I think 36 but I can be wrong
José César
Hosted by Darren Baker
How much 1:35 scale Shermans have Dragon?
modelpanzer
Joined: October 20, 2008
KitMaker: 109 posts
Armorama: 106 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 11, 2011 - 07:04 AM UTC
How much 1:35 scale Shermans have Dragon from 1995 till today
I think 36 but I can be wrong
José César
I think 36 but I can be wrong
José César
postbusf
Joined: November 15, 2007
KitMaker: 158 posts
Armorama: 154 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 11, 2011 - 08:12 AM UTC
Well, I guess that´s about right.
But non off them are acceptable accurate (my personal opinion)
Some details are under sized and some details are simplefied.
In all these years they could'nt produce at least one acceptable Sherman.
But in all fairness, if you don't mind these issues, these kits are fun to build.
My Sherman off choice are the Tasca offerings.
They are more expensive then Dragon kits but more cheaper then all the AM stuff you need to make the Dragon Sherman look like it should do.
I love Dragon kits and there quality but pass on there Sherman offerings.
Ps. I would'nt mind if Bronco entered the Sherman game.
Frank.
But non off them are acceptable accurate (my personal opinion)
Some details are under sized and some details are simplefied.
In all these years they could'nt produce at least one acceptable Sherman.
But in all fairness, if you don't mind these issues, these kits are fun to build.
My Sherman off choice are the Tasca offerings.
They are more expensive then Dragon kits but more cheaper then all the AM stuff you need to make the Dragon Sherman look like it should do.
I love Dragon kits and there quality but pass on there Sherman offerings.
Ps. I would'nt mind if Bronco entered the Sherman game.
Frank.
ALBOWIE
Joined: February 28, 2006
KitMaker: 1,605 posts
Armorama: 1,565 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 11, 2011 - 11:10 AM UTC
I am no lover of DML as a business but I believe they have done more for the Sherman in 35th than any other mainstream manufacturer. Yes, Tasca do it better but not even they have 100% accurate Shermans. As for DML having no acceptable Shermans I'd ask what is wrong with the (current) Firefly 1c or even the current release M4 Composite. IMHO thes have the best composite hull available (including the Formations one). The instructions generally suck but are acceptable in the 1c. Also the M4A2 with Fabricated Hoods (6231) British Sicily is pretty close to the correct M4A2 and the best fabricated hull M4A2 available. There M4A3E8 is pretty good also but does still have the stupid grouser covers (fortunately easily removed). It has only just been eclipsed by the Tasca one (which still has faults with weld seams etc).
Just putting things in perspective
Al
Just putting things in perspective
Al
Charlie-66
#186
Joined: May 24, 2006
KitMaker: 771 posts
Armorama: 750 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 11, 2011 - 11:37 AM UTC
I don't know how many Shermans they have released, but I'm afraid I've bought more than one of almost all of them. I've never understood the Dragon bashing though. I just don't get it. If I recall correctly it was Dragon in the early 1990's who started cranking out kits of all kinds that arguably may have been the catalyst for the wealth of kit choices we have today. Their kits may not be perfect, but how many of us rememeber when the old Tamiya M4A3E8 was the only game in town? I scarf up every Sherman I can get whether Tasca or Dragon, or Tamiya. The Tasca kits are fantastic; but have their quirks as well. The plastic seems brittle at times; for example try cutting the tow shackels from the sprue without them breaking in half. Also, I hate the little rubber pads that we are supposed to cut and use in assempling the road wheel assemblies. All the companies kits have their quirks; I'm a Shermanaholic so keep 'em coming! 
junglejim
Joined: February 18, 2003
KitMaker: 1,728 posts
Armorama: 1,629 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 11, 2011 - 12:00 PM UTC
Dragon Shermans are for modelers, Tasca Shermans are for assemblers. 
I get much more satisfaction from correcting a few minor things on the former. I won't deny that Tasca Shermans are the best, if out of the box is your thing and you don't mind spending the $$ for them go for it.
