Couldn't help myself, it just arrived, so I had to take a peek. There are a few things that struck me as neat, and a couple of thoughts as well.
Neat things, in no particular order:
Adjustable idler axles,
Separate, clear headlight lenses and TC cupola vision blocks,
One piece gun tube,
Engine cover rests,
Separate gun trunnions,
Casting numbers/symbols on the mantlet,
Typical Tamiya ease of construction (this from the instructions only, I haven't started it)
Exhaust/cooling air deflector built up from several pieces, which with some very minor thinning on one edge should look quite good,
Tracks actually look very good,
And a prediction: There will be a motorized version released. The upper hull is designed to be easily separated from the lower, one clip and a poly cap.
Most of this has probably already been covered in various reviews, so please accept my apologies if I'm I'm re-hashing old news, but this one is clearly designed to be a builder. I'm thinking I'll have to build the Asuka kit of the same thing as well, just to really see how much visible difference there will be in the built-up models. Bottom line: I'm impressed, and will probably add a couple more to the stash.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Tamiya M4A3E8, 1st impressions
rfbaer
Texas, United States
Joined: June 12, 2007
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,696 posts
Joined: June 12, 2007
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,696 posts
Posted: Monday, December 21, 2015 - 10:00 PM UTC
SKiernan
Dordogne, France
Joined: March 11, 2006
KitMaker: 87 posts
Armorama: 80 posts
Joined: March 11, 2006
KitMaker: 87 posts
Armorama: 80 posts
Posted: Monday, December 21, 2015 - 10:19 PM UTC
Do the driver and co-driver hatches have periscopes and handles? In the photos it seems to be the older M4A3 hatches and hull.
Thank you
Steve
Thank you
Steve
Tojo72
North Carolina, United States
Joined: June 06, 2006
KitMaker: 4,691 posts
Armorama: 3,509 posts
Joined: June 06, 2006
KitMaker: 4,691 posts
Armorama: 3,509 posts
Posted: Monday, December 21, 2015 - 10:20 PM UTC
Sounds good Russ,I acquired the Asuka/Tamiya one just before this one came out.I would have liked to try this one myself.
C_JACQUEMONT
Loire-Atlantique, France
Joined: October 09, 2004
KitMaker: 2,433 posts
Armorama: 2,325 posts
Joined: October 09, 2004
KitMaker: 2,433 posts
Armorama: 2,325 posts
Posted: Monday, December 21, 2015 - 10:37 PM UTC
I saw something, possibly on FaceBook a guy was badmouthing the kit, especially the fit, or lack thereof?
Taking it with a grain of salt, different people, different levels of skill and different expectations...
Cheers,
Christophe
Taking it with a grain of salt, different people, different levels of skill and different expectations...
Cheers,
Christophe
rfbaer
Texas, United States
Joined: June 12, 2007
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,696 posts
Joined: June 12, 2007
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,696 posts
Posted: Monday, December 21, 2015 - 10:50 PM UTC
The upper hull appears to be either a new part or well revised, as the welds are very nicely done raised beads, and the glacis to side weld is present. I've built a bunch of the old Tamiya big-hatch hulls, and this is different, good cast texture on the drivers' upper hull area, separate fuel fillers, good stuff all 'round. I'm already thinking VVSS variants and M50s. This thing a Mr Potato Head of Sherman kits, and I'm starting to get the Jones on to actually build it, which is good because I've been in a good three-month-long slump.
Drivers' hatches have a cast texture, periscopes and, in common with turret hatches, molded-on handles, easy enough to fix. Once again, new or heavily-revised parts, but an improvement over the older parts.
I can't comment as to fit at this point, but I know there is a slight issue with the Tamiya T23 turret halves, once again easy enough to fix. I do know, from building a couple of the Tamiya M51 hulls, that the lower multi-piece hull, goes together very well.
Drivers' hatches have a cast texture, periscopes and, in common with turret hatches, molded-on handles, easy enough to fix. Once again, new or heavily-revised parts, but an improvement over the older parts.
I can't comment as to fit at this point, but I know there is a slight issue with the Tamiya T23 turret halves, once again easy enough to fix. I do know, from building a couple of the Tamiya M51 hulls, that the lower multi-piece hull, goes together very well.
