FYI, the A1, A2, A3, A4 portion of a Sherman only refer to the hull and nothing to do with the turret. Your top photo is an M4A3 75(W) and the bottom photo is an M4A1 76.

The 75mm and 76mm turrets are different. The old Italeri kit from 1989 is an M4A3 76 with the bigger turret. The old Tamiya M4A3 75(W) is like the top photo, the original Italeri M4A1 76 is the bottom (or close enough).

Hope this helps.

First off, which Italeri M4A3 kit do you have? The 76mm T23 turret, or the late high bustle 75mm gun turret? Italeri makes kits of both versions. If you want to build a 75mm gun type, IIRC, the Verlinden turrets are forthe earlier small hull hatch tanks and you would need either a new upper hull, or different base kit altogether. Italeri Sherman’s are all late production large hull hatch types. They are not bad kits by any means, but have been superseded by newer better kits. And yes, the tracks are best replaced. I like the AFV Club indie link tracks myself. The open spoke road wheels can be used with most VVSS version suspension. Look at reference photos if you plan on building a particular tank such as one of Col Abrams’ “Thunderbolt” mounts. 

The Sherman had a huge production run, with multiple versions and sub variations among them. 

It is kit #6440, an M4A3 76MM, supposedly. I've read the turret and gun are all wrong and the tracks are junk. I've found the tracks, so that's easy enough. What needs to be corrected on the turret? I know the gun is shaped wrong and you can get those, but if the turret is all wrong I'd be better served to replace both.

Since the hull is all wrong for an early M4, I'll build the A3 and make the corrections that are most needed and find and early M4 kit and build that also.

BK

Edit, having read more I see the gun is misshaped and the hatch is a split type which is apparently largely not correct. Verlindin makes an M4A3 turret and gun. Is this the correct one for the M4A3 as they state?

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/verlinden-productions-811-76mm-sherman-turret--142277

Why not just build this one (if you must) as is and use it as a test build for armor and to gain some experience.  Then get a much better, more accurate model of the version you want to build.  It seems like it would be much cheaper and less hassle that way.  As the route you are looking to go down (new turret, gun, tracks, etc., etc....) seems like a real pain in the a**.  

Brandon: It's your kit so build it how you wish. And the guy's know a lot more about this sort of stuff than I do. But still it seems like adding a bunch of aftermarket parts to this kit is like the guy who put a $5000 stereo system into a $3000 car. You might be better off just building the thing for practice out of the box and then using your experience on a better kit later on. 

That's my two cents for what it's worth (and that's not much!)

Edit: Lol, looks like Gino posted the same time I did... 

The Italeri T23 turret is mostly ok. It could use a little fine tuning such as texture. The split loaders hatch was used on the initial production types on all 76mm gun tanks, and commonly seen when first taken into combat. It was later replaced by the smaller single piece loaders hatch. The biggest gaffe in the turret is the step molded into the barrel of the main gun near the mantlet. It’s an easy fix by sanding or replacement. 

Here is a great site for all things Sherman

http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/index.html

BrandonK

It is kit #6440, an M4A3 76MM, supposedly. I've read the turret and gun are all wrong and the tracks are junk. I've found the tracks, so that's easy enough. What needs to be corrected on the turret? I know the gun is shaped wrong and you can get those, but if the turret is all wrong I'd be better served to replace both.

Since the hull is all wrong for an early M4, I'll build the A3 and make the corrections that are most needed and find and early M4 kit and build that also.

BK

Edit, having read more I see the gun is misshaped and the hatch is a split type which is apparently largely not correct. Verlindin makes an M4A3 turret and gun. Is this the correct one for the M4A3 as they state?

 

The kit is what it is supposed to be. The lower hull and turret are from the 1970s when Italeri issued their first Sherman kit, the M4A1 76mm. It was based off of one of the tanks provided to the Italian Army after WW2. The gun had been cut and welded back into place when the tank was demilitarized. Italeri copied this error.

Since the US Army tends to dump lesser versions on its allies, beggars can't be choosers, the turret this tank uses is the split hatch loader's hatch. It was a trial that was more cumbersome than it was worth. So this variant of tank was pawned off onto our allies.

So your base kit is about 45 years old. This M4A3 upper hull was first released in the late 1980s as the M4A2 'Jumbo" #253 (not an M4A2 nor a Jumbo) with the 1970s 76mm turret. As kitted, what you have is a decent representation of a late war Battle of the Bulge and beyond US Army standard tank. It's just not the best model kit of that tank, but acceptable by 1989 standards.

There is an older Tamiya kit, circa 2000, that is an early production M4, that fits your bill and since it's been surpassed, you can get it rather cheaply.
https://www.scalemates.com/kits/tamiya-35190-m4-sherman--128886

I would not spend any real money on any aftermarket for your kit. By the time you add the price of the kit, new tracks, new turret, new whatever, you'd exceed the price of a superior kit.

