Hey, guys, about that Italeri M36B1...I made mine into an M36 with scratchbuilt upper hull and a somewhat corrected turret and interior--first big armor project in 20 years. Yeah, I guess I'm stupid...Anyway, I can confirm that there is LOTS of work to do to that thing to make it acceptable. Now, I understand that money is a factor for all of us but I favor waiting for the Academy kit. I have the Achilles, not yet started, and it looks fabulous. If you have to have the very rare M36B1 on the M4A3 hull I would honestly recommend using the forthcoming Academy M36 along with the Tamiya M4A3 hull rather than trying to fix the old Italeri kit. Just my.02, there.
I too love those TDs and anything with a 17pdr gun too--my collection will be heavily skewed in favor of Fireflies and the M10/M36 family. And while I am here, what kind of trouble can I stir up asking for rants or raves regarding the two extant M18 Hellcat kits?
Greg
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
Tank Destroyer Question
Greg
Joined: April 12, 2002
KitMaker: 455 posts
Armorama: 298 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 02:25 AM UTC
210cav
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 6,149 posts
Armorama: 4,573 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 03:09 AM UTC
I built the AFV M-18. Great kit. Bought the brass barrel, but the kit one is more than sufficient. Went together well. I consult the Perth Military Modeling site prior to commencing construction. Great advice and superb pictures. I do not know about the Academy kit, but for my two cents, I doubt there is a hair difference between them.
Do well.
DJ
Do well.
DJ
m1garand
Joined: February 08, 2002
KitMaker: 1,248 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 03:15 AM UTC
I am in the middle of building the AFV Club M-18. An enjoyable build for me. I have heard that the Academy kit is a very good kit as well.
210cav
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 6,149 posts
Armorama: 4,573 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 03:22 AM UTC
BC--agree, she is a fine kit. I also thought the M36B1 was a neat kit to put on the shelf. I am on the Dragon Wagon project and following Rob's advice to take her one step at a time. So far so good. Fit is perfect or better and the parts are virtuall flash free. I am painting her with MM enamels and Tamiya acrylics. I pray this will come out the way I visualize. Let you know how I progress.
DJ
DJ
m1garand
Joined: February 08, 2002
KitMaker: 1,248 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 03:32 AM UTC
I'm in the middle of the M-18 and the AFV Club M-10. Both are very nice kits. Always paint with MM and Humbrol enamels. 
Greg
Joined: April 12, 2002
KitMaker: 455 posts
Armorama: 298 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 05:37 AM UTC
Sounds like the AFV Hellcat gets high marks from you fellows; that might be the one to snare. Anybody know offhand how it scales? I know the Academy kit is, among other things, about seven scale inches too narrow. That siad, they both LOOK like an M18. Did either one of them get the turret ring offset right? I understand that the turret ring was offset two inches to the right of vehicle centerline.
Gre
Gre
m1garand
Joined: February 08, 2002
KitMaker: 1,248 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 05:41 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Sounds like the AFV Hellcat gets high marks from you fellows; that might be the one to snare. Anybody know offhand how it scales? I know the Academy kit is, among other things, about seven scale inches too narrow. That siad, they both LOOK like an M18. Did either one of them get the turret ring offset right? I understand that the turret ring was offset two inches to the right of vehicle centerline.
Gre
I'm not one to measure things like that. I'm more interested that it looks like a hellcat when done. And that it goes together nicely like it should.
Greg
Joined: April 12, 2002
KitMaker: 455 posts
Armorama: 298 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 06:11 AM UTC
Well, BC, I have to agree with you on that...But I can't help myself in asking, I really can't. Partly it is an obsession with detail and partly a way to justify the financial outlay. I can tell the wife I'll be MUCH happier building the more accurate (and probably expensive) kit! Probably doesn't matter; it all keeps me out of bars anyway so I'm not sure she really cares how much I spend! I freely admit that I am one who occasionally breaks out the dial calipers to measure a kit--way over the edge, I admit. And just so you all know how far this detail obsession goes, I regularly remove the wheels of the car to wash and wax them by hand! Makes modeling seem tame, doesn't it :-)
Greg
Greg
210cav
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 6,149 posts
Armorama: 4,573 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 08:27 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Sounds like the AFV Hellcat gets high marks from you fellows; that might be the one to snare. Anybody know offhand how it scales? I know the Academy kit is, among other things, about seven scale inches too narrow. That siad, they both LOOK like an M18. Did either one of them get the turret ring offset right? I understand that the turret ring was offset two inches to the right of vehicle centerline.
Gre
Good Lord! Do not tell me that you are one of those people who goes around with rulers, little lights and a measuring tape at Model Shows.....
