ZIMMERIT ?

From what i found on Achtung Panzer, these were converted from Oct to Dec 44. So i guess it would depend on the chassis used. So it would depend on which hull was used. They seem to have mainly been converted from Auf H and early J's. I can't find any photo's of the real thing, but pics of models show both with and without. So really it would be upto you.

Bish has you covered. Berge's were done on reconditioned existing Pz IV hulls and not purpose built hulls...so if the original hull had zim, so would the Berge. The chances of it needing zim are high considering the use of Ausf H (all had zim) hulls or early Js (J's were produced starting in March-April '44) which were also produced when zim was in use until end of Aug '44. I'm fairly certain DML's kit is on an H hull but haven't looked too deeply into that particular offering to be 100% sure.  

I can never remember when the H started production so never sure if they all had Zimm. Thanks for clearing that up bill.

detail, hope we are going to see some nice WiP piccys.

@wbill76:

Quote[The chances of it needing zim are high considering the use of Ausf H (all had zim) hulls or early Js (J's were produced starting in March-April '44) which were also produced when zim was in use until end of Aug '44. I'm fairly certain DML's kit is on an H hull but haven't looked too deeply into that particular offering to be 100% sure.  ]quote

Sorry, but I don't think I can go along with the "Ausf H (all had zim)" part!    The Pz IV zim story is not that black-and-white!  The CW Zimmer Company in Berlin actually finalized their formulation of their product - zimmerit - only in late Spring 1943.  Some supplies trickled out to frontline units from MAY out to around NOV 1943 and was variably applied by field crews in rear-area shops...  Factory application and use of standard zimmerit patterns started up at the end of DEC 1943 with an OKW order officially stating that zimmerit would heretofore be a standard item on certain tanks and other AFV (StuG III and IV, Panzer IV, Panther, Tiger I, Tiger II, StuPa/brummbar, Sturmtiger, Jagdpanther, etc.).  Zimmerit was a required factory application from DEC 29 1943 until OCT 07 (or there-abouts) 1944.

Juxtapose this against the production history of panzer IV H and J...  The H entered production in April, 1943 and ended in July 1944.  The J entered production in JUNE 1944 and continued to April 1945.

There were somewheres around 3400 Panzer IV H produced.  Average monthly production ranged around 260 - 300 per.  So, one can very conservatively figure that at least 1000 - 1200 H were produced (7+ months @ around 260 per would actually be over 1800, or perhaps 1/2+ of all H made!) without factory zimmerit!  MAY - DEC 1943 H did not have factory zim, and probably only a few received field-applied zim - though damaged tanks sent back for refurb would get zimm'd as part of the rebuild process IF rebuilt from DEC 1943 on into 1944).

About 1760 Ausf J tanks were produced; those made from JUN 1944 thru SEPT would have been factory-zimm'd.  Those produced from OCT 1944 on were not so encumbered, as zim application was officially halted as of OCT 1944.

Dragon has actually "acknowledged this" by producing their mid-production H kit 6526 - which comes zim-free and generally should not have zim applied (unless one wants to depict a rebuild veteran re-issued after DEC 1943)!

So... from this, I would say that one has considerable option with that Berge IV!  IF a G hull - likely no zim (no OEM factory application - but maybe rebuilt with zimm in 1944).  IF an H hull - you have about 50 / 50 on it having factory zim - and a rebuild probably got zimm'd if rebuilt as a gun tank.  Of course, the Berge would be a recycled hull, so...   Both G and earlier H tanks COULD have been field-zimm'd....  IF a J hull, I'd guess it would most likely be an early J, so should have factory zim.  I'd bet probably no J was field-zimm'd, on account of field application was halted in DEC 1943 before J entered production.

I hope this will help clarify things around this issue!

Bob 

... and my suggestion will be as follows !

Please consider that the Zimmerit coating was addionally weight and it was therefore later on "abandoned" !

Bergepanzer IV weren't "produced" in a larger amount ... due to A.H. strictly but not really followed directive that tanks (i.e. Panzer) aren't allowed to be disarmed and used otherwise than for fighting purposes.

Therefore and in following all those above mentioned arguments the better choice ( i.e. your decision !) will be to asssemble this Bergepanzer IV without a Zimmerit coating.

Good luck

That's interesting info Bob on the delay of zim at the factory level until Dec. '43...I'm curious as to your source for that considering it's been accepted (barring new info/research as always is the case with convention ) that official application at the factories began in Aug '43? It wouldn't surprise me that there were delays in reality so you have me genuinely curious as to the shift in the timeline for factory application beginning much later and running for a shorter period of time vs. field application?

