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.

I'm assembling a StuG III G and have a question about the components that came in the blister. I got three possible barrels. One is shorter and this one should be the 10.5 cm StuH42 option.

The other two barrels are same length and thickness. The only difference is at the end closest to the body. One is squared and the other is more cone shape like a jagP almost.

Any ideas?

The rounded one is the saukopf(?) mantlet, while the more more boxy one is the original style. I may be wrong tho

Yes, that's right. The rounded one is the Saukopf mantlet, which as far as I know was used from November 1943 onwards. I believe the older boxy mantlet was still produced in some factories, but I don't have time to check right this minute.

Hordini is basically correct - the cast Topfblende (pot mantle) mantlet was introduced in November 1943, but the earlier boxy mantlet continued to be fitted (probably from accumulated stocks) for some time afterwards.

Modeling advice.

If you can, drill a hole int he resin where the metal meets the resin. Use magnets to mount the barrel so you can swap from 75 to 105.

Why? StuGs were ubiquitous for the Germans. Cheeper than tanks and effective in the field. Chances are, if a unit has access to armor, it has access to StuGs.

In game terms, they are pretty darn cost effective as well. Solid gun, solid armor, low price. The only thing is many times you have the option of changing from 75 to 105 for free. In V2 this used to not be a huge problem as the 75 was usually better all around.

Now the 105 is a breakthrough gun, and direct smoke is much more useful. Both of those really have you thinkiing about the one better AT point the 75 has and which type your list will be needing. Magnets mean you don't have to buy two StuGs to make up your mind.

Thanks for the clarification and modeling ideas!



Automatically Appended Next Post:
One more question. I've never worked with this material the tanks are made our of (resin?) . What is a good bonding agent?

Phydox wrote:Thanks for the clarification and modeling ideas!



Automatically Appended Next Post:
One more question. I've never worked with this material the tanks are made our of (resin?) . What is a good bonding agent?

Normal superglue has work fine for me on the resin tanks, I use the Krazy Glue pens for all my miniatures and have never had a problem.

Shotgun wrote:Modeling advice.
Why? StuGs were ubiquitous for the Germans. Cheeper than tanks and effective in the field. Chances are, if a unit has access to armor, it has access to StuGs.

Granted they we're extremely useful and seemingly everywhere but everything I've ever read suggested they were a poor replacement for tanks. Germany was starting to lose more tanks than they were producing and the StuG was quick and cheap to build. However they did not compare to a Tiger or Jagdpanther.

The box mantle, being the earlier version was still being made by some factories. These were intended to be replaced by the topfblende (which was the official name, meaning pot mantle. Although apparently they nicknamed it the saukopt, or pigs head) but when supplies of rubber started to dwindle they switched back to the box mantle.

Also the box mantle had an opening for a machine gun to be fitted. I'm not sure why they they decided to switch to the topfblende.

Well, to be fair, StuGs weren't originally meant to replace tanks. The StuG is not a tank, it's an assault gun intended originally to support infantry units. They only started replacing tanks in some Panzer divisions when the Germans began really suffering shortages later in the war (that is, even more than they were before).

The StuG wasn't supposed to compare to a Tiger or Jagdpanther, it was a medium assault gun. The Tiger was a heavy tank, and was not even close to being a mainstay armored vehicle for the Germans (less than 1,400 built), and the Jagdpanther was a tank destroyer and was even more rare (a little over 400 built). The most common tanks the Germans used were Panzer IIIs and IVs (with over 5,700 and over 8,000 - probably closer to 9,000 actually - built respectively).


Regarding the "Saufkopf" mantlet, I believe it started being produced at least partially because the box mantlet was known to be a shot trap.

I'd say Stugs probably knocked out alot of stuff...

There were other reasons for their extended use, besides lack of other tanks.

They were ideal mobile A/T platforms for the kind of defensive fighting Germany had to do in the later war period.

Small, low profiled and packing a punch made them ideal 'ambush' vehicles, able to shot and scoot.

If you were to ask what was Germanys best fighting vehicle... I'd be hard pushed to move away from the contribution of the Panzer III and Stug III during the war.

Not as 'kewl', but far more reliable...

Amen, Panzer III would get my vote with Stug III second.

Cwen - the cast mantlet was more heavily armoured than the welded version, and had a superior ballistic shape. Its introduction coincided with the up-armouring of the StuG to 80mm on the front. The welded version only continued to be used because there was a shortage of the cast version - read my previous post. The welded mantlet was modified to take a co-axial MG in mid-1944, and the welded version was so modified in October 1944.

I agree with Big P. StuGs were very effective, and one of the most important German AFVs of the second half of the war, when the Germans were essentially on the defensive. They had their limitations - an assault gun with a fixed weapon was never going to be a proper substitute for a tank - but they were excellent in defence and many StuG units notched up very high numbers of kills. For instance, the Sturmartillerie Brigaden (the independent brigades equipped with StuGs) destroyed over 6,500 Soviet tanks for the loss of a little over 700 StuGs during January - August 1944; on the Eastern Front it was basically StuGs and Panzer IVs that faced the massive Soviet offensives in 1944. They didn't strictly replace tanks - in addition to the independent Sturmartillerie Brigaden, StuGs equipped the Panzer-Abteilung of 9 Panzer-Grenadier divisons and the Panzerjaeger-Abteilung of various types of division.