M4A4 Sherman Dragon - Nr. 6035
Queensland, Australia
Joined: September 04, 2015
KitMaker: 1,517 posts
Armorama: 1,109 posts
Posted: Monday, January 02, 2017 - 02:17 AM UTC
Hi all,
i need some "Shermanologist" a member of another forum is building a very nice diorama set in Sicily 1943 and ask if this box is ok for a British Sherman in that period and if require some AM or scratchbuild
this is the old kit M4A4 Sherman Dragon Nr. 6035
https://www.scalemates.com/kits/141407-dragon-6035-m4a4-shermanThis is the awesome Dio...
http://www.freeforumzone.com/d/11324145/Sicilia-1943/discussione.aspxThanks for your help!....
barkingdigger
Associate Editor
#013
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: June 20, 2008
KitMaker: 3,981 posts
Armorama: 3,403 posts
Posted: Monday, January 02, 2017 - 03:06 AM UTC
Tell your friend to get the Tasca kit instead! I wrestled the ancient DML kit a while ago, and still twitch at the memory of the pain. (See my build
here.) You will want lots of AM stowage etc regardless of base kit.
"Glue, or Glue Not - there is no Dry-Fit" - Yoda (original script from Return of the Jedi...)
Quebec, Canada
Joined: November 15, 2002
KitMaker: 3,960 posts
Armorama: 3,579 posts
Posted: Monday, January 02, 2017 - 03:19 AM UTC
I think Tom is right ... the Dragon kit is not the best kit out there ... The Asuka kit is much better ... But if it is already bought then yes you can use it , just don't add the armor plates to the sides of the hull or the turret... those were added in late 44 in Italy.
Queensland, Australia
Joined: September 04, 2015
KitMaker: 1,517 posts
Armorama: 1,109 posts
Posted: Monday, January 02, 2017 - 03:38 AM UTC
Thanks!
already have that kit in the stash is for that reason ask if is suitable
Arizona, United States
Joined: January 18, 2006
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,808 posts
Posted: Monday, January 02, 2017 - 04:22 AM UTC
The old DML M4A4 is suitable. It's just got a lot of problems.
I found a nifty feature on the forums called HIDE USER.
I was going to try it on myself and go stealth, but it only works on other users.
Queensland, Australia
Joined: September 04, 2015
KitMaker: 1,517 posts
Armorama: 1,109 posts
Posted: Monday, January 02, 2017 - 04:32 AM UTC
Quoted Text
The old DML M4A4 is suitable. It's just got a lot of problems.
mmmm...Ok...but "lot of problems" can be easy-fix or "lot of problems" put back the kit in the stash and buy a new one?...
wich problems?...
Ontario, Canada
Joined: February 04, 2009
KitMaker: 743 posts
Armorama: 549 posts
Posted: Monday, January 02, 2017 - 04:46 AM UTC
Not sure if your looking for accuracy but that ancient Dragon kit has a problem with its hull in that its too long. The image on the kit box is also of a late Sherman v. More like you would find during Operation Overlord and afterward in NW Europe rather than Operation Husky. I did a re-do of one of my Italy Sherman V circa 1943. So take a look here for what kind of features an early Canadian Sherman V would have. It has the same problem as the kit you mentioned in that the lower hull is too long.
I haven't finished my re-build as yet. Still working on the weathering. Should be a dusty looking vehicle.
Any updates I do will be posted here:
https://totalwarinscale.blogspot.ca/https://www.facebook.com/totalwarinscalemodels/https://archive.kitmaker.net/forums/243521#2054623http://ghmicro.wix.com/twis-first-cut
Arizona, United States
Joined: January 18, 2006
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,808 posts
Posted: Monday, January 02, 2017 - 05:43 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text
The old DML M4A4 is suitable. It's just got a lot of problems.
mmmm...Ok...but "lot of problems" can be easy-fix or "lot of problems" put back the kit in the stash and buy a new one?...
wich problems?...
Not an easy fix, but not hopeless either. Based on the diorama being built there's plenty of talent.
Besides a lower hull that is too long, nothing fit right on the DML M4A4 I built back when it was new. If I remember right the fit to the hulls was very poor. I did a quick look for the link to a build log explaining what needs to be done, no luck. As Totalize shows, it can be built up to a decent looking model.
