| PiersBrand | 28 Jun 2016 3:35 p.m. PST |
|
| Louie N | 28 Jun 2016 4:51 p.m. PST |
It's hard work to make it that weathered and worn. Excellent painting as always Thank you for sharing |
Frederick  | 28 Jun 2016 6:39 p.m. PST |
A cagey old vet waiting to give Ivan a bloody nose – outstanding work |
| langobard | 29 Jun 2016 3:46 a.m. PST |
Just brilliant! THAT's what a panzer should look like! |
| bracken | 29 Jun 2016 5:00 a.m. PST |
|
| Murvihill | 29 Jun 2016 8:08 a.m. PST |
Beautiful paint job. The first thing I notices was the running wheels weren't split. Guess I'm a button counter now. |
| Skarper | 29 Jun 2016 10:53 p.m. PST |
The Panzer IV was a popular [with their crews] and effective tank. The big cats get all the attention but the PzIV was the mainstay for most of the war. Lovely model as usual. Shame about the wheels but I can see they have to compromise. Could the gap be painted in do you think? Or you could add the side skirts and nobody would see. |
| PiersBrand | 30 Jun 2016 1:40 a.m. PST |
Yer the lack of split wheels is due to the one piece nature of the running gear. Of course if you add the side skirts you don't see it. You could paint it but as all detail is lost on the table I'm not sure I'd bother (says the man who put zim on it!). |
| Skarper | 30 Jun 2016 4:08 a.m. PST |
TBH I didn't notice the wheels until I read Murvihill's post though I spotted the Zimmeritt right away! |
| Murvihill | 30 Jun 2016 11:33 a.m. PST |
I must confess, my platoon of STG IV's has the same problem and I pretty much ignore it too. |
| kevanG | 02 Jul 2016 6:34 a.m. PST |
"but the PzIV was the mainstay for most of the war" I was always surprised how few there actually were. the total number of mark 4's only just exceeds the combined totals for panthers and tigers stugs were more common Peirs' painting is superb |
| Skarper | 02 Jul 2016 9:24 a.m. PST |
The production ratio of PzIV to Panther is about 3:2. Panthers were quite common from 1944 – probably about 50% of tanks in Panzer units were Panthers. [This is why the Sherman was so much less effective than expected on the rare occasion any German tanks were encountered.] What I think perhaps should be factored in is the greater mobility of the Panzer IV on the march, crossing bridges, navigating narrow lanes etc together with easier maintenance of a proven design that had been in service a long time. This leads to me to give the Panzer IV extra credit above and beyond its gun/armour stats |
