OKB Grigorov offers its take on a proposed design for a Pz.Kpfw. IV turret with a 75mm gun on a Pz.Kpfw. 38(t) chassis.

Read the Full News Story

If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!

This one is just silly as a proposal as the full-up weight of a Pz IV turret with an L43/48 barrel, with or without schurtzen would simply be too much for the 38T chassis to successfully operate. Sure, they made Marders with the same long-barreled gun, but the weight of the turret would exceed the design perimeters of the chassis by a large percentage making the suspension so overloaded that it wouldn't be able to function on anything rougher than pavement. If then. Not to mention the needs for a new compatible hydraulic and electrical system. According to Spielberger Krupp undertook this proposal in 1944 before quickly determining that it "proved to be impossible to carry out". As such why bother making a kit of a proposed failure that was never pursued beyond the drawing stage? And would probably never have worked? Beats me too.

Almost all of the "paper tank" was failure by dfait, that is why the remain on paper. Still there is demand for them among the modelers, and as company we do what people demands (so we can sale it). Also this is it at leas s real proposal, not like "what if" tank most of which are engineering impossibility, or pure idiocy. Like my favorite class : "100 t class chassis with gut on it without any armor":)

I agree that more choices are good and apologize if I offended; I also don't care much for "what-ifs" in general and the silly ones in particular. I'd just rather see things that I can actually use, like a really kick-ass 1/35 Schwimmwagen as an update for Tamiya's fine but somewhat dated kit. It strikes me as odd that Dragon, for example, offered so many variants of the related Kubelwagen but zilch on its more interesting stablemate. Or more soft skin vehicles, etc.

Soft skins are very difficult and expensive for research and then design. All the chassis and drive train is visible, an there are a lot of small parts. They require live sample or very very good documentation. Just for example- few years ago we plan to make FROG-7, i personally examine one, crawling on my back 6+ meters under it to examine the chassis...and we froze the project half way done, because i has ho access to the engine and transmissions. Plus most of the people want "tanks" or at least something with armor.

I agree completely; it is just that, as many have noted, we live in the Golden Age of modelling. To which I'd add that we're probably the last generation to do so in numbers worthy of manufacturers' attention, much like the train guys in that regard. That being said I have to put on my whiny face for a moment and point out that virtually EVERYTHING has been offered, often a dozen or more times. This is where companies like yours come in and fill a desire for the different and I understand that. I even appreciate it but I, and so many like me, have virtually everything that we'd want (outside of that elusive Amusing Hobby's Ferdinand!) and need support vehicles and specific figures in order to finish diorama projects that have been waiting in the wings for YEARS. Shame about the FROG-7 though.

Trumpeter will do it, and honestly we can make more money offering aftermarkek- wheels, cabin, chassis frame (we actualy put it in production , PE, very detailed), missiles, PE detail set, resin detail set, engines.....

Georgi, I agree with you about the soft-skins. They require much, too-much effort. I design WW1 armor in limited runs. The soft-armor did not sell well. It appears most modelers want "tanks and armor." I started out designing rare AFVs and they sold OK. Then I released a series of Renault FT-17 variant vehicles and accessories and those have sold very well. To me it appears that the market place wants tanks.

So that would be "tanks a lot" I guess.(Groan...)