Why German armor?

The trend you see here is a reflection of the market trend. Check out any of the major model manufacturers and you will find that the majority of the kits made are German.

Now if it's because of the mystique of the German equipment or if it's because a Tiger just looks much better than a Sherman, I have no answers.

But for me, I'll take a Shermie any day.

[:0] Shermie! did you nearly admit a Tiger is better looking than a Sherman? LOL

There's a lot of variety in German armor, vehicles from very funny looking to very powerful, color schemes, markings, uniforms, you name it. Always something different. A lot of fun.

By the way, I do primarily US.... hmmm.

Ron.

Have a nice night all.

I've always had a fondness for German armor, aircraft, you name it. I just feel that the looks are much nicer than the Allied counterparts. They have nice lines, are quite innovative, and most of them just look plain mean. I challenge you to find something that looks like the Dornier Pfiel from that era. (Yes, it's a plane, but hey, we're all modelers here, right?)

I think it's a combination of things.

One, the Germans made good tanks -- strong tanks, technologically interesting tanks. At least in the late war period, qualitiatively in such things as armor and firepower, some of their vehicles were the best there were, even if they were a bit fiddly and overcomplicated, and tended to be a little underpowered.

Two, they used them well -- they always used them well tactically, and they used them well operationally and strategically in the beginning of the war (and stupidly as time wore on). They were the poster boys for the blitzkrieg, a series of amazing victories that shocked the world.

(And those victories opened the door, let's never forget, to some of the most horrifying atrocities that human beings ever committed against their fellow men, conducted almost universally with sickening cruelty -- my wife has very few living decendents because of the abbatoir that the Germans turned Eastern Europe into. Sadly, she also lives with the reality that, in all likelihood, their deaths were full of terror and humiliation, at the hands of leering sadists.)

Three, they are good-looking. A panther is a handsome vehicle indeed. Is there any better symbol for the blunt instrument that is a tank than the Tiger I? Look at a Tiger II and you can see how powerful it was -- it exudes menace. Not something you can say about a Sherman, which looks like it's your best friend.

(And it was the best friend to many people it liberated from Nazi tyranny!)

Four, let's face it, there is some level of allure about the princes of darkness, about the bad guys marching around the world (in sharp black uniforms with skulls embroidered on them) casting their shadow -- especially if it wasn't you that they cast that shadow over.

Now, there are elements of all these things in armor modelling other subjects, but the German tanks bring it all together.

I personally think German armor is alot cooler than US in WWII... I especially like the panthers and the 88 flak guns. then the tiger series, then the pzkpfw 4 and 3 series... GERMANS JUST HAD BETTER EQUIPMENT ALL AROUND. maybe it is because the first kit i Built was a panther. =D

QUOTE: GERMANS JUST HAD BETTER EQUIPMENT ALL AROUND.

I don't know if I'd agree with that. The biggest and heaviest of them were certainly better at tank to tank combat than their American or Soviet opponents.

But to be good in combat, the tank has to get into combat. The big German panzers were often ponderous and mechanically unreliable. They were gas guzzlers when they certainly could not afford to be.

As Woody Allen said, 90% of life is showing up. American tanks were a lot more likely to show up.

The primary opponent of the tank in WWII was the infantryman and the anti-tank gun. 75% of all shells fired by Shermans were HE. The Sherman's 75 fired fast fast fast, and it's HE power was good.

Tank to tank is glamourous, and the Germans had that down, but in the workaday world of the WWII tank, the Sherman was probably the better combat asset.

I agree with most of what is said. I feel for me it's the underdog factor. You tell yourself that they were usually outnumbered, but did so much damage. Why? They generally had better equipment and tactics. Which leads me to the equipment. The Germans as has been noted, had many variations and built hulking tanks like the Tiger II and the Maus. They just become fascinating subjects. While I do like some Allied armor, they just don't offer a level of mystique to them. They won more from sheer numbers than technilogical inginuity. Still I model all kinds.

"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."-R.E.Lee

Wow! This seems to be getting a bit tense!

I've liked German armor since I was a kid because I'd always heard how the Tigers could take one shot at a Sherman and blow it up while the Shermans shells would just bounce off the Tigers. That level of power just facinated me. I guess it still does. Anyway, that "awe" migrated to the Panthers and Me-109's (yep, aircraft, me too!). And for some reason, WWII subjects have always fascinated me more than modern stuff (both aircraft and armor). But, I've always loved the Sherman, too. I've always wanted to build one. Soon...soon!

