AMPS Thunderbolt Review

Enjoy!

Of course you musn't forget our own Pat McGrath's excellent review either.

M4A3E8 Thunderbolt VII Review (Better pictures!) )

Vinnie

Mine is almost ready to paint, I have a few grievances:

-Workable suspension is silly, particularly with non working tracks. The springs are too stiff and the shock assembly does not stay straight under tension. I just glued mine in place. Probably works better as 'poseable' rather then 'workable' if you are doing a dio.

They only use the one muzzle brake for the standard barrel. Since the aluminum barrel is fully drilled for a brake-free version, there is no provision on the part to fit properly to the aluminum one. It literally is flush mounted to the end, and the ridge is only a fraction of a millimeter larger then the barrel, so you have to hold it in place the entire time the glue(epoxy) dries, with no easy way to check if it is straight-as it 'dances' on the end of the barrel.

-Also the aforementioned lack of etch nor duplicate pioneer tools, although the original castings with huge sprue mounts still are crisp. Nor are there any interior details, breech work, ammo, buckets, figures, etc like any new German AFV has from DML. You can see that that do make a few extra bucks on Sherman fans with the minimum of new parts. Why they didn't use the new mold technology on the headlight guards is another mystery. They are Lego-block thick and are mounted to sprue A with huge tabs. They could of re-done about 15 parts and a new muzzle brake for the al. barrel, you'll figure out which ones I mean when building it.... The price is the same as a Tiger or Panther, there should be a duplicate tool set, some various etch brackets and other goodies. I already see more upcoming M4's in the works from them, why not do it?


-The add-on front armor nuts are the tiniest pieces I have ever seen in styrene. And for some reason the average DML kit leaves you with a handful of extra road wheels, turrets, barrels, mantlets and about 250 other leftover parts, there are only 8 of these little suckers-so BE CAREFULL not to loose them. I actually recovered one from my grey carpet after looking like a crack addict on the floor for about 15 minutes

-There are parts to remove from the front of the hull as listed in reviews, but there are also two thick tabs inexplicably inside the upper hull that need trimming in a tricky area, so watch the fingers! There is also no provisions for the add-on turret armor, they are tricky to glue on with no clear indication as to where the exact contact areas should be and requires a gel-type CA or the like and patience to hold it in place while it dries. The side armor has no clear markings either but at least the mounting area is flush.

-The fenders are VERY fussy. I have a lot of PE experience and it took a lot of effort to bend them. The front fenders do NOT fit properly without trimming. If simply glued in place, the flange will not let the lower hull go into place!( found this out after interlacing the parts carefully and priming). Yanking off flat pieces of PE sheet is risky business, so check the fit and trim for no inner overhangs first. You also have to be very careful with the mounting brackets with no molded placement marks. You pretty much have to use the smaller paint guide drawings for reference-and test fit the add-on armor and mark the upper hull before gluing as two brackets come very close to the edges of it. The brackets also require some finesse to clean the sprue tabs without damage. These really should of been done in etch with small marks relief etched into the fenders. Again, on any kit with Ausf in the name it would have em.


THAT being said, I still LOVE the kit. There is no reason to not buy it. It just takes a little more skill then even some of the other more complicated kits. The add on armor is awesome, and all the details listed in the reviews are dead on. Raised weld seams, the aforementioned tiny nuts on the front plate, the casting numbers, and rear ventwork are just fantastic.

I still got through it quickly but would have really blown a gasket if I had not caught the front fender overhang problem after painting and weathering-it was bad enough pulling fully glued PE parts apart to start with!

Still has to be the best Sherman kit ever! I also understand what the fans of Allied armor get a little buggered about....With a little hope, DML may also remember the T34 also has fans too in the near future(although sales of OOP kits can appear to be a little slow to them), but I digress, one Allied afv at a time...

