Jaguar Models makes a resin kit that has much better detail than the Dragon kit, even though it has been on the market longer. It's pretty pricey new, but they can be found cheaper used. I've grown old waiting for a good Sheridan kit. Maybe someday.

Quoted Text

---

Jaguar Models makes a resin kit that has much better detail than the Dragon kit, even though it has been on the market longer. It's pretty pricey new, but they can be found cheaper used. I've grown old waiting for a good Sheridan kit. Maybe someday.

---

Jaguar kit was just as inaccurate as the Academy one. I actually suspect Academy used the Jaguar kit as a reference and this was the source of most errors. The myth has been created around the Jaguar kit, but it was not a good kit.

The new hull top and turret top were done by AEF. I have the parts too which I inherited from my brother when he gave up in disgust on the whole Sheridan mess. He still has the Tamiya hull and turret though and awaiting inspiration.

I've bitten the bullet and built two Academy kits and so long as I don't compare them to any pictures of real Sheridans I'm okay. I mean just how do you get the driver's hatch and hull front so totally wrong? I have a Vietnam and Desert Storm one and even plan on building a third for 1970s 11ACR. But I do not compare them to any diagrams or anything. I wanted to build them and I did. So horribly wrong. It's like that 50 year old Revell Sherman kit. How can you get something so wrong?


At one point I had even gotten the Jaguar for him and that was not any improvement on the Academy.

Doing aftermarket products for Academy Sheridan never made any sense - there is not a single part in the whole kit that is accurate, so any AM set would have to be just a whole new kit...

By the way, even some AM sets that are available are not always that good... E.g. surprisingly Friul tracks for Sheridan are quite inaccurate with wrong shape of links. The only Friul tracks I know that are so inaccurate... Maybe the Friul designer decided that the kit is not worth any better effort.

"..the tank was doomed from the get go...The anti tank rocket was a failure from the start, but the real asset was the beehive round... The recoil system was just as bad. ..The hull being made of aluminum was marginal at best to save as much weight as they could (TACOM's spec). Yet the turret was cast steel. End users found ways to up armor the turret, and Tacom came out with plates to add to the front of the hull. Too little too late...What it needed was another hundred fifty horsepower and a steel hull. The hydraulic system was really an easy fix, but at the time the machinery was able to make parts accurate enough without doubling the cost. So much of the main gun had to be fitted."

Will there be a correct model of the M551?

Quoted Text

---

"..the tank was doomed from the get go...The anti tank rocket was a failure from the start, but the real asset was the beehive round... The recoil system was just as bad. ..The hull being made of aluminum was marginal at best to save as much weight as they could (TACOM's spec). Yet the turret was cast steel. End users found ways to up armor the turret, and Tacom came out with plates to add to the front of the hull. Too little too late...What it needed was another hundred fifty horsepower and a steel hull. The hydraulic system was really an easy fix, but at the time the machinery was able to make parts accurate enough without doubling the cost. So much of the main gun had to be fitted."

---

I don't see it this way, and as a former Sheridan soldier in the 11th ACR, we saw the Sheridan for what it was, a fast, lightly armored, amphibious recon vehicle. It had a perfectly serviceable HEAT and HEP round that could devastate a target, and the missile was also serviceable and very accurate under certain conditions up to and over 3,000m. The beehive round was fine, but caused a huge amount of wear on the gun, and in three years in the CAV, I only saw one fired. The real problem with the Sheridan was the recoil of the main gun and the Army's insistence on using it as a MBT replacement. The suspension system and drive train were designed for the missile, but couldn't handle the recoil of the conventional 152mm round. But it had some firsts-- it was the first air transportable and amphibious armored vehicle equipped with a laser range finder, ensuring proper targeting when it was operating (if it wasn't knocked out during recoil). And it was the first light armored vehicle with a missile-gun system capable of defeating the T-55 and T-62. But the missile, not the conventional cannon, was supposed to be the main armament. The "conventional" 152mm round wasn't really "conventional" at all and was 3mm less than a 155mm artillery piece. It had a cellulose combustible cartridge, an obturator ring, and a screw type breech with a detent button designed to hold the round in place--pretty unusual for a tank. This was necessary because the "gun" tube was designed for a missile. The real culprit in the Sheridan's failings was the $5000 cost of every missile(a huge expenditure in the 60s). Many Sheridan crews fired only one missile a year due to the cost. When I was in the 11th CAV in the 70's, we got to fire one missile per platoon each year! By the way, the proper term for the armor plating in the Commander's position is "The Teacup" not the "crowsnest". I built the ancient Tamiya offering in the early 80s after leaving the 11th CAV so I could have a Sheridan to display on my desk as a Company Commander. But an accurate kit is long overdue. I appreciate the Academy effort, but it could be better. I've contemplated combining the best of the Academy and Tamiya kits, but it would be nice if there was a new kit as none of the kits on the market are accurate. I'd love to relive the real headaches of the Sheridan, but I don't need the headaches of the current kits. I could relive lots of old Sheridan stories while building an accurate kit---it was fast, melt-able, punch-able, rugged (in some ways), easily repaired in the field (depending on what was broken), and could be fun when it worked, but because of that fat gun it was a real pain in the ass sometimes.
VR, Russ

I drove A10 Atrp 1/11th from late 77 until we traded them for M60A1s and was school trained in Knox. We called the TCs plates chicken shields. When I got there the tracks were on their last legs. It was rare for all 6 tracks in the platoon to be up at the same time. Parts were scarce since they were on the way out. The recoil was severe the first 2 road wheels did lift off the ground. The M551 was much better in Europe then Nam, no humidity and moderate temperatures.

Oh and Gary the turret was made of welded plate not cast. If memory serves I don't believe our missile system was operational most of the time.

I built the old Tamiya kit as my tank years ago. I would love an accurate one.

Tom

If anyone is interested in a kit bash and scratch enhanced M551.

https://armorama.kitmaker.net/forums/195276#1635812

Dave

When did Dragon make a M551