Codename: Sherman 2016 - 3pc Differential Housing Conversion 210122

[Rubicon Models]

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.

[ripley]

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 ) .

[Tracks]

Nice!
This will finish off the Sherman line of kits?

[Jaeger]

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.

[Pinky]

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.     

[ripley]

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 ?

[ultravanillasmurf]

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.

[Eclaireur]

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

[ultravanillasmurf]

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.

[Eclaireur]

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

[elias.tibbs]

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.

[ultravanillasmurf]

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 ^__^.

[ultravanillasmurf]

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
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."

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
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
I will redo the above page when I start on my three Rubicon M4s.

[H0ffmn]

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.



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??

[H0ffmn]

The quote and picture are taken from the Sherman Minutia page under the M4A1 Pacific Car page