Jim
I get much more satisfaction from correcting a few minor things on the former. I won't deny that Tasca Shermans are the best, if out of the box is your thing and you don't mind spending the $$ for them go for it.
Jim
gatorbait
Joined: August 25, 2002
KitMaker: 252 posts
Armorama: 201 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 11, 2011 - 12:30 PM UTC
I've got Dragon and Tasca M4 series tanks. Both, I think are terrific . The engineering philosophies are different but I think both are quality products. I never understood Dragon's turret set up and conversely, Tasca's corect sized turret ring and the total lack of any sort of interior,. Dragon's DS tracks are a godsend in my opinion, much easier to use .
I'll give Dragon this as well, they continue to improve their product. The Shermans they made in the early 90's were nice, and had a very obvious Italeri parentage, the current generation still shows some of the ancestory in the suspension, but the improvements are impressive and a nice indication that Dragon listens.
Tasca has a very nice suspension as well, different philosophy and their M-4A-1s are exceptionally nice . .That said, I am baffled by their insistance on a 2 piece gun barrel, for the 75, 76 and the 17 pounder. Akll that engineering and then a gimme to the AM guys.
Basically, for we Shermanohilics, this is a time of plenty and that plenty is pretty nice .
I'll give Dragon this as well, they continue to improve their product. The Shermans they made in the early 90's were nice, and had a very obvious Italeri parentage, the current generation still shows some of the ancestory in the suspension, but the improvements are impressive and a nice indication that Dragon listens.
Tasca has a very nice suspension as well, different philosophy and their M-4A-1s are exceptionally nice . .That said, I am baffled by their insistance on a 2 piece gun barrel, for the 75, 76 and the 17 pounder. Akll that engineering and then a gimme to the AM guys.
Basically, for we Shermanohilics, this is a time of plenty and that plenty is pretty nice .
warreni
Joined: August 14, 2007
KitMaker: 5,926 posts
Armorama: 712 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 11, 2011 - 01:24 PM UTC
I agree Dave.
I cannot understand Dragon bashing. WHy are people so upset with parts of a kit you can't even see when they are assembled? I have all the Dragon releases from over the past 6 years, of which I have built 4 so far, and you cannot fault the moulding quality of any of them. Some may think Tasca is better, but for the cost they don't even give you one pice barrels, and their suspension may work but it is very fiddly to assemble.
Oh well, each to their own. I think all the Shermaholics out there should just be gratefull for the wide variety of tanks available.
I cannot understand Dragon bashing. WHy are people so upset with parts of a kit you can't even see when they are assembled? I have all the Dragon releases from over the past 6 years, of which I have built 4 so far, and you cannot fault the moulding quality of any of them. Some may think Tasca is better, but for the cost they don't even give you one pice barrels, and their suspension may work but it is very fiddly to assemble.
Oh well, each to their own. I think all the Shermaholics out there should just be gratefull for the wide variety of tanks available.
jphillips
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 1,066 posts
Armorama: 789 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 11, 2011 - 02:00 PM UTC
Aren't there still some variants of the Sherman that have yet to be produced as kits? There are all the different types of "Funnies", of course. But some might not be popular enough to sell widely.
A lot of Shermans have been released, that are identical or nearly so, except for their decals. We've had American, British and Commonwealth Shermans, French ones, and Israelis. But Brazil, Egypt, India and Pakistan also used M4s in combat.
A lot of Shermans have been released, that are identical or nearly so, except for their decals. We've had American, British and Commonwealth Shermans, French ones, and Israelis. But Brazil, Egypt, India and Pakistan also used M4s in combat.
hudyjatai
Joined: February 21, 2011
KitMaker: 89 posts
Armorama: 88 posts
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011 - 04:22 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Aren't there still some variants of the Sherman that have yet to be produced as kits? There are all the different types of "Funnies", of course. But some might not be popular enough to sell widely.
