Hi all,
I apologise to everyone for my absence - I've been busy chatting up pretty nurses from a horizontal position for quite a while (unfortunately only me being horizontal)... and yes because of this (being horizontal - not the nurses) much to my dismay I completely missed the UK Jadgpanther appearance :(
There's always next year!
Here are my thoughts and opinions on the dreaded Zimmerit. I'm no expert on anything (except falling asleep in front of the TV) so I must stress these are just my opinions and observations and are only intended for us all to try and achieve an accurate as possible model. I started this little "study" a while ago but have just picked it up again in light of recent postings and tried to semi-complete it and get something posted, in haste! I hope it's not too late and helps some...
First I don't think there were very many "patterns" of zimmerit on Tiger 1's. There seems to be a "standard" pattern seen on the vast majority, and then a few oddities. My previous post (page 84) showed 2 different "waffle" type patterns on early Tiger 1s. To my scant knowledge there are only a few other published instances that show any "different" patterns - in this case it's an unusual "ridges with squares" pattern... http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm4.jpg (Tigers at the Front by Jentz - TATF from now on) p.122 and now one (fromTATF p.155) that shows a vertical recess between "columns"... http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm11.jpg
Some more "oddities"...
There is the Kubinka Tiger 1 http://tanxheaven.com/nic/tiger1kubinka2005/tiger1kubinka2005.htm that has remnants of zimmerit on the turret sides that is in a vertical ridge pattern - hard to see in the pics on the link but here's a pic from Achtung Panzer No.6 that shows it more clearly http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/kubinkatiger.jpg (this Tiger was repainted in the markings of the 505 by the museum some time ago.) There are a few more views of this "vertical ridging" in D.W. to Tiger 1, p.131. There are a couple other pics of Tiger 1s that show this vertical ridging on the turret sides too http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/verticalzimm2.jpg http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/verticalzimm.jpg both from Tigers in Combat II by Schneider, p 236 and 238 (hardback edition - it differs in the softback edition).
Also there are some instances of zimmerit applied to the slightly sloping horizontal area on the front of the tiger - the near horizontal face between the front mud flaps. http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimmonfront.jpg from Germanys Tiger Tanks D.W. to Tiger 1 by Jentz & Doyle p.153
That's just about the complete and total lot of "oddities" on the Tiger 1 zimm to my knowledge - only accounting for a very small number of instances in a few hundred? photos of Tiger 1s with zimm (don't make me count them!), but that doesn't mean there were not others similar to these oddities, or even with a different zimmerit pattern, it just means that we have no photos of any other "different" ones. Anyone have any pics of others or know of them?
The best reference I have seen for a measurement to help us modellers to get accurate scale zimm is one that shows a really factory fresh late Tiger 1 with mint zimmerit from a few different angles, the most useful being the shot from directly in front. http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm1.jpg and close up http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm1closeup.jpg These pics are from Panzer Tracts No.6. I count 12 full "columns" plus roughly a half column either side of these on the lower front face. So that makes roughly 13 (and a bit?) columns on this lower front face between the front hull extensions. I'll let you do the math. I think this likely to be the best source to base your measurement on. The back is shown here http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimmerit2.jpg and a 3/4 view too http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm2.jpg (Diversion: WW, note our old friend the "salami holder" ~ gun barrel rest wooden block ~ sitting to the right on the last pic.)
Of course two or three pics would be better, just to make sure that we get an "accurate average" so here they are... 13 and a bit? columns here... http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm12.jpg (TATF p.115) and 13 and a bit? also here by counting these two half pics of the same Tiger together (use the two black spots at the leading edge of the hull front as a reference point) ... http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm14.jpg http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm15.jpg (TATF p.112, p.113) Three instances of different Tigers with similar zimm properties is a reasonable average I assume.
Next, how thick was the zimmerit applied?
Hmmm... open can of worms...
Back on one of the links Jeff supplied there is an article that seems to be relatively "official" and a guide or directive from the time on how to apply zimmerit. That doesn't mean that it was done exactly this way in production but it's the best we've got to go on. Here it is in the original German http://tankomania.com/data/e/271.html You can do a Google tor Babelfish translation of it into English.
The important things here (if I am reading it correctly) are that the document suggests that zimmerit be applied initially in a thin layer in squares with 5mm spacing between (I think to give the later thicker coat something more to try and adhere to) then allowed to dry or be force dried. Then a secondary layer is applied to a suggested thickness of 4mm!!! I assume this to be to a total of 4mm thickness. This was then ridged with a "putty knife" or other such tool.