The Asuka (formerly Tasca) kit is a much better model. It can be built out of the box with no need for all the fixes.
I found a nifty feature on the forums called HIDE USER.
I was going to try it on myself and go stealth, but it only works on other users.
Michigan, United States
Joined: October 28, 2002
KitMaker: 4,021 posts
Armorama: 3,947 posts
Posted: Monday, January 02, 2017 - 05:34 PM UTC
Choose the path that will result in the most enjoyment for you. For me, the accuracy and buildability are the premium requirements once I've chosen a subject.
I don't build older/less accurate kits simply because I have them. I weigh it carefully with what's newer/more accurate on the market.
To me, the M4A4 comparison would be an easy choice. Being a Shermanaholic, I can see every inaccuracy on the DML kit and that won't leave my mind. Thus, I sell/give away my older DML stuff and have replaced them with Asuka/Tasca kits.
The few dollars difference don't bother me -- especially since I'm patient and will wait around for a good deal or a trade.
Roy Chow
Join AMPS!
www.amps-armor.org
Louisiana, United States
Joined: May 19, 2007
KitMaker: 459 posts
Armorama: 421 posts
Posted: Monday, January 02, 2017 - 07:05 PM UTC
In echoing what has been said, the Dragon M4A4 is junk only suitable for a waste can. it was one of the early kits dragon did way back in the 90's and the number of problems with the kit are to many to list. the only M4A4 kit is the old Tasca now called Asuka Models, check out Pacific Coast Models they are about the best source now.
However, the British Commonwealth forces didn't operate M4A4 Shermans in Sicily at 1943. At that time the M4A4s were being used for training in the US. The brits had M4A1, and M4A2s at that time. Prior to D-Day in Normandy many M4A4s were rebuilt and sent to Britain and other allies.
Arizona, United States
Joined: January 18, 2006
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,808 posts
Posted: Monday, January 02, 2017 - 08:01 PM UTC
Quoted Text
In echoing what has been said, the Dragon M4A4 is junk only suitable for a waste can. it was one of the early kits dragon did way back in the 90's and the number of problems with the kit are to many to list. the only M4A4 kit is the old Tasca now called Asuka Models, check out Pacific Coast Models they are about the best source now.
However, the British Commonwealth forces didn't operate M4A4 Shermans in Sicily at 1943. At that time the M4A4s were being used for training in the US. The brits had M4A1, and M4A2s at that time. Prior to D-Day in Normandy many M4A4s were rebuilt and sent to Britain and other allies.
I looked right over the diorama being in Sicily. M4A4's don't show up until the fighting in Italy, but the M4A2's were there from North Africa on.
The good side is M4A2 DV from Asuka is perfect for Sicily, and on sale at Hobby Search:
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10090009Dragon also has the M4A2 DV, but it seems to be sold out at the moment. The Asuka kit is a better value.
I found a nifty feature on the forums called HIDE USER.
I was going to try it on myself and go stealth, but it only works on other users.
Queensland, Australia
Joined: September 04, 2015
KitMaker: 1,517 posts
Armorama: 1,109 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 - 04:37 AM UTC
Thaks Folks from me and from my friend!
I state that i am not a Shermanologist at all, my friend did some research and now is very doubtful, because in some sites refer to the entry into service of 'M4A4 in '43 in Sicily and there are also pictures where there seems to be M4A4 in hand of Commonwealth forces...
http://panzerserra.blogspot.com.au/2015/07/m4-sherman-medium-tank-direct-vision.htmlhttp://nastasicilia.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/appunti-fotografici-per-una-storia-di.htmlhttp://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Jack+Wallace+wartime+diary+Invading+Sicily+1943/8683896/story.htmland here find this statement:
"The combat debut of the M4A4 appears to have occurred on July 10, 1943 when C Squadron of the 12th Canadian Tank Regiment (Three Rivers Regt.) made an assault landing in support of the 1st Canadian Infantry Division at Pachino Bay in Sicily. The photo above depicts a later scene, and is captioned, "A British Sherman tank advancing near Catania, Sicily, 4 August 1943." However, the only unit in Sicily with M4A4s was the 1st Canadian Tank Brigade, which was composed of the 11th, 12th and 14th Canadian Tank Regiments. The Brigade's War Diary lists the WD Numbers of over 200 M4A4s issued to its regiments in the UK prior to its deployment to Sicily. "Condor" appears to be T-146514. If so, the Diary has it that it was issued to the 11th Canadian Tank Regiment (The Ontario Regt.). "Condor" can be seen to have the elongated drivers' hoods that were introduced in production in November 1942. Courtesy of the Imperial War Museum, Photo NA5522."