A lot of Shermans have been released, that are identical or nearly so, except for their decals. We've had American, British and Commonwealth Shermans, French ones, and Israelis. But Brazil, Egypt, India and Pakistan also used M4s in combat.
Brazil has never used the Sherman in combat...
ericadeane
Joined: October 28, 2002
KitMaker: 4,021 posts
Armorama: 3,947 posts
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011 - 04:31 AM UTC
I'm an avowed Shermanaholic. Period.
And I'm an unashamedly pro-Tasca builder too (or an assembler according to Jim). Why? Because my list of tweaks to a Tasca kit is much smaller in general to a similar DML product. I love the Tasca M2 Browning MG and find their tracks to be very good. I don' t use the rubber VVS inserts -- I just cut a slab of 0.40 styrene and fix them. As for the two part barrels, they a much more correct in outline than most of the AM aluminum barrels out there. I use them all the time. I've even used the spare barrel in other kits too.
I just like their finesse factor and hate the jumbled DML directions. Tasca's cost, frankly, isn't that much more dear than a new DML kit. For me there's no decision. Don't get me wrong, I think DML is an enormous boon to our hobby. I give them complete props for that. I always have a few on my workbench at any given time (and I can't wait for that M3 Medium!!! Whoo hoo!).
But for Shermans, I applaud DML but vote for Tasca with my money and my precious modeling time.
And I'm an unashamedly pro-Tasca builder too (or an assembler according to Jim). Why? Because my list of tweaks to a Tasca kit is much smaller in general to a similar DML product. I love the Tasca M2 Browning MG and find their tracks to be very good. I don' t use the rubber VVS inserts -- I just cut a slab of 0.40 styrene and fix them. As for the two part barrels, they a much more correct in outline than most of the AM aluminum barrels out there. I use them all the time. I've even used the spare barrel in other kits too.
I just like their finesse factor and hate the jumbled DML directions. Tasca's cost, frankly, isn't that much more dear than a new DML kit. For me there's no decision. Don't get me wrong, I think DML is an enormous boon to our hobby. I give them complete props for that. I always have a few on my workbench at any given time (and I can't wait for that M3 Medium!!! Whoo hoo!).
But for Shermans, I applaud DML but vote for Tasca with my money and my precious modeling time.
modelpanzer
Joined: October 20, 2008
KitMaker: 109 posts
Armorama: 106 posts
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011 - 04:38 AM UTC
Thanh you very much for all the great answers.
I think I miss some references.
I have 11 Tasca kits but only 3 Dragon kits: 6062, 6183 and 6325.
So, which of the Dragon kits are the more good, accurate and detailed
José César
I think I miss some references.
I have 11 Tasca kits but only 3 Dragon kits: 6062, 6183 and 6325.
So, which of the Dragon kits are the more good, accurate and detailed
José César
jphillips
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 1,066 posts
Armorama: 789 posts
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011 - 01:37 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextAren't there still some variants of the Sherman that have yet to be produced as kits? There are all the different types of "Funnies", of course. But some might not be popular enough to sell widely.
A lot of Shermans have been released, that are identical or nearly so, except for their decals. We've had American, British and Commonwealth Shermans, French ones, and Israelis. But Brazil, Egypt, India and Pakistan also used M4s in combat.
Brazil has never used the Sherman in combat...
I thought the expeditionary force in WW2 Europe had Shermans! My mistake. But I think I forgot one country. Didn't Uganda use them in Idi Amin's disastrous war against Tanzania?
jowady
Joined: June 12, 2006
KitMaker: 1,027 posts
Armorama: 683 posts
KitMaker: 1,027 posts
Armorama: 683 posts
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011 - 05:30 PM UTC
Well I like the Dragons and the Tascas are cool too. They have really spoiled us, I can remember when Tamiya first introduced the M4 and M4A3 kits and boy we really though that they were something. Of course that was back before photo etch. Monogram had their 1/32nd scale Shermans, I had a few but when you reflect on them now . . . . . Anyway, yes their are a few versions left to make in styrene, most notably the DD tank and the "dry" M4A3 and the M4A3 (W) with the 75mm turret but mounting a 76mm gun. There are various flamethrower versions as well. Maybe a Calliope. There was also a Russian conversion that I saw a photo of long ago of an M4 (probably A2) with the 75mm turret but the mantlet had been modified to take the Soviet 76.2 gun, with what looked like a mantlet from a T-34. It may have been a one off experiment but I think it would be cool.
