What the new Sherman is NOT... (1 Viewer)

[binder001]

Just got my BBA015 "General Inspection" What a gorgeous model! The tracks are SO much better. One the down side, it is advertised as an M4A3, but is in fact an M4A1! Before you ask - yes, there really is a difference! The A-ONE had a cast upper hull and a radial engine, the A-THREE had a welded hull and a Ford liquid-cooled engine. The BBA015 is a GREAT model of the M4A1 76W. It should NOT be in 14th Armored Division markings. The 14th was supplied with M4A3 types, mostly drawn on the supply line from Southern France (it was a Seventh Army outfit). Trivial stuff to many collectors, but for the money involved I expect that a little more homework would be done. It's like the issue about "why is an M3A1 scout car in the Ardennes?" There are plenty of people, myself included, who would be only too glad to help with this kind of question. Just because it's American doesn't mean that no one cares if it's right. Can you imagine the outcry from the German collectors if there was an Afrika Korps Panther or some other fantasy scheme?

Gary

 

[jazzeum]

Not good

Gary, were there M4A1s in the Ardennes?

 

[desk11desk12]

Just got my BBA015 "General Inspection" What a gorgeous model! The tracks are SO much better. One the down side, it is advertised as an M4A3, but is in fact an M4A1! Before you ask - yes, there really is a difference! The A-ONE had a cast upper hull and a radial engine, the A-THREE had a welded hull and a Ford liquid-cooled engine. The BBA015 is a GREAT model of the M4A1 76W. It should NOT be in 14th Armored Division markings. The 14th was supplied with M4A3 types, mostly drawn on the supply line from Southern France (it was a Seventh Army outfit). Trivial stuff to many collectors, but for the money involved I expect that a little more homework would be done. It's like the issue about "why is an M3A1 scout car in the Ardennes?" There are plenty of people, myself included, who would be only too glad to help with this kind of question. Just because it's American doesn't mean that no one cares if it's right. Can you imagine the outcry from the German collectors if there was an Afrika Korps Panther or some other fantasy scheme?

Gary

Wow Gary:

Good catch, I'm a big WWII buff but not to that detail. You definitely have a point about accuracy. I was wondering about the differences between this model and the previous Sherman KC produced. They just didn't seem the same.

Too bad about the scout car too, I like it but if it doesn't belong to that field of battle then, well.....

I wish the figures weren't glued on to the base of the vehicle, and then you could mix and match some of these models in the right field of battle diorama.

However, these models are a very nice piece of work.

Carlos

 

[Combat]

Hmmm an Afrika Korps Panther. That would look pretty cool even if it never existed. Having run out of space I put the repainted King Tiger with my AK figures and it doesn't look bad. A little heavy for the sand perhaps.

 

[binder001]

Gary, were there M4A1s in the Ardennes?

Yes, there certainly were! The model IS good and DOES represent a type that fought in that action, so I am glad to have one. I was just disappointed in the research, plus the fact that the fighting around Bastogne had a LOT of M4A3 types with the 4th, 6th, 9,th 10th, and 11th Armored Divisions.

On the scout car, since the tank is marked as being from the 14th Armored Division, one COULD think of the scout car as Free French. The French First Army was right alongside Patch's Seventh US Army in the 6th Army Group, and the French did have a lot of older equipment, so the model can "fit in" quite historically.

Gary

 

[maddadicus]

The inaccurate Sherman model is why I did not buy this one and I am a Sherman fan. Michael

 

[red devil]

I always say if you like the look of something then buy it regardless of historical accuracy - after all Andy is allowed some 'Artistic Licence' surely? However I won't be buying it either as I don't need another Sherman even though K&C UK came up with quite a realistic price of £105 for this release, which was a pleasant surprise and hopefully a sign of things to come.
Red

 

[noli-poli]

With all the sand bags around, there's no telling if it has a cast (M4A1) or welded hull (M4A3). But you can tell from the turret type...it is T23 (extended rear for 76mm barrel). According to the "Sherman in Action" book (by Squadron Signal Publication), "there were several possible variations in fittings & details on the M4A3 (76mm)...Crew and unit modifications also altered the appearance of many vehicles." Bottonline is we do not know what's underneath those sand bags so I would take KC position that this is indeed a M4A3.

N-P

 

[noli-poli]

...On the scout car, since the tank is marked as being from the 14th Armored Division, one COULD think of the scout car as Free French. The French First Army was right alongside Patch's Seventh US Army in the 6th Army Group, and the French did have a lot of older equipment, so the model can "fit in" quite historically.

Gary

I read in one article (I'll post it as soon as I find it) that the White Scout Car was in the BoB but was relegated to MP duties because of its soft armor.

N-P

 

[binder001]

With all the sand bags around, there's no telling if it has a cast (M4A1) or welded hull (M4A3).... Bottonline is we do not know what's underneath those sand bags so I would take KC position that this is indeed a M4A3. N-P

Can I sell you my Hyundai for the price of a BMW? ;-)

!) Look at the rear of the upper hull - it is NOT covered by sandbags and has the distinctive curvature of a cast hull! 2) Look at the engine deck - that is the distinctive deck of the M4/M4A1 with a Continental air-cooled radial engine. That, sir, is clearly an M4A1. Ignore tyhe turret and gun - it is the engine that seperates the "-A" sub types of Sherman, that and the M4A1 is the ONLY Sherman type with a cast upper hull. No crew modification is going to change those basic features. The model is clearly and unarguably an M4A1. If you collect Napoleonics, and you think you're are getting an drummer, aren't you a little surprised to get a bugler in the box instead? After all, they are both musicians, right?

