Jim takes a look at this newest release from Tamiya. The all new tool mid production M10 Wolverine. Oddly they have left the Wolverine nickname off the box.
Link to Item
If you have comments or questions please post them here.
Thanks!
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
REVIEW
M10 Wolverine - Mid Production
staff_Jim
Publisher
Joined: December 15, 2001
KitMaker: 12,571 posts
Armorama: 6,599 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - 05:42 AM UTC
orange_3D
Joined: July 28, 2005
KitMaker: 602 posts
Armorama: 469 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - 12:43 PM UTC
Interesting insight into model reviews 
I've recently taken interest on this vehicle and it is one of the more important US AFV of WW2. So much so that the Germans had to fake it, hehe. I guess it's not so exciting as there has been previous models of this from AFV club and Academy. I think even Tamiya themselves had an earlier version as well.
I remember Steve Zaloga's Osprey modelling book on US tank destroyers mentions those kits. I wonder how this new release stacks up against AFV clubs version. Those close up photos in the video are quite helpful. The figure details look a bit soft, especially the face.
I've recently taken interest on this vehicle and it is one of the more important US AFV of WW2. So much so that the Germans had to fake it, hehe. I guess it's not so exciting as there has been previous models of this from AFV club and Academy. I think even Tamiya themselves had an earlier version as well.
I remember Steve Zaloga's Osprey modelling book on US tank destroyers mentions those kits. I wonder how this new release stacks up against AFV clubs version. Those close up photos in the video are quite helpful. The figure details look a bit soft, especially the face.
SEDimmick
Joined: March 15, 2002
KitMaker: 1,745 posts
Armorama: 1,483 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - 06:37 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Jim takes a look at this newest release from Tamiya. The all new tool mid production M10 Wolverine. Oddly they have left the Wolverine nickname off the box.
The Wolverine name came from the British, not the US Ordnance Dept.
Most names we use to identify tanks didn't become popular till after the war.
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - 07:19 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextJim takes a look at this newest release from Tamiya. The all new tool mid production M10 Wolverine. Oddly they have left the Wolverine nickname off the box.
The Wolverine name came from the British, not the US Ordnance Dept.
Most names we use to identify tanks didn't become popular till after the war.
That's TRUE!
Not to be a "smarty-pants", but if one reads the various books and publications written by authorities and WWII ex- US servicemen on US Armor and Soft-skins, US vehicles are mostly referred to by their military designations, i.e: M3/M3A1 Light, M3 Medium, M4 Medium (subsequent sub-types such as M4A1, M4A2, M4A3, M18, M24, M26, etc.); there ARE exceptions, such as "Jeep", "Beep", "Deuce-and-a-Half", "Six-by", "Jimmy", and so on...
The British, on the other hand relied on NAMING much of their armor and certain soft-skins, and that included US and Canadian-built equipment, i.e, the "Wolverine", "Firefly", "Grant", "Lee", "Shermans", etc...
staff_Jim
PublisherJoined: December 15, 2001
KitMaker: 12,571 posts
Armorama: 6,599 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - 08:40 PM UTC
Lol... well I haven't been paying that little attention to US tank history over the past 15 years guys. 
I do know about the British nick names. But I am pretty sure Tamiya still calls them M4 Shermans on the box. That said they do tend to stick to US Ordnance names for many other releases though.
Cheers,
Jim
I do know about the British nick names. But I am pretty sure Tamiya still calls them M4 Shermans on the box. That said they do tend to stick to US Ordnance names for many other releases though.
Cheers,
Jim
m4sherman
Joined: January 18, 2006
KitMaker: 1,866 posts
Armorama: 1,808 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - 09:16 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Lol... well I haven't been paying that little attention to US tank history over the past 15 years guys.
I do know about the British nick names. But I am pretty sure Tamiya still calls them M4 Shermans on the box. That said they do tend to stick to US Ordnance names for many other releases though.