Bill

For me I think it's the mystique of how when they started the war they used some really lame equipment to post their greatest victories and yet when their technology clearly exceeded the allies they suffered their most humiliating defeats. But I believe there was nothing more terrible for a crewman to see than a Sherman on your flank when you're in a Stug III.

Well... mayber your right about them not being able to get into battle, but still the ones that did were "vitually unstopable" (German and Russian tank veterans on a history channel presentation yesterday) and when they were outgunned, they made use of the Blitzkreig tactic like in the invasion of france and poland.

PS> There was nothing more terrible for a crewman (or soldier) than to see a sherman any where around you while your stuck in a half track... stick ur head up to get out and u get it chopped to bits by a 30 or 50 and u dont stick ur head up to get out u get anhilated by a 75mm shell, or burned alive if its a flame thrower sherman.

For me it is simply because of the variety. The allies did not introduce as many types and variants of armor as the Germans did. And as the others have mentioned, these armored things come in many forms fromfunny to awesome. Of course Shermans could be built in so many ways for it is a fact that it was a platform for many special-purpose vehicles of WWII. But a modelers' display shelf would not be as striking without those multi-colored German armor.

For me it's mainlyl because the German armor looks, cool, mean or just interesting!! That and they used another color paint besides Olive Drab I do have US kits also and will get to them but I wanted to do a few cool German tanks first!!

Eric

I guess one of the factors touched on here, but not expanded, was the fact that the types of German equipment was so varied. The sheer number of vehicle types fielded was huge, compared to any single country of the allies. Also German equipment looked markedly different, even when built on the same chassis. A Sherman still looked like a Sherman, whether it was a M4A1 or a VC Firefly. Yes there were a lot of differences between variants, but from 20 feet away from the model they would not be as obvious.

Look at how many different looking tank destroyers each country made and add that to your list of Tanks. Don't forget to add self-propelled artillery too. Then what about captured and converted/ composite vehicles? You have a pretty big list of German stuff compared to your Allied lists.

Then look at how old the hobby is. Someone new to the hobby years ago would usually be young and looking at buying a range of vehicles, not the full complement of one vehicle's sub variants (only us freaks do that hey Sherm).

The mystic built around the Tiger was not something new. Every allied tanker feared them, and saw one whenever they saw any German Tank. Film, books, etc all made this tank larger than life, and of course every kid wanted one. The pull of the tiger was a natural avenue to steer you to other German vehicles as well. (Even Sherm has admitted to building a German vehicle or two in the past.)

But how many real manufacturers were around then? One of the most important things a manufacturer looks at is longevity of moulds and cost vs revenue. How many early Tamiya German vehicle offerings were based on the same Panzer IV hull and running gear components? Back in 1979 based on the Panzer IV chassis there were:

Panzer IV D
Panzer IV H
Wirblewind
Mobelwagon
Stug IV
Brummbar
Jagdpanzer IV

7 kits from 1and they all looked different! Then Tamiya also had the Panzer 2 and Marder 2, the Panzer 3 and Stug 3, Panther and Jagdpanther and the King Tiger and Jagdtiger.

The same principle applied to the M3 Stuart, M5A1 and M8 vehicles, M3, M16 and M21 halftracks, M10 and M36 and the T34/76 (2 types), Su-85 and SU-122, but apart from the difference between the T34 and the SU's these groups all looked the same from a short distance.

It has only been in recent years that manufacturers have realised that today's modellers are older and more discerning that those of 20-30 years ago. (How many of you 30+ guys can remember your Fathers regularly buying and building kits 20 years ago?) We are not prepared to accept the compromises of the past and expect each kit to be accurate in it's own right - whacking a M4A4 hull on an M3 Grant chassis don't cut it! Also, how many kids can afford the cost of a Dragon Wagon or Famo, both with trailers, these days? We have grown with the hobby, and it has grown with us.

Whilst we applauded the M8 Greyhound and M20, are now eagerly looking toward a decent M36 Jackson and beg for a Sexton, many of us still secretly covet the recent German offerings like the Marder 3's, The Karl's and Leopold's, etc. Old habits are hard to shake.

Then again, I could be wrong............................. maybe it is just a size issue after all. Everyone just wants a bigger, meaner, tougher tank than the next guy

I agree with pretty much everything everybody has said.

You have to admit they were querky, funky machines. Who else would come up with a "Hetzer" - looks like a flattened out VW beetle. It's the interest in the unique. I'm not going to go into wether Germany should have spent the time to develop all those types (not going down that path) but they were innovaters. They came up with some great ways to kill somebody.

