Kevin Brant takes a look at the two sets of Bogies designed specifically for the Sexton but that can also be used for a Grizzly from Resicast.
Link to Item
If you have comments or questions please post them here.
Thanks!
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
REVIEW
Resicast Canadian BogiesPosted: Monday, April 15, 2013 - 10:18 AM UTC
bill_c
Campaigns Administrator
New Jersey, United States
Joined: January 09, 2008
KitMaker: 10,553 posts
Armorama: 8,109 posts
Joined: January 09, 2008
KitMaker: 10,553 posts
Armorama: 8,109 posts
Posted: Monday, April 15, 2013 - 10:26 AM UTC
Nice review, Kevin. Nice to see other points of view, too, on this manufacturer.
Posted: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - 04:11 AM UTC
Hi Kevin,
Look forward to the build. I bought both sets and agree they look like a good update option. Minimal work required on the kit to make the switch.
Who'd have though we would have a Sexton in plastic, grand times for Allied Modellers.
Cheers
Al
Look forward to the build. I bought both sets and agree they look like a good update option. Minimal work required on the kit to make the switch.
Who'd have though we would have a Sexton in plastic, grand times for Allied Modellers.
Cheers
Al
Posted: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - 07:30 AM UTC
Alan
Now that we have a Sexton, can we have a Grizzly?
Kevin
Now that we have a Sexton, can we have a Grizzly?
Kevin
multibank17pdr
France
Joined: February 06, 2010
KitMaker: 127 posts
Armorama: 119 posts
Joined: February 06, 2010
KitMaker: 127 posts
Armorama: 119 posts
Posted: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - 10:18 AM UTC
Thanks for this review. Resicast M4 molded-in-one VVSS boggies proved To be vert convenient to up date some kits (italeri, Tamiya...) or save time on others (Tasca...). I guess these Canadian twins Will do the same.
Also, Formations Models had offered such a conversion before -http://www.formationsmodels.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=4&products_id=61-
If #F116 is planned To convert Tasca boggie, I did modified Dragon VVSS boggie with a set from Formations without major issue... Now I am just waiting for the Sexton kit to reach my bench...
Also, Formations Models had offered such a conversion before -http://www.formationsmodels.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=4&products_id=61-
If #F116 is planned To convert Tasca boggie, I did modified Dragon VVSS boggie with a set from Formations without major issue... Now I am just waiting for the Sexton kit to reach my bench...
Removed by original poster on 04/16/13 - 22:26:10 (GMT).
Posted: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - 03:45 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Alan
Now that we have a Sexton, can we have a Grizzly?
Kevin
Sure. Buy a good M4A1 75 Dry VVSS, modify the stowage to commonwealth pattern and ensure the tracks are either T54E1 or CDP and voila, you have a Grizzly.
It's no more difficult than that.
Now, a Ram. That would be loverly!
Paul
junglejim
Alberta, Canada
Joined: February 18, 2003
KitMaker: 1,728 posts
Armorama: 1,629 posts
Joined: February 18, 2003
KitMaker: 1,728 posts
Armorama: 1,629 posts
Posted: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - 03:52 PM UTC
...and file the notch on the rear hull top edge! But you knew that!
Jim
Jim
Posted: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - 04:15 PM UTC
Quoted Text
...and file the notch on the rear hull top edge! But you knew that!
Jim
Just so!
ericadeane
Michigan, United States
Joined: October 28, 2002
KitMaker: 4,021 posts
Armorama: 3,947 posts
Joined: October 28, 2002
KitMaker: 4,021 posts
Armorama: 3,947 posts
Posted: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 - 05:05 AM UTC
What was the purpose of the notch? I always wondered why it was implemented.
Posted: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 - 06:23 AM UTC
I'm not sure anyone has ever come up with a definitive answer for that, Roy. The most common answer I've heard is that the notch on the cast Lees, Shermans (and Grizzlies) and Rams that had it appears to have been to permit rain water falling on the engine deck to drain off over the stern as opposed to filling up the ledge around the deck plates and then seeping into the engine compartment.
Makes some sense, I suppose, especially if the engine electrics were very suseptable to damp/water, but later vehicles didn't have anything of the kind, and the welded Shermans never did, so it must not have been really needed. Perhaps it was one of those things thought "good to have" when the initial requirements were created and then never got removed from the casting drawings until much later in the war.
Paul
Makes some sense, I suppose, especially if the engine electrics were very suseptable to damp/water, but later vehicles didn't have anything of the kind, and the welded Shermans never did, so it must not have been really needed. Perhaps it was one of those things thought "good to have" when the initial requirements were created and then never got removed from the casting drawings until much later in the war.
Paul