From this page...
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a4/m4a4_variants.htmlwhat is the truth? ...
...i decide to ask here because i know Armorama is a right place for Shermanolics ...
P.S:...I honestly I find it hard to distinguish from a A2-A3 by A4 ...
RobinNilsson
TOS Moderator Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,693 posts
Armorama: 5,562 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 - 04:58 AM UTC
Not a Sherman expert, far from it, but the M4A4 is longer than the other variants and one way to spot it is the distance between the bogies.
Compare these two:
M4A3
M4A4
On the M4A4 the gap between the road wheels on two adjacent bogies is more than half the diameter of the roadwheel, the same gap on the M4A3 is smaller.
/ Robin
In memory of Al Superczynski:
"Build what YOU want, the way YOU want to....
and the critics will flame you every time"
Arizona, United States
Joined: January 18, 2006
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,808 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 - 05:04 AM UTC
OOPS!
I followed your links and there are M4A4's in some of the pictures. In the second link "ACE" is definitely an M4A4. The tanks in several pictures in the Canadian link, your third link, seen from the rear, are M4A4's.
My mistake, I over looked the Canadian units.
I found a nifty feature on the forums called HIDE USER.
I was going to try it on myself and go stealth, but it only works on other users.
Ontario, Canada
Joined: February 04, 2009
KitMaker: 743 posts
Armorama: 549 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 - 06:57 AM UTC
The Canadians were the first to use the Sherman V (M4A4) in combat and did so in Italy. The Brits and other CW nations used M4A1's (Sherman I) and the diesel powered M4A2(Sherman III). The First Canadian armoured brigade had them for operation Baytown but I am not exactly sure if they had them for Operation Husky. The Sherman Minutia website qas you say states they had them in Sicily.
The Tasca/Asuka kits are bar none the bees knees for Shermans but you should know they are designed to represent a late Sherman V but can easily be made to represent an early M4A4. So as I said previously you will have to follow the early config if you want an accurate Italy/Sicily Sherman V. I am sure some of the shermaholics here can list off the features of a Sicily/Italy Canadian Sherman V.
http://ghmicro.wix.com/twis-first-cut
North Carolina, United States
Joined: February 06, 2006
KitMaker: 1,544 posts
Armorama: 1,464 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 - 08:00 AM UTC
The DML kit is pretty bad as far as inaccuracy goes but it looks the part. If youre wanting an accurate representation of the real deal its another story. Youre going to need an early M4A4 with direct vision slots, early to mid turret, symmetrical suspension skids, etc... The kits turret is pretty bad as well as the drivers and co drivers hatches, trans cover, wheels, boggie trucks, cupola, tools, and the lower hull length. The good news is that you can purchase all the fixes through the aftermarket sources but then youre at more than the cost of the excellent Asuka kits...
Chris
Queensland, Australia
Joined: September 04, 2015
KitMaker: 1,517 posts
Armorama: 1,109 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 - 08:01 AM UTC
Awesome!...
If you folks can tell me what need to be done for a Early Canadian M4A4 i will be grateful!...
Queensland, Australia
Joined: October 02, 2008
KitMaker: 658 posts
Armorama: 629 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 - 12:26 PM UTC
G'day Vicious
Send me a PM please with some contact details - I'm also in Queensland and probably able to assist somewhat faster than people on t'other side of the world. Where are you in Queensland?
Regards
Rob
Queensland, Australia
Joined: September 04, 2015
KitMaker: 1,517 posts
Armorama: 1,109 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 - 01:28 PM UTC
Quoted Text
G'day Vicious
Send me a PM please with some contact details - I'm also in Queensland and probably able to assist somewhat faster than people on t'other side of the world. Where are you in Queensland?
Regards
Rob
G'Day Mate
I am up north in the Whitsudays and you?...the question is for a friend on the otherside of the world....
...in Italy,he made the question on Zimmerit.com a Italian forum, but nobody answer,then it came immediately to mind armorama...
...were the Shermanolics goes!