I might have an older 75 mm turret that isn't being used, but I'd have to look.

 I hear you loud and clear. I'll build it as is and fix the barrel. But I will add tracks as the problem with the kit ones can't be overcome unless I want a rocking horse tank, and I don't. I got it cheap enough to add the tracks. I'll pick up newer correct kits of the other variants as I feel like it. I do have the Tamiya M4A3E8 that I'll do this winter most likely. It looks decent. Maybe make it a Fury tank for kicks.

Thanks for the assist gents. I'll press on.

BK

You won't have the rocking horse problem if you glue the road wheel arms into place. As the kit's suspension is designed, if you do not glue them into place they will "rock" in an unrealistic way. The kit has them hinged in the center, as one side goes up the other goes down. This is not how Sherman suspension worked.

If you look at the suspension unit in this photo, the holes in the center of the bogey unit, the ones that look like a giant screw driver fits into the slot, is where each arm pivots. Each arm can go up or down independent of the other arm.

Thanks, RG. I will definately give that a go first.

BK

Rob Gronovius

FYI, the A1, A2, A3, A4 portion of a Sherman only refer to the hull and nothing to do with the turret. Your top photo is an M4A3 75(W) and the bottom photo is an M4A1 76.

The 75mm and 76mm turrets are different. The old Italeri kit from 1989 is an M4A3 76 with the bigger turret. The old Tamiya M4A3 75(W) is like the top photo, the original Italeri M4A1 76 is the bottom (or close enough).

Hope this helps.

 

If the top photo is a M4A3 75W, why is there an applique plate on the hull side? I believe that's mosy likely a M4A2 as those are Commonwealth troops. 

You are correct, I was trying to point out that the turret isn't the determining factor in whether or not a Sherman is an A1, A2, A3 or A4. People often use today's logic when they think about Sherman tank development. With modern US tanks, the M60 came first, followed by the M60A1, M60A2, and M60A3. With Abrams it was M1, then M1A1 and M1A2.

But Shermans were developed in parallel lines. First came the M4 and the cast hulled M4A1. Both used the same radial engine. But the aircraft industry needed the radial engines for bombers and fighters and told the Army to find new engines.

General Motors develops a twin diesel engine which is dubbed the M4A2.

Ford develops the GAA gasoline engine and it is the M4A3, which becomes the US Army standard because the Army doesn't want to deal with needing diesel in addition to gasoline.

Chrysler develops the multibank (five car engines connected together) and it is the M4A4.

Try all you want, but you erroneously stated the photo is of an M4A3 which it is clearly not.

Frankenpanzer

Try all you want, but you erroneously stated the photo is of an M4A3 which it is clearly not.

 

Without seeing the engine deck or rear hull plate, troops & crew aside, you can't rule out it being an M4A3. It is a dry stowage 75mm Gun welded hull small hatch type in the upper photo. But it could also be an M4 or M4A2. It's obviously not a cast hull M4A1, and the bogie spacing is not the extra spacing of the longer hull M4A4. 
The top photo is not a late model 47* wet stowage, welded large hatch hull, M4, M4A2, or M4A3.

stikpusher

 

 

Frankenpanzer

Try all you want, but you erroneously stated the photo is of an M4A3 which it is clearly not.

 

 

 

 

Without seeing the engine deck or rear hull plate, troops & crew aside, you can't rule out it being an M4A3. It is a dry stowage 75mm Gun welded hull small hatch type in the upper photo. But it could also be an M4 or M4A2. It's obviously not a cast hull M4A1, and the bogie spacing is not the extra spacing of the longer hull M4A4. 
The top photo is not a late model 47* wet stowage, welded large hatch hull, M4, M4A2, or M4A3.

 

True. He did state though, it was a M4A3 75mm W or wet stowage, which it is clearly not. 

Frankenpanzer

Try all you want, but you erroneously stated the photo is of an M4A3 which it is clearly not.

 

Now, to the important part, do you have useful input to assist this modeler regarding this model kit? Yes, I wrongly identified the tank, but is my error even germaine to the discussion?

I built their erroneously labeled Italeri M4A2 'Jumbo' (still not an A2 nor a Jumbo), kit #253. It was basically their M4A1 with a different upper hull.

I have never looked at the specific kit mentioned, #6440, but I suspect it is probably the exact kit with a different box and decals. I bought kit #253 while in Germany, guessing 1989, but didn't build it until well after my household goods arrived in the States well after Desert Storm. If I was to guess, 1993 or 94.

I don't recall any real issues with the kit back then other than gluing the suspension bogeys in place as I mentioned and the gun tube on the original kits. I didn't know about the gun tube issue back then, so I know I didn't correct it. I don't know if Italeri fixed that well known issue in the most recent release.

