Dragon Models
1/72 Sherman Ic Firefly
Kit Number: 7322
Reviewed by  Jim Pearsall, IPMS# 2209

[kit boxart image]

MSRP: $15.95
Website: www.dragonmodelsusa.com

The Vehicle and Gun

When World War II started, the standard anti-tank guns were in the 37 to 40mm class. Although they are derided by many, these guns could handle just about any AFV in use in 1939. It was only when the tankers went back and griped about the holes in their tanks that the builders began getting serious about armor protection. Shipbuilders had been developing armor plate designed to withstand armor-piercing shells for decades but once the novelty of the tank wore off, it became obvious that more armor with better stopping ability was needed. The Germans developed the PzKpfw IV, V and VI, which had much better armor. The Americans developed the Sherman. The Germans had much better armor.

As the tanks became bigger and more protected, the gun makers, following standard engineering practice, built bigger guns with higher velocity rounds, which were to penetrate the thicker, better armor of the newer tanks. The German 88mm is well known, and its ability to knock out tanks. Less well known, but an even more fearsome weapon, was the British 17-pounder. The 17-pounder had only a 76mm bore, but with a much longer barrel than the American 76mm tank gun, giving it higher velocity with better penetration. With the APDS (Armor Piercing Disposable Sabot) round, which became available in August 1944, the 17-pounder could effectively penetrate any German tank, provided the range was sufficiently short.

[gun comparison]This picture compares the 17-pounder to the US 76mm gun. The M4 is on the left, the Firefly on the right. The 17-pounder was originally to go on the Cromwell tank, (but it just wasn’t ready in time for Normandy) although the British Tank Board had decided that mounting this gun in any American tank was of little use, as they were planning to replace all Shermans with British-designed tanks. Major George Brighty of the Lulworth Armored Fighting School advocated mounting the 17-pounder in the Sherman but was stymied by the fact that the Sherman’s small turret couldn’t hold the large gun and that the recoil mechanism was far too bulky to fit in the turret. The first answer was to enlarge the turret with a "bustle" which added room for the gun. The other answer was to do away with the recoil mechanism, bolt the gun directly to the turret, and allow the chassis to absorb the recoil. These were crazy ideas. The engineers were beside themselves, undecided whether to laugh or cry. It worked. The Sherman Firefly was the most common British AFV fielded in World War 2.

The Model

[sprue layout]This kit is listed as an "Armor Pro" kit. There are a lot of parts to this model. Also, as you can see by the large number of "parts not for use" my spares box is happier. The only part which needed any attention before assembly was that looooong gun, which had a mold line on top and bottom. This was easily fixed with a Flexi-File® in a couple of minutes. This model is a state-of-the-art rendering, and the fit was excellent in almost all cases.

[bogie instructions] [completed bogie] [suspension]

Construction

The basic construction is quite simple and all the parts fit nicely. The exception to the fit is in the first step, assembling the bogies. I had a tough time getting the parts to fit into the bogie assemblies, particularly the C4 parts. Otherwise, I was very happy with the wheels and the main parts. The bogies mount cleanly onto the lower hull.

Assembly of the upper hull and turret are pretty much uneventful, except for the photo-etch. If I had this project to do over, and know what I know now, I would have installed the hatches on the front of the hull, and then added the PE.

[photo-etch fret] [fret in scale] [finished hatch]

The problem was that the PE is so fine that I was continually damaging it as I tried to assemble the hatches to the hull. This was another place where the fit was not 100%, and I had to fiddle with the hatches and openings to get a good fit. Of course I managed to either knock off or bend those super little grab irons and add-ons on the hatches while trying to get the parts to fit. Yeah, it’s repairable, and Dragon gives you some extra parts, just in case.

On the other hand, I had absolutely no problem with the parts on the turret hatches, as these fit perfectly, and I installed them before putting on the PE. The PE is incredibly fine and it certainly adds a lot to the hatches.

[review image] The tracks are one-piece units, but are nicely molded. I had no problem getting them onto the suspension, and the mating surfaces are practically invisible. Dragon notes at the top of the instructions that these are a new material called "Dragon Styrene 100", which can be sanded, cut, and glued like regular styrene. They say it is a "cross breed" with the advantages of both styrene and PVC vinyl. I did have to glue the tracks to the bottoms of the wheels, as the track wasn’t quite flexible enough to allow the weight of the model to make the tank sit down. It still looks good, and worked for me.

As far as painting, I was rather bewildered that although the color callouts had Mr. Color and Model Master colors, there was nothing mentioned about olive drab. They do have Mr. Color 304 (OD) on the painting/marking instructions, but not on the color conversion chart.

Decals are minimal, but were absolutely perfect. I am becoming convinced that there is a positive correlation between the quality of decals and the time required for them to float off the paper. These took 10 seconds or less, a benchmark for 21st century decal quality.

Overall Assessment

Recommended to modelers with AFV AMS, even a mild case of AMS.

This isn’t a kit to give a 10-year-old to build without a lot of help. Dragon’s not lying when they label this kit as an "Armor Pro" version. While the basic kit is clean, fit is good, and there just aren’t any real show stoppers, the PE is so fine and finicky that only a dedicated armor modeler (or a reviewer) will have the patience to see this one to a successful conclusion.

Without the PE, the kit is still really buildable, and would still make a really nice display model. But what a shame to leave all that detail in the box! My thanks to Dragon Model USA for the chance to review this kit.


[review image] [review image] [review image] [review image]


Information, images, and all other items placed electronically on this site
are the intellectual property of IPMS/USA ®.