DAK Tiger I

[Captain Blood]

Rubicon Tiger I for my burgeoning Western Desert wargaming collection.
I've built it as early production model, although I've cheated slightly by using the mid-production turret top - mainly because I wanted the MG34 and 'swing aside' commander's hatch.
I'll add a Perry panzer commander in due course.
I tried to get the colour to the kind of 'green sand' I saw from photographs of some of the early DAK Tigers.

Only one tiny criticism of an otherwise brilliant kit - the surface moulded-on details of cables, tools etc was indeed extremely fiddly to paint accurately... If Rubicon ever redo this kit, those surface moulded items could really do with a whisker more relief / definition.

I'm hosting these pics on Lead Adventure Forum, a German based forum, so for the pictures I've smudged out the tiny swastikas within the DAK insignia - showing Nazi symbols is still against the law in Germany, and even a miniscule infringement could land the forum owner in legal trouble...












A few close-ups...

[ultravanillasmurf]

Excellent, a very careworn Tiger.

The stowage looks good, but would be concerned about the effect on temperature management of blocking the grills.

I agree about the cables etc, this was one of the first batch of kits to be released. I would prefer them to be separate, as it would make them easier to paint, plus photographs of the early Tigers do not always show them present.

[Pinky]

This Tiger has a lot of personality.  Opinions are divided on whether the greenish colour was actually used, but it's come to be identified with Tigers in Tunisia.  It seems a bit of shame to have used the 'wrong' turret, but I can see why you like it.  Most (but not all) these early Tigers also had different muffler covers and fenders.   

[Marcin]

It seems a bit of shame to have used the 'wrong' turret

Yes, it is in may opinion also quite a shame. Early Tigers are slightly different than late. I could understand these changes on one from Eastern Front. It could happen, that some newer parts has been used to mantle older machine, but in Tunisia it has been the beginning of Tigers service (despite their unfortunate debut on Eastern front of course).

The other thing are markings.
AFAIC Tigers in Tunisia has been part of 501 pz.abt. (Independent panzer brigade) and later their remnants has been included in 504 pz.abt.
Afrika Korps has been part of African forces, but not all forces in Africa has been "Afrika Korps". The 501st was assigned to the 5th Panzer Army, so they hasn't been in Rommel's "Afrika Korps", but under command of Generaloberst Hans-Jürgen von Arnim (8 Dec 1942 - 9 Mar 1943).
So I'd advise you to reconsider changing Afrika Korps markings on this Tiger to 501 pz.abt beautiful stalking tiger:



(but to tell you the truth, I haven't seen it either on any Tunisian Tiger photograph I've seen - I'm not sure, when this logo has been established).

[Captain Blood]

Thanks for the positive feedback 

I agree I have overdone the stowage - and you certainly wouldn't park kit on top of the engine vents where it would cook... But it's just creating an impression...

To explain - I sense enormous passion and expertise about accurate detail amongst the serious AFV modellers on this forum. So please don't be too horrified when I say that I'm not personally fussed about fine details. I just want to produce nice-looking wargames models that broadly look the part. It's a Tiger tank for use in North Africa. None of the people I play wargames with will be able to tell the exact difference in insignia or hatch type. So please do provide constructive criticism on the painting / modelling, which is very much appreciated and very useful to me as an AFV newbie. But please - if you can bear to - try to turn a blind eye to any minor idiosyncracies, which will usually be conscious choices on my part, not errors

[Rubicon Models]

Captain Blood, you will get used to these guys on the forum - which had been very helpful in many ways!  From historical details to painting & conversions!  We also learn a lot from them too!  Please keep up with the good work and post as frequent as you can... thanks again!

 

[Pinky]

To explain - I sense enormous passion and expertise about accurate detail amongst the serious AFV modellers on this forum. So please don't be too horrified when I say that I'm not personally fussed about fine details. I just want to produce nice-looking wargames models that broadly look the part. It's a Tiger tank for use in North Africa. None of the people I play wargames with will be able to tell the exact difference in insignia or hatch type. So please do provide constructive criticism on the painting / modelling, which is very much appreciated and very useful to me as an AFV newbie. But please - if you can bear to - try to turn a blind eye to any minor idiosyncracies, which will usually be conscious choices on my part, not errors

Don't get the wrong idea - it was apparent from your earlier comments that the use of the mid-production turret was deliberate.  My observation that this was a bit of a shame that you'd chosen the 'wrong' turret was a reflection of the lovely work you'd done on the model, which really captures (impressionistically, rather than pedantically) the look of a Tunisian Tiger.  My comments come from admiration of your work rather than the desire to nit-pick.  So please show us more - there are bound to be comments about historical points, but we all love a cool model like this one!

[Marcin]

It all depends on the approach I'm historian, and historical accuracy is huge part of the hobby for me (with lots of fun).
I can advice you to reconsider something, but decision is yours and depends on your personal approach. No offense meant  

I hope that more historical point of view will spread across battlegamers, but it's all about fun, isn't it?

[ultravanillasmurf]

Definitely want to see more of your work.

[Captain Blood]

Thanks gents (and our Rubicon hosts )  Wasn't meaning to be precious or defensive - just pointing out that I come at this from a slightly less than stringent perspective when it comes to pinpoint historical accuracy. But please be assured I greatly admire and respect you guys who know your AFVs inside out. It's just that I prioritise figures and models that look good over absolute historical truth.

@Marcin: No offense taken, not at all
I'm a historian too, by the way (well, I've got a history degree and an awful lot of history books, which is sort of being a historian... ) I get very cross about glaring historical inaccuracy in the movies and on TV. Interestingly, I've never felt quite so bad about taking a few modest liberties when it comes to putting things on the wargames table. Horses for courses I guess...

But thanks for your forbearance / understanding of my occasional heretic ways I look forward to building some more Rubicon models and sharing them here.

Meanwhile, being new to this whole 1/56 AFV modelling world, I did complete another model in between my Rubicon Crusader and my Rubicon Tiger. And that was this resin Blitzkrieg Models Sdkfz231 - this one's FULL of historical inaccuracies (no headlamps, grab rails, width indicators, etc) but you can blame Blitzkrieg for that, not me... I've done my best with it. Hope it's okay to share a couple of pics here, even though it's not a Rubicon product

I'm sure there'll be a Rubicon kit of this in due course, so it will be interesting to compare and contrast...

[ultravanillasmurf]

Another excellent paint job.

It uses Rubicon items (I recognise the crate amongst other bits).

[Marcin]

great paintjob :-) on both of them.
Can you write what weathering products do you use?