You are correct on the earlier production dates for the Hs and that some did not receive zim, that was my error to state that "all" should have it...I was thinking only of "late" Hs but spoke more broadly. I stand corrected. 

You have the J production timeline wrong though. Ausf J production did begin at the end of Feb '44 with chassis number 86394 so it would be correct to say that production from MARCH (not June) through Sept '44 J's would've had zim as a matter of course. That would mean that a much larger number of H's produced would be without zim if the Dec '43 start-point is accepted...hence my curiosity regarding the source info for that initiation start-date vs. three months earlier in Aug '44.

wbill76

That's interesting info Bob on the delay of zim at the factory level until Dec. '43...I'm curious as to your source for that considering it's been accepted (barring new info/research as always is the case with convention ) that official application at the factories began in Aug '43? It wouldn't surprise me that there were delays in reality so you have me genuinely curious as to the shift in the timeline for factory application beginning much later and running for a shorter period of time vs. field application?

You are correct on the earlier production dates for the Hs and that some did not receive zim, that was my error to state that "all" should have it...I was thinking only of "late" Hs but spoke more broadly. I stand corrected. 

You have the J production timeline wrong though. Ausf J production did begin at the end of Feb '44 with chassis number 86394 so it would be correct to say that production from MARCH (not June) through Sept '44 J's would've had zim as a matter of course. That would mean that a much larger number of H's produced would be without zim if the Dec '43 start-point is accepted...hence my curiosity regarding the source info for that initiation start-date vs. three months earlier in Aug '44.

Bill: We have to, I guess, use the sources we have!

Gordon Rottman (Rottman, Gordon (2005), World War II Infantry Anti-Tank Tactics, City: Osprey Publishing (UK), ISBN 978-1-84176-842-7 ) provided the DEC 1943 - SEPT / OCT 1944 dates for zim usage.  To be sure, I've seen elsewhere earlier start dates.

Another source (panzerworld.net) provides the following:

quote[

In an OKH order dated 1943-12-29, Zimmerit was to be applied on the following vehicles:

• Pz Kpfw III
• Pz Kpfw IV (100 kg)
• Pz Kpfw Panther (160 kg)
• Tiger I (200 kg)
• Sturmgeschütz III (70 kg)
• Panzerjäger 38t
• Panzerjäger Hornisse

The Zimmerit was to be applied to all surfaces of the hull and superstructure, including surfaces under the armour skirts. Zimmerit was, however, not to be applied ]quote.  This would seem to go along with the Rottman "point" about a DEC start-up date.

I'm not the apologist for either of these folks / sources.

My point would still be that zim, whether it started up in AUG 1943, or DEC 1943, would still have missed many hundreds of panzer IV H. I'd suppose that the lower number of ca 1000 H "ohne-zim" (lacking zim) would be closer and falls within that conservative estimate I pointed at.  I'm comfy with only 1000 or so H lacking factory zim instead of some higher number (ca 1800+) which would be calculated from an average per-month rate of 260+ 

As to the panzer IV J dates - Achtungpanzer.com offers the following:

Quote[ In June of 1944, Ausf J, the final variant of Panzerkampfwagen IV tank family entered production as a replacement for Ausf H (10 Serie BW). Its production did not cease until March 1945 with 2970 produced solely by Nibelungenwerke and in small number by Vomag. This medium tank received a designation of Sd.Kfz.161/2. Chassis numbers for Ausf J were approx.86394 to 86573 and unknown to approx.89541. ]quote.

Again, I cannot be the apologist for these folks or source.  It's what they said!  All of us know that there are certainly some vague places in the history of these tanks, albeit one should expect that there are some firm records of production "living" somewhere.  This matter of when the J entered production is not, however, any sort of issue nor debate to me!  Whether they started up in JUNE or JULY 1944 or as early as March 1944 doesn't much impact whether early J had factory zim... they did, from whenever they started production thru to OCT 1944!    What's more interesting is that these guys say there were more (ca 2970) J produced then some other folks have claimed (the ca 1760 I had mentioned above).

For whatever it may be worth, I've been simply fascinated by the oft-repeated claims of many that all H had zim, let alone all Panthers, etc.  I just cannot reconcile those claims with the stuff that gets put out there as source info!   

Cheers!

