Dragon M4A1 #7273

Hosted by Paul Giles, this discussion group is dedicated to 1/72 scale and smaller AFV modelling.

Dragon M4A1 #7273

Joined: March 19th, 2007, 9:06 am

January 18th, 2012, 6:37 am #1

Why are there two sets of tracks included? All the marking options seem to use the same kind and the instructions don't mention options.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 23rd, 2005, 7:01 am

January 18th, 2012, 6:58 am #2

I was confused about this too, but it gives you extra options for other projects, so surely all good?

It's a shame that Dragon didn't pay more attention to producing an accurate contour on the upper hull of this half-assed attempt at an early M4A1.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 19th, 2007, 9:06 am

January 18th, 2012, 9:33 am #3

Well it matters in that I don't know if the profiles are generic thus all showing the same tracks. Just seems odd that AFAIK this is the only Sherman kit they do with two types of tracks and there's no reason for it. Funny thing is there's no step in the instructions that shows when to put the tracks on, not that I need it but I figured that's where they'd have the info on what the second set is for.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 3rd, 2005, 12:24 am

January 18th, 2012, 1:49 pm #4

I was confused about this too, but it gives you extra options for other projects, so surely all good?

It's a shame that Dragon didn't pay more attention to producing an accurate contour on the upper hull of this half-assed attempt at an early M4A1.
I wasn't aware there was an issue regarding Dragons M4A1 upper hull.

Where exactly is the contour of the upper hull wrong, and is this fixable?

Cheers,
Peter
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 11th, 2005, 3:03 pm

January 18th, 2012, 3:21 pm #5

Why are there two sets of tracks included? All the marking options seem to use the same kind and the instructions don't mention options.
Greetings,
I know of two reviews of this kit and neither mention why two types of tracks are included, and neither mention any improper contour to the hull shape. I'd like to hear more about ther hull shape issue; can't be worse than the ESCI-Italeri M4A1 hull shape?
http://www.172shermans.com/kitreviews/D ... A1_rev.htm
http://www.172shermans.com/kitreviews/D ... dyprev.htm

I am very pleased they included an extra set of tracks and though it would be nice for Dragon to specify which track goes with each version I am not much bothered by them not. If we don't care about historical accuracy than it doesen't matter. I enjoy doing historical research and making sure my track stype is the right one if at all possible. Now I have an extra set to replace my lousy ESCI track with!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 27th, 2003, 11:02 pm

January 18th, 2012, 4:28 pm #6

Stephen,
the article you are referring to
http://www.172shermans.com/kitreviews/D ... dyprev.htm
does show both sets of tracks (up close and personal) and mentions them.

Cheers
Rob




<a href="http://www.onthewaymodels.com/" rel="nofollow">

</a>


Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 19th, 2007, 9:06 am

January 18th, 2012, 5:20 pm #7

But it doesn't say why there are two included which is what he said.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 27th, 2003, 11:02 pm

January 18th, 2012, 7:00 pm #8

is to blame...





<a href="http://www.onthewaymodels.com/" rel="nofollow">

</a>


Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 8th, 2005, 3:16 am

January 19th, 2012, 2:35 am #9

Why are there two sets of tracks included? All the marking options seem to use the same kind and the instructions don't mention options.
I would imagine that many were sold to war-gamers for their Sherman kits with L/L tracks. Also,glueable track on the Trumpeter kits would be cherished,huh? Also,could this be the only kit that you can get one or the other set in? And,last,I'll bet that more than a few static builders picked up a kit just to have 2 more sets of glueable,paintable track for their Italeri,UM and Trumpeter kits in the stash. On second thought,this could be a cruel Chinese joke,at the expense of the reference-deprived among us. Hope this helps........Dan
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 23rd, 2005, 7:01 am

January 19th, 2012, 9:01 am #10

Don't get me wrong, I think we're lucky to have a mostly-decent 1/72 small-hatch M4A1 kit.
The detail parts are really fine, nd the extra tracks are a great bonus.

But as a long-time Sherman enthusiast, my own opinion is that in this kit the angle where the near-vertical hull sides transitions to the top of the hull is too sharp for any small-hatch M4A1.It could be improved by sanding, if you don't mind removing the tool stowage, but I just think Dragon could and should have made a better job of it.

If you view a completed example from the side, the turret appears a bit sunken into the hull top also, and the shell ejection port is definitely too low down in the turret relative to the hull.

I really hope when Dragon eventually sees fit to give us Alamein Shermans, that they re-tool the hull and turret completely, like they did with their recent early Tiger 1 releases.
Quote
Like
Share