login   |    register
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
FEATURE
  Building the DML Panzer IV E
Teacher
Visit this Community
England - North West, United Kingdom
Joined: April 05, 2003
KitMaker: 4,924 posts
Armorama: 3,679 posts
Posted: Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 09:26 AM UTC
A full build of Dragons new Panzer IV Ausf. E.

Vinnie

Link to Item

If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!
Kelley
Visit this Community
Georgia, United States
Joined: November 21, 2002
KitMaker: 1,961 posts
Armorama: 1,631 posts
Posted: Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 09:53 AM UTC
Vinnie,
Nice job on this one. When I was looking at the pics of the finished product I thought something about the main gun didn't look right. There is a gap between two of the styrene pieces that fit on the barrel. I'm no Pz IV expert (especially the early variants) but take a look at Tom Cockles build and you can see what I mean hopefully.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/110741/message/1129955554/If+it+looks+like+a+Panzer+IV+E...

It looks like something that you should hopefully be able to fix before you start putting the paint on.

Cheers,
Mike
PanzerKarl
Visit this Community
England - North West, United Kingdom
Joined: April 20, 2004
KitMaker: 2,309 posts
Armorama: 1,858 posts
Posted: Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 09:58 AM UTC
thats just a beautiful looking kit you have there vinnie.
you make it look so easy,nice clean build and you must have bags of patients putting all that etched stuff on the model
carnt wait to see the beast painted and weathered.
nice on mate,see you tomorrow,


cheers karl

one more thing,id like to see this model in a Dak version,or have you desided to paint it panzer grey?
Teacher
Visit this Community
England - North West, United Kingdom
Joined: April 05, 2003
KitMaker: 4,924 posts
Armorama: 3,679 posts
Posted: Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 10:22 AM UTC
Yeah......thanks Mike. I don't know what you're talking about? :-) Naw! I'm too honest, I went back and changed it. Thanks for pointing that out, didn't see it at all!
Karl, I don't know for sure yet. I think I'm going to have a rest before I paint it... :-) :-) :-)

Vinnie
atcockle
Visit this Community
Alberta, Canada
Joined: October 22, 2005
KitMaker: 9 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 11:02 AM UTC
Vinnie,

Excellent looking build there.

Just one thing though, I believe I said that A27 on the suspension was the part to use and A16 was to have been blued out.

Looking forward to seeing it finished.

Regards,

Tom
Teacher
Visit this Community
England - North West, United Kingdom
Joined: April 05, 2003
KitMaker: 4,924 posts
Armorama: 3,679 posts
Posted: Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 07:30 PM UTC
Thanks Tom. er....oops. I'll change that then!

Vinnie
blaster76
Visit this Community
Texas, United States
Joined: September 15, 2002
KitMaker: 8,982 posts
Armorama: 3,034 posts
Posted: Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 09:27 PM UTC
Thanks tons Vinnie. My kit should arrive next week. I'll be suer to have a copy of your report in the box to aid in the ease of construction
panzerspike
Visit this Community
Connecticut, United States
Joined: July 31, 2005
KitMaker: 3 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 23, 2005 - 03:24 AM UTC
Vinnie ,

What on earth are you going to do about that gap on the front plate and why have you not brought this up in your review buidup? Seems you are trying to paint a pretty picture for DML with out telling of any of the negatives of this kit . I do like this kit but what good is a review if your not going to share the good with the bad . In my book the poorest review is a flowered review by someone getting free kits by the reviewed kits Maker. Are you making a biased towards DML review because they gave you the kit ? Also it appears you have put the drivers visor on upside down , I believe you should address this .

Brian
sgirty
Visit this Community
Ohio, United States
Joined: February 12, 2003
KitMaker: 1,315 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 23, 2005 - 04:15 AM UTC
Hi, Thanks for the article and posting those pictures of your kit. Looks very nice and it has been an inspiration to this child over on the other side of the 'pond' to get my kit out and do some fooling around with it here this morning.

I too have noticed this gap in the nose section in your photos. I've heard it said that there is a missing weld seam that needs to be added by the builder and I assume this must be the area they were talking about.

