Amongst my current overloaded workbench are 3x Ersatz M10s from Panzer Brigade 150. Donor hulls are from Dragon Panther Ds (not ideal but cheapish and more importantly available) with M10 conversion kits from Ken Overby.

I made a start by assembling most of one kit over the weekend. The plan was to work out any fit issues before building the other two, better to mess on up than all three!

Anyway the Dragon hull went together as expected with no issues. Plastic hull and joined "fast assembly" road wheels meant it fell together. Despite many moaning about the wheels the joining tabs can't be seen at all when assembled and when was the last time you saw a roaadwheel maintenance diorama?

Fitting the conversion kit to the D hull took a bit more work however. Due to the stepped hull sponsons and some fit issues to the front hull plate area I had to grind away material from both kits to close about a 3mm gap.

Having said that it's nothing most modellers can't easily achieve. Track fit was very tight but luckily I'd thinned down the inner track guards. Even then the conversion kit is on the tight side for the width of the D hull.

Anyway one is assembled now except for a few final details, aerials, deck screens and some replacement grab handles.

cheers
Brent

I like the fact that you cut out the missing bow MG aperture and added the ball mount behind - nice touch! I just made the flaps in the shut position and glued them on. I notice you left the rear with the slope. I haven't seen any profile photos that definitely show this, but several drawings have it with a vertical surface. Dragon seems also to have extended the front too long with it extending beyond the original Panther towing clevis brackets. The way Dragon has done it, it makes it impossible to use the towing U-bolts, yet in a photo of one of the captured vehicles, US forces have attached towing cables to them for recovery purposes. Not in any way bashing your build - just commenting on possible errors by DML.

Biggles, did you read the post?
He said he used the Ken Qverby's update set.
This set has the opening and the ball mount for the hull MG included.

Wiggum.

Thanks for looking guys. And yeah I agree Biggles, like many recent kits Dragons M10 looks ok but has a lot of shortcuts.

Ken update take care of most of the Dragon Ersatz kits issues, it has opening for the bow MG, driver, radio and commanders hatches, plus most of the handles etc are represented. Also the way the front glacis plate is made the towing shackles have enough space and can be used, although I did open up the edges on mine to give a little more room.

There's still room to improve it though. I'll end up replacing most of the grab handles and the rear profile is a little off. The "necked" in rear guards seem to be a feature seen in the reference pics and it's to match the side guards up with the profile of the rear hull plate. Makes sense when you look at the shape of the rear plate. The lower inclined sheet metal on the rear plate seems way to short compared to the pics though (which I trust more than drawings) however I don't think I'll be changing them . . .

And a question for anyone who might know - the front MG port was covered by a plate attached with a chain according the US intel report. Does anyone know where the chain attaches too? Does the plate have to be removed before action or can the R/T operator do it from his open top hatch? And would the plate then just hang down the front glacis?

cheers
Brent

I believe the MG hatches were hinged and opened outwards from side to side horizontally. Maybe the MG gunner just opened fire and the blast knocked the doors open . But then, I could also be totally wrong!

And yeah I first thought they were hinged, but most after-action pics show the plates missing and the report definitely says they were attached by chain. I guess I'll cover one up with a plate and leave the other two open just for a bit of variety.

Neat subject Brent. May I make a suggestion? The horizontal braces that affixed the turret's fake armor were only thin L-shaped angle rods -- very delicate looking. I think if you were to add this (maybe out of some PE?) it would add a cool amount of fragile detail to your ersatz M10. Just a thought

Thanks Roy! Yeah I actually added them out of evergreen angle but that doesn't show in the pics very well and they are oversize though. I'll see what I can bend up successfully ....

I'd actually like to try and replicate the damage to the mantlet sheet metal shown in the some of the NARA pics, that really shows how thin the sheet metal used was, I doubt if it was much more than 1mm.

cheers
Brent

Nice progress so far, Brent. it’s amusing how an oddball subject has become so popular in this forum. Can't wait to see more.

Cheers,
Jan

Thanks Jan !

And been so busy doing other scales that these guys (I have three to do) have sat for far too long.

Finally decided on what latch details to add to the insides of the TCs hatches (it was really bothering me lol) and once that was sorted laid on the base paint. Brushed with GW acrylics and in my version of RAL6003 which is what I think they were painted in, rather than the GI reports of Olive Drab.

Anyway, it's ready for shading and detailing ....

cheers
Brent

Very nice Brent -- I like the subtle tones. If I hadn't taken a second look I'd take this as 1/35. Thanks for sharing. Cheers, Tat

Thanks Tat, appreciate you looking in

Tis a bit plain-Jane at the moment, should spruce up with the lining and shading .....

cheers
Brent

Hi Brent,

Very nice work, the Overby add-ons really do make the difference. I don't know how effective these tanks would have been at fooling the US forces, if I remember correctly, none of them got into a combat situation, so we will never know. I suppose from a distance they may have looked the part, the StugIII they disguised was not about to fool anyone I reckon.

I look forward to seeing the trio finished, the work so far is excellent.

All the best,

Paul