_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV: IDF [Israeli Defense Forces]
Armor and AFVs of the IDF army from 1947-today.
Hosted by Darren Baker
M51 muzzle brake
Kelley
Visit this Community
Georgia, United States
Joined: November 21, 2002
KitMaker: 1,966 posts
Armorama: 1,635 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 22, 2007 - 03:32 AM UTC
This post is in regard to my review of the new Dragon Premium M51 where I stated the new muzzle brake was once again too small. Well, I stand corrected. Chris "Toadman" posted his pics of the M51 here:

http://www.toadmanstankpictures.com/m51_sherman.htm

Which by the way is an excellent set of reference pics. Near the bottom he has some pics of the muzzle brake with measurments on them. After running his measurements through a scale calculator and then comparing the converted numbers to the new M51 muzzle brake it looks like Dragon got the MB correct. From what I can tell there may be minor differences but they're so small that it's not worth mentioning.

I can honestly say I'm glad what I said in the review was wrong as I was already thinking about scratching a "correct" muzzle brake and wasn't looking forward to it.
This does bring up an interesting question though that was brought up in the original thread announcing the review. Were there different variations of the muzzle brake used by the IDF? Some people who I consider to be very knowledgable about this subject, Tom Gannon among them, have stated the original Dragon MB was too small, yet the new one is smaller still. Also there is the Accurate Armour replacement piece which is not only bigger but also a slightly different shape than both of the Dragon MB's. It was reportedly mastered based on measurements taken by the person who mastered it from an M51 in Israel. Oh well something to think about.

Mike
junglejim
Visit this Community
Alberta, Canada
Joined: February 18, 2003
KitMaker: 1,728 posts
Armorama: 1,629 posts
Posted: Friday, March 23, 2007 - 12:18 AM UTC
Together with Chris's measurements, and a couple other ones I had, I came up with a common measurement that they all have (everybody measured something different!). These are the top and bottom plates. The new brake is correct in these measurements, but is too small in 'height' ie appears a bit squashed. It still looks too small to my eye when on the end of the barrel, compared to a real photo, but I guess it's accurate. So once again it boils down to what the builder is happy with. I'd like to do more complete drawings, once we can get the rest of Chris's measurements (overall length, height and width would be good)


Cheers,
Jim
CMOT
Staff MemberEditor-in-Chief
ARMORAMA
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 10,954 posts
Armorama: 8,571 posts
Posted: Friday, March 23, 2007 - 12:31 AM UTC
the first picture has the measurment wrong it should read 10 3/4 inches if i am reading the tape correctly.
Vodnik
Visit this Community
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Friday, March 23, 2007 - 01:31 AM UTC

Quoted Text

but is too small in 'height' ie appears a bit squashed. It still looks too small to my eye when on the end of the barrel, compared to a real photo, but I guess it's accurate.



"A bit squashed" is a big understatement If I remember my yesterdays measurements, it is almost 50% too small in height. I believe that actually the muzzle opening is noticeably too small too - I think it is smaller that the caliber of the gun!
So it is good to know that top and bottom plates from new DML kit are useable, but I still plan to modify what is between them to make muzzle brake "fatter".


Quoted Text

the first picture has the measurment wrong it should read 10 3/4 inches if i am reading the tape correctly.


You are right, but in this case it doesn' matter that much. If you use correct 10 3/4" to check kit part, the straight edge of the muzzle brake top plate is a bit too long (should be 7.8 mm), but the angled part on the rear of it seems to be too short, so in total the length is probably close to correct.

Pawel

Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: July 20, 2004
KitMaker: 1,141 posts
Armorama: 950 posts
Posted: Friday, March 23, 2007 - 02:27 AM UTC

Quoted Text

the first picture has the measurment wrong it should read 10 3/4 inches if i am reading the tape correctly.



Aaaccckk!!! Good catch! I guess that's what happens when I'm doing this stuff so late at night. I'll correct it when I get home later this evening.

Chris "toadman" Hughes
Toadman's Tank Pictures
210cav
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 6,149 posts
Armorama: 4,573 posts
Posted: Thursday, April 05, 2007 - 11:24 PM UTC

Quoted Text

So what's the finial vedict on this?



Just use the one supplied, math can/does make your head hurt.
Kelley
Visit this Community
Georgia, United States
Joined: November 21, 2002
KitMaker: 1,966 posts
Armorama: 1,635 posts
Posted: Friday, April 06, 2007 - 12:03 AM UTC

Quoted Text

So what's the finial vedict on this?


Gary, according to my measurements from front to back, and side to side the muzzle brake matches the measurements on Chris' pics. Like Jim said, the heighth is still off, again according to my measurements it's 1 mm too short.

Mike
Kelley
Visit this Community
Georgia, United States
Joined: November 21, 2002
KitMaker: 1,966 posts
Armorama: 1,635 posts
Posted: Friday, April 06, 2007 - 12:04 AM UTC

Quoted Text

math can/does make your head hurt.



How true!!
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: July 20, 2004
KitMaker: 1,141 posts
Armorama: 950 posts
Posted: Friday, April 06, 2007 - 01:21 AM UTC
I took more measurements last week so I should have them up on Sunday or Monday. I just have to finish getting caught up on a few other photo things.