I did have a rather hard time trying to figure out just where the nose plate, D-52, fits exactly on the front of the hull. At first I had mine mounted too low and when I test-fitted the glacis plate, B-31, on I had a pretty fair gap between these two. Luckily I was able to use some liquid glue and soften the seams and get the nose piece off with no damage to either this plate or the hull front. I then had to move this front piece up a tad so that it looked better, or at least cut down the gap that I had between it and the glacis part.

I think that part D-52 is made so that there's just too much of a 'lip' on that lower edge and without really clear instructions or pictures in this area on the instructions, this piece can get mounted lower than it should go, maybe.

I think I'll chalk this up to one of those little 'land-mines' that Dragon has been notorious for in their less that perfect instruction sheets. Sure wish they would make some quality changes in this area to bring them up to the quality of their kits.


Anyway, thanks. Can't wait to see it once it's all painted and weathered up.

Take care, Sgirty
Teacher
Visit this Community
England - North West, United Kingdom
Joined: April 05, 2003
KitMaker: 4,924 posts
Armorama: 3,679 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 23, 2005 - 05:39 AM UTC
Bryan J Tares,
firstly....I am in NO-ONE'S pocket as you infer. Nearly all of my kits I have bought myself. It is all my HONEST opinion. Have you built the kit? The gap you refer to is there because I have yet to cement the upper hull to the lower hull, it's purposefully unattached to enable me to paint it later. The gap disappears when a tiny amount of pressure is applied. The drivers vision block is, I assure you, on the correct way and has just dropped down since I removed two small stops on it, again to enable painting later. Basically if you're going to make accusations of favouritism in your first post instead of perhaps introducing yourself, then I sincerely hope your better at making friends in the real world than you are in the Cyber world...... :-) :-) :-)

Vinnie
Clanky44
Visit this Community
Ontario, Canada
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 1,901 posts
Armorama: 553 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 23, 2005 - 01:44 PM UTC
Vinnie,

First of all thanks for the build up review, articulate and concise. I've printed off the article and await the model, which will be built without problem, thanks to you.

As far as the negative thread posted above by Brian,.... you're way too polite.... unfortunately when you post up models for the public to view you open up yourself to scrutiny, if it's constructive, I'm all for it. If it reaks of envy and plain old malice, then it p****s me off!

Again, thanks for your work,.....

and one last thing,.... Brian,... do us all a favour and

Frank
panzerspike
Visit this Community
Connecticut, United States
Joined: July 31, 2005
KitMaker: 3 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 23, 2005 - 02:48 PM UTC
To Vinnie and Frank ,

First off there is a positive issue with this kit on the font transmission plate and its fit . Second Vinnies visor was out of place . Not in either instance did he mention that these were left this way for painting ease in his write up . The last words he ends his total write up with are "Thank you DML for the sample" . I happen to like this kit tremendously and also wrote DML many letters on a couple errors before it was released . But there is a bad review status going around our Hobby as of late with so called reviewers getting free DML kits and then putting up flowered reports on them . This is a terrible trend going on in this hobby right now and I believe that reviews should show the good with the bad so as to truly help the modelers not just be free advertisement for the company in question. A true review is very important for all not just me especially for the less informed on a certain vehicle many modelers depend on these reviews . There is no Envy or malice intended here just was using the information provided in the post . I happen to have a bit of knowledge of this particular vehicle and would like to see it correct for all . Now DML has shown a bit of care as to correcting their mistakes and the best way to get them to see these mistakes is for all reviewers and builders to make them noticed . I hope DML will fix there front transmission plate in there newer kits along the way and will do all I can to see this happen . Frank I speak about this vehicle and this kit from knowledge and experience , and when you can do so also then you can tell me to shut up but not until then . Vinnie no malice was intended specifically towards you and envy is out of the question here , but I do want everyone to know all the facts so that in the future these kits can be improved on .

Brian J Tears
WildCard
Visit this Community
Texas, United States
Joined: May 23, 2005
KitMaker: 945 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 23, 2005 - 06:02 PM UTC
Teach! With the high production value of yours when DO you find the time to TEACH?! :-)

Thanks for paving the way for the rest of us. With your valuable infos we can minized the error on the way to build our own.

WC
Teacher
Visit this Community
England - North West, United Kingdom
Joined: April 05, 2003
KitMaker: 4,924 posts
Armorama: 3,679 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 23, 2005 - 06:18 PM UTC
Thanks guys. I'm fully aware of the problems some people are having regarding the fit of the glacis plate. I didn't have that problem. You can only write it as you find it.