SKiernan
Dordogne, France
Joined: March 11, 2006
KitMaker: 87 posts
Armorama: 80 posts
Joined: March 11, 2006
KitMaker: 87 posts
Armorama: 80 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - 01:21 AM UTC
Thank you, I am looking forward to getting this
rfbaer
Texas, United States
Joined: June 12, 2007
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,696 posts
Joined: June 12, 2007
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,696 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - 01:54 AM UTC
No trouble, I'm looking forward to building it.
dwnrng44
Michigan, United States
Joined: September 15, 2009
KitMaker: 26 posts
Armorama: 24 posts
Joined: September 15, 2009
KitMaker: 26 posts
Armorama: 24 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - 03:48 AM UTC
Good news is the turret in this kit is completely new tool and not what was is in their M1 Sherman kit. The fit of the turret halves is nice. I was surprised they didn't just use the M1 turret. It looks to me that the only parts in this kit taken from older kits are the bogies (M51) and the .50 Cal. The kit this will be compared to is the Tasca 35-020, which is a very nice kit. But Tamiya has built a model that I believe will stand up to the Tasca with a lot less parts. For instance, each Bogie truck is made up of 8pcs compared to 15 for the Tasca and looks just as good. The only advantage to Tasca is it articulates. The return rollers and bogie mounts. Tamiya has cast them into the lower hull sides and they look great and are aligned. You have 28 parts to glue on the Tasca kit to get the same result. Tracks, I think the vinyl looks ok compared to 308 pcs. for the Tasca T-66's. Again the Tasca kits are beautiful and I've built a couple of their M4A3E8 versions, but Tamiya's new one should build up just as nice a model with fewer parts which will probably be attractive to many. You can't have to many Shermans
Armorsmith
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 09, 2015
KitMaker: 1,063 posts
Armorama: 1,000 posts
Joined: April 09, 2015
KitMaker: 1,063 posts
Armorama: 1,000 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - 04:15 AM UTC
I've not built this variant of this Sherman(or many others for that matter) but your impression of the kit has given me the itch to get this one. Thanks for the in box review and look forward to the build review.
rfbaer
Texas, United States
Joined: June 12, 2007
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,696 posts
Joined: June 12, 2007
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,696 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - 04:36 AM UTC
You're welcome. I truly think this would be an excellent "first Sherman" kit.
I think that if I were to build something totally OOB, this kit could be it. I mean, aside from thinning the brush guards for the front and rear lights, and maybe the individual pieces of the exhaust deflector, I could do it. I'm one of "those people" that can't build OOB, whether or not I actually improve anything. I built one of the Tamiya M51 kits, 95% OOB, and am still happy with it, and I think this kit is actually better than the M51 in a lot of ways.
Plus the kit-bashing potential is enormous....
I think that if I were to build something totally OOB, this kit could be it. I mean, aside from thinning the brush guards for the front and rear lights, and maybe the individual pieces of the exhaust deflector, I could do it. I'm one of "those people" that can't build OOB, whether or not I actually improve anything. I built one of the Tamiya M51 kits, 95% OOB, and am still happy with it, and I think this kit is actually better than the M51 in a lot of ways.
Plus the kit-bashing potential is enormous....
wowcool
Solomon Islands
Joined: September 26, 2015
KitMaker: 113 posts
Armorama: 106 posts
Joined: September 26, 2015
KitMaker: 113 posts
Armorama: 106 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - 07:21 AM UTC
The subtitle "European Theater" shows possibility that they're planning to release a post-war variant soon.
Their Panther D also had adjustable idler axles but could've been much better had the axles been engineered to attach to poly caps within the hull, allowing us to adjust the axles after building the kit. Unless the fit is considerably tight on this kit, the rubber band tracks will just pull them out if you didn't apply any adheisive.
Their Panther D also had adjustable idler axles but could've been much better had the axles been engineered to attach to poly caps within the hull, allowing us to adjust the axles after building the kit. Unless the fit is considerably tight on this kit, the rubber band tracks will just pull them out if you didn't apply any adheisive.
rfbaer
Texas, United States
Joined: June 12, 2007
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,696 posts
Joined: June 12, 2007
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,696 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 - 08:58 PM UTC
From the look of the parts, adhesive is a must. Unlike some other tanks, the idler adjuster on a Sherman is outside the hull, and there simply isn't a way to make it strong enough in 1/35 scale otherwise. Small beans, and the instructions recommend a particular position for the idler axles for use with the kit tracks. If one were to use AM tracks such as Friul or possibly Asuka, the adjustable idler would be an enormously handy feature.