Chris "toadman" Hughes
Toadman's Tank Pictures
SIMONAFV
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: February 27, 2005
KitMaker: 30 posts
Armorama: 29 posts
Posted: Friday, April 06, 2007 - 02:04 AM UTC
M51 was made in 4 batchs. Each time improvements was made so 4 different muzzle brakes.
Then add 3 upgrades also add replaced guns.
So who is correct?
Shadowfax
Visit this Community
Michigan, United States
Joined: November 02, 2006
KitMaker: 389 posts
Armorama: 351 posts
Posted: Friday, April 06, 2007 - 03:32 AM UTC
Have fun with this... Before ANY of the current kits became available, I tried my hand at that muzzle break. First in brass sheet, then in styrene. It came out alright, but was far from accurate. I remember using a Finescale Modeler Magazine line drawing for reference.
Shadowfax
Visit this Community
Michigan, United States
Joined: November 02, 2006
KitMaker: 389 posts
Armorama: 351 posts
Posted: Monday, April 30, 2007 - 05:18 AM UTC
Just picked up the "Reconstructed Version" of Big Red One movie. There are LOTS of M51 Shermans masquerading as Panzer IV and Tigers.

Not a bad movie either....
fireontheway
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: May 17, 2006
KitMaker: 370 posts
Armorama: 368 posts
Posted: Monday, April 30, 2007 - 04:24 PM UTC
I just built the brake that was recommended in "another" review that stated that the incorrect part #'s were shown on the instructions. Well that brake looks awful. It is too narrow at the opening and gets taller as is goes back towards the barrell. Its just 6 simple parts (1 that broke while sanding it) but its not, dare I say "Rocket Science". So I will be going with the other brake supplied in the kit, that really looks like the 1 I should have used in the 1st place. Sometimes the "Experts" arent always right.
gbkirsch
Visit this Community
Ohio, United States
Joined: June 04, 2005
KitMaker: 627 posts
Armorama: 455 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 - 03:32 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

So what's the finial vedict on this?



Just use the one supplied, math can/does make your head hurt.



I second that!! Here's mine from the Academy kit:



Gary
Kelley
Visit this Community
Georgia, United States
Joined: November 21, 2002
KitMaker: 1,966 posts
Armorama: 1,635 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 - 09:11 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I just built the brake that was recommended in "another" review that stated that the incorrect part #'s were shown on the instructions. Well that brake looks awful. It is too narrow at the opening and gets taller as is goes back towards the barrell. Its just 6 simple parts (1 that broke while sanding it) but its not, dare I say "Rocket Science". So I will be going with the other brake supplied in the kit, that really looks like the 1 I should have used in the 1st place. Sometimes the "Experts" arent always right.


Timothy, I'm pretty sure I know which review you were referring to above and the reviewer is wrong, the instructions don't give the wrong part #'s for the new muzzle brake. The correct part #'s for the new muzzle brake are from the "J" sprue, not the "H" sprue as the reviewer said. The "H" parts are the "old" muzzle brake.

Mike
fireontheway
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: May 17, 2006
KitMaker: 370 posts
Armorama: 368 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 - 03:37 PM UTC
Gary, sorry I took my hammer out and smashed that nerve of yours. You seem as passionate about this issue as I do about "Judging" at some shows. I dont consider anyone in this "Hobby" an expert. I dont know anyone on this or any other Forum. I do know my experience as a Tanker, and from what I've seen during over 21 years in the Military. That and peoples comments both positive and negative are my references. But I am always willing to learn new tips and techniques. Some people treat this hobby like golf, way too seriously, sorry rivet counters of the world. With that said, I await the storm.
gbkirsch
Visit this Community
Ohio, United States
Joined: June 04, 2005
KitMaker: 627 posts
Armorama: 455 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 - 08:06 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Some people treat this hobby like golf, way too seriously, sorry rivet counters of the world. With that said, I await the storm.



Timothy, you are eloquent! As a former abused caddy as a kid, I can't stand to play golf as an adult but I applaud your comments. I too take the hobby seriously to a point. Beyond that, I can never imagine milling small parts to exact engineering specs but I find it incredibly interesting that some here are that capable. Really I guess everyone here no matter their skill level finds useful information and perspectives. But the golf analogy is priceless!!!

Gary
fireontheway
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: May 17, 2006
KitMaker: 370 posts
Armorama: 368 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 - 11:10 PM UTC
OK then with all that settled I am ready to tackle the Muzzlebrake. That is what "this" is all about.....right? Building kits? I do value all of your opinions. I may not adhere to your advice, but I value your experience and techniques. It just seems that this particular horse has been beat to death for quite awhile. Or maybe I need to get myself a micrometer or caliper and jump the fence. Nothing personal.
Chilihead
Visit this Community
Missouri, United States
Joined: July 03, 2002
KitMaker: 626 posts
Armorama: 456 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 - 11:46 PM UTC
Gary, screw the muzzle break and let's go get some KC BBQ and some brewski's to suck down and then go home and slap that M-51 together!
Actually I am waiting on the info as well, I have the kit ready to go. Hell you knows we might see a new crew for it. Mrosko
gbkirsch
Visit this Community
Ohio, United States
Joined: June 04, 2005
KitMaker: 627 posts
Armorama: 455 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 03, 2007 - 12:15 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Gary, screw the muzzle break and let's go get some KC BBQ and some brewski's to suck down and then go home and slap that M-51 together!



Chris has the right idea!!!

Gary
 _GOTOTOP