Bob

Thanks Bob, will have to look into that source a bit more to satisfy my own curiosity as it's not one I'm familiar with in general.

FWIW, Achtungpanzer.com is not the most reliable of sources...it's good for general info but has errors in many places due mostly to use of outdated source material that hasn't been updated for quite some time.

As you say, there aren't that many vehicles that you can say with 100% certainty that "ALL" had zim...all depends on the vehicle type and when it was produced and it's far more accurate to say that certain variants or chunks of the production run did/didn't have a particular feature such as zim. If indeed the window was reduced by 3 months to the Dec period...that dramatically shrinks things down for different vehicle types as Dec '43 was a change point for many vehicle types (particularly the Pz IV family) depending on the different Waffenamt orders issued as a result of the usual Hitler conferences on armaments production and targets/goals as well as responses to some of the Allied bombing campaign damages to various factories (like Alkett). I'm highly skeptical of the Dec '43 date for factory-zim production though as it's not something that has been accepted by the research community at large vs. the Aug '43 inception date cited by original-source researchers such as Jentz and Doyle, Spielberger, etc.

The panzerworld.net source you have for the OKH order is interesting...it lists the Panzerjager 38t as a candidate for zim yet this was never carried out...at least there aren't any photo evidence showing Marder III Hs or Ms with zim that have surfaced to substantiate that. Same thing with the Hornisse/Nashorn. Makes me wonder on another level about just what that order was referring to vs. what was actually carried out.  

There's always the lag between orders being issued and implemented due to the standard practice of factories using up existing supplies of whatever they had on hand first before shifting over to newer parts/features in the production line. This introduces some wiggle room (and overlap!) in many many cases, making it very difficult to ever say that anything was ALWAYS or NEVER done when it comes to German vehicle production (speaking in broad terms of course) throughout the course of the war.  Modelers however always want things to be black/white or fit into nice little categories so we "invent" designations to try to accomplish that all the time. It's one of the reasons I find building German armor so enjoyable (and the research fascinating).

Your point about the substantial number of Pz IV Hs w/out zim stands, no question about that! However, the kit that Greg has is derived from DML's IV-H late hull and would sport features seen on a hull that would've received zim at the factory IMHO. 

[quote user="wbill76"]

....FWIW, Achtungpanzer.com is not the most reliable of sources...it's good for general info but has errors in many places due mostly to use of outdated source material that hasn't been updated for quite some time.]quote

Yeah...  I'm certainly not putting them up as the be-all / end-all,  but without doing a more-thorough search...

Quote[... The panzerworld.net source you have for the OKH order is interesting...it lists the Panzerjager 38t as a candidate for zim yet this was never carried out...at least there aren't any photo evidence showing Marder III Hs or Ms with zim that have surfaced to substantiate that. Same thing with the Hornisse/Nashorn.]quote

That would be interesting (the note on the panzerjager 38(t))!  But to be careful here... are we really speaking of a "panzerjager 38(t)" - which would be a Marder III H or M open-top tank-hunter - or are we actually speaking of the Jagdpanzer 38(t), which would be the "Hetzer"?   I seriously doubt either that the OKH had ordered the Marder to get zim, nor that those panzerworld folks actually intended to suggest that OKH had done that.  So I'll guess we and panzerworld are speaking about the Hetzer...

As to the Hetzer getting zim...  well, as the StuG III and later the StuG IV, and the earlier-production Jagdpanzer IV 70/L (v) were to be zimm'd per orders at the factory, it is not hard to imagine that the Hetzer may also have been so planned.  But, given as orders go out and there is some time-lag before things get executed, I would find it plausible that perhaps by the time things were about ready to start zimming the new Hetzer (which had only really started production in JUNE 1944), the SEP 44 stop-order had come down.  In any case, as I understand things, there were no Hetzers zimm'd - albeit only a rather small number had been produced by the time of the stop-order.

But that's just my "reasoned guess"!  

Quote[ ...However, the kit that Greg has is derived from DML's IV-H late hull and would sport features seen on a hull that would've received zim at the factory IMHO. ]  quote.

I'll take your word for it concerning the later IV-H status of Dragon's Berge-IV hull!  IF that's what the D has provided in that kit, it would seem much more likely that the modeled berge should have zim - as later H were factory-zimm'd!  I guess I was thinking that the D's Berge-IV either had some options for building either earlier and later H hulls, or that it was defacto an earlier or mid-production H hull.... the first case would have provided the option to "zim or not" - the latter case would actually strongly "argue against" zim!