The only thing is - what are the real numbers. Do we really know about how many kits actually are sold ? Maybe shermans out sell all kits 2 to 1. Which is easier to find a shermal hull and chasis or a PZ IV (like Petbat said the basis of all the above). A sherman hull is probably the only one that is made by most aftermarket conversion companies ? How about sherman suspension ? They are all over the place.


But, who definetly kicks butt with MODERN ARMOR?

Who said that the Tiger 1 looks good?!?!?!?! I mean the Sherman is ugly, but a close second is the Tiger 1! It’s a tuna can on a shoebox. And the Tiger 2, and Panther tanks are beefed up copies of that ugly T34.

Personally I was first attracted to German armor by history class, and reading about that sneaky Desert Fox, who time and again outmaneuvered superior allied forces. My first tank kit was the Tamiya Pz IV D and I still love the look of the Pz IV and Pz III tanks.

As mentioned before, there are just so many theaters of operation and so many different variations of German armor to build in so many different colors. However, I must admit that a market trend has provided the modeler with a LOT of kits, and most recently, references for German WWII tanks. This last trend is perhaps the biggest reason that I do not build more allied armor. I have started to accumulate a growing library of references that include only German armor so far. When I get a real job and can afford more books, my building preferences will probably expand.

I just want to include this last paragraph, sorry if I’m babbling here: Building German armor sometimes makes me “not feel right”(for lack of a better way to put it); like I am glorifying some terrible era in history. Perhaps I’m thinking too much, but I try to stay away from SS topics and there is no way I would ever want to build a subject like Wittmann’s Tiger. Not that I mind these vehicles being built by other modelers, not at all, but sometimes I think people forget that those 88 little rings represent brave soldiers killed that were fighting for the right side.


Sorry if I sounded a little too “heavy” there at the end,
edog

What got me started building German Armor was the availbilty and variety of models when returned to modelling.

Armored vehicles fascinate me, and the Germans had a lot of them. Do the math!

You knew I wasn't going to miss posting on this subject

As for me, I think that the Tiger I & Tiger II are works of art. Not to mention the Panthers, Sturmtigers so on...

You also had different developers competing for rights to produce them (Henschel & Porsche) Again, the same basic tank but, each with a distinctive look.

Then there is the creative factor when modeling German armor. Unless you plan on modeling a German Panzer Grey piece, the camoflage possibilities are endless. No 2 patterns looked the same. A good point is to look at some of the German armor posted here. Each member has painted a camo scheme that they like and think would fit their armor the best. The same way the original Panzer crews did during the war. You can have the same Tiger I with Zim coating applied, without Zim, painted German Grey, painted in Africa Desert Yellow, 2 tone camo, 3 tone camo, Ambush pattern, winter whitewash (you get the point)

There aren't too many choices like that, available to U.S. Armor modelers, who want to keep their pieces as accurate as possible.

QUOTE: I just want to include this last paragraph, sorry if I’m babbling here: Building German armor sometimes makes me “not feel right”(for lack of a better way to put it); like I am glorifying some terrible era in history. Perhaps I’m thinking too much, but I try to stay away from SS topics and there is no way I would ever want to build a subject like Wittmann’s Tiger. Not that I mind these vehicles being built by other modelers, not at all, but sometimes I think people forget that those 88 little rings represent brave soldiers killed that were fighting for the right side. Sorry if I sounded a little too “heavy” there at the end, edog

Not that I want to get in a debate about the wrongdoings during the war, I just want to state my case on why I am building my 1/16 Tiger I as Wittmann's S04 (with the 88 kill rings)

As a tank Commander, he was one of the best. He was both feared and respected by those he faced. In many an interview I see now, with US & British tank crews who faced him, they all say that they respected him, because he knew battle tactics so well. As for being part of the SS, yes he was. Up to what point he supported, we will never know. He was however, loyal to the Panzer crews he served with. We know this for a fact.

I also understand that, those 88 rings meant lives were lost, by many Allied crew members. In the same manner of speaking, if you were to build a Corsair Aircraft model, say by Pappy Boington, would you not put the little Japanese Rising Sun flags below the cockpit canopy, that represented kills?