Cheers,
Jim
Some names have been copyrighted, Jeep, Ford etc. Jeep even copyrighted the grill, which was a Ford design.
Chaman911
Joined: August 28, 2015
KitMaker: 319 posts
Armorama: 308 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - 09:25 PM UTC
I was under the impression the British called the m10 an Achilles.
brentwal
Joined: February 06, 2010
KitMaker: 100 posts
Armorama: 73 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - 09:34 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Oddly they have left the Wolverine nickname off the box.
Also might be to help keep Disney/Marvel/Fox Lawyers at bay
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - 09:36 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I was under the impression the British called the m10 an Achilles.
Only when rearmed with 17 pounder.
Chaman911
Joined: August 28, 2015
KitMaker: 319 posts
Armorama: 308 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - 09:47 PM UTC
Ahh very good. Thank you for the info.
treadstone
Joined: April 29, 2006
KitMaker: 83 posts
Armorama: 45 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - 10:56 PM UTC
What I would like to know is, how does this kit hold up dimensionally. Recently when this kit was first announced, an outline diagram of the turret was posted showing the outlines of the Academy and AFV Club kits in comparison to the real M-10, the academy kit turret was to long and narrow and the AFV Club turret was wide and squat. So once again how dimensionally correct is this kit.
jon_a_its
Joined: April 29, 2004
KitMaker: 1,336 posts
Armorama: 1,137 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - 11:41 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I was under the impression the British called the m10 an Achilles.
The Achilles name applied to the 17pdr upgunning of their 3" armed 'wolverines'
ULIX-VM
Joined: February 22, 2016
KitMaker: 834 posts
Armorama: 649 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - 02:17 AM UTC
m10 coming late in the war but were used in correct way.
russamotto
Joined: December 14, 2007
KitMaker: 3,389 posts
Armorama: 2,054 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - 02:40 AM UTC
I think the detail looks very good, especially under the magnified view provided with the photos. The figures are good, and with proper care will look very nice. It appears they took the same approach as with the M4A3E8 kit where handed parts have different attachment points so the modeler (me) can't really mess them up or get them backwards.
ALBOWIE
Joined: February 28, 2006
KitMaker: 1,605 posts
Armorama: 1,565 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - 03:31 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I was under the impression the British called the m10 an Achilles.
Nope, the Achilles (which seems to be a Post War name) was an M10c which was rearmed with the excellent 17 Pdr AT gun. They also used the M10 as built because there were never enough M10c to go around. I believe the Wolverine name came from Promotional material by the manufacturer like the Hellcat and not the British.
Al
multibank17pdr
Joined: February 06, 2010
KitMaker: 127 posts
Armorama: 119 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - 04:27 AM UTC
Is it me or Tamiya is really rushing back on the 1/35th market ? Somua, AMX 13, Su 76, M4A3E8 and now this M10 ! While some are promising and promising, Tamiya is just delivering superb kits, easily buildables that the most-talented modelers can lead above the crowd.
What is also very interesting with this M10 is the completly new VVSS boggies which look very nice and smartly designed to provide both details and easy-building (Asuka/Tasca have a look, please). Also, Tamiya has finally understood that M4 stamped wheels are not hollow ! Two much expected udpdates since the first Tamiya M4 Sherman, centuries ago… Tamiya should provide them asap in their M1 Super Sherman/M4A1 76mm kit (ref 35322) that is unfortunatly plaged with the old prehistoric boggies (despite a beautiful cast upper hull).
Also, considering the M10 is sharing its chassis with the M4A2 and the fact that M4A3 wet upper hull can suit some of the last diesel powered Sherman (75 and 76 mm guns), Tamiya could also easily offer us, at short notice, a brand new M4A2 (especially with the T23 turret from their Easy Eight) ! We can even wonder about a new range of M4A3 75 mm (just the turret is needed). If, so Tamiya should at last redesign its .50 mm machine gun, Tasca and even Dragon offers are much more realistic !