I have a few pics in the "tank aces" campaign thread, but I will put one up here later tonight when I get home with the fenders installed before I paint it matte black and get to the fun part

Hey, when it's painted I'd like to see it! I picked mine up from the LHS last night and before I assemble it will be measured up for my 1/16th R/C project.

Lots of parts though!


Jeff

WOW Kevin. You should have submitted an official review. It sure was long enough and detailed enough. Except for the barrel issue no other problems were brought up in the other reviews. It was a little disconcerning that there were so many trim and fit problems. Now I'm having seconds thoughts about getting this kit next. Might just pass on this one for now and wait for the M4A2 coming soon.

I wouldn't say trim and fit problems so much as 'pay attention' problems They didn't slow me down much at all. I quickly redid the headlight guards other then the front framework with thin strip stock and the other fender went very quick after I farted around with the first one for a bit. It's all give and take, a little more tinkering with the add on armor and fenders in lieu of, say, painting 48 roadwheels on a Tiger

I still built mine in about 5 evenings to major components for painting. I'm not a Sherman fan per se and I still really like the way it looks. The overall fit is excellent it's just overengineered in places. I can't wait to paint it! But like I said, I wouldn't let ANY of this put anyone off from buying it.

I would say to make it virtually PERFECT(and equal to say a Panzer IV kit 's contents).

-A small sprue of clampless pioneer tools
-PE tool clamps and fender supports
-A new muzzle brake for the aluminum barrel
-slide molded or pe light guards
-revised fret with the cutouts for the lower hull to fit on the front fenders, or at least an instruction revision leaflet


The suspension dampers can be glued in place so no big deal there

And if they really wanted to go nuts:

-Pre bent fenders-they are some tough PE to bend without a hold n' fold with no relief lines-the King Tiger gets preformed PE grills and wiring...
-wire frames for the periscopes
-some interior detail....

I type about 70 wpm so I can fill a page quickly

I just stopped home before going out to watch the race(at a bar, not the track unfortunately) Heres the fender issue:

The part off the fret, the size of the tab is large:



Trimmed and installed. If it is inside the ridge of the upper hull, the lower will not fit. Forigive the messy glue, it was prettier the first time The front armor plate will friction-fit with the upper armor plate so you can check your placement easilly.



From the top, with the slightly reworked headlight frames(I just did everything but the front frame with strip stock(.010x.030). The front frames are thinned slightly too but look fat from above:


Voila! I trimmed them with sharp shears but had to re flatten them with a postal tweezer. I tried to just ever so slightly distress them, this is going to be a pretty clean tank, but those fenders probably didn't get out of the factory without a dent.

A note on the brake. I glued the barrel in the turret first making it much trickier. Glue the break on first so its easier to allign. I let 5 min epoxy sit for about 2 minutes then put some on and set the brake and held it together and babysat it for about 4 minutes. A few minutes after that when it was clearly set I went back and wiped it smooth with rubbing alcohol at the joint. Piece o cake, especially if its not epoxied in the mantlet, whoops. Every time I carefully checked if the brake openings were square with the mantlet, I repeated 'duh' untill dry.

alright I need to boogidie boogidie boogidie up the street....

Hmmmm, I think you have the turret armor on the wrong sides. The smaller side faces front.


Jeff

Great update there Kevin. I still think you should have submitted it for an official review. You certainly have enough details in your report

Thanks guys. Well DML's instructions and CAD drawings have the armor going this way, So I don't know for sure if they were wrong. I still have yet to find a decent picture anywhere of Thunderbolt VII.

I don't have the kit yet. I do have sort of a double check question tho.... Roy stated in his review that the oval hatch is correct, the instructions seem to show the split hatch???

