_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV: Axis - WWII
Armor and ground forces of the Axis forces during World War II.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Zimmerit on Panthers
hugohuertas
Visit this Community
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Joined: January 26, 2007
KitMaker: 1,024 posts
Armorama: 1,013 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 - 12:38 PM UTC
Maybe a short question with many answers, but need some advice here
I got Dragon's Panther A Late, Panther D for Kursk offensive, and Panther G
What kind of zimmerit is accurate for each one? Horizontal, Tile, Waffle?
Thanks for your help!!!

GeraldOwens
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 - 08:15 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Maybe a short question with many answers, but need some advice here
I got Dragon's Panther A Late, Panther D for Kursk offensive, and Panther G
What kind of zimmerit is accurate for each one? Horizontal, Tile, Waffle?
Thanks for your help!!!



Panther D Kursk offensive: None. Zimmerit was introduced two months after the battle, and very few tanks received it retroactively.
Zimmerit was applied after all brackets and stowage boxes were installed, so the putty, and the pattern would "break' around the tool brackets on the hull sides, for instance. In some cases, it was not applied under the spare tracks on the hull sides, since the links would cover it anyway.
Late Panther A tanks could be seen with a single, "scratch," coat of Zimmerit, with a pattern of horizontal and vertical grooves cut with the edge of a trowel, dividing the putty into small squares, and the putty's surface was sometimes roughened randomly with the trowel as well, presumably to give it a "tooth" for the second coat. The grooves were often pretty wobbly. Many Panther Ausf. A tanks were shipped out with only this first layer, and it has been dubbed the "tile" pattern by some.
If the factory had time to apply the second, "finish," coat of Zimmerit (they were applied on subsequent days, and the putty was force-dried with an alcohol burner), the pattern was usually vertical grooves applied with a roller (probably a recycled cog wheel of some sort), though horizontal grooves are occasionally seen. Some factory teams thought that the pattern of squares in the initial layer was supposed to be preserved in the final layer, so these were often rescribed onto the grooved pattern.
Variations of these patterns were also seen on early G model Panthers. Tanks produced after late September, 1944, had no Zimmerit, as it was banned as a suspected fire hazard.
The "waffle" pattern was a square pattern of dimples pressed into the putty with a metal stamp, and was seen on Sturmgeschutz III assault guns. MIAG and Alkett had their own specific styles. It was not used on Panthers.
Best bet for a model builder is to work from a photo of a specific vehicle.
hugohuertas
Visit this Community
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Joined: January 26, 2007
KitMaker: 1,024 posts
Armorama: 1,013 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 - 12:15 PM UTC
Thanks for your explanation Gerald
I'm a modern period builder, but was "attacked by a kind of Panther virus" on the last months...
I know that the best way is to search for specific pictures of a given vehicle, but since modern stuff remains being my main interest, just was too lazy to do a deep searh on this matter.
Your advice is really helpful
rolf
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: August 17, 2004
KitMaker: 301 posts
Armorama: 250 posts
Posted: Friday, January 07, 2011 - 08:35 AM UTC
[/quote]
Tanks produced after late September, 1944, had no Zimmerit, as it was banned as a suspected fire hazard.
[/quote]

I believe the "Fire Hazard" reason has been debunked. It was dropped because the weapon it (zimmerit) was designed to counter never materialized sufficiently or at all, that being hand held magnetic mines. So it was considered useless and a serious waste of valuable manufacturing time.

Roy
GeraldOwens
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Friday, January 07, 2011 - 09:45 AM UTC

Quoted Text



I believe the "Fire Hazard" reason has been debunked. It was dropped because the weapon it (zimmerit) was designed to counter never materialized sufficiently or at all, that being hand held magnetic mines. So it was considered useless and a serious waste of valuable manufacturing time.

Roy



Debunked by whom and where? All of the published books by Jentz and Spielberger cite the original documents, which relate anecdotal reports from the field that the material could catch fire when the vehicle was hit.
There was a debunking, but it was by the Germans themselves. The use of Zimmerit was suspended in September, 1944, until controlled tests could be carried out. The tests showed it didn't catch fire, but as you've mentioned, there was little or no use of magnetic mines in 1944-45, and scant justification for bothering with Zimmerit. Its uselessness could certainly be cited as the reason it was not reintroduced, since no one missed it, and the British captured over 100 tons of unused Zimmerit at war's end.
HEINE-07
Visit this Community
Ohio, United States
Joined: February 28, 2007
KitMaker: 392 posts
Armorama: 198 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 - 04:17 PM UTC
When making square "tile" pattern zimmerit, it is important to practice several times first, with old kits. This practice showed me the importance of counting the number of scribe-lines on an actual tank, and making markers on the finish-model for the placement for each particular line. Otherwise, they may come out looking dis-proportionate to the scale of the model, or, end up bending, or curving in odd ways as the scribing approaches the angled edges of the model. Good luck with your vintage armor.--Rick.
 _GOTOTOP