I have to agree with Ron and Dwight, I think the draw of modeling German armor is simply a function of the incredible variety of vehicles the Germans were able to field during the war, as well as many of their innovative aspects. There were the basic tanks, and then all the varieties. For example, there was the Panther A, D, G, F, the Bergepanther, Jagdpanther, and the experimental Coelian Panther. And just look at all the things the Germans did with the Czech (?) 38(t) chassis: Marder III, IIIM, and Hetzer, just to name a couple.
I guess the other reason I build German armor is because the machines have that LOOK about them--ominous, intimidating, and powerful--that "don't-mess-with-me" appearance; and maybe kind of "stylish" in their own peculiar sort of way. Comparatively speaking, the Sherman, IMO, was just plain butt ugly (Sorry, Robert--no offense intended).
Gip Winecoff

That's a deep, moral question (a couple of posts back) inherent in any military modelling. These machines were designed to kill; it's as simple as that. To me, who they were designed to kill is irrelevant. There is honor and a sense of rightousness on all sides of battles. In the end, the victors decide who was truly "right" (as far as recorded history is concerned).

I build models of a wide variety of subjects because of a fascination with machines, and perhaps an even deeper fascination with why humans do with them what they do.

Oh yeah, and the Germans made some really big tanks.
I like really big tanks!

I wasn’t going to post on the ethic question that’s been raised here but as i started this thread maybe I should.

Lets remember that the Victors get to write the bulk of history, that not to condone what the Nazi's did but remember that all sides will commit what would be called war crime; it just depends on who wins. Of cause im NOT including the holocaust as this was an indefensible crime.

I don’t like to think of this in terms politics or of what government did, more of the suffering and bravery of those who did the dirty work. I try to imagine you’re self as the 19yr old suffocating inside of a tank fighting only to stay alive!
So I suppose model making is in some strange way a tribute to those who lived and died in those terrible times.





Oh as yes they made very big Tanks!!! And lets face it a Churchill V Panther whos the better looking!

I'm rather facinated with the AAA and Flack guns that tried to blow my fathers Halifax out of the sky as well as the A/C he was douling with as Midupper Gunner.

I must be honest and say that I love armor all around, present and past, however I must admit that I have an affinity for WWII German armor and this might sound a bit silly but it's mostly because they were so massive, they have a great desing and look all around ready to put up a big and hard fight...

QUOTE: Lets remember that the Victors get to write the bulk of history, that not to condone what the Nazi's did but remember that all sides will commit what would be called war crime; it just depends on who wins.

This is true. An interesting example of this is the treatment of merchant ship crews by submariners who had just sunk the merchant ship. The "awful Hun" generally either ignored the floating merchantmen or, if the situation allowed, showed them so basic human kindness. On the other hand, American submariners regularly machine-gunned Japanese merchantmen who were floating in the water following a sinking.

American soldiers were certainly not beyond criminal activity and sexual assaults where they had defenseless civilian populations under their control, sadly.

However, based on patterns of behavior of the German soldier in the East, and of course Japanese behavior wherever they fought, I think it's still pretty clear whose soldiers were overall the worst behaved.

And as to the Holocaust, let's not forget that, contrary to post-war assertions to the contrary, the common German soldiier was often involved in the Holocaust, particularly on the Eastern Front. The book Frontsoldaten has lots of interesting stuff about this -- the way line german infantrymen participated in the the murder of Jewish civilians, sometimes set up as sort of a sporting event.

I'm a wargamer too, and I notice that the interest in German militaria shown at wargaming conventions goes beyond historical interest and often veers into adulation. I have a fellow wargamer friend who is Jewish and who has no problem wargaming WWII on the German side, but still shakes his head in amazement at the t-shirts you see worn by people admiring the work of such units as LSSAH, Das Reich and Totenkopf (all of which committed war crimes), and the insistance so many have on always playing the Germans. It takes me a little aback too, I must admit.

The ironic thing about this is that many of these self-same people are big-time flag wavers for the USA -- conservative patriot types. Why they don't back the USA all the way completely baffles me. (I don't want to allow my self to think about whether that is the direction they want the USA to go in.)

Sorry to take this is this direction, but I think it has to be said that these issues are the elephant in the room in a discussion of this topic.

Well, my intentions were not to turn this thread into a political discussion and I apologize for the trend that way. I merely wanted to state my personal preference when modeling German armor to stay away from SS topics. Erock, I totally understand why someone would model Wittmann’s Tiger and I don’t oppose it. However, I find no interest in modeling subjects like that myself. By the way, I think we are all waiting for some updated pics of that bad boy.

Larry, so that guy I saw about a month ago with the Das Reich t-shirt on was not a Nazi? Knowing what the symbol was, I found myself giving the poor guy a pretty dirty look and almost said something to him.

Ya gotta love us "Tread-Heads"

If nothing else, we ARE a passionate bunch!