Ok guys I've just bought the above mentioned. And am now looking for some bits to make it a little better..... eg: better tracks, gun barrell.




I'm trying to depict it in Normandy in late spring early summer

Paul

One thing I do is to go to www.greatmodels.com and use search to find your kit,once you find the kit,they usually list all the accessories that are available for that kit.Whether you buy from them is up to you,but it does give you a pretty good listing of all the AM stuff available for a particular kit.

Voyager makes a nice PE set as well as a barrel and mantlet. I don't know if they have a jumbo pack that includes everything for this kit, but they may. Lucky model has several items listed, for very good prices.

If you want to get sick with detail and options....try Aber. Fantastic sets of Photo-etch and they have barrels as well. Great models usually has links if the item has been reviewed. Find your kit, click on accessories, and go wild!!!!!!

Ok, quick update.

I've been doing quite a bit of research for the Stug.
I've purchased the following for it...




I've also bought a couple of figure sets... I just need a setting now..

You'll need to add the Zimm. Also might want to look into the Saukopf mantlet and later metal return rollers. The later Stug G was a VERY different animal than the earlier ones: different engine deck welds, rear plate, mufflers, etc....

HTH
Chris

Thanks for that Chris, I was hoping to not have to do too much re-configuring of the Stug, but try and use it as it is, with small alterations

Looks good,looking foward to your project.I already gathered stuff for a Stug III only in 1/48 for the group build.

It would seem that you have plenty of options here-

As molded, the G-fruhe is an early G, and does not need zimm to be accurate. IF you are thinking of sticking with an "early" and adding details to the kit, folks have ID'd all sorts of good stuff. You CAN add on schurtzen and still "right".

Ss you are doing it as a "Normandy" vehicle, the question I think would be whether you could either ID any actual "fruhe" G in any of the units serving there at or after D-Day, or whether you could reasonably posit there having been such. I personally suppose it to have been at least possible... but I'm just offering an opinion, here. Maybe one or another of those references will help resolve this?

Bob, after doing some "Googling" I've found this "In December of 1944 the 2.Panzer-Division was withdrawn from the Eastern Front and sent to rest and refit in France. After a period of rest and occupation duties in France, the division saw heavy fighting against the Allied Armies during the D-Day Invasion in June, 1944. After the desperate battles for Normandy the 2.Panzer-Division was nearly destroyed in the Falaise Gap. It managed a breakout from the pocket and suffered staggering losses while doing so."

This was taken from Feldgrau.com

So hopefully I can now concentrate on scratching my building...

Paul: What does the shifting of the 2PD to the West have to do with the subject at hand? You assume that in their shift that old equipment was sent with them and therefore a early production Stug IIIG Early could be in Normandy. The fact is that most equipment would have been left behind to other units.

People have kindly suggested that short of photographic evidence to the contrary, you ought to change your intent on making it a Normandy vehicle.

BTW: the voyager PE set you have is for the very very nice DML kit. It may not fit completely with the Tamiya StuG IIIG.

Paul, Roy;

OK - I think I'll toss this one out to you...

Dragon has produced two StuG III G kits- #6320 and #6365 (which are the same kit but 65 has the schurzen included). According to Cookie Sewell's review of the -65 kit, DML claims and provides decals for a Pz Div 2 vehicle in Normandy in 1944. Now, Sewell is usually pretty careful in his critiques, IMO, so I'll take it as being reasonable from his lack of gaff on this that DML is being at least plausible.

Which, I think, could be considered as being a sort of "OK provenience" for going ahead with the plan! I would! Make it an "older" early in the 2 PzDiv in Normandy. You can even add schurzen if you like, and you don't NEED to zimm it, either!

Of course, just my tossing out my opinion, here, gents!

Highly unlikely you would have an unzimmed StuG III G running around in Normandy post June '44. Here's why I say that...consider when zim was introduced (Aug '43) and then consider how long this StuG III G would've had to be around and intact (without seeing combat) prior to June '44 and the Normandy invasion (nearly a year). Given the flow of units and the strategic importance of StuG production during this time period (remember that the StuG IV was introduced due to the interruption of StuG III G production by Allied bombing), particularly to equip units on the Eastern Front and this becomes a tough scenario to have actually happened just at this point.