DJ
Greg
Joined: April 12, 2002
KitMaker: 455 posts
Armorama: 298 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 10:07 PM UTC
My dear 210Cav, no; I don't do the light and ruler thing in public. At home, for my own work, sure--that's different. Hell, my own modeling skill isn't so fantastic that I could ever feel the slightest bit justified in putting anyone else's work to that kind of scrutiny. And no matter how much my work might earn compliments from my friends, I'll bask in that for maybe ten seconds before methodically picking my own model apart and describing the seam I'm not happy with, the shape I didn't quite get right, the item misplaced because I followed the directions and didn't have a reference available that told me differently. Can't do that to other's work, however; only my own. But l presume that I'm similar to many of you in that I often add some detail widget here or there that can only be seen with strong light from a certain angle once the model is done. A certain silly modeler's pride in knowing it is there, even if one has to be a contortionist to see it.
Greg
Greg
210cav
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 6,149 posts
Armorama: 4,573 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 11:12 PM UTC
Quoted Text
My dear 210Cav, no; I don't do the light and ruler thing in public. At home, for my own work, sure--that's different. Hell, my own modeling skill isn't so fantastic that I could ever feel the slightest bit justified in putting anyone else's work to that kind of scrutiny. And no matter how much my work might earn compliments from my friends, I'll bask in that for maybe ten seconds before methodically picking my own model apart and describing the seam I'm not happy with, the shape I didn't quite get right, the item misplaced because I followed the directions and didn't have a reference available that told me differently. Can't do that to other's work, however; only my own. But l presume that I'm similar to many of you in that I often add some detail widget here or there that can only be seen with strong light from a certain angle once the model is done. A certain silly modeler's pride in knowing it is there, even if one has to be a contortionist to see it.
Greg
My Dear Greg--I obviously touched a sensitive nerve here......
Enjoy life!
DJ
Greg
Joined: April 12, 2002
KitMaker: 455 posts
Armorama: 298 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 11:24 PM UTC
Oh, no, not so much a sensitive nerve as exposing my neuroses! Despite whatever whining I or others do, this hobby is very enjoyable or I wouldn't still be doing it after 30 years. At least in my case, there is a certain masochism involved that compels me to strive for great accuracy and fidelity of detail, yet be consistently self critical of my efforts. Something about my familial German perfectionism, I'm sure. Ok, maybe there was a nerve there: I'll use flashlights to admire the work of others and marvel at their skill and ingenuity. What I have a dislike for is the flashlight-toting self-appointed expert (or judge) who uses the tools to find fault rather than to praise. Maybe because I am so self critical I find it unseemly for others to be overly critical. But I suspect that topic is another thread entirely!
Greg
Greg
salt6
Joined: February 17, 2002
KitMaker: 796 posts
Armorama: 574 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 07:49 AM UTC
You guys haven't mentioned the 90mm towed AT gun. Don't know the M number.
Michel
Joined: March 13, 2002
KitMaker: 95 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 12:48 PM UTC
Talkin' about the ZVEZDA ( ex-ITALERI, ex-AIRFIX, ex-MAX...) brit' 6 pdr, you ' ve to do some work to bring it to US standart...US M1 57mm AT gun ' ve a longer barrel ( couldn' t remember how much...Circa 5mm ), with a " tuliped " end ( is it REAL english, this one ? ), new breech, carriage, shield, wheels, ammo...And I forgot something !
You could ( ? ! ) find a nice article in an old FineScale Modeler ( # July 84...Yes sir, I ' m that OLD ! ), givin' you all you need to know to tackle to the beast....
If you NEED it, I could send you ( by post, I couldn' t use this beautiful, and so expensive, scanner...Grrrr ! ) photocopies of the article, as it ' s doubtful you could find that oldish FSM issue...
By the way, you could see in US TD in combat ( # 7005, from CONCORD Pub. " At war Series ", p 64 ), a somewhat blurred photo of an 57mm on a Dodge WC63 ( erroneously captioned: M6, 37mm GMC ), from the Marine 3rd Div on Bougainville, early 44...But it' s doubtful, lookin' to the countryside AND the helmets of the walkin' dudes ( seems to look like more ETO and Army, for me ) ! Nevermind, it ' ll be a nice model, this one, and definitely NOT common !
' ve a nice day...!
You could ( ? ! ) find a nice article in an old FineScale Modeler ( # July 84...Yes sir, I ' m that OLD ! ), givin' you all you need to know to tackle to the beast....
If you NEED it, I could send you ( by post, I couldn' t use this beautiful, and so expensive, scanner...Grrrr ! ) photocopies of the article, as it ' s doubtful you could find that oldish FSM issue...