Of course there are plenty of experimental types as well, incl a Sherman with the t-26 turret and 90mm gun.
Of course there are plenty of experimental types as well, incl a Sherman with the t-26 turret and 90mm gun.
modelpanzer
Joined: October 20, 2008
KitMaker: 109 posts
Armorama: 106 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 14, 2011 - 04:30 AM UTC
After some search I fonde 2 more kit box so total are 38 kit box:
'39-'45 Series
6031 Sherman Vc 'Firefly'
6035 M4A4 Sherman
6041 M4A4 w/80lb Rocket
6048 M4A1 75mm Early Version
6062 M4A2 Tarawa
6083 M4A1 (76)W 'Operation Cobra'
6121 Sherman Vc 'Firefly'
6182 'Firefly' Vc
6183 M4A3E8 'Thunderbolt VII'
6188 M4A2 (76)W Red Army
6228 Sherman Mk.Ic 'Firefly' Hybrid
6231 British Sherman Mk.III Mid. Production Sicily
6255 M4A3 (76)W VVSS Sherman 'Battle of the Bulge'
6313 Sherman Mk.III
6325 M4A3 (76)W
6354 Sherman M4A3 (105mm) HVSS
6404 U.S. M4A1 DV
6441 M4 Sherman 'Composite Hull' PTO
6447 El Alamain Sherman
6462 U.S.M.C. M4A2 Late PTO
6511 M4 Sherman 75mm Normandy
6527 Sherman Mk.III DV Initial Production
6548 M4 (105mm) Howitzer Tank
6579 M4 DV
6637 M7 H.M.C (firist variant from Dragon)
6665 M4A3E2 'Jumbo'
6698 M4A3 (75)W ETO
Korean War Series:
6807 M4A3 HVSS POA-CWS-H5 Flamthrower
6811 M4A3E8 (76)W Sherman
Imperial Series:
9009 M4A3E8 (76)W Sherman
9010 M4A3 (76)W HVSS Sherman
Modern AFV Series:
3528 M50 Super Sherman
3539 M51 ISherman
Orange Box:
9102 Sherman M4A4 75mm
9104 'Firefly' Ic Hybrid Hull
9110 'Firefly' Vc
9122 M50 Super Sherman
9124 M4A3 HVSS POA-CWS-H5 Flamthrower
AMAZING.
José César
'39-'45 Series
6031 Sherman Vc 'Firefly'
6035 M4A4 Sherman
6041 M4A4 w/80lb Rocket
6048 M4A1 75mm Early Version
6062 M4A2 Tarawa
6083 M4A1 (76)W 'Operation Cobra'
6121 Sherman Vc 'Firefly'
6182 'Firefly' Vc
6183 M4A3E8 'Thunderbolt VII'
6188 M4A2 (76)W Red Army
6228 Sherman Mk.Ic 'Firefly' Hybrid
6231 British Sherman Mk.III Mid. Production Sicily
6255 M4A3 (76)W VVSS Sherman 'Battle of the Bulge'
6313 Sherman Mk.III
6325 M4A3 (76)W
6354 Sherman M4A3 (105mm) HVSS
6404 U.S. M4A1 DV
6441 M4 Sherman 'Composite Hull' PTO
6447 El Alamain Sherman
6462 U.S.M.C. M4A2 Late PTO
6511 M4 Sherman 75mm Normandy
6527 Sherman Mk.III DV Initial Production
6548 M4 (105mm) Howitzer Tank
6579 M4 DV
6637 M7 H.M.C (firist variant from Dragon)
6665 M4A3E2 'Jumbo'
6698 M4A3 (75)W ETO
Korean War Series:
6807 M4A3 HVSS POA-CWS-H5 Flamthrower
6811 M4A3E8 (76)W Sherman
Imperial Series:
9009 M4A3E8 (76)W Sherman
9010 M4A3 (76)W HVSS Sherman
Modern AFV Series:
3528 M50 Super Sherman
3539 M51 ISherman
Orange Box:
9102 Sherman M4A4 75mm
9104 'Firefly' Ic Hybrid Hull
9110 'Firefly' Vc
9122 M50 Super Sherman
9124 M4A3 HVSS POA-CWS-H5 Flamthrower
AMAZING.