Vinnie
Vodnik
Visit this Community
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,248 posts
Armorama: 3,845 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 23, 2005 - 07:13 PM UTC

Quoted Text

But there is a bad review status going around our Hobby as of late with so called reviewers getting free DML kits and then putting up flowered reports on them .


Most model kit manufacturers and aftermarket companies as well provide review samples to reviewers nowadays. This was true for years in case of reviews published in printed hobby magazines and recently manufacturers started to treat most respected "online" reviewers and hobby websites the same way. There is nothing specific to DML there. And only stupid reviewer could write "flowered" review only because he got a free sample, as this would undermine his credibility. If Vinnie has not mentioned some problem, the only reason for it is that he had not encountered it in his sample, what of course does not mean that it cannot appear in other samples.

Pawel
Plasticbattle
#003
Visit this Community
Donegal, Ireland
Joined: May 14, 2002
KitMaker: 9,762 posts
Armorama: 7,443 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 23, 2005 - 07:18 PM UTC
Thanks for the build review Vinnie. Great to see it built up and the problems you had, highlighted. Reviews like this are priceless in my books, as one knows what to expect when building.
Its sad that your integrity has been questioned, but theres only one person here, with egg on their face.
Ross
Visit this Community
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: December 23, 2004
KitMaker: 213 posts
Armorama: 130 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 23, 2005 - 11:40 PM UTC
Thanks for showing the finished thing sans paint. I have been waiting to see what it looked like through many reviews, having avidly followed this story since it's annoncement. It will be great to see how you finish it off.

Ross
thedutchie
Visit this Community
Ontario, Canada
Joined: February 01, 2005
KitMaker: 1,299 posts
Armorama: 919 posts
Posted: Monday, October 24, 2005 - 01:07 AM UTC
Hey Teach

Do you teach modelling at school? :-) Good stuff. Thanks for the review. Cant wait to see that sucker with some paint on her.

Alpenflage
Visit this Community
Massachusetts, United States
Joined: May 21, 2003
KitMaker: 1,120 posts
Armorama: 1,002 posts
Posted: Monday, October 24, 2005 - 01:42 AM UTC
Looks like an excellent build, Vinnie. Great review as well

1 Question though, how come no in-progess shots of the turret ?

I cant wait to get one of these

Cheers !!

Alpen
Teacher
Visit this Community
England - North West, United Kingdom
Joined: April 05, 2003
KitMaker: 4,924 posts
Armorama: 3,679 posts
Posted: Monday, October 24, 2005 - 01:51 AM UTC
Robert, pure oversight on my part, sorry. I just got carried away and forgot to take more pictures.

Vinnie
Tarok
Visit this Community
Victoria, Australia
Joined: July 28, 2004
KitMaker: 10,889 posts
Armorama: 3,245 posts
Posted: Monday, October 24, 2005 - 02:15 AM UTC
Neat review, Vinnie.

As you know I'm by no means at all an Axis modeler or even a armour buff, but after your review I might (a very slim might ) be tempted to build the DAK version...

Any chance you'll build the DAK version for the Mediterranean theatre campaign coming up in 2006? Sorry, can't blame me for trying to do some recruitment, can you??? :-) :-)
jimbrae
Visit this Community
Provincia de Lugo, Spain / España
Joined: April 23, 2003
KitMaker: 12,925 posts
Armorama: 9,484 posts
Posted: Monday, October 24, 2005 - 02:46 AM UTC
To Brian J. Tears congratulations, normally one requires a good number of posts to offend so many people. You have probably broken all records by impugning the reputation of reviewers on this and many other sites - in your first post.. .

First of all, this isn't a review. It is actually a feature piece on the building of the PzIV. There is a subtle difference, which no doubt, in your state of 'moral superiority' you were unable to differentiate between...

Secondly, the material which is sent for review by manufacturers is sent on a 'no-conditions' basis. The only thing which is asked of us, is to give a fair (warts and all) assesment of their products. At NO time are any 'incentives' 'pressure' or any other influences brought to bear on us . To suggest otherwise is insulting, petty and cynical. Your comments are not only ill-informed, they are all of these three adjectives.