Sorry, I'm not the brightest bulb, but I do know a model of a Medium Tank M4A1, 76mm, Wet Stowage when it's sitting on my desk.

Gary

 

[noli-poli]

Gary:

Are you upset? I was just expressing my personal opinion. No way I am challenging your expertise. So be it its an M4A1. I wasn't born yet in WWII. All I know from my readings is that the Army made field modifications as they see fit. Merry Christmas.
N-P

 

[Rob]

Was just wondering how many of you would really not buy this tank because of these differences?.For me personally i think this looks an excellant model and it would have to be something major for me not to buy it.A lot depends also on how you display it.I mean if you are displaying it in a diorama and you want absolute realism then i can understand it,but if you are displaying it next to other vehicles surely it doesn't matter?.This is not a criticism just wondering how many would miss out on this model for (forgive me)what would seem fairly superficial reasons.Again chaps not criticising just wondering.

Rob

 

[boot51]

Whatever this Sherman is or is not it's still a great addition to any collection. I envy Gary's knowledge of military vehicles and I think he's just pointing out a little lack of research and therefore accuracy on K&C part. Gary's right to point out these errors as it obviously bothers the collectors who know it's not right, but for those of us who don't know all the details on all the vehicles and the units they were in, this Sherman is still a definitely must have piece. Besides, it has those great tracks that some of us made such a fuss about.

Fred

 

[maddadicus]

I am with Gary on this one. The Sherman buff that I am, my heart wanted this as advertised, but when I saw it, I knew it was not right. And just to buy it because it has better tracks, it is a SHERMAN, and it is well detailed does not make it look any better to me. Just my opinion. What is nice about competition is that with all the new mfg., someone will give me what I want, done right.......Michael

 

[OzDigger]

It's certainly a shame that K & C fixed the detail of the tracks but let the side down with the overall accuracy. I must admit that I wasn't aware of this error, but then I wasn't aware of the different engines in the Sherman until Michael pointed that out to me in one of our tank discussions some time ago. My excuse is that I favour the German tanks, they're just so sexy

Model Aircaft collectors are often divided into three main categories: Collectors, Investors and Enthusiasts, and I guess figure and model vehicle guys are much the same. We all seem to make allowances in this hobby to enable us to get our next model fix and I suspect this Sherman won't suffer much in sales because it has the wrong name. After-all the 'Puma that isn't a Puma' seems to sell ok

 

[binder001]

Noli-Poli, you're a good person. I apologize for sounding upset. You are right that the troops did a LOT of modification and the Sherman did evolve a LOT over its production life.

By the way, I don't want people to avoid this model. It IS a very fine rendition of an M4A1 76mm Wet Stowage medium tank, a very common type in the ETO after July of 1944. Andy and the gang made a fine collectible model that I am pleased to have in my collection. It just isn't the M4A3 advertised. I was just disappointed in an easily avoidable mis-labeling of an expensive item. The tank will still be posed with LTG Patton giving the crew hell for the sandbags (as soon as I quit buying tanks and tank books and get a better display case!).

Merry Christmas to all and a thanks to Andy for the nice Sherman.

Gary

 

[wadepat]

Was just wondering how many of you would really not buy this tank because of these differences?.For me personally i think this looks an excellant model and it would have to be something major for me not to buy it.A lot depends also on how you display it.I mean if you are displaying it in a diorama and you want absolute realism then i can understand it,but if you are displaying it next to other vehicles surely it doesn't matter?.This is not a criticism just wondering how many would miss out on this model for (forgive me)what would seem fairly superficial reasons.Again chaps not criticising just wondering.

Rob

Rob,

To answer your question, I would still purchase this tank. Clearly, it is a great model, even if mislabeled. I do not have Gary's tank knowledge and my ignorance allows me to enjoy these models to the max. The fact that the tank is mislabeled provides an interesting topic of discussion when I am showing my collection to other people. Simply stated, I would prefer that the model be accurately labeled, but I am not upset with the mistake. Mistakes are many times innocently made and I will not allow such mistakes to impact on the pleasure I experience with the hobby. Now, if they called the tank a Russian T34, then I might be upset, especially after paying the retail price for it!

Warmest personal regards,

Pat

 

[Rob]

Hey Pat,i agree with everything you just said.Can't wait to get mine!

all the best

Rob

 

[jazzeum]

This is starting to resemble the conversation we had a few months ago on the 101st Airborne patches.

 

[noli-poli]

I just looked at the bottom of the tank and it is imprinted with "Sandbag Sherman M4A1." So I guess the model is historically correct (not sure about the unit code on the gun barrel..did the 14th Div. use M4A1's?). It is the advertising that is incorrect.

BTW, I noticed a gold seal and mine is numbered 239

N-P