They're expensive I know, but I get the impression they're not as accurate as all that, for when I looked up the Formations website I see a lot of "corrective" items for Tasca kits. Better to go with the cheaper kits and upgrade then?

The Tasca Sherman kits are worth every penny in my book. They go together very well and the fit is perfect. Very well engineered kits.

I don’t know why every one is claming that the late M4A1 transmission is incorrect, I have been doing a lot of research on the M4A1’s in Normandy, and ALL the pictures I have found show them ALL to have the correct E4186 cast differential housing as supplied in the tasca kit.

I would recommend Formations ride height spacers as I find them easier than the foam blocks that need to be cut, and maybe a turned barrel. Their cast texture is a little on the “soft” side, but that is easy enough to correct.

If you want to “Enjoy” a smooth build, then I recommend a tasca kit.

Really, they are very nice kits, few serious flaws and easy to build from my experience.

The Formations add-ons tend to be minor variations/additions/improvements and, though nice, not entirely "necessary" for the Tasca Shermans.

As to whether they're worth the cost, well, that's a personal decision. For me I would never pay full retail because their cost exceeds value in my opinion. They are just too damned expensive.
But that said, I have purchased several on sale for around thirty bucks each, more than reasonable all things considered.

Mark

I've built a couple of shermans by other companies (naming no names, but including the nearest direct competitor in terms of quality) but in my opinion no-one touches tasca for quality

Yes, if you want to tweak them there are things to tweak, but not nearly as much as thecorrections needed, sometimes major, on other's kits. And they are a joy to put together.

In fact I like them so much I'm a converted shermaholic building Tascas only and have a few waiting now in the stash


As for the price thing, this may depend on where you are, and I'm guessing you're in the US? I don't know the price differential to the 'nearest competitor' where you are, but in the UK Tasca and 'the other sherman producer' cost the same. Tasca wins hands down here as the quality is much higher and you're not buying a box with a mish mash of sprues some dating back ten or more years.

As always though, shop around and price need not be an issue

I would say "Yes".

The only inaccuracies I have seen found are small or very small. The small thing was that their differential housings are slightly undersized in the radius around the nose and final drive housings. Unless you are a real nut like me you'd never find it, and even now that I have I wouldn't bother changing it because the rest of the detailing on those parts is so clean and nice. The very small things are detail items, such as missing drain holes, details correct for Shermans but not the tank in particular, missing bolt heads, thin weld lines, stuff like that. All easily correctable for those who want to. The biggest "issue" I recall is that the riveted lower hull is wrong for some marking options. True, but I don't consider markings in my value estimations - my preference. If they were to use the riveted lower in the wrong version altogether (say for a large hatch M4A1), then that would be a "medium" inaccuracy to me, because it is fixable.

Where are these places where people say Tasca kits are inaccurate?

I checked the Formations website and none of their items are "corrective" for Tasca kits. The ride height spacers would come closest, but they don't correct anything. The welded M4A1 lower hull is a more common type, not a correction. The M34 gun and mount is mainly a metal barrel set to my eye - I could find nothing wrong with the mount pieces in the kit. (Perhaps the other listed kits need them?) All the others are conversions, providing versions that Tasca doesn't offer. You should note that Rob has made his latest conversions using Tasca, not DML kit base kits. That should tell you something right there.

I guess the idea of value depends on the particular version. The newer equivalent DML versions are pretty nice, but they have worse problems with their entire differential and nose, something I would feel compelled to correct. The Tasca M4A4 is a generation ahead of the DML item. The amount of work necessary to bring the DML up to the Tasca level out of the box is certainly worth the price difference to me.

A quick look at one online retailer that carried both brands gives a $60-63 price for Tasca and $42-$45 for DML. (Although some are as low as $39, others as high as $55.) For the few models I build I would rather spend $20 more and eliminate the basic correction work.

Yes, if you must have the most up-to-date, best designed, make-all-other-Sherman-tank-kits-obsolete model of the Sherman tank and don't mind spending around $60.

No, if you just want a decent Sherman tank kit sitting on your shelf and any old Sherman, be it Italeri, Tamiya, Academy or any flavor of Dragon kit will do. Most of these still build into solid representations of the quintessential US WW2 tank and are not as expensive.

Bottom line is what you want to spend and what you want in a kit.

