King and Country Tanks as Seen by Mike's Die Cast (1 Viewer)

[jazzeum]

I came across this site, which offered the following critique. I'm not sure what he means by "artistic" or "stylized" but I throw it out for comment:

"Some of the tanks are very accurately reproduced, with good detail (as seen above). Others are a bit "artistic" or "stylized". Look at the pictures closely before you buy. Overall, though, very nicely done!"

Here's the link: http://www.mikes-tanks.com/Britains.htm#King and Country

 

[Louis Badolato]

Brad,

I think that when the critic is using the terms "artistic" or "stylized" he is probably referring to the rougher, less detailed early polystone products like the first Wittman Tiger or the early Deuce and a Half truck.

Louis

 

[jazzeum]

Louis,

You could be right but he has pictures there of some recent offerings like the WS 26 and one of the recent Afrika Corps tanks.

 

[Louis Badolato]

Yes, and with regard to the newer vehicles depicted (a Panzer IV, Matilda, the third Wittman Tiger and the Afrika Corps Panzer III) he gives good ratings, then refers to some other vehicles as being not as detailed, and recommends examining K&C vehicles carefully before purchasing. I can't read minds, but this seems to indicate that what he depicted on his website (the newer vehicles) were of an excellent overall quality, but that the "artistic" less detailed vehicles (which can only refer to the early polystone) are less satisfactory.

 

[Flammenpanzer]

It is nice to see a comparision of the vehicles. Does the Britians Pak 40 hold up well to K&C detail and scale?

 

[binder001]

The opinions are a matter of perception and of some peoples' opinions. I can safely say that there are serious reserch mistakes in a couple early K&C Shermans. I still have the one but would not buy the other. It's important to me because I have been a Sherman tank fan for over 30 years and the details matter to me. That isn't meant to put Andy down, the models are fine for toy soldiers, but the errors still exist. The DD45 M4A3 105 shows just how good his tanks can be. That one is a fine representation of EXACTLTY what he says it is. Just shows how K&C gets better with every new series. Anyway, your review may have also recognized the historical errors on previous models and judged the series from them. Just representing one point of view.

Gary B.

 

[Louis Badolato]

Could you please list the errors in the earlier model Shermans? I don't know as much about the details of these vehicles, and would like to learn. I did note that, in the Iwo Sherman, the sculptors managed to turn the guards around the lights on the front into two triangular protrusions on each side. Please educate me about the other errors.

 

[jazzeum]

I can't say I'm up on the finer details of tanks. When you mean some of the earlier ones, which ones do you mean? I'm assuming you're referring to DD 27, the Easy Eight. Also as a tank buff, what's your views on some of the recent offerings. What did you think of the Puma, for instance?

 

[binder001]

First, I'll admit my limitations, I have spend a lot of effort on US stuff, but only a modest effort at the Germans, so I won't critique the German vehicles.

Iwo Jima Sherman (which I believe was the same casting used for the Battle of the Bulge?) - generally represents an M4A3 75mm Wet Stowage. Biggest single problem is that suspension. Note that the return rollers should only be on trailiing arms, the extra roller on a forward arm is bogus. One problem is that BMC and others copied the exact error leading to a number of innaccurate Shermans around. Without taking a Dremel tool and resculpting the suspension the problem can't be fixed. Next is a minor irritation that comes partly from the Tamiya model company - the extra "patch" armor on the side (called applique armor) should not be present on this model of Sherman. This was a factory level fix to earlier hulls to add protection to ammo racks, in the later M4A3 depicted the ammo racks had been relocated to the bottom of the hull, so the patches wouldn't help. The hull should be exactly like DD45. Andy got the hull and suspension right on that one. Trivia - many of the M4A3s on Iwo Jima had been field modified by the Marines with wooded planks spaced about 4" off the main hull side and the space between the steel and the wood was often filled with concrete - the Japanese never had enough good AT guns but they had lots of dedicated soldiers willing to run up and put a mine against the side of a Marine tank. 'nother trivia - Andy did add the water tank on the rear deck that was unique to USMC tanks in the Pacific. The infantry often ran short of water on hot islands and some units' tanks carried a 50 gal. tank of drinking water for the gyrenes to fill canteens from.

