Stug III Ausf. F

  • move
The kit is the old DML Stug. III Ausf. F. The gun barrel is from a newer DML kit. Super detailed with Eduard photo etched, & Friulmodel tracks. Painted with Testor's enamel model master paints.

Weathering with washes of winsor newton oil paints & MIG dark brown wash. Along with Bragdon enterprises weather system pigments.

MIG mud & Europe earth enamel & pigments, along with real dirt mixed with acrylic paints for mud and dirt simulation.

"Star" decals & dry transfer letters for Stug. Abt.210 were used.
  • move
  • move
  • move
  • move
  • move
  • move
  • move
  • move
  • move

About the Author



Built this same kit about a decade ago with mine converted into a StuH instead to depict one of the trial vehicles deployed at Kursk; I like to try and depict variants not always planned on by the manufacturer. That's just me. Anyways, I really like the paint job and weathering.
APR 24, 2020 - 12:34 PM
bud your comment was an ass type thing...lets see ALL your builds ummm. bet we can pick your [auto-censored] apart ...oh hell yea.
APR 24, 2020 - 01:11 PM
the above comment is for obg153
APR 24, 2020 - 01:13 PM
Yeah, outrageous! I've even seen this on 1:1 scale German Sturmgeschütz builds!
APR 25, 2020 - 12:16 PM
Cool photo, terrible pain job. That was tongue-in-cheek as yes, I know Aberdeen's policy on enemy combatant vehicles. As in don't paint 'em.
APR 25, 2020 - 01:03 PM
Very nice work! I have always been a fan of the StuG and I totally like what you did with this one: great painting and weathering, worn down but in a realistic way! I really do hope, RFM or Takom or maybe MENG are coming out with a full line of Pz.III and variants with full interiors soon... it's about time for those guys to be depicted after all those zillions of Tigers and Panthers and now Pz.IVs...
APR 26, 2020 - 07:46 PM
In all the time on this site, it would be hard to count the number of times where comments regarding some particular build are both complimentary and/or point out a minor flaw or error, or question the builder's choices in construction. In most cases, the builder may acknowledge the comment & may explain their decisions. Just as often, someone with more expertise or knowledge of a particular subject may point out that the builder was right/wrong in their choice, explain what could/should have been done, indicate how the alleged flaw/error might have taken place in a real-world setting, or simply suggest that it's within the realm of artistic license. It's called constructive criticism, and everyone generally benefits from it since the intent is to enhance one's skills & improve everyone's knowledge about a particular subject. If I was wrong in my comment, I'd readily admit it. Apparently though, PanzerTim missed class that day. Rather than offering anything constructive, he makes a direct, personal attack, describing my post as, "an ass type thing." That's a sure sign of where his head is at.
APR 27, 2020 - 03:14 AM
Very thoughtfully expressed statement. I agree! Your comment from above was pointing something out, and it might have NOT been a flaw at all as another poster was showing. And you just said that you were ready to accept a misconception on your side. That's the purpose of a discussion alas a forum! Anyway, just don't give him the same treatment, meaning your last sentence. You don't have to stand for that, do you?
APR 27, 2020 - 09:00 PM
Nice highlight on its tracks, very cool job!
APR 28, 2020 - 05:49 AM
The Aberdeen vehicle is in a poor state. The fenders would have been fitted to the hull.
APR 29, 2020 - 01:57 AM