It is a favor for him he is doing a diorama really amazing and deserves a little 'help.
http://www.freeforumzone.com/discussione.aspx?c=15474&f=15474&idd=11324145Queensland, Australia
Joined: October 02, 2008
KitMaker: 658 posts
Armorama: 629 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 - 03:59 AM UTC
G'day Vicious
I'm in SEQ. I was going to suggest you come to a meeting of AMMS this Saturday, but I think it's a tad far . . .
Regards
Rob
Florida, United States
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 - 05:01 AM UTC
The original Dragon kit needed to have its lower hull sawed off at the rear, even with the rear face of the access plate on the belly. The rear plate could then be attached normally. This was the biggest issue, but there were others. The opening in the turret face for the gun mount was also mispositioned, requiring a lot of surgery.
That said, it may be heresy, but Dragon has replaced nearly every part of their M4A4 kits in the intervening years, as new Sherman releases meant that more parts were retooled. The Cyber Hobby orange box M4A4 is cheap, and very buildable (Cue the peasants with torches to burn me at the stake, but I'm not that crazy about the Asuka kits--I think their suspension is very over-engineered, the casting texture a touch too subtle, and at those price points, I would at least expect a turret interior).
Queensland, Australia
Joined: September 04, 2015
KitMaker: 1,517 posts
Armorama: 1,109 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 - 06:14 AM UTC
Quoted Text
G'day Vicious
I'm in SEQ. I was going to suggest you come to a meeting of AMMS this Saturday, but I think it's a tad far . . .
Regards
Rob
Thanks Rob
really looking to meet some modeler in real life but yes...am a bit far,here in Airlie i feel like the caracter in "little Britain"... "the only gay in the village" and probably i am not but i think i have to put a newspaper advertisement to find another lonely soul...
...here exist just 3 hobby and usually the people does all 3 together,Sailing,fishing and drink Rum!...
Jarno
Queensland, Australia
Joined: September 04, 2015
KitMaker: 1,517 posts
Armorama: 1,109 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 - 10:54 AM UTC
Thanks Geland
now i think the best choice in goes for a M4A2(Sherman III)
United States
Joined: September 29, 2016
KitMaker: 77 posts
Armorama: 55 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 - 12:11 PM UTC
Quoted Text
The original Dragon kit needed to have its lower hull sawed off at the rear, even with the rear face of the access plate on the belly. The rear plate could then be attached normally. This was the biggest issue, but there were others. The opening in the turret face for the gun mount was also mispositioned, requiring a lot of surgery.
That said, it may be heresy, but Dragon has replaced nearly every part of their M4A4 kits in the intervening years, as new Sherman releases meant that more parts were retooled. The Cyber Hobby orange box M4A4 is cheap, and very buildable (Cue the peasants with torches to burn me at the stake, but I'm not that crazy about the Asuka kits--I think their suspension is very over-engineered, the casting texture a touch too subtle, and at those price points, I would at least expect a turret interior).
One of the other things to consider/research is whether or not the Asuka kit has any p/e included. I bought an Asuka M4A1 only to find that it didn't have any periscope guards so I had to buy a P/E set just to get them. The kit does include lots of junk that I don't need, anti-tank obstacles and 25 gallon drums but it does have vinyl track so you don't have to make that link by link track that is the only option in early Dragon kits. And while in general I think the Asuka suspension is a pain it does have one piece Drive sprockets that are a much better option than Dragon's. The Later Dragon kits have much better texture on the hull and turret and why oh why hasn't Asuka ever learned about casting numbers? Asuka kits are good but they have their own problems, it would seem that the definitive Sherman line has yet to be produced.
Arizona, United States
Joined: January 18, 2006
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,808 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 - 06:01 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Thanks Geland
now i think the best choice in goes for a M4A2(Sherman III)
With the M4A2 you have a few options. The M4A2 DV I mentioned above, with ealy VVSS, or with the mid type VVSS, cast drivers hoods and the welded drivers hood tanks. On your second link, the forth picture of the tank driving past the trolly car is one of the welded hood M4A2's. Dragon did a Tarawa M4A2 that is the same tank. All you would need to do is British type stowage.
Gerald and John brought up some valid points. Over-all I still think the Asuka kits are better values.
I found a nifty feature on the forums called HIDE USER.
I was going to try it on myself and go stealth, but it only works on other users.