Despite the beautiful Tasca/Asuka M4 range (I have about twenty of them, a half-dozen finished) and, also, some good -if less than perfect- Sherman kits from Dragon, I’ll love to see more M4 from Tamiya. And a M36B2 and british 17 pdr Achilles variants. Because their kits are so smooth to build and still give us a chance to add some inputs while so many kits today are so detailled that I just feel overloaded.
Thanks Tamiya for 40 years of enjoyement and to armorama for their everyday work fuelling our hobby.
What is also very interesting with this M10 is the completly new VVSS boggies which look very nice and smartly designed to provide both details and easy-building (Asuka/Tasca have a look, please). Also, Tamiya has finally understood that M4 stamped wheels are not hollow ! Two much expected udpdates since the first Tamiya M4 Sherman, centuries ago… Tamiya should provide them asap in their M1 Super Sherman/M4A1 76mm kit (ref 35322) that is unfortunatly plaged with the old prehistoric boggies (despite a beautiful cast upper hull).
Also, considering the M10 is sharing its chassis with the M4A2 and the fact that M4A3 wet upper hull can suit some of the last diesel powered Sherman (75 and 76 mm guns), Tamiya could also easily offer us, at short notice, a brand new M4A2 (especially with the T23 turret from their Easy Eight) ! We can even wonder about a new range of M4A3 75 mm (just the turret is needed). If, so Tamiya should at last redesign its .50 mm machine gun, Tasca and even Dragon offers are much more realistic !
Despite the beautiful Tasca/Asuka M4 range (I have about twenty of them, a half-dozen finished) and, also, some good -if less than perfect- Sherman kits from Dragon, I’ll love to see more M4 from Tamiya. And a M36B2 and british 17 pdr Achilles variants. Because their kits are so smooth to build and still give us a chance to add some inputs while so many kits today are so detailled that I just feel overloaded.
Thanks Tamiya for 40 years of enjoyement and to armorama for their everyday work fuelling our hobby.
staff_Jim
PublisherJoined: December 15, 2001
KitMaker: 12,571 posts
Armorama: 6,599 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - 10:17 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextOddly they have left the Wolverine nickname off the box.
Also might be to help keep Disney/Marvel/Fox Lawyers at bay
Yeah sadly that is probably it. So sad though.
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - 12:04 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Yeah sadly that is probably it. So sad though.
It's certainly not it. As has been said, Wolverine was a British name for M10, not nearly as popular as the Sherman name has become. To be honest I completely forgot that M10 was called that until I saw your article. The kit does not come with any British marking, so there is no reason to put the Wolverine name on the box.
Neither Academy nor AFV Club (except for the late production boxing, but even there it was noted as "British 'Wolverines'") kit had Wolverine name on the box.
SEDimmick
Joined: March 15, 2002
KitMaker: 1,745 posts
Armorama: 1,483 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - 04:50 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Is it me or Tamiya is really rushing back on the 1/35th market ? Somua, AMX 13, Su 76, M4A3E8 and now this M10 ! While some are promising and promising, Tamiya is just delivering superb kits, easily buildables that the most-talented modelers can lead above the crowd.
Not really, they are coming out with about 2 1/35 scale kits a year (vs some companies 2-3 a month!), but often they are doing things that have been on the want lists of people for years...like the Somua S35 and M10
phantom8747
Joined: March 09, 2015
KitMaker: 281 posts
Armorama: 273 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - 05:34 PM UTC
I am looking forward to this release. I have the Academy 70th Anniversary kit of the M10.Were there any problems with it?
Chaman911
Joined: August 28, 2015
KitMaker: 319 posts
Armorama: 308 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - 08:54 PM UTC
Would like to see a dimensionally correct Hellcat😀
Tojo72
Joined: June 06, 2006
KitMaker: 4,691 posts
Armorama: 3,509 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - 09:14 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextIs it me or Tamiya is really rushing back on the 1/35th market ? Somua, AMX 13, Su 76, M4A3E8 and now this M10 ! While some are promising and promising, Tamiya is just delivering superb kits, easily buildables that the most-talented modelers can lead above the crowd.
