I feel that a Soviet SP gun might be more popular, and if you did the SU-122/85 you've already got the chassis done.

- maybe a French or Italian tank, like a Somua or M13/40 (perhaps with parts to build a Semovente).  I do wonder how popular French armour would be though.  Italian armour might be a better seller, but that's just a guess.  It would mean another subject covered in boltheads...

- at some point fairly soon you also need to do both a US and a British truck.  And other interesting stuff like artillery (probably best to start with anti-tank guns, since by then you'll presumably be experienced at designing figures). 

[elias.tibbs]

That's a nice line up that pinky suggested.

An M4/M4A1 could be useful for British/US players too. As well as jeeps (I promise I'll stop asking for them!).

I think Japan needs some love next year, even if it's just one tank.

[Patrick R]

Oooh a Hetzer Tank Destroyer ...

Italian M13 Would be nice.  Churchill, especially the AVRE/Crocodile/ARK/Bridgelayer versions just for the sheer hell of it.

Lee/Grant

[H0ffmn]

I definetly would purchase some of the above mentioned vehicles, especially the Panzer III G/H, the M4A1 Sherman, the Italian M-13/40, and the M-3 Lee/Grant. Pretty much anything used in North Africa!!

[bull-nut]

I second the call for an early M4 sherman, especially if it also includes parts for the Sherman 1c firefly. Not as numerous as the Vc, but I think that just adds to its charm, not to mention that the running gear and lower hull could maybe be re-used for the M3 Lee/Grant?

[Suetonius Paullinus]

I hope the Pacific Theatre will see some love as well next year.

A Hetzer is great news indeed :-)

Cheers

SP

[Pinky]

I second the call for an early M4 sherman, especially if it also includes parts for the Sherman 1c firefly. Not as numerous as the Vc, but I think that just adds to its charm, not to mention that the running gear and lower hull could maybe be re-used for the M3 Lee/Grant?

I'd also be very keen to have an M4A1, but unfortunately the Firefly wasn't built on the M4A1 hull, and I want a Firefly more!  So I suggested the M4A4 - even though this would mean that Rubicon had to design a new set of tracks and running gear, as the M4A4 hull was longer.

An alternative would be the late cast/rolled M4A1 "hybrid" hull, as this was also used for the Firefly conversion.  It's a good looking tank.  The hybrid M4 was also used by the US Army, and quite a few saw service in the Pacific.  But it wouldn't fill that "early Sherman" gap.  Of course, Warlord already do a mid-production M4 which is suitable for the British and the US Army.

I suspect another truck would actually sell better...

[Rubicon Models]

Thanks everyone for the input on our 2016 Wish List... In fact many of the vehicles are under our radar and some are even being researched now! We will revise our Wish List accordingly.  2016 is going to be a busy year for us.  As promised last year, we have shifted our focus from the Germans to Americans, and next year, we will once again switch to a new ally... be it Russians or British!  God save the Queen!

We are now in the final stage of preparing supporting material for our upcoming new releases - this include box art for the packaging, all new waterslide decals, and most important... assembly instructions! We are also putting the final touches on the moulds to make sure everything we engineered are there!




While we are busy readying the secondary stuff, our in-house painter, Kent, is busy painting up samples for our Facebook and website pages.  Currently painting the M3 and M3A1... will post the painted vehicles soon!

[bull-nut]

Pinky: I'm aware that the M4A1 wasn't considered suitable for the firefly conversion, something to do with the wrong mantlet or traverse gear i think ( both?), which is why I didn't ask for an early Sherman II. It was the Sherman I exclusively that I was after, the problem with the M4A4, even with rubicons excellent work on multi variant kits, is that I think 3 turrets and 4 guns may be two much even for them to fit into one kit. I suppose the Fireflies loaders hatch/radio box could be  seperate components, dropping the parts count to only 2 turrets, but we are still looking at 4 different guns, unless the 17lbr muzzlebrake was a seperate part as well, using the 76mm M1A1 barrel, which could compromise the accuracy rubicon are striving for. Now if someone were to release aftermarket conversions at a reasonable price....

How on earth did I forget the Sherman I hybrid? Does anyone make one at the moment?

Now if you were to continue with the early/mid war theme for the we Brits and do an A11 Matilda for France/North Africa?

[Pinky]

Pinky: I'm aware that the M4A1 wasn't considered suitable for the firefly conversion, something to do with the wrong mantlet or traverse gear i think ( both?), which is why I didn't ask for an early Sherman II. It was the Sherman I exclusively that I was after, the problem with the M4A4, even with rubicons excellent work on multi variant kits, is that I think 3 turrets and 4 guns may be two much even for them to fit into one kit. I suppose the Fireflies loaders hatch/radio box could be  seperate components, dropping the parts count to only 2 turrets, but we are still looking at 4 different guns, unless the 17lbr muzzlebrake was a seperate part as well, using the 76mm M1A1 barrel, which could compromise the accuracy rubicon are striving for. Now if someone were to release aftermarket conversions at a reasonable price....