Personally, I have taken a BMC Sherman (based on the K&C Iwo Jima Sherman) and combined it with the suspension and turret from an FoV M4A3 to get a 54mm version of this very common late tank. I can provide photos on request.

On DD27 we have an interesting mix of features. The vehicle produced as actually an M4A1 76mm Wet Stowage, HVSS, (informally an M4A1E8). The features are better here. The HVSS referes to the wider "easy eight" suspension that went from the earlier 16-inch wide tracks to about 23" wide. (Wider track = lower ground pressure, ergo better mobility). The tank is really quite good. Minor problems - Andy used a model of an Israeli Super Sherman for his master and a few of the stowage items are unique to those tanks, and there is no photographic record of the M4A1E8 having seen combat. It's "sister" the M4A3E8 saw lots of action from the Ardennes campaign through Korea, it has the welded hull and a Ford engine versus the cast "turtle" hull and Radial engine of the M4A1 series. There were (reportedly) a number of M4A1E8 in Europe ready for issue but the war ended before anybody used one in anger. After VE day a lot of them were given to the French Army and many ended up in Israel. (for movie buffs, those are French M4A1E8s in several of the scenes in "The Longest Day", including the fight at the Uistreham casino). So I still have my DD27 in the collection because it still makes a good late war Sherman and the crew figures are VERY nice.

Again, as a Sherman buff I enjoy DD45. It's an M4A3 with 105mm howitzer. These were issued to tank battalion headquarters elements to give the commander his own direct fire HE capability. This same hull was also used for a 76mm gun turret (like DD27) or a 75mm gun.

I hope these comments have helped a little.

 

[Louis Badolato]

Thank you for the information. It was really educational. I wonder what Andy will think when he reads your comments. He should run his next Sherman or other U.S. tank designs past you for approval.

 

[binder001]

Andy's doing good improvement on his own, but I'm always glad to advise. As stated, the DD45 was very nice and the M18 Tank Destroyer is also good. The newer trucks, the "Deuce and a half" and the weapons carrier (WC51) are great little models. In an email from Andy he once commented that he starts with a 1/35th model, then customizes it to get the look he wants. He really is getting good at the extra stowage and "junk" that GIs gather in a combat zone. Not every unit was the same, but some photos of US armor in the late European campaign look like a Gypsy circus with all the extra stuff piled on. Since Andy was a real soldier he knows how troops "acquire" things that end up on their vehicles. The armor and mechanized units have that advantage - plenty of their own vehicles. Some tank units added layers of sandbags and such as supplemental armor, others just piled on extra stuff like ration boxes, water and fuel cans, tentage, etc. That makes adding extra stuff on my models or 1/32nd diecasts a lot of fun, PLUS it makes that tank individual. I looking at historical photos taken soon after VE day it's interesting to see how fast the "Army mentality" took over. The extra stuff came off and most later 1945 victory parades have very clean tanks in them. That's one of the beauties of K&C tanks and vehicles - plenty of "combat GI look".

 

[Louis Badolato]

I also love the extras which give the armored vehicles originality and combat realism. Andy was already adding these realistic touches while he was still doing the wood vehicles. He started with the 1996 Arnhem British Sherman, which had a box of supplies on the back deck. By the time the Vietnam vehicles and the wood Cromwell rolled around, knapsacks started hanging off turrets and the sides of vehicles. My favorite wood vehicle, the late Stug III (circa 1997-1998), had a back deck covered with extras, from a milk jug to extra bogie wheels with spikes stored in the lug-holes. The Long Range Desert group Chevy 30 cwt truck, and the SAS desert jeeps also came covered with the numerous extras necessary to survival in the desert. A neat aside about the LRDG Chevy Truck: when I visited the Imperial War Museum in London they had one of these trucks on display, which they had recovered from the Libian Desert where it had been lost 40 years before. Aside from the fact that the paint had been sand-blasted off by sand storms over the years (the car shined like it was made of chrome) and the rubber tires had dried out and cracked, it was exactly like Andy's version.