By the way, you could see in US TD in combat ( # 7005, from CONCORD Pub. " At war Series ", p 64 ), a somewhat blurred photo of an 57mm on a Dodge WC63 ( erroneously captioned: M6, 37mm GMC ), from the Marine 3rd Div on Bougainville, early 44...But it' s doubtful, lookin' to the countryside AND the helmets of the walkin' dudes ( seems to look like more ETO and Army, for me ) ! Nevermind, it ' ll be a nice model, this one, and definitely NOT common !
' ve a nice day...!
Greg
Joined: April 12, 2002
KitMaker: 455 posts
Armorama: 298 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 10:03 PM UTC
The 90mm towed gun....I don't recall the ordnance designator either, but like the famed German 88 this one was an anti-aircraft weapon. To the best of my (limited) knowledge, we never officially converted those units to anti-tank. By the time we figured out that the 90mm was needed, we also figured out that towed guns were toast. If you doubt this, check out the stories of 2AD in the Ruhr Pocket. They ran up against defensive belts of 88s and 128's ringing the major cities, part of the flak defenses. Lead elements moved up, made contact, took fire. Called for arty with the new pozit fuse and that was that--no more gun crews. Now, I know that those towed 90s did see anti-tank use, particularly in the Bulge, but my point is i don't believe AT units were officially formed around the weapon.
Greg
Greg
Kencelot
Joined: December 27, 2001
KitMaker: 4,268 posts
Armorama: 2,804 posts
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2002 - 05:38 AM UTC
The gun you speak of is the M2 w/ mount M2. This was the first of the 90mm guns produced as a dual-purpose weapon. It was made with the requirements of having a negative elevation (minus 10 degrees) - for ground targets, and rapidly set-up for for firing-without the need to mount on a seperate pedestal.
Can only wish someone would produce this as a kit.
Can only wish someone would produce this as a kit.
Greg
Joined: April 12, 2002
KitMaker: 455 posts
Armorama: 298 posts
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2002 - 05:57 AM UTC
Well, yeah, Kencelot a kit of the thing would be nice to see--funny how towed ordnance gets little attention from mainstream kit makers, with the notable exception of AFV's Long Tom.
Did we actually form TD units with this weapon? I picked up that new TD book that was mentioned here in another post (big black hardcover one) and the towed 3-inch was the only one I noticed as I scanned the equipment lists.
Greg
Did we actually form TD units with this weapon? I picked up that new TD book that was mentioned here in another post (big black hardcover one) and the towed 3-inch was the only one I noticed as I scanned the equipment lists.
Greg
Kencelot
Joined: December 27, 2001
KitMaker: 4,268 posts
Armorama: 2,804 posts
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2002 - 06:20 AM UTC
As far as all my resources tell me, the 90mm M2 was basically an experiment with the gun as a dual purpose weapon. The need for 90mm was regognized by both air defence and ground defence. Anti air units were put to the test with the gun. It was very successful with both air and ground targets, but was still too big to be manuvered quickly enough for use as a TD. TD doctrine required offensive capabilities.
210cav
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 6,149 posts
Armorama: 4,573 posts
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2002 - 06:21 AM UTC
Quoted Text
The gun you speak of is the M2 w/ mount M2. This was the first of the 90mm guns produced as a dual-purpose weapon. It was made with the requirements of having a negative elevation (minus 10 degrees) - for ground targets, and rapidly set-up for for firing-without the need to mount on a seperate pedestal.
Can only wish someone would produce this as a kit.
Correct me if I am wrong--- as I am away from my source books---but wasn't the M2 an improved M1 Anti-Aircraft weapon that converted to a dual purpose (ground and air)?
DJ
Ranger74
Joined: April 04, 2002
KitMaker: 1,290 posts
Armorama: 658 posts
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2002 - 11:47 AM UTC
The success of mobile TDs ended towed guns for the US Army, although the need for the 90mm was recognised with the intro of the M36, which was an attempt to get the 90mm into action as soon as possible. The M26 Pershing being behind schedule. The 57mm and 3" towed guns, I believe, were the only real towed guns to see service the US Army, the pop gun (37mm) not withstanding.
I will say that it took some nerve of steel to man a towed TD, I've to respect those guys, especially after they fired their first shot.
I will say that it took some nerve of steel to man a towed TD, I've to respect those guys, especially after they fired their first shot.
210cav
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 6,149 posts
Armorama: 4,573 posts
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2002 - 10:06 PM UTC
Can not agree with you more on the bravery of those Soldiers who manned a 57mm or 76mm towed AT gun. One shot heroes. It was all over after the popped the first round.
DJ
DJ
Kencelot
Joined: December 27, 2001
KitMaker: 4,268 posts
Armorama: 2,804 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 04, 2002 - 04:27 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Correct me if I am wrong--- as I am away from my source books---but wasn't the M2 an improved M1 Anti-Aircraft weapon that converted to a dual purpose (ground and air)?
Indeed it was sir! An improved M1 with new mount M2 instead of the M1A1 mount.
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.