You may be able to get a cheap 75MM turret on eBay by looking for kits being sold for parts, or by looking for the auctions selling specific sprues from Sherman kits. Just be warned, there is an awful lot of 1/35 Sherman stuff on eBay, so you may want to adjust your search settings to "Price + Shipping: Lowest First". 

Also, there are a huge number of variations on Shermans, so you need to carefully figure out such things as which style mantlet you want, high bustle or low bustle, applique armor or not, and hatch configuration. In real life, turrets from tanks knocked out in battle from shots to the hull were used to replace damaged turrets on other tanks, so you can get away with some mixing and matching. The replacement turrets didn't have to be exactly the same; they just had to fit. 

If you are interested in adding cheap authenticity to your kit, look for articles on using liquid cement to create a cast appearance on smooth plastic turrets. 

When I jumped on this kit I didn't realize there were so many M4 variants. But, with your guys' assistance I have begun to see the variations and models. Stiks website is a huge help. I will turn down the barrel, no biggie and glue the suspension to fix the rocking horse issue. Other than that on this kit I'm just gonna try to make it look good, even it the kit is not completely correct. The kit was initially looking to build is totally different than what I got, do to ignorance on the varations, but I will come up with one in time. I want the cast hull, small gun sherman we started out with. But, like I said, as I build the various types it will find its way to the bench.

I picked up a cheap Walker Bulldog. Looks to be an older kit from Tamiya and not the greatest kit overall, but I'll use it as a test bed for weathering. I'm not concerned on that one with accuracy as much as making it look convicing.

I've been off the bench since August due to a family loss and I lost the drive to build. Now I have it back so I'm warming up with an auto quicky and then headlong into armor. I've gotten my motivation back and then some. Tons of kits waiting to get built. I appreciate your help and patience as I learn a new modeling skill to add to my talents.

BK

Sorry about your family loss and hope things are better now, it's good to see you back!

Another way to deal with the 'rocking horse' suspension is to mount the model to a base. Just remove the turret and drill a small hole though the bottom of the hull into the base. Then drive a wood screw though the hull bottom into the base tight enough to flatten out the bogies but not enough to break the running gear.  

Aside from the barrel step, there are no true glaring inaccuracies in the kit. It is not incorrect. While it may be lacking rivet lines here or there, or some other small details, it is a good basic solid kit. It is easily built in a single long day session. Painting can range from simple OD to some multi tone camo schemes. Add a Value Gear stowage set made for the kit, and you have a fine project for learning and developing your armor skills with.

After listening to you guys I'm gonna just build it up and make it look as good as I can and then the next kits will get more goodies. Test bed on this one and then onward.

BK

Stik, do you know where I might find that Value Gear stowage that you mentioned? Extra stowage is one of the things all my Sherman's could use, and I've never heard of Value Gear before your post.

M1GarandFan

Stik, do you know where I might find that Value Gear stowage that you mentioned? Extra stowage is one of the things all my Sherman's could use, and I've never heard of Value Gear before your post.

 

M1, I’ve seen the stuff on eBay, at Brookhurst Hobbies here in So Cal, and now at Andy’s Hobby Headquarters in AZ

heres a link to the Value Gear site

http://www.valuegeardetails.com/BuyStuff.html

Stik, thanks for the info and the link. This looks real interesting. Hope you're re doing OK and not inhaling too much smoke from the fires.

John G.

BrandonK

After listening to you guys I'm gonna just build it up and make it look as good as I can and then the next kits will get more goodies. Test bed on this one and then onward.

BK

This would be your best bet. There really isn't anything wrong with these Italeri Sherman kits. It's just that they are not up to the standards set by newer kits by Tasca/Asuka and some of the better Dragon ones and the most recent Tamiya ones.

With some intermediate modeling skills and good weathering, it will look fine.

M1GarandFan

Stik, thanks for the info and the link. This looks real interesting. Hope you're re doing OK and not inhaling too much smoke from the fires.

John G.

 

The Value Gear stuff is good. I bought a few of their generic sets and really am happy with it. And as for myself, I’m doing just fine. The fires must be burning elsewhere, because I have not smelled or seen smoke locally for a week or more now.

Stik, Glad to hear about the fire situation there. I know there was a pretty bad fire in Yorba Linda a few years ago. I guess most everything burning is still up north of you.

Thanks again for the info.

M1GarandFan

Stik, Glad to hear about the fire situation there. I know there was a pretty bad fire in Yorba Linda a few years ago. I guess most everything burning is still up north of you.

Thanks again for the info.

 

Yes I remember that fire. It burned dpwn the river canyon and wiped out a bunch of structures. The column of smoke was crazy and we were directly downwind in the ash fallout area. Our cars, yard, and driveway were covered with the stuff.