Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So yeah new Sherman kit. Looks better than the resin one but we shall see.

I think it looks pretty good, might use theses instead of M4A1s.

Yep, it was mentioned in the July preview, but the PSC M4A3 Sherman kit is a better value.

I should do a comparasion of popular models from different companies across price and quality.

Ghaz im not sure the PSC one is better value as you can't use both turrets, the 75mm and 76mm turrets use the same bottom plate. So as they set gives you the option to swap turrets I think this is equal or better value. I'll be picking up a couple of sets for my US.

Ben

 Grey Hunter wrote:
Ghaz im not sure the PSC one is better value as you can't use both turrets, the 75mm and 76mm turrets use the same bottom plate. So as they set gives you the option to swap turrets I think this is equal or better value. I'll be picking up a couple of sets for my US.

Ben

Do you actually have the kit? Because the assembly instructions show that they use different bottom plates (75mm in green and 76mm in red).

The main sticking point in swapping 75 and 76mm turrets on PSC tanks is the lack of a second AAMG and there is only one commanders hatch assembly. If you don't glue in the commander's hatch you can pry it out and move it to the other turret.

It's the lack of hatches that don't allow turret swapping for the PSC Sherman, not the bottom plate.

If you want flexibility then the BF set may be the better deal.

Battlefront's M4A3 kit retails for $45.

Plastic Soldier Company's M4A3 kit retails for $28.99

Assuming you need at least ten hulls, two boxes from BF will cost $90. With PSC, three boxes will cost $86.97.

Battlefront only makes sense if you need just a single box or the uparmoured models, otherwise PSC wins out.

But those 3 boxes still won't have 10 of each turret and I do own the PSC kit I used it for my Soviet Shermans, so I know there was a reason

thanks Lucius I know there was a reason you couldn't make both turrets.

Also personally I prefer the bulkier BF versions, the PSC are more accurate but don't make great gaming models in my option.

 Grey Hunter wrote:
But those 3 boxes still won't have 10 of each turret and I do own the PSC kit I used it for my Soviet Shermans, so I know there was a reason

So you won't have ten of each turret, you'll have five full complete extra models so you won't have to exchange turrets. You just exchange the full models.

He'd still be five models short, though, wouldn't he?

With the BF option, he could have ten of one, or ten of the other, or any combination in between, and could switch them at will.

With the PSC option, he could have ten of one and five of the other, and he wouldn't be able to switch them (unless there's a way to magnetize the bottom plates?).

Eumerin wrote:
He'd still be five models short, though, wouldn't he?

Not if you only need ten hulls, or if you only need five additional models equipped with 76mm guns. There is no 100% correct answer for all situations. It comes down to the individual player's needs.

Eumerin wrote:
With the PSC option, he could have ten of one and five of the other, and he wouldn't be able to switch them (unless there's a way to magnetize the bottom plates?).

It's not the bottom plates as mentioned already, it's the lack of hatches.

You can easily make additional hatches by taking a cast of one and making copies with green stuff.

 Ghaz wrote:
Yep, it was mentioned in the July preview, but the PSC M4A3 Sherman kit is a better value.

Ah, but people will whine how about the multi-part tracks on the latter even though they have 5x as much detail.

Not to let facts get in the way, but the PSC Sherman wheels (i.e. - the area of the model you'd actually notice after painting) are noticeably less detailed than BF's offering just looking at the picture. Combined with the arguable benefit of being able to build both turrets without added fuss and the inclusion of decals, the BF offering isn't awful. Still more expensive, but within a reasonable tolerance when taken as a whole package.

I still feel that your best overall value lies with PSC if you're building an armored company and thus needs loads of boxes, for the reasons Ghaz previously offered. However, if you wanted a single platoon of tanks or want the options for up-armoring present in the BF box, it seems like an okay deal.

Can someone tell what's the extra gun barrel is for (next to the 76mm)?

105mm

Not that. The other long directly next to the 76 on the sprue on the left.

Probably just an optional 76mm barrel with a muzzle brake.

Looks like the barrel of an easy 8 to me

If they have made the molds so that the top half and bottom half* of the sprue can be changed, then the top half plus a new mold with HVSS tracks gets you an Esay 8, and the bottom half plus a new mold with the cast hull gets you the M4A1.



*top or bottom half of the sprue as shown in the picture at the top of the thread.

The kit however is missing numerous pieces that would allow you to make an Easy Eight, especially the widetrack Horizontal Volute Spring Suspension (HVSS).

Thats why they need to change out the bottom half*, which has the tracks. Change the VVSS track mold for a HVSS mold (with track guards) and you have an E8


* bottom half of the sprue as shown in the picture at the top of the thread.

Notice the difference directly above the tracks. On the model, that would be a part of the main hull and not the tracks.

For a company that had a three year build up to produce plastic kits to match or beat their competitors many of the BF plastic kits feel awfully rushed as as a result are often a bit lacking. The star exhibit for this being the Panzer IV kit.

I think their current plastics look fine, if overpriced. The Panzer IV (According to Battlefront) was one of their earlier models and was originally planned to be a part of the Open Fire box.

The shurzen for the Panzer IV however ...

The shurzen are part of the same kit. Some of them are good, the SU Tank Hunter Kit is good (but could be better). The problem is that the Panzer IV needed to be better than the PSC one, but in so many ways it isn't. Plus it's badly laid out on the sprue for expansion to utilise what they have for other models.

As mentioned, it's one of Battlefront's earliest CAD designs, so it's expected to show that. As their designers get better using CAD the kits are getting better. It's a learning process.

Then they had plenty of time to fix it before release then. Block off the shurzen section of the sprue and package it with the old plastic ones. Nobody would have been any the wiser. Releasing it like that was amateurish at best.

Even the SU kit has some very odd layout issues. with some very obvious gaps in the design such as the SU122 gun.

BF have showed very limited vision with their plastic kits.

The problem with the shurzen was they didn't realize the problem with it until they previewed the model on their web site, presumably after they were already produced and shipped.

And their 'Big Cats' Panther/Jagdpanther kit does show vision.