Now applying it to the Tiger 1s – the first "square" layer at 1mm thick?, extra on top of that to bring it to 4mm and then the ridging adds maybe another 4 mm of depth - that makes about 8mm thickness. Ok let's completely exaggerate and say the first square coat was 4mm thick, the second added - AN EXTRA 6MM - in thickness and the ridging takes the high points up ANOTHER 6MM - that makes a total of 16mm.
So now the bad news... in 1/16th scale that would make this exaggerated instance only 1mm thick from the base to the highest ridges! So based on the info above if we desire accurately scaled zimmerit on our Tamiya Tigers it should be less than 1mm thick with ridges! and probably only about .5mm! Amazing? When you think about it they wouldn't make it thick enough to obscure or hinder the fittings used to hold the tools etc. and the tools/cables etc from being able to be attached to the fittings. For instance the square nuts welded to the hull sides used to bolt the side mud guards to are 25mm thick in 1:1 scale (measured on the Bovington Tiger.) If zimm were of a great thickness it would prevent the side guards from being attached. Of course the scale thickness of zimm only really comes into account if you wish to show the thickness, like in battle damaged areas, and shouldn't matter (tooooooooo) much as long as you can still attach tools etc. If you think this a problem in 1/16th scale... what about in 1/35th? Yikes!
Ok, now some combat pics to try and support the zimm thickness/thinness theory...
Here's a couple of pics (from Tigers on the Eastern Front p.55 and p.56) showing some damaged/chipped zimmerit and from this we can hopefully get an idea of the thickness of the zimmerit with the help of a few handy indications of scale - the towing cable we know is 32mm diameter, the track cable at bottom right, we know to be 14mm diameter, next we have the driver in the first pic (maybe he has chunky hands) but his ring is likely to be a 3-5mm band? So how thick is the zimmerit? Is it as thick as one of the cables or even one of his fingers? http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm6.jpg
OK some more nicely damaged zimmerit on the second pic with our "scale gauge" the cables again and also a handy scale marker are the bolt heads that attach the side guards - these bolt heads are 10mm deep or thick (measured from the Bovington Tiger)... http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm5.jpg
What do you think?
I think we are all under the impression that it was a lot thicker than it actually was. My guess is that it was most likely about 8-10mm thick at maximum on the Tiger 1. What we often see is harsh shadows under the ridging that gives the impression of real depth. I think we are often fooled because we see what we want to believe...
I've seen, felt and measured a little of what I firmly believe to be unaltered zimmerit on the Jadgtiger at the UK Tank Museum at Bovington http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/jagdtiger.jpg and the Jagdpanther (square pattern) at London's Imperial War museum http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/jagdpanther1.jpg Both times I was actually surprised at the lack of thickness. I always thought it would be about 25mm thick but it was more like an average of... wait for it... 4 mm thick on the Jagdpanther with its square pattern and recessed lines, and (from memory - I didn't take notes of my quick measurements of the Jagdtiger) about 6mm to the highest point of the ridges on the Jagdtiger, the width of "columns" varied enormously. You may think this thickness to be the result of heavy weathering from years and years of neglect. Initially I may have agreed with you instantly but... with pondering the possibilities... now I think the weathering issue somewhat overplayed. From what I have seen there is still quite a bit of detail in some areas of zimm that you would normally have expected to be eroded with weathering, specially on the Jagdpanther, the Jagdtiger's zimm is quite weathered. With the Jagdpanther I measured the thickness in areas that were chipped/broken and the metal base exposed or better still - seemingly recently chipped/exposed (somewhat worrying) and which showed little or no weathering - yep 4mm on average. I plan on re-visting Bovington soonish to check and measure the Jagd's zimm properly. I can't promise exactly when. (Diversion: The Jagd is massive!!! Best I can describe it is... like a apartment block on tracks! Photos cannot begin to explain it... I found myself thinking "They were joking, weren't they? This is far too big to be practicable!" The Tiger 1 is seriously big, the King bigger, but the Jagdtiger is ridiculously big... I can't imagine a Maus! If you ever have the chance to visit a decent tank museum... don't hesitate... it'll blow your mind!)
Now some general observations for the Tiger 1 zimm...