José César
pseudorealityx
Joined: January 31, 2010
KitMaker: 2,191 posts
Armorama: 1,814 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 14, 2011 - 07:24 AM UTC
3529 M51 Isherman (before the Premium edition came out)
modelpanzer
Joined: October 20, 2008
KitMaker: 109 posts
Armorama: 106 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 14, 2011 - 10:12 AM UTC
Quoted Text
After some search I fonde 2 more kit box so total are 38 kit box:
'39-'45 Series
6031 Sherman Vc 'Firefly'
6035 M4A4 Sherman
6041 M4A4 w/80lb Rocket
6048 M4A1 75mm Early Version
6062 M4A2 Tarawa
6083 M4A1 (76)W 'Operation Cobra'
6121 Sherman Vc 'Firefly'
6182 'Firefly' Vc
6183 M4A3E8 'Thunderbolt VII'
6188 M4A2 (76)W Red Army
6228 Sherman Mk.Ic 'Firefly' Hybrid
6231 British Sherman Mk.III Mid. Production Sicily
6255 M4A3 (76)W VVSS Sherman 'Battle of the Bulge'
6283 M4A3E8 'Albin F. Drayk'
6313 Sherman Mk.III
6325 M4A3 (76)W
6354 Sherman M4A3 (105mm) HVSS
6404 U.S. M4A1 DV
6441 M4 Sherman 'Composite Hull' PTO
6447 El Alamain Sherman
6462 U.S.M.C. M4A2 Late PTO
6511 M4 Sherman 75mm Normandy
6527 Sherman Mk.III DV Initial Production
6548 M4 (105mm) Howitzer Tank
6579 M4 DV
6637 M7 H.M.C (firist variant from Dragon)
6665 M4A3E2 'Jumbo'
6698 M4A3 (75)W ETO
Korean War Series:
6807 M4A3 HVSS POA-CWS-H5 Flamthrower
6811 M4A3E8 (76)W Sherman
Imperial Series:
9009 M4A3E8 (76)W Sherman
9010 M4A3 (76)W HVSS Sherman
Modern AFV Series:
3528 M50 Super Sherman
3529 M51 ISherman
3539 M51 ISherman Premium Edition
Orange Box:
9102 Sherman M4A4 75mm
9104 'Firefly' Ic Hybrid Hull
9110 'Firefly' Vc
9122 M50 Super Sherman
9124 M4A3 HVSS POA-CWS-H5 Flamthrower
AMAZING.
José César
Up date.
José César
42rocker
Joined: January 17, 2012
KitMaker: 62 posts
Armorama: 62 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 03, 2012 - 02:43 PM UTC
Thanks for a great listing of the Sherman's that are out there.
Later 42rocker
Later 42rocker
lukiftian
Joined: March 12, 2010
KitMaker: 791 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 03, 2012 - 03:49 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Well, I guess that´s about right.
But non off them are acceptable accurate (my personal opinion)
Some details are under sized and some details are simplefied.
In all these years they could'nt produce at least one acceptable Sherman.
But in all fairness, if you don't mind these issues, these kits are fun to build.
My Sherman off choice are the Tasca offerings.
They are more expensive then Dragon kits but more cheaper then all the AM stuff you need to make the Dragon Sherman look like it should do.