I kinda was confused by that too. The oval hatch is shown as a generic easy8 hatch and the instructions, cad, and line drawings have all the armor on what they call the 'early style' turret. The art(single painting) on the box however depicts the oval hatch with the taller .50 mount. No offense to the artist, but the hull sides and fenders in the artwork are out of proportion and the armor mounts and shapes are slightly different, including some incorrect perspective on the turret side shapes, so I can't tell if the artwork came from a refference photo of the actual T-VII. So who knows? Its box art against model manufacturer.. Typically the line drawings for markings and paint on DML kits show what parts are on what version, and often help you decipher which version your are building when every other step has the optional double-arrow symbol-the Initial Tiger or even the Ticongeroga-class cruiser kits are like this, all three drawings are different for each version. On this kit they are all exactly the same turret(although the add-on armor is varied on the drawings).

I really can not find much on this tank online so I couldn't figure out if the artist had heavilly researched the subject or was asked to do an armored easy8 painting as thunderbolt VII and used the other turret style from generic refferences for easy8's. I really wish kit makers would actually put ONE or TWO photos they use to model the kits, how hard is that? Some resin ship kits include some of the refference photos they used or at least links to where they got the info. I also have heard that this armor was unique to this tank in some ways that other up-armored easys would not match it exactly either. I am by no means an AFV expert so if its that hard to find even a single photo, the chances of anyone who ever sees this model in person would never know the difference. If someone has a definitive photo they need to post it because I found a lot of people are asking the same thing online.

Not having a mystery super-rare book with actual clear photos that somehow never made it to any website ever where I could confirm authenticity is mostly why I dodged doing a formal review to start with. I figured someone has a photo of this tank that could compare it. I got much bigger projects to get to, including two aircraft carriers, Revell's re-release of the show-off 747 for my father's birthday as a 30 year tribute to the first model he ever built me, and Trumpy's 1/16 T34-85 is in the mail.

Wow I read the both reviews. Now we have two reviews both with different oppinions on the turret types both from refference photos. I had only read the review here before starting. I do know I skipped deleting the grouser covers out of convenience.

Something tells me this model will be painted and on the shelf before it's sorted out

Kevin, thanks for taking the time to raise some interesting points - very useful indeed!

Alan (Shermiesrule) - Pat did an excellent review, but, just in case you're unaware of it, THIS is the site policy on Review Submissions:

https://armorama.kitmaker.net/forums/81672&page=1

Yeah ... you're right. After studying ALL pictures it appears I was getting the wrong impression.

It's always great to have a second pair of eyes! :-)


Jeff

Gday all
It would seem from the couple of pics I could dig up on Abrams tank that the split hatch is used, and that the turret arnour has been applied correctly... Hope this helps!
Cheers
Brad

Well I researched for the heck of it online and actually did find the color plate rendering used in a couple refference books and it has the oval with high-mount .50 like the e8 had going into Korea, but the armor is right-on what the kit has. Apparently the unique armor on Thunderbolt 7 is the way the side hull armor 'stands' off the side. I saw many others where a couple plates are flat welded to the side and trimmed around the fender brackets(like the box artwork). And various older custom scratch built and modified models all appear to have the split hatch(I figure they probably have pics before scratch building a metal r/c model). Corgi makes a replica with the oval but the .50 mount isnt even in the right place and the overall shape looks odd. So I am leaving it as is, thats enough 'research' for this little guy

And I'm building a model, not doing a review anyway. If they gave me a kit and said do a review I would. Heck I usually pay a few extra bucks at full retail at the LHS just to help support them rather then getting most kits online. I just figured dozens of these are hitting modeling desks and most modelers fully paint and weather the hull halves before final fitting them, I didn't want to see people freak out that they don't fit with the fenders as-is and I figured out how to fix them after some frustration so I started typing....I can type at talking speed so I also tend to drivel on even on a keyboard in very short order :-)

At least my next little project in afv is a Panzerhaubitze 2000 which I already have about 50 super high-res pictures of.

Thanks for the heads up on the problem areas. I'm just getting started on mine. I'm not a Sherman fan at all but I wanted one of these

After all the horsing around trying to research it the kit is pretty darn accurate as per the directions overall.