Aggravated with 1:43 Sherman Tanks on Recent MTH Flatcars

Sorry about that. There was an earlier post about the size but we cannot see every post. I cannot recall why the change but it may have been the vendor.

That's a significant difference there!

I was confused when I compared the 2018 catalog photos of the Shermans with the actual production, not even close. And, sellers on e-bay are using the catalog photos! Yet another reason not to pre-order sight-unseen.

You almost come out ahead by buying 1:48 Tamiya kits and bare flat cars. The initial runs of tank flats were good, then they started messing things up. The build dates on the flats in one run was the mid 50s, now it seems they've changed the size, etc.... 

Other than the time spent building the kits (which, based on the chain work doesnt seem to bother you), I think the product is better if you just roll your own. You end up taking the plastic blocks off and replacing them with wood chocks and adding tie downs anyway if you want them to look good, just start with 2 good parts and join them up. 

I am the same way... if it isn’t scale, it doesn’t work for me.  Great layout, by the way.

First, I understand your frustration.  

Second, Just say they are two different variants as there were different variants in real life for which the measurements differed.   I bet few if any visitors will realize that.  

Third, they make wonderful pills you can take to help you deal with your aversion to the size difference which is causing unnecessary angst.  I say this a bit tongue in cheek,  as an individual with OCD who takes medication daily.   Can't help it if I was born without a certain chemical in my brain. 

- Greg

I had to chuckle when I read your post, as more often than I can count my friends have chided me for being OCD.  I must have a bit of that chemical in brain, because I know the size difference really should not bother me, yet it does!

Here is the MTH page for the 2010 scale sized Shermans.

Here is the MTH page for the 2018 over sized Shermans.

On the web page they appear to be the same tank.  I pre-ordered them a year or so ago.  I could have bailed on my LSH and left him holding the bag, but I bought them even though I am not pleased with them.  That is the nature of the hobby, and that really stinks.  

I understand your frustration and can sympathize with you. I have a suggestion that might help you deal with your situation. First off, when building your train, start by putting on the flats with one size Sherman. Follow those with some flats with some support vehicles like these...

or perhaps add some flats with different tanks like these...

then add the rest of the flats with the other sized Shermans. The differing cars will visually break up the disparate sized Shermans and hopefully make it visually more acceptable.

I feel your pain. I bought this about 3 weeks ago says on the box 1/50 yeah right more like 1/64 I was so mad when I got it and scaled it next to the corgi Diamond T I put it back in the box and got rid of it. Do not buy this one it is  very small for O gauges. Hobby Boss also sells Sherman there sold at Hobby Lobby in our area I have a few and there nice and not that hard to build. There 1/48 scale. 

T4TT posted:

...I have several of the older MTH flatcars with Shermans and think they are GREAT!  I believe those tanks are 1:48 (maybe 1:50) but they look corrrect when alongside 1:48 Jeeps.  

The Shermans on the latest flatcars are 1:43.  They are fine models but they are significantly larger then the first run of Shermans.  I am the picky type that can't run these flats in a train with the smaller Shermans.

Yep, does pose a bit of a problem if you want to create one fairly long train of Shermans with a mix of the two sizes. I am facing the same situation. I have about 10 or so of the earlier Shermans-on-flats and just picked up four of the recent releases. I have not yet decided how I want/plan to deal with the tanks' size difference, which is fairly significant.

Boilermaker1 posted:

You almost come out ahead by buying 1:48 Tamiya kits and bare flat cars. The initial runs of tank flats were good, then they started messing things up. The build dates on the flats in one run was the mid 50s, now it seems they've changed the size, etc.... 

Other than the time spent building the kits (which, based on the chain work doesnt seem to bother you), I think the product is better if you just roll your own. You end up taking the plastic blocks off and replacing them with wood chocks and adding tie downs anyway if you want them to look good, just start with 2 good parts and join them up. 

This.

Sell the ones you don't want--somebody else does, I'll bet--and build the Tamiya (or Frog/Bandai) kits.  You'll have more options as to how you want to display them, anyway.

Actually the smaller shermans look like M1a1 tanks and the larger models match their larger brothern M4a3E8 versions. As the war progressed the Sherman tanks evolved with bigger 76mm cannons or their english varient with the 3 pounder on it...

So a slightly larger tank vs. the smaller could be justified... BTW,  just how many rails are we running on anyway? 

That would irritate me, too. If you want to keep things somewhat realistic, and consistent, the oversize tanks certainly won't work. They look somewhat more toylike also, at least to me. Also, the double star is wrong, and the gun barrels are too long, among other problems.

As I've mentioned before, I use diecast 1/50 Corgi Shermans for loads, