ARM: Review - DML 1/72 scale M4A2(76)W Red Army

Kit Review: Dragon Model Limited 1/72 Scale Armor Pro Kit No. 7275; M4A2(76)W Red Army; 177 parts (145 in grey styrene, 29 etched brass, 2 DS plastic, 1 twisted steel wire); price US$13.95

Advantages: new kit of this version in this scale

Disadvantages: Some engine deck details may be off

Rating: Highly Recommended

Recommendation: for small-scale Sherman and Soviet armor fans

The Soviets were pleased to get American M4 medium tanks for a number of reasons, and one of the most important was that they mostly got the M4A2 variant with twin GMC diesel engines. Since all other Soviet tanks built after the start of the war were diesel powered, the fact that they only needed one form of fuel supply for tanks, as well as their being less susceptible to fire, was considered a great advantage. While they thought the 75mm gun was acceptable in all roles except tank killing, the 76mm gun in the later model Shermans at least put them on a par with the T-34 76mm tanks in tank-versus-tank combat.

DML has now released a kit of the Soviet version of the Sherman using many of their myriad of parts for Shermans in 1/72 scale, and this is one which sports a number of new parts to get the right version. The model uses the A sprue for the T23 style turret with oval loader's hatch, and comes with a choice of all three major guns used (M1, M1A1 and M1A1C - without, with threading, and with muzzle brake).

The hull is a brand new molding but does make use of some of the M4A2 (56 degree hull) parts. There is a short correction note in the kit that shows the changes needed to adapt those parts to this kit, most of which requires modification to the engine cooling air exhaust grille under the rear hull overhang. The kit also includes etched brass grouser stowage bin vent covers so that the modeler does not have to remove them from the kit.

The suspension is the familiar pressed steel welded wheel set for VVSS Shermans with flat top return rollers, which I seem to recall is not quite right for this particular M4A2 variant. (I believe more of them had the raised return roller mounts by this time of the war.)

One nice new touch is a pair of T49 three-bar steel cleat tracks, which is more accurate for this particular tank as the Soviets liked the extra traction they provided. As usual the tracks are single piece DS plastic runs.

Etched brass comes on two frets and covers most of the small details such as the stowage rack at the rear of the hull and the light guards. There is a supplemental fret with the aforementioned covers on it.

Markings and finishing are provided for two vehicles: 2nd Guards Tank Army, Berlin , 1945 (white 154); and 8th Guards Mechanized Corps,.

1944-1945 (white 216). I would like to have seen Colonel Dmitriy Loza's white 900 from the Vienna operation, but that's just me!

Overall this is another gap filler in DML's excellent run of small scale M4 tanks.

Thanks to Freddie Leung for the review sample.

Cookie Sewell

Sprue breakout:

A 39 T23 style turret with oval loader's hatch B 40 Sherman 47 degree hull details C 32 VVSS suspension with pressed steel wheels and straight return rollers D 32 M4A2 parts and three-piece transmission cover E 2 M4A2 47 degree hull X 2 T49 track in DS plastic Y 1 twisted steel wire MA 27 Etched brass MB 2 Etched brass

Reply to
AMPSOne
Loading thread data ...

I have read that the Russian 76mm AP round was markedly inferior to the US 76mm round (and German 75mm) in penetration; inferior steel core or some such. (Mind you, in 1941-42 it was still plenty good enough to deal with most German AFVs of the period.)

On the other hand I seem to recall reading that there was some problem with the US 76mm HE round; not as effective as the standard Sherman

75mm round?

Bruce Melbourne, Australia

Reply to
Bruce Probst

Bruce Probst wrote: : : On the other hand I seem to recall reading that there was some problem : with the US 76mm HE round; not as effective as the standard Sherman : 75mm round? : Due to the higher velocity of the 76mm round, fuzing of the HE shell was much tricker. As in, getting it to explode before it buried itself in the ground.

That is the only issue that I am aware of between the US 75mm and 76mm shells.

Bruce

Reply to
Bruce Burden

not a problem, but design considerations. The 76mm had thicker walls, to resist the force of the main powder charge: less room for HE. The higher velocity that aided AP performance and accuracy, hinders HE, as the shell is likely to bury itself deeper before exploding than the slower moving 75mm. This also why mortar shells are among the most deadly for the caliber, slow moving, very thin walls.

The 75mm shell was nearly as good as the 25 pounder, while the Soviet 85mm, nearly the same bore as the 25, was far worse in HE effectiveness, as well

** mike **
Reply to
mike

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.