Add to this the fact that France was used as a "rest and refit" location during this time period and most units that cycled through were given new gear, trained up, and then sent back to either the Eastern Front or Italy to see combat and you get the idea. The text that was quoted regarding 2PzDiv should read "December '43" and not December '44 for obvious reasons. That doesn't mean that it shouldn't have zim...DML frequently provides markings for its vehicles that require zim for them to be 100% accurate since they don't provide the molded-on zim on most kits to go with the markings schemes provided. The vehicle that includes Schurzen falls into the time period when zim was also applied (Schurzen were first fitted to StuG III Gs in May-June '43 as part of the Kursk directives) since that style of Schurzen and rails were fitted until March '44 when the triangular type and revised plates were introduced. So the odds are clearly in favor of a StuG III G with early-type Schurzen fitted having zim in Normandy vs. it not having it (2 months of production pre-zim vs. 9 months of production w/ zim).

Flipping through the reference photos that I have of units in Normandy all show StuG III Gs with Schurzen rails (rarely with the plates actually mounted) with zim and none without for example. Now is it possible that there was 1 lonely StuG III G "early" still bopping around in Normandy that didn't have zim? Anything is technically possible when you consider that there were units in Normandy that had some oddball vehicles like the early Pz IV C/Ds, some early StuG III short-gun, etc.

However that's like trying to prove a negative...because you can't say with 100% certainty that there weren't ANY because we don't have photos that show EVERY vehicle down to the unit, timeframe, and chassis number to disprove the assertion that there might, just might, have been ONE that didn't have zim. The likelihood is heavily against this though and the burden of proof (if there were to be one) would fall on the person claiming the exception to the rule rather than those backing up the rule from a consistency standpoint IMHO.

Just something to consider in the grand scheme of the "accuracy" debate ongoing in this thread.

Bill P. and All;

That was quite a download of good info, and I thank you for it! Always neat to get some real stuff on all a this! You must have some stuff I certainly don't!

Just for some parting fun... I found yet a couple more of interesting twists on the G... these are from the Squadron/Signal "Sturmgeschutz III in Action" pub-

The colour plates include 4 G vehicles said to be from Russia 1943 & '44, and the Balkans '44. These feature the welded mantlet- 2 different schurzen formats, but no apparent zim (though some of the "in Russia" photos of G do have zim, and others, not). On p32 is what is claimed to be a pic of a column of G in France in 1944- with schurzen, welded mantlets and apparently no zim. (and captioned in ref to units there for refit or training). The adjacent pic, of an "early G" in Italy, 1943, shows the version lacking the cupola-deflector, and w/out zim or schurzen. P48 shows 2 late-war G from Germany (1945) which have some "early" features, such as welded mantlets (but with the co-axial MG) - and a rundumfeuer MG on top- no zim, but schurzen.

Maybe doing the proposed build as either a "Russia", "Balkans", or pre-D-Day France vehicle would work and still be plausible (again looks OK for no zim, and schurzen an option (but think on those mounting styles...) - or one in "Italy 1943". The late-war G on p48 of that pub are also intriguing!

Just an opinion, now, no expertise here, guys!

All,

Thanks for everyones input regarding this thread, I didn't expect a full debate on whose right and wrong. I mearly suggested I'd like to show my Stug in Normandy. I am open to changing the area so as to "best fit" the vehicle in the historically correct area.

Just as an extra note on France, how accurate are Bison decals? They do a set for the Stug III Ausf G with the early mantlet. It is there decal #35067.

Ok yes I may need to tweek the Stug a little but like I said above, I am open to changing the area the Stug is situated at...

Again thanks for everyone's input.

Paul.

I have this same reference and know the color plates you're referring to. As you've discovered, dating things by certain features alone such as the mantlet type isn't an exact science. The text for the color plates also isn't very precise in the timeframes stated so must be taken with a grain of salt when checking their respective features. Considering when zim was introduced (and discontinued), when Schurzen were introduced (and changed), and when different mantlet types were introduced (as well as other features like the rundumfeurer MG), and you have the opportunity for overlap since none of those features were introduced together at the same time. The German production lines followed a general practice of using up existing stocks in production before converting over to new features/changes, so there's always going to be some fuzziness involved depending. The block-style mantlet for example continued to be used right up through the end in 1945 side-by-side when the cast-style mantlet was introduced because it was expedient to continue to produce them simultaneously to keep up with demand. As you point out, the block style mantlet underwent some of its own adaptations including the introduction of the coaxial MG to keep pace with similar adaptations made to the cast mantlet (ironically the block-style mantlet w/coaxial was introduced into production before the cast-style by a couple of months).

