_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV: Allied - WWII
Armor and ground forces of the Allied forces during World War II.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Similarity of Valentine Mk VI with others
chuckster
Visit this Community
Missouri, United States
Joined: May 30, 2003
KitMaker: 289 posts
Armorama: 170 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 19, 2016 - 06:04 AM UTC
I bought a Miniart Valentine Mk VI on ebay very cheap. It's the Canadian version that was sent lend-lease to Russia. Maybe that's one of the reasons it sold for so little, there's a lower demand for it than the ones in British service. Does it resemble the mark II or III enough to be passed off as one, or is it too unique?
shart1979
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: September 12, 2015
KitMaker: 19 posts
Armorama: 19 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 19, 2016 - 06:24 AM UTC
The mk2 and mk4 are sshared the same hull and turret configuration. The main difference was the mk 2 had an external side fuel tank and the mk4 had a new engine and transmission fitted but that didn't change the hull configuration.

The mk3 had a wholly different 3 man turret with the extended bustle at the rear. Hope that helps
chuckster
Visit this Community
Missouri, United States
Joined: May 30, 2003
KitMaker: 289 posts
Armorama: 170 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 19, 2016 - 06:49 AM UTC
It helps a lot, Shaun! This means I can build one of the British versions in North Africa if I want. All I need to do is order some decals from Archer or someone else. Thanks!
Cantstopbuyingkits
Visit this Community
European Union
Joined: January 28, 2015
KitMaker: 2,099 posts
Armorama: 1,920 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 19, 2016 - 09:49 AM UTC

Quoted Text

It helps a lot, Shaun! This means I can build one of the British versions in North Africa if I want. All I need to do is order some decals from Archer or someone else. Thanks!


You can't built any of the British versions with a MKVI. Compared to the MKIII/II it had a 2 man turret and a differently shaped front, for example.
D_J_W
Visit this Community
Hamilton, New Zealand
Joined: December 30, 2005
KitMaker: 436 posts
Armorama: 367 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 19, 2016 - 10:01 AM UTC

Quoted Text

You can't built any of the British versions with a MKVI. Compared to the MKIII/II it had a 2 man turret and a differently shaped front, for example.


Why not? The turret on the Mk. VI is the same as on the Mk. II, the two man turret. The only things that need to be changed from the Canadian version to the British is the headlights and wheels, both of which are included on sprue B in the MiniArt Valentine kits.

cheers
David
shart1979
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: September 12, 2015
KitMaker: 19 posts
Armorama: 19 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 19, 2016 - 01:26 PM UTC
If it helps for the comparison
North Africa Mk2


Russian Mk4
Cantstopbuyingkits
Visit this Community
European Union
Joined: January 28, 2015
KitMaker: 2,099 posts
Armorama: 1,920 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 19, 2016 - 07:33 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

You can't built any of the British versions with a MKVI. Compared to the MKIII/II it had a 2 man turret and a differently shaped front, for example.


Why not? The turret on the Mk. VI is the same as on the Mk. II, the two man turret. The only things that need to be changed from the Canadian version to the British is the headlights and wheels, both of which are included on sprue B in the MiniArt Valentine kits.

cheers
David


I just clearly explained that you have to deal with the differantly shaped hull (among others) for a MKVI Valentine, not just the wheels and lights



Quoted Text

If it helps for the comparison
North Africa Mk2


Russian Mk4


Usually a comparison shot is very helpful but not in this case, as we were talking about the MK VI, not the MKIV.
IPLawyer
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: March 18, 2015
KitMaker: 71 posts
Armorama: 63 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 19, 2016 - 08:59 PM UTC
It appears you may be in luck. From my admittedly superficial review of the sprue A(upper hull) and sprue D (turret), the sprues shown in a review for the Miniart Mk IV:

https://armorama.kitmaker.net/review/5466

and the Miniart Mk VI:

http://www.missing-lynx.com/reviews/britain/miniart35123reviewcs_1.html

look the same to me.

I appears that your Mk VI even includes the Russian crew for the Mk IV kit!

I would not be surprised if they put "Early Prod[uction])" on the Mk VI kit so they did not have to include the later modifications to the Mk. VI and just use Mk. IV.



dtniedert
Visit this Community
Kentucky, United States
Joined: December 11, 2014
KitMaker: 152 posts
Armorama: 139 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 19, 2016 - 09:23 PM UTC
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/gb/Tank_Infantry_MkIII_Valentine.php
goldnova72
Visit this Community
Alberta, Canada
Joined: February 21, 2009
KitMaker: 627 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 19, 2016 - 09:28 PM UTC
The Canadian built Mk VI had a cast nose and Browning 30 cal co ax mg . The British built tanks had a bolted nose and a Besa mg . So although you could hide the nose with stowage , sand bags or cammo netting , the turret mg mount will be the wrong shape . I would just build it and paint it the way you want , sometimes we go crazy nit picking every little detail , of your family and friends who see the built kit , how many are going to know the difference ? If its built for competition , well that's another story
Thudius
Visit this Community
Uusimaa, Finland
Joined: October 22, 2012
KitMaker: 1,194 posts
Armorama: 1,077 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 19, 2016 - 09:43 PM UTC

Quoted Text

The Canadian built Mk VI had a cast nose and Browning 30 cal co ax mg . The British built tanks had a bolted nose and a Besa mg .


I think that was one of the bugaboos with the Canadian boxing, no cast nose included. The kit does come with two different mantlets and probably a whole host of not for use parts so a backdating might not be as difficult. Admittedly I'm no Valentine expert so I'd like to get some answers on what other versions can be built out of the box from the Canadian built offering as I have one in the stash as well. According to Alan L in the review link above, it would seem a Mk II is indeed possible OOB.

Kimmo
IPLawyer
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: March 18, 2015
KitMaker: 71 posts
Armorama: 63 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 19, 2016 - 09:45 PM UTC

Quoted Text

The Canadian built Mk VI had a cast nose and Browning 30 cal co ax mg . The British built tanks had a bolted nose and a Besa mg . So although you could hide the nose with stowage , sand bags or cammo netting , the turret mg mount will be the wrong shape . I would just build it and paint it the way you want , sometimes we go crazy nit picking every little detail , of your family and friends who see the built kit , how many are going to know the difference ? If its built for competition , well that's another story


Historically, you may be correct, but if you look at the link I provided above to a review of the Miniart Mk. VI, the nose of the hull on both the box cover and on sprue A appears to be bolted not cast.

Also, from Wikipedia

"Valentine VI
Canadian-built version of IV. Initially known as Tank, Infantry Mark III***.[9] It used some Canadian and American mechanical parts and a GMC diesel engine. Late production vehicles had cast glacis detail, along with more use of cast sections instead of fabricated. The first fifteen were produced with a 7.92 mm Besa coaxial machine-gun, thereafter replaced by a 0.30 inch Browning coaxial machine-gun."

As I indicated above, I think Miniart did the less common "Early Production" Mk. VI so they could re-use the sprues from their Mk. IV kit.
 _GOTOTOP