Could I suggest, that next time you make allegations like this, you actually look at the work that is being put in to the site. Positive criticism is always welcome, ill-mannered attacks on the probity and professionalism of reviewers/feature writers are not...Jim
SEDimmick
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: March 15, 2002
KitMaker: 1,739 posts
Armorama: 1,477 posts
Posted: Monday, October 24, 2005 - 04:17 AM UTC

Quoted Text

To Brian J. Tears congratulations, normally one requires a good number of posts to offend so many people. You have probably broken all records by impugning the reputation of reviewers on this and many other sites - in your first post.. .

First of all, this isn't a review. It is actually a feature piece on the building of the PzIV. There is a subtle difference, which no doubt, in your state of 'moral superiority' you were unable to differentiate between...

Secondly, the material which is sent for review by manufacturers is sent on a 'no-conditions' basis. The only thing which is asked of us, is to give a fair (warts and all) assesment of their products. At NO time are any 'incentives' 'pressure' or any other influences brought to bear on us . To suggest otherwise is insulting, petty and cynical. Your comments are not only ill-informed, they are all of these three adjectives.

Could I suggest, that next time you make allegations like this, you actually look at the work that is being put in to the site. Positive criticism is always welcome, ill-mannered attacks on the probity and professionalism of reviewers/feature writers are not...Jim



I guessed you missed what is happening on Missing-lynx and Track-link with a person working for DML's parent company posting misleading information...

http://www.track-link.net/forum/news_general/11038

panzerspike
Visit this Community
Connecticut, United States
Joined: July 31, 2005
KitMaker: 3 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, October 24, 2005 - 05:21 AM UTC
Well Jim ,

I tell you what apologizing does not come easy to me , probably not to anyone it is human nature to think you are right . But I may have used bad judgement on my words about the integrity of the reviewer and for that point I will say that I am sorry to Vinnie for that . The two questions I raised about his build I feel were honest on my part maybe a bit too direct but honest , they did look wrong . To you Jim I will say that the last words written by Vinnie in his not review but build as you put it are " Thank you DML for this review sample " . Review being a main word in this making me full believe that this was a review . I would like now to tell everyone also that I love this kit and couldnt wait for it to get in my hands . But I know that there is a problem with the upper hull matching neatly to the lower hull if you attach the rear first the front seems short and if you attach the front first you know vice versa .There is also a problem with the general layout of the front transmission plate that I hope is in repairs for DML's future kits. I feel that these items on any kit should be proclaimed and then maybe DML will fix them they have been doing some of this . But they wont know what to fix if these things are not pointed out to them . Now one of my pet peeves on all sites is giving information this needs to be taken very seriously as the masses that read reviews , builds and especially responses to posted questions most take these as gospel . So their needs to be more responsibility taken by the ones providing so called information because the people asking these questions don't know the answer or they would'nt be asking and if they are reading here or any site they are taking it as gospel . Now there really are so called reviewers out there that actually work for these companies or sister publishing companies that are reviewing these kits and flowering the reviews . Then these reviews are being read by those less knowledgable about this certain vehicle and they are taking these reviews as gospel too . If I can in any way help this matter by bringing this out into the light I feel can only improve our hobby . Another thing when talking about a kit and what may be wrong with it I am not trying to hurt the kit but help the modeler for when they approach this kit . Most modelers will not build it this year but sometime down the road and when they do crack it open the first thing they are going to ask is what tweaks are there on this kit and how do I fix them . So by announcing these tweaks and talking of them we make it easier for our fellow modelers in the future . Well I have babbled on along time now , I see by yours and others posts that you see me as the scourge of our hobby but believe it or not I love this hobby and only want to make it better for all of us .

Brian J Tears
NichoIppy
Visit this Community
Hong Kong S.A.R. / 繁體
Joined: October 24, 2005
KitMaker: 2 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, October 24, 2005 - 06:24 AM UTC
Huh? When did Dragon employed hundreds of modelers as their employees? There're hundreds of modelers bought the kit but don't find any serious problem worth pointing out, so they're also paid by Dragon? Oh... Please!!

Back to topic, thanks Vinnie! It's certainly my best reference to build the kit (though I may not start it right now). Hmm... back to my work, build more models, less chime in