Comparison of Tank Dozer and Fording Stacks? (1 Viewer)

[6th Wisconsin]

I am thinking about buying either the Sherman with dozer blade or the fording stacks. Don't know if I can justify to my wife getting both right now!! Can anyone compare the overall build quality of the two? I am aware of the incorrect unit markings on the fording stacks model.

 

[Rob]

I have the fording Sherman and have seen the Dozer,both are excellent.The finish on these Figarti Shermans really is first class,very realistic.Their crew figures are getting better and better as well,well worth having both these vehicles in my view.

Rob

 

[binder001]

I have both - they are "sister" vehicles as far as many of their components so there is little to choose other than which modification gets you going.

FYI - the wading stacks would be appropriate for a scene prior to invasion, on a landing craft or shortly after landing. As the vehicles and units moved of the beach they dumped the waterproofing and wading gear. The incorrect markings are one digit in the regiment designator (says "86", should be "66")

The tank dozer is appropriate for all kinds of operations right up to the end of the war.

I think they are both decent models.

Gary B.

 

[Phantom Warrior]

I have both but if I had to chose one, I would take the dozer.

Terry

 

[Stryker II]

Gary: would the dozer be correct for pacific USMC? I don't want army markings on it--easy to change, or is it a model sherman that themarines did not have? I would say M4A3 would be correct for anything from Tarawa on, still hoping for a flame thrower version!!!..............Stryker

 

[6th Wisconsin]

I have both - they are "sister" vehicles as far as many of their components so there is little to choose other than which modification gets you going.

FYI - the wading stacks would be appropriate for a scene prior to invasion, on a landing craft or shortly after landing. As the vehicles and units moved of the beach they dumped the waterproofing and wading gear. The incorrect markings are one digit in the regiment designator (says "86", should be "66")

The tank dozer is appropriate for all kinds of operations right up to the end of the war.

I think they are both decent models.

Gary B.

It looks like I might get both (just ordered the one with stacks), though I will have to sell off a few other items to keep my wife placated (my first Figarti vehicles, and she was just getting used to the price of K&C vehicles). I suppose I can buy a few mechanics and have them repairing the stack version on the beach post-landing, while the dozer tidys up the beach. I envision using my new K&C LCA for a landing diorama and use these tanks in a post-landing setup - hopefully with an LCT if K&C makes one (I really wish I could spring for the Figarti version, which looks amazing). And that new halftrack is sooo tempting too. Thanks for the input.

 

[Vezzolf]

Fording Stacks has my vote

 

[6th Wisconsin]

Still hoping I can withstand my wife's wrath, but I ended up ordering both. There just isn't much time to make up your mind with these Figarti vehicles. If she threatens to kill me, I will have to unload one of them.

 

[binder001]

Gary: would the dozer be correct for pacific USMC? I don't want army markings on it--easy to change, or is it a model sherman that themarines did not have? I would say M4A3 would be correct for anything from Tarawa on, still hoping for a flame thrower version!!!..............Stryker

Nope. The Marines didn't use the M4's - the Army got first call on those. That's why the Marines ended up with the M4A2, the wanted the M4/M4A1 but the Army had priority. The M4A3 wasn't going to be available for a while and the USMC wanted the 75mm gun tanks. The Army told the Marines that they could grab some M4A2s from a batch earmarked for the British. Later the Marines got the M4A3s and they ended up nudging the M4A2s out of service. I have seen a photo of an M4A3 tank dozer on Iwo Jima, but that doesn't help you much now.

The Marines did use some M4A1s on Cape Gloucester but they were borrowed from Army stocks.


Gary B.

 

[Stryker II]

Nope. The Marines didn't use the M4's - the Army got first call on those. That's why the Marines ended up with the M4A2, the wanted the M4/M4A1 but the Army had priority. The M4A3 wasn't going to be available for a while and the USMC wanted the 75mm gun tanks. The Army told the Marines that they could grab some M4A2s from a batch earmarked for the British. Later the Marines got the M4A3s and they ended up nudging the M4A2s out of service. I have seen a photo of an M4A3 tank dozer on Iwo Jima, but that doesn't help you much now.

The Marines did use some M4A1s on Cape Gloucester but they were borrowed from Army stocks.


Gary B.

Thanks Gary: I will have to go back and check my tank files on Tarawa. China Gal and Colorado must have been M4A2's on Tarawa?........Stryker

 

[binder001]

Yes, M4A2s - they were from the same batch and had similar features (I believe they were built by Fisher Body). That's why DML made a 1/35th M4A2 "Tarawa Version" - they were all sister tanks. The website "Tarawa on the Web" has a nice sub-feature on the tanks with pictures of most of them.

Gary

 

[6th Wisconsin]

I just received my Sherman with fording stacks, my first Figarti vehicle. Top notch!!!! What a great decision to get this one. Now, I eagerly await the dozer version!