Comparing the combination of different features allows you to get a pretty close approximation of when a particular StuG was produced during the production run, sometimes down to a specific month, sometimes to a range of months, but that's as precise as it gets. There aren't official "early", "mid", "late" designations, these are just modeler-terms applied for convenience sake to try to organize this.

As for the pic you reference for the StuGs in Normandy, you have to look closer...the nearest vehicle in that column clearly has zim on the rear plates and has the distinctive Alkett waffle-type pattern. These are posted for discussion purposes only.





Paul,

Sorry to hijack your thread a bit but as you can see when it comes to StuGs, setting an exact timeframe is a little tricky. If you want to change your setting to reflect the configuration of your Tamiya kit, I would suggest any theater pre-June 1943 for minimum hassle. That would mean you could depict this StuG in one of three main locations (Eastern Front, Italy, or France as a refit vehicle) that would suit that time period. Ultimately it's your model and there aren't any model police out there who will come knocking on your door demanding proof that your

Paul:

(Echoing Bill P. Me, Too! I certes don't want to hijack your thread. I think you have lots of great leads (save mine!) on what you might do. I look forward to seeing it, whichever way you go!

Bill: Great info! You make the case "in spades": all this "early - mid - late" stuff and dating by seen features is strictly "con granum salis" to me! There was any amount of overlap, using of old stocks, repairs, field expediency, and poor records. Which leaves me comfy with my posits previous! And Perish the Model Police!

BTW, That's a neat B&W pic you have posted - but not the one(s) I was ref'ing! I can clearly see the waffle on your's! I would plead "nolo-contendre"! I apologize for not posting the pic I was talking about - which looked at a column crossing a small bridge and heading up-hill towards the photographer. My bad!

That's not a pic from the more recent StuG III Walk-around 2 pub, is it? It does not appear in my old pub.

This thread has me off to paw that DML StuG III G kit in my closet with growing enthusiasm!

Bob,

It would seem we are working from different editions perhaps. Mine is the Armor Walk-Around Number 2 with a copyright of 2001 by Squadron/Signal. The pic in question appears in my edition on p. 26 and is the only pic that shows a column of vehicles in Normandy so I assumed it was the same one you were after even though you said yours was on p.32...sounds like the "Walk Around" has changed in content over time perhaps?

StuGs are a fascinating subject IMHO both due to their long-lived design and the modifications they underwent from the start of the war all the way to the end. This of course makes it somewhat messy for us modelers due to that evolution but also provides for a lot of variety along the way.

I want to thank everyone for their input into this thread. And I want to just post this last pic....


Text underneath states "A StuG III destroyed in Normandy, 1944. This vehicle likely suffered a catastrophic internal explosion"

I have decided to change my dio and will leave the area till last!

Just a quick update, I've been waiting for over a week for the PE kit for the Stug only to be dissapointed that it won't be coming

So I've had my money refunded and am now looking for something else.......

I have decided to place the stug in a rest & refit situation.

Can't wate to see some progress work photos.

Ok, my replacement PE kit has now arrived, so I've made a start on the Stug.

I'll post pictures this evening. Still not quite sure on what dio to do with it yet. Maybe i'll get a flash of inspriration soon.


Paul.

Paul:

Hi!

Sounds like the StuG is driving forward!

Just as a sort of "other place" to look for some inspiration (and yes, even with regards that Normandy idea), there is this recent Osprey Modelling Manual on the StuG III done by Gary Edmundson (sp?)-

I was just looking at it last nite and recalled you and your project. There's a great work-up in this book on a later G set in Normandy... I started to droll with the stuff he's done over on it. FYI sorta, I think he's using that Tamiya kit you are using, so...


And ALL, with ref that zimm debate... His model sports a waffle pattern done, I think, with the Atak resin applique product.

Cheers!

Bob

Bob,

Thanks for the info, I've just purchased the book you mentioned! Looked at it a few weeks ago and got the Stug in Action one instead.

Paul

Paul;

Huh!

I splurged a bit back and bought both - the Osprey book offers lots of great pics of recent builds done by a master, and I have found it an inspirational mine of the first order, in that it shows all sorts of detail mods and bits which I can make (mostly from styrene). Whereas the "In Action" books show the real thing, and allow one to see the various "options" and variations in the field.

Both good sources for your project, methinks!