Fun, fun, FUN!

That Berge would look cool with zim, that's for sure!  Specially a rather battered and chipped coat, as befits a refurbished / recycled panzer IV battle casualty!

Cheers!

Bob

I never realised Zimm was ever field applied, i thought it was only applied at the factory.

In regards to the Dec order, i have come across these types of orders before often after the subject referred to has been oput in place. I think these orders are more a case of formally oredering something thats already happening.

I tend to agree there Bish...the Dec '43 order would appear to be an update order for new vehicles entering production (like the Hornisse) and vehicles that were no longer in production (Panzer III) at the time the order was issued. My interpretation would be that in the Pz III case it's referring to vehicles sent back for repair or refit/update (ala the Pz III Ms and Ns that show up in Norway at war's end with zimmerit). Hornisse/Nashorns did not ever receive zim nor did Marders...although it's possible that the Panzerjager 38(t) reference is actually aimed at Hetzers as Bob speculates. I don't believe this order refers to the start of zimmerit application in total at the factories as we know that other vehicles not mentioned also received zimmerit that were already in production prior to this (such as the Brummbar and StuG IVs)...so it's not as comprehensive as might appear at first glance, at least the way that panzerworld.net has it presented at any rate.   

As to the "Hetzer" question, it was barely on the drawing boards only with the developmental drawings done by Dec 17, '43 and a wooden model wasn't finished and presented to the Waffenamt for inspection until Jan 26, '44...so for it to be featured in an OKH order regarding zimmerit application 12 days later is highly doubtful to my mind but I suppose it's possible. For what it's worth, it was referred to as either the Leichter Panzerjager auf 38(t) or the PzJager 38(t) (as well as other variations that changed slightly) in orders from WaPruf 6 and other entities from January through Sept '44 and the Jagdpanzer 38 designation only appears for the first time in Sept '44 (after production had begun) and becomes standard in Oct '44 (Spielberger's Light Jagdpanzers). So much for German precision when it comes to vehicle naming!     

               Perhaps I am a fool,but I loaned out my panzer IV refs to a young modeler on this site and he has since disappeared.LOL And I seem to have misplaced my Bergie ref. at home here,but from the info you gentlmen have shared it would seem the choice is mine. Perhaps I will zimm the lower hull and leave the upper un-zimmed. I thought it was very interesting to see a softskin in zimmerit.

                                                    Greg"Detailfreak"Rowley

detailfreak

               Perhaps I am a fool,but I loaned out my panzer IV refs to a young modeler on this site and he has since disappeared.LOL And I seem to have misplaced my Bergie ref. at home here,but from the info you gentlmen have shared it would seem the choice is mine. Perhaps I will zimm the lower hull and leave the upper un-zimmed. I thought it was very interesting to see a softskin in zimmerit.

 

                                                    Greg"Detailfreak"Rowley

@Greg R.;  Sorry to hear about someone skipping off with your refs!  Argh! 

You definitely have choices, friend!  From all the previous exchange on zim and PZ IV H this thread, and from what I just read in some of the reviews of the Dragon bergepanzer IV kit, I would at this point suggest that it was more likely that your berge was zimm'd, on acct of the kit being on an H - late production hull (factory zim) - or maybe even on an early J hull also factory zim).  But that's only my opinion!   Of course, this being built on a recycled tank, that zim could have been badly knocked off (but avoid thinking about a recycled burn-out!  That could be zim-free from the fire, but all the steel would have been compromised... so probably not rebuilt.)...  

IF you decide to zim the lower hull, I'd also think zim on the uppers, as about the only ways to get such a split (zim on lower, none on upper) would have been for the berge assemblers to swap the entire upper hull armor from an un-zimm'd tank onto a lower hull from a zimm'd tank... or for them to have for some reason chipped all that upper zim off during the rebuild process.  To show the first option, you could find yourself hustling around trying to reconcile "donor" vehicle versions and characteristics!  FUN, but I think could get pretty complicated!  Not, you understand, that I would begin to suggest that this could never have happened nor that the gluttonous modeler could not go there - perish that heinous thought! )  The second option -chipped off - may or may not have ever happened - I cannot guess why in reality they would have done this - but it would be cool to show such if you could... but how to convey that this is what was done in your build? 

On the "soft-skins and zim" idea...  not that I know of!  Of course I may be confused as to what you are speaking to! You are not suggesting that the berge - a fully-armored ex-tank sans turret and gun - counts as a soft-skin, are you?

