In-Box Review
Bergepanzer Tiger I
Bergepanzer Tiger I
  • move

by: Andrew Jerome [ ANDREW_JEROME ]


There was only one Bergerpanzer Tiger 1 made in World War 2. It was a Mid-Production Tiger with a crane mounted to it. I will first start out by saying that it was not a Bergerpanzer at all. It was a mine/demolition laying tank. It was knocked out very quickly due to the fact that its cannon was replaced with crane supports. Other than that, not much is known about this vehicle.

Highs: Great detail on newly tooled crane parts, no flash, many spare parts, zimmerit molded on, Magic Tracks, option for leaving wheels off.
Lows: No lightening holes in tracks, sparse decal sheet, zimmerit is feint on hull but deep on turret, hole to fill on the front plate.
Verdict: Overall, I feel that this kit might have the upper hand against the Rye Field offering mainly because of the zimmerit. The only main issue with this kit are the tracks. The guide horns are not hallowed.
Percentage Rating
  Scale: 1:35
  Mfg. ID: 089195868503
  Suggested Retail: $75.00
  PUBLISHED: Dec 04, 2016
  NATIONALITY: United States

Our Thanks to Dragon USA!
This item was provided by them for the purpose of having it reviewed on this KitMaker Network site. If you would like your kit, book, or product reviewed, please contact us.

View Vendor Homepage  |  More Reviews  

About Andrew Jerome (Andrew_Jerome)

I am a high school student with an interest in scale modeling. I have been modeling for about 3 years.

Copyright 2021 text by Andrew Jerome [ ANDREW_JEROME ]. All rights reserved.


It wasn't a functioning gun tank, the turret was burnt and unrepairable. Also, it wasn't a Command tank. It was an ordinary Tiger, one of the one that were built as Command tanks but converted back. See LINK David
DEC 05, 2016 - 11:59 AM
It wasn't a functioning gun tank, the turret was burnt and unrepairable. Also, it wasn't a Command tank. It was an ordinary Tiger, one of the one that were built as Command tanks but converted back. See LINK David [/quote] *** Ah! I was curious as to the ex-pot antennae holder on the roof. That explains it!
DEC 05, 2016 - 01:44 PM
Even if it was a Tiger with a burnt-out turret I would think that even late in the war surely spares, even taken from another donor tank, would have been available. As to using it as a recovery vehicle: we'll ignore that there were strict orders forbidding this practice as Tiger's were infamous for transmission and final drive problems. That's why Bergepanthers were so invaluable as they could tow a Tiger and, weighing tons less, had the good possibility of managing without damage to itself. The turret-mounted crane is laughable as even with the reduction gears the crane wouldn't be able to do much useful that would justify the work. You don't convert a vehicle for a one-off. What that purpose was is a true mystery. If it was actually a recovery Tiger then it would have made more sense to pull the turret at the same time that the gun was removed. I think that Dave would agree on that at least.
DEC 07, 2016 - 01:07 AM
At the time of the conversion, the battalion had thirty-seven Tigers plus three unrepairable damaged ones. A thick-skinned demolition charge layer may have seemed more desirable than one more Tiger. David
DEC 07, 2016 - 01:45 AM
There were orders to be sure but in times of combat we know that single famos and single tigers would attempt lone recovery and there are at least a couple of pics to show this. I also find a lot of people say "The bergetiger would never tow a tiger", etc. The 508 had more than just tigers that needed recovery...not to mention war booty. We must also be wary when we assume or surmise by saying things like "even it was burned out surely it was better to use it as a donor tank". This flies in the face of fact: we already know that pz.abt for whatever reason opted as for a one-off conversion rather than retain it as a donor tank. The statement "You don't make one off conversions" also holds no truth as we have dozens of examples to show this: everything from the bergetiger(?) to the fuel drum carrying Kubelwagen. Let us not be contrarians for the sake of it but rather engage in meaningful dialogue. Why is the crane "laughable"? I work with cranes every day and a crane (or jib, really) this size should have no problem lowering a 700lb Borgward load. I am not saying I believe it was a charge layer but it is definitely possible. Don't forget the diary statement that alludes to just that, also. As for why not pull the turret...well then the field shop would have to source steel, cut it, and plug the hole...perhaps not ideal considering the situation at Anzio. Or perhaps the turret could still rotate which could assist positioning the weird little crane/jib. Bizarrely it appears the crane operator would need to be out of the tank to use the crane. I wonder would the tank back up to the "target" and rotate the turret so the operator could at least be halfway inside the driver's hatch? This mystery vehicle is certainly excitingvto discuss, anyway. Perhaps one day an "in action" photograph will appear!!
DEC 07, 2016 - 07:49 AM
Like I said in my post, "think like a motor pool warrant officer/NCO" not a pedantic historian. What do you need and what can you make with what you have? Screw orders. I need that tank towed and all I have to do it with is this tank, and the enemy is readying a counter attack and it's raining and my sausage was cold and my socks are wet. I don't want excuses, I want results. Panzer vor!
DEC 07, 2016 - 08:19 AM
***Indeed, and the Germans were certainly getting their butts kicked pretty good at Anzio. TBH the so-called bergetiger would be ideal to recover Borgward demo vehicles which were often damaged or broke down in the course of their duties. Perhaps the berge was even an improvised Borgward control tank - making it a "triple duty vehicle"!
DEC 07, 2016 - 08:25 AM
It was a Borgward control tank before the conversion. Not after. David
DEC 07, 2016 - 12:29 PM
Very interesting! That could certainly lend credence to the charge layer claim. As always, thanks David, for all your info .
DEC 07, 2016 - 08:16 PM