Probably the most accurate Sherman on the market is still the Italeri M4A1(76). They based it on a particular surviving tank, which is why the gun tube looks the way it does. That, and the lack of any casting texture are about all that is inaccurate. You can get them for $10 at most model shows. (But plan on getting new tracks and a gun tube at the same time.)

KL

First, let me say that we are the importer/distributor for Tasca items for the U.S. and Canada. We took their line because it had a good reputation for fit and accuracy. Also, the previous importer had very high retail prices on these kits from $80 to $100, so we thought that with substantially lower retail prices, there would be a good market for the new kits as well as the previously released kits.

Our retail prices range from $49.95 to $61.95. You can check this on our web site at: www.pacmodels.com. If the dollar improves significantly against the yen, we will be able to lower the retail prices.

As a modeler, I built the Tasca 4th Panzer Division Pz.II "Luchs". I found that it fit well and by checking some previous build reviews, I was able to make a very nice model of it. The paint job did not end up the way I wanted, so one of these days, I will re-paint it. All in all, I found it to be a very enjoyable build.

I am now working on their 1:24 Pz.II F. The fit is good and I haven't had any problems so far. So two thumbs up for me. My next project will be their new M3A3E8 "EZ 8".

Best Regards,

Ken Lawrence
Pacific Coast Models, Inc.

I love tasca. They are just really fun to build, and for the price, id say its worth it. The biggest issue i have is the two-part gun barrel, which can be used, of course, but for the price should really include an aluminum barrel or at least a single piece offering.

I've built four and can't see my building any other companies' kits for Shermans ever, frankly.

As for their not supplying a single piece barrel -- I've used their split barrel as a replacement for another kit! They are perfectly fine, IMHO.

And for where "you get the impression that they aren't all that accurate" -- I'm flummoxed at the mention of such mysterious proclamations.

Tom, I was in the same boat as you for a while and had a hard time justifying paying that much for a kit from a manufacturer I wasn't really familiar with. I am very glad that I did take a chance and buy one, and they are certainly worth the price.

I took mine from Luckymodel when they had a sale + 10% off when you order more then 50USD, so it was around 45 USD with delievery.

at the risk of being flamed to death:

yes, Tasca's kits are brilliant in every aspect. but, given the choice i'd rather have a DML sherman

let the flaming begin (runs for cover)

Can't see any reason to" flame" you as you put it, freedom of choice after all, but it would be only fair to give a reason/s why you would rather choose DML . You never know some might agree with you.

I'm doing other projects right now, nothing Sherman-related. But I wanted to know for future reference. Sometimes things get overhyped and they aren't really so great after all, so I wanted to be sure. Thanks.

One of the guys in my club is building a dragon sherman direct vision, and i am building (built) the tasca one. They are both excellent kits, but the engineering on the tasca IS superior. The dragon kit uses more parts to accomplish the same thing. Also there is less cleanup with the tasca IMO and things just fit. It was the best build i have ever done.

After they are built they look pretty much the same, you have to be a rivet counter to really tell the difference.

Having built the DML PTO Sherman and now the M4A1 Tasca Hedgerow Cutter, I would rate the latter as the better OOB kit.

The Formations "fixes" are not essential on that particular kit. You can convert the Tasca hull to a cast version by removing the bolts on the bottom. Or you can spend $20 for a resin version. You can make shock absorber pads that actually work, or use resin blocks that don't move. The transmission cover is accurate for the "Battling B*tch" kit Tasca is replicating, but if you want a "narrow nose" transmission, Formations can provide it.

The DML DS tracks take paint and glue together better than the Tasca vinyl ones IMO, but I'm finding that my DS tracks I didn't use for other kits are starting to show signs of deterioration, so I'm not sure they will hold up over time. So I ordered the Panda plastic tracks from Formations, and will not use the vinyl ones I have already painted.

There is no such thing as the "best" kit, since things like accuracy, ease-of-build, clear instructions and PRICE determine what folks buy.