How on earth did I forget the Sherman I hybrid? Does anyone make one at the moment?

Now if you were to continue with the early/mid war theme for the we Brits and do an A11 Matilda for France/North Africa?

Yes, I see that's what you meant - sorry.  It's interesting that noone (not even British armour experts like David Fletcher) seems to know precisely why certain Sherman models were considered unsuitable for the Firefly conversion.

An M4/Sherman I would be a good basis for a kit which could also be built as a Firefly.  Realistically, that would involve 2 turrets and 2 guns, which Rubicon did comfortably with their M4A3 kit.  They might struggle to include enough parts for an early M4 as well though, as that would mean another set of tracks with M3 bogies, and a different hull (or at least a different glacis), as well as sandshields (if they were to do it properly).       

I think there's a resin Hybrid IC Firefly model in 1/56 scale.

[bull-nut]

According to the Osprey book by Fletcher,  the narrow (M34) mantlet was considered unsuitable, probably because of difficulties in fitting the 17lbr, as were diesel engines(the M4A2 was mostly used by the USMC?) and electric and one of the designs of hydraulic traverse.By the time you take all these into account, it only leaves the M4/M4 Hybrid, and M4A4 as potential doner vehicles IF they have the Oilgear hydraulic traverse system. As I recall, the US stopped production of the M4 fairly early in the European campain, much to the chagrin of the British who quite liked it, which is why most Fireflies seem to be converted from the M4A4 (Sherman V). Of course all of this is conjecture unless we can speak to someone who was actually involved in the conversion program at a fairly high level, and that isn't going to happen for obvious reasons.

My reference to 4 guns included the US M1A1 76mm and the 105mm Howitzer, though the 76 may have not been used on M4?

[Pinky]

Yes, I have Fletcher's book too.  He doesn't seem to know why the M4A2 was unsuitable (the British used over 5000 of them, although their numbers were dwindling by 1944), and the unsuitability of the narrow mantlet ruled out earlier versions of all marks.  And it's not clear which Shermans had power traverse, so that doesn't help much.

Mark Hayward's book has some more information, including a quote from a letter which states "Not all 75mm Shermans are capable of mounting the 17-pdr gun", but the letter doesn't say why.  Hayward ends up speculating as well as to why certain marks weren't considered appropriate.   

M4 production didn't end early; it switched to the "hybrid" type (in late 1943) and 105mm version.  The US Army doesn't seem to have used the "hybrid" M4 much (if at all) in NW Europe, but the British did, and the IC Hybrid Firefly seems to have been reasonably common judging from photographic evidence. 

The M4 wasn't fitted with the 76mm gun, and the 105mm version of the M4 also had the revised 47 degree glacis - including that version as an option would be a stretch.

I guess my 'ideal' British Sherman kit would have parts for several different versions of the M4, including an early version as used in North Africa (although maybe not the initial version with the M3-style bogies), the "hybrid" hull, and the Firefly.  But it would probably require too many sprues to be doable. 

[Pinky]

Just read Rubicon's Facebook page, and I noticed there were several requests for an SdKfz 222 and an SdKfz 232.  I wonder which one would be more popular?  I think the 8-wheelers are immensely cool vehicles, but maybe a lot of gamers prefer the smaller (cheaper) 222?

There's strong support for a US and British truck - I suspect they'd sell better than any AFV (especially considering how well-received the Opel Blitz was).  There's also support for more Soviet subjects.

I also noticed that the Hetzer got an extremely positive response - obviously a savvy decision by Rubicon to release that one!

[ripley]

If Rubicon wants to make a multi version kit then the 8 rad 231 is the way to go . You can have the basic 231 ( don't forget the front  add on armor shield )  , add the frame antenna and you got the 232 . Add a reworked upper hull and a couple of extra support arms and you have the 263 command vehicle . I think the Panzerspahwagon  233   should be a separate kit ( using the short 75mm gun  Rubicon is working on for the 251 ) , and since its an open topped vehicle they could add drivers' seats , steering wheels , ammo , etc and crew .   Not on this this years release schedule of course  .    And while I like the 222 ( got a couple in 1/35th ) it really doesn't have as many cool variants as the 8 rad . Ok, you could do the 221 with the machine gun or 2.8cm sPzB41 , and there was a radio version , the 223 .  Not as cool as the 8 rad , but yea if you make I will buy it