did you know later in WW2 the marines used M4A3?
Yup. The initially used both M4A1 and M4A2s, then upgraded to the A3s by the time they rolled into Iwo Jima and Okinawa.
2 Likes
Now look from us both doing a mass run on Shermans now we are doing Abrams
1 Like
Like I said before; Kindred spirits we are. 
I have about 20 Abrams, with at least two ready for paint, all different, I think …
The M4A1’s were borrowed from Army stock and returned right after the campaign. The M4A2’s were Marine stock. Marines would have kept the A2’s but the Army changed the manufacturing lines so we had to change versions. Same at the beginning and end of MC tanks with the Abrams. Army supply choices impacted Marine options.
Marines also has Easy Eights w/105 turret and dozer blade. Plus the comm “Porcupine” version with a fake welded turret.
1 Like
Back on topic:
Started work on the hull by plugging some parts with sheet styrene and gluing the upper and lower hull into place. A little drilling here and there plus assembled the drive sprockets with the rings to make sure everything lined up and cleared. The part that worries me is the rings rubbing against the upper hull, but they do roll. i figure everything will be covered up, but it still nags me a little.
Noticed that the upper hull was a bit warped, but with some coercion, i made it work. Might end up adding some putty to blend everything up, but it looks good.
3 Likes
Updated comparison between the Tamiya variants.
M1 (L); M1A1 (M); M1A2 (R).
M1 upper turret length (4 15/16”)
M1A1 upper turret length (5 1/4”)
M1A2 upper turret length (also 5 1/4”)
Noticed that the lower hull parts between the A1 and A2 turrets are not interchangeable. The main guns mount differently on both versions.
4 Likes
The turret front on the Tamiya M1A1 is 100% wrong. I remember seeing the early test shots of this kit in Tamiya Model Magazine where it had the ‘short’ turret of the M1 but with the 120mm gun. Tamiya must have realised their mistake because by the time it hit the shops they’d lengthened the turret. But they completely goofed it by moving the gun mount forwards and keeping the original ‘short’ mantlet, rather than doing what they should have done and keep the gun mount where it was and lengthen the mantlet.
As a result the shape of the turret front plates is completely off too, with the small triangular plates being much too small proportionally.
You probably know all this, but I’m still bummed at Tamiya after all these years for not doing their research, and with Trumpeter, Academy, Dragon (in 1/72) etc. for just blindly copying them without doing their research either.
At least Tamiya finally got it right with the M1A2, even if it has a bunch of other issues.
1 Like
Tamiya’s Later M1A2 SEP with tusk has optons for the blow out panels
Well? I think this one will be my first and last Tamiya Abrams kit. I’ll stick to Ryefield and Meng for those.
Hull is complete.
Did the surgery on the turret top. Honestly; I’m having second thoughts about this. I have plenty of styrene, but don’t know if it’ll work out as I want.
Not giving up on it yet; I’ll keep working on the turret top until it looks good.
3 Likes
Don’t forget to remove/fill in the mount for the CITV in front of the loaders hatch.
Ken
1 Like
Here are links to a discussion about the mantlet shape on the IPM1/M1IP. Long story short, the overall mantlet shape in Tamiya’s M1A2 kit is correct for an M1IP although you’ll have to modify it for the smaller gun, while the mantlet shape in the Tamiya M1A1 kit is inaccurate.