I built a DML Sherman III (the recent-ish 'Sicily Mid Production') then a Tasca Sherman III right after, about as close of a direct comparison as you can get I think

Looking at just the building experience and ignoring issues of accuracy for now; Comparing the two:

On the Sprues:
The DML had sprues from a number of their sherman kits some of which are getting on a little now and although still very good are not up to the latest standards

The Tasca was also a mix of sprues (almost all their shermans share common sprues) however there were less redundant parts in the box and all of it was moulded to the highest recent standards of detail and finesse


clean Up
The DML parts required a LOT of clean up with each part having multiple attachment points and those 'nodes' they seem to love. I have heard it said that these allow them to inject plastic better and produce a higher standard of moulding. Although superior to many companies it is in my opinion mildly inferior to Tasca in quality

Tasca Parts required much less clean up, however, that infamously complicated suspension adds a lot of parts, so if you're looking at how many attachment parts in the kit rather than how many on each individual part then it will take along time to clean up the tasca suspension because there is so much of it!

Fit
DML- by and large fit is pretty good but not perfect. It is seriously let down though by three major issues in my opinion:
1 the transmission bolted strip. If you fit this how DML tell you to and you're unlucky (which is asy as the location is imprecise) you will end up with a nasty (more than 1mm) gap
2 The idler attachments are seriously weak, a 0.5mm locating stub and hole. This means the idler has to be glued and thoroughly thorougly set before you add the track under tension (as it should be) even then it has a tendency to bend inwards if you're not lucky
3 the locating tabs on the sprockets are imprecise. you need very careful alignement to ensure the teeth run true

Tasca:
It is perfect. not got, not very good, but absolutely 100% perfect. Parts will only fit in their intended location as locating pins are individual part specific (so no confusing similar looking parts)
Also parts fit with only the finest of visible lines, virtually snap fit. In fact on some parts I've even wandered whether I need to glue them its that precise

Tracks
DML give you some really seriously nice rubber tracks with their DS track. Not everyon likes it, but on the active track of the Sherman its fine not to have sag and the detail is extremely crisp for bandies. Only one problem (and it is a nasty one) they're too long! By about 15mm! You will need to remove two links to get them to fit and pin them back together for strength

Tasca, nice detail, but not as good as DML. Need to be stuck together in two places as each side is in two parts, meaning two joints to get just right or have to hide. They will glue with styrene cement though
Some people have reported that they can degrade over time and snap. I think this must depend on what has been done to them though. I prime mine in acrylic primer and paint in acrylic and have never had a problem

One final thing worth mentioning: Tasca Shermans come with what is undoubtedly the very best styrene M2 .50 on the market, and sometimes some of their superb jerry cans but they never give you the tow cable!


Anyway, that is my comparative assessment, others may disagree

:P
well, in DML's kits you often get more for your money. A tasca kit is ~60$ and you get some PE for that (and plastic ). In DML's kits you get for around 10$ less metal barrels and such. Plus, I didn't really like having the hull tub in separate parts.

on another hand, Aaron S. is right: Their kit are very easy and fun to build (though I like having lots of parts)

To be fair they go together really well, and it allows them to easily make variants...
I have also had warped DML tubs ;(

To each his own right? Trust me DML has lots of my money. I am sure Mr. Dragon is doing fine, and now Mr. Tasca can have his share of my money as well.

I picked up a Tasca Sherman ll El Alamein yesterday because it was on sale and I wanted to see if Tasca was any better than Dragon. On a 'first look' all the pieces seemed to be very sharp and well molded, and I agree that the Tasca .50 cal and Jerry cans are probably the best injected molded items on the market - whenever neccessary I replace these Dragon items with Tasca. However, the first thing I noticed when opening the box, and which was very disappointing, was the fact that before I even start building the model I will have to add casting texture and foundry marks to appropriate parts ie. upper hull, turret, mantlet, transmission cover, and other various bits. All these parts were nice and shiny and smooth! At least, on the Shermans I've seen by Dragon, they add the texture and some foundry marks. It comes down to whichever is cheaper at the time, and if the extra work is worth it.

Slightly disappointed to hear that and a little surprised

I'm building their Sherman V at the moment and although I had to add a couple of casting marks, the vast majority where there, as is the cast texture on the turret and transmission housing. The DML one I last built needed a lot more adding certainly.

Maybe it varies from kit to kit

I have built the early direct vision, and it had casting and texture, maybe a little soft but it was there... strange.

They are worth it and I wish they would do a M-24 as well

Aaron and Biggles: How rough do you think the 1/35 skin of cast Sherman parts should be?

Here's a discussion:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47208/thread/1299562923/How+%26quot%3Brough%26quot%3B+could+a+Sherman+turret+casting+be--

I find their cast texture amount very suitable for my tastes.

If you look at 1:1 survivors, you'll see that indeed, they are quite smooth.