I love Dragon kits and there quality but pass on there Sherman offerings.
Ps. I would'nt mind if Bronco entered the Sherman game.
Frank.
I don't think Dragon M4A2s are that bad at all, and even though their Fireflies took several tries each they are quite good now.
Shermania
Joined: January 30, 2013
KitMaker: 537 posts
Armorama: 531 posts
Posted: Friday, October 11, 2013 - 09:56 AM UTC
I've been hard on DML in the past but have eased off lately. Truth is, only 3 companies have been producing Shermans and tamiya only makes 4 variants. Tasca is my company of choice but ironically I've built a lot more DML Shermans than Tasca and tamiya combined. The new sherman kit wars went on from 2006 thru 2010. things have slowed down a bit of late, I certainly hope a 4rth company jumps into the mix, would like to see both afv and bronco get into the sherman fray. I believe a full interior sherman is long over due. Didn't mention academy since not terribly familiar with their tanks and all that stuff is OOP now.
A few of newer DML kits have become my preferred non tasca kits. in particular 6404, 6511, and 6579. Generally speaking, beginning modelers or folks not very familiar with Shermans should avoid DML. This is due to issues of accuracy, lazy research, and horrid instructions. But for anyone willing to do fixes and knows what to expect, I think DML sherman kits have a lot to offer.
A few of newer DML kits have become my preferred non tasca kits. in particular 6404, 6511, and 6579. Generally speaking, beginning modelers or folks not very familiar with Shermans should avoid DML. This is due to issues of accuracy, lazy research, and horrid instructions. But for anyone willing to do fixes and knows what to expect, I think DML sherman kits have a lot to offer.
Totalize
Joined: February 04, 2009
KitMaker: 743 posts
Armorama: 549 posts
Posted: Friday, October 11, 2013 - 11:34 AM UTC
You will have to add what I believe is Dragon's latest Sherman their Sherman III DV Italy version. Kit 6573.
As someone has mentioned previously Both DML and Tasca have accuracy issues from a dimensional perspective. I have quite a few of the DML Shermans but also quite a few Tasca kits as well.
Just a q quick example. Using the 1/35 scale drawings in Son of Sherman Tasca's M4A2 hull is about 2.5mm short in length while DML's is about 3mm. Tasca's M4A4/Sherman V hull is spot on. At the end of the day a few milimmeters off is really impossible to discern with the human eye once the kit is built up. Yes the Tasca Shermans build much easier then the DML kits and the instructions are much better than DML's as well but conversely DML gives you more options on average and come with things like tow cables (though not that good)and forward tow cable brackets molded in place whereas you have to add the forward one on the tasca kits with an AM piece. So both have their positives and negatives and will build into very nice representations of the Sherman.
As someone has mentioned previously Both DML and Tasca have accuracy issues from a dimensional perspective. I have quite a few of the DML Shermans but also quite a few Tasca kits as well.
Just a q quick example. Using the 1/35 scale drawings in Son of Sherman Tasca's M4A2 hull is about 2.5mm short in length while DML's is about 3mm. Tasca's M4A4/Sherman V hull is spot on. At the end of the day a few milimmeters off is really impossible to discern with the human eye once the kit is built up. Yes the Tasca Shermans build much easier then the DML kits and the instructions are much better than DML's as well but conversely DML gives you more options on average and come with things like tow cables (though not that good)and forward tow cable brackets molded in place whereas you have to add the forward one on the tasca kits with an AM piece. So both have their positives and negatives and will build into very nice representations of the Sherman.
KurtLaughlin
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Saturday, October 12, 2013 - 12:19 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Dragon Shermans are for modelers, Tasca Shermans are for assemblers.
I get much more satisfaction from correcting a few minor things on the former. I won't deny that Tasca Shermans are the best, if out of the box is your thing and you don't mind spending the $$ for them go for it.
Jim
I enjoy correcting the few minor things that are wrong or missing on Tasca kits. I don't enjoy rebuilding basic structures on DML kits.
KL
 |
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.