Just some thoughts!  I am looking forward indeed to see what you do with this beast! 

@Bill:

As you noted, that Hetzer was only in the early stages of concept and development in DEC 1943, so, yes, it would seem rather prescient of the OKH to order that their relatively distant-in-time Hetzer should get zim, wouldn't it!   But if not the Hetzer, to what could such a possible order refer?  Certainly not to zimming Marders and the like (Nashorns, Hummels, Wespe, Grille, Bison, etc.) - as it seems that all the open-top armored SPG vehicles were not on the zim list!  You got me, there, Pard!

In terms of the discussion of dates and hulls-of-IV and zim...  I would strive to keep clear that the discussion of the zim orders has been about start and stop of factory application during production, and has little to offer about zim applied on refurbed / rebuilt tanks. 

So far as I know, we have no "dispute" about whether AFV were field-zimm'd in earlier or mid-1943, nor that such may have continued in its sporadic field way up to 1944.  And I am sure that zim application on rebuilt AFV started up at the Nibelungenwerk in the late summer of 1943... notably with those Ferdinand and StuPa IV (brummbar) which survived Kursk (JUL 1943).  As we know, those original Ferdinand and StuPa served at Kursk, as did the first Panthers (D), and panzer IV G and early H, without zimmerit...  with the survivors heading off for rebuilds and refurbishment after that battle.  The refurbed Ferdies became Elefants with zim, and the refurbed StuPa early came back as up-graded StuPa with zim and new versions of schurzen. This was, of course, sometime in SEP or later, 1943, after Kursk was over.

So, if we put this into perspective, zim was 1) not factory-applied to those IV-G, early H, Panther D, Ferdinand, StuPa IV when they were made sometime prior to that battle - so no factory application order was in effect much or at all before JUNE 1943... the first 60 StuPa, for example, being built between April and May 1943 and arriving in time for Kursk, the Panther D - built from 01-1943 to 09 - 1943 - and few if any ever having factory zim (despite that cool Dragon D with zim kit), the Ferdinand (built MAR - MAY 1943), etc.  2) Kursk survivors - StuPa and Ferdinands - were recycled to Nibelungenwerk and refurbed from OCT 1943. While there, they received refits and zim. 

This would certainly support there being some "practice" - if not an ordered process - in place for zim on refurbed AFV as of OCT 1943.  And it pretty much also bounds when zim hit tank production lines - not apparently in effect before JUNE 1943 - as these players were not issued with factory zim.  On the other side, that putative DEC 1943 order Panzerworld ref'd could not be about zimming refurbed AFV ,  as zimming was being done at Nibelungenwerk during refurb by OCT 1943!

Of course, this does not in any way rule out that such a factory-application order had not been sent earlier then April-May 1943...  like you said before, there is (was) certainly a time-lag between order and execution!

To me, the real fun in the German modeling research comes about as we try to reconcile all the claims and dates and proffered "records" with the other things - documented appearance of vehicles in the field with feature x, y, or z!

Got to LOVE it!  (And boy do I!)

Cheers!

Bob

panzerbob01

To me, the real fun in the German modeling research comes about as we try to reconcile all the claims and dates and proffered "records" with the other things - documented appearance of vehicles in the field with feature x, y, or z!

Got to LOVE it!  (And boy do I!)

Cheers!

Bob

I am glad someone thinks its fun. I find the more i look into somthing, the more confused it gets. Sometime si just get to a point and say 'right, i'm going to do it this way and to hell with it'

                    I saw a zimmerit set for a 251 ausf.d I believe. No doubt field applied.

Really, now thats one i have never seen.

Bish

Really, now thats one i have never seen.

Yeah - a -251 with zim... truly an ODD DUCK, that!  But there apparently was at least one such vehicle, as captured in a photo taken in Russia in later 1943 - see it posted in a 2007 thread on this exact subject on:

http://planetarmor.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4223 

That pic and a close-up also appear on other military sites.  I have seen perhaps at least one - maybe 2 - other pics of such vehicles in one or another publ - I think a Concord Military book may have a different pic.... 

I think you can safely bet that this was a field zim job!

From that PlanetArmor post, there is, or at least was, an ATAK resin zim-kit put out for the SdKfz 251 - D, presumably to capture this very vehicle.

Bob

O, nice. I am a big 251 fan and i don't have a /8 yet. This will be something different. Thanks for the link.