In what I call the "standard" pattern there quite often seems to be a marked difference between the appearance on the turret sides compared to the hull front/back/sides pattern ridge spacing. Here's a pic that shows the two roughly in the same plane for comparison. http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm8.jpg (TATF p.148) It seems that way in a lot - maybe 80% of pics that show the turret zimmerit on Tiger 1s. It seems to have less ridges - roughly half the amount? of ridges compared to an area on the sides or front. Looking through a number of pics there seems no consistency or pattern in this as far as model is concerned - there are zimmed Mid versions with tight ridges on the turret and also others with the spaced out ridges, and Late model Tiger 1s with tight ridges and others with the spaced out ridges.
But... just when I thought that the zimm had only widely spaced ridges on the turret along comes another pic that shows wide ridging on the hull, lol! http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm10.jpg (TATF p.95) keen eyes will have spotted this in one of the pics above... http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/verticalzimm.jpg
Another observation of the "standard" patterns is that the vertical lines between columns are generally not recessed lines to define the columns but seem to be ridges - likely just slight build up or excess of zimmerit at the edges of the "putty knife" used. Also the individual horizontal ridges don't seem to be perfectly straight - the tool used to apply it must have had a great deal of flex - they quite often seem "wavy" in appearance.
And from what I've seen the zimm doesn't appear to have been a very smooth paste when it was applied. Maybe it just wasn't mixed very well. It often appears somewhat lumpy and gritty in parts
One strange thing to me is that there are few pics that show the rear turret bins freshly blown off (supports still intact) and damaged zimm underneath them, indicating that it is likely the turrets were zimmed before the bins were attached. I need to investigate this one further.
And let us not forget that zimmerit was applied by humans with all the problems that go with that. It wasn't perfectly applied by machines and actually often appears quite messy, uneven and varies enormously when viewed close up. See earlier pics and these too (from Tigers on the Eastern Front p.55 and p.56) http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm7small.jpg http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm7.jpg The first pic shows it small and it looks relatively neat, the second shows it in close-up and you can see it wasn't always as neat as we think. I imagine the average modeller would think this a poor job on a model because of it being messy, nowhere near parallel columns and generally uneven... but... it is real!
I believe the only 1/1 scale Tiger 1 with zimmerit is the Saumur Tiger 1 (now on loan to Munster) but I seem to recall reading somewhere that this was... "kindly re-zimmed" by the owners. I don't know if this was in selected areas or the whole Tiger. An indication of it's enthusiastic re-zimming is that there is zimmerit applied to some areas where it just shouldn't be... on top of the completely inaccurate remains of rear mud guards (I assume post war addition like the front ones) and other areas - but at least they didn't zimm over the battle damage! Oh well, what's done is done.
Good luck with the roller idea WW. It's always worth experimenting and you may get great results. Keep us informed. I think it doesn't matter what method you use as long as you are happy with the results. And of course it's always worthwhile practising over and over again on scrap until you are confident and can do it almost without thinking. Jeff, the "new material" sounds fab! And it could be easily tinted with acrylic paint (ochre) to make it an authentic colour, which will be great for us guys who are going to run them about and no doubt get a little battle damage in the process!
I haven't checked the King's zimm specifics (I'll do so in future) but I suggest that whatever you do on the Tiger 1 (if you are doing it), use the same application method and probably the same scale on your Porsche/Henschel King and check references for the individual turret zimm idiosyncrasies.
This is probably good advice to all who are trying to do their zimm accurately... check all the reference material you can of the model, and then specifically check the unit and company that you are trying to represent and base your decisions on those references. All the books the pics were scanned from are great and well worth buying!
I firmly believe (I'm no expert) that more than 80%? of Tiger 1 zimmerit roughly adhered to the style shown earlier at this link http://www.btinternet.com/~wladyslaw/tiger/zimm8.jpg so if in doubt I recommend you base it on this "standard" pattern. I've highlighted the oddities throughout this post but that just proves that human beings with something malleable under their control... will be human... And please bear in mind that these are oddities, the vast majority seem to be like the last link.
I hope all of this hasn't confused you all but explains a little about the idiosyncrasies of zimmerit that I have discovered and how much it varied, and how much it was similar. I've enjoyed the process and will try to add to it to clear up any mistakes I've made through rushing the post. Please feel free to totally ignore my post entirely, and to disagree with it entirely or in part, and to post replies to my ramblings.
Regards,
Wlad.