Not really, they are coming out with about 2 1/35 scale kits a year (vs some companies 2-3 a month!), but often they are doing things that have been on the want lists of people for years...like the Somua S35 and M10
You can add to that
Jagdtiger
JSU-152
JS-2
Jagdpanzer Lang
Isherman
Mark IV Male
Panther A
BT-7
Elefant
All new tooled and nice kits,definitly fits niche
Greenmachine
Joined: June 25, 2015
KitMaker: 129 posts
Armorama: 122 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - 10:50 PM UTC
Tamiya a is smoking with these new kits!
orange_3D
Joined: July 28, 2005
KitMaker: 602 posts
Armorama: 469 posts
Posted: Friday, May 27, 2016 - 11:33 AM UTC
I've been trying to wrap my head around the different M10 variants. This is what I got so far:
M10 (early) 76 mm gun, small slab counterweights
M10A1 (mid?) 76 mm gun, wedge shaped counterweights
M10 late - 76 mm gun, duckbill counterweights
M10 mk II c -Achilles - 17lbr gun, duckbill counterweights (some use the wedge shape counterweights?)
Also, there are 2 engine deck configurations. Diesel engine deck for M10 which is the configuration we see in the new Tamiya kit, and an engine deck for the gasoline engine that was the same for the M10A1, M36?
There were also differences in the rear exhaust, but not sure what the different versions should look like.
Was there also a hull version that didn't have the add-on Armour bosses, or was that only for late war M36?
Was there a 90mm M10 or was that the M36?
I wish I had the Steve Zaloga's Osprey Tank Destroyer book with me. Anybody an expert on these detail variations here?
M10 (early) 76 mm gun, small slab counterweights
M10A1 (mid?) 76 mm gun, wedge shaped counterweights
M10 late - 76 mm gun, duckbill counterweights
M10 mk II c -Achilles - 17lbr gun, duckbill counterweights (some use the wedge shape counterweights?)
Also, there are 2 engine deck configurations. Diesel engine deck for M10 which is the configuration we see in the new Tamiya kit, and an engine deck for the gasoline engine that was the same for the M10A1, M36?
There were also differences in the rear exhaust, but not sure what the different versions should look like.
Was there also a hull version that didn't have the add-on Armour bosses, or was that only for late war M36?
Was there a 90mm M10 or was that the M36?
I wish I had the Steve Zaloga's Osprey Tank Destroyer book with me. Anybody an expert on these detail variations here?
gmat5037
Joined: November 24, 2008
KitMaker: 103 posts
Armorama: 102 posts
Posted: Friday, May 27, 2016 - 01:19 PM UTC
The hull without the add on armor bosses are a late M10 feature and some M10Cs had this hull. The last 300 M10A1s were produced w/o the turrets to be built as M36s. Late war M10s in Europe had some overhead protection added. But you know this from Zaloga's book. Sorry.
Grant
Sorry, I misread your post and thought that you had the book.
M36s converted after the first 300, that used late M10A1s w/o the bosses, used reconditioned M10A1s that had remained in the States and had been used for training, I believe. So they would have had many hulls with the bosses and the date of conversion would not be a good indicator of the type of hull. In 1945 and post war M10s w/ Diesel engines were converted to M36B2s but would not have seen service in WWII.
I'm away from my references, so any mistakes are mine.
Grant
Grant
Sorry, I misread your post and thought that you had the book.
M36s converted after the first 300, that used late M10A1s w/o the bosses, used reconditioned M10A1s that had remained in the States and had been used for training, I believe. So they would have had many hulls with the bosses and the date of conversion would not be a good indicator of the type of hull. In 1945 and post war M10s w/ Diesel engines were converted to M36B2s but would not have seen service in WWII.
I'm away from my references, so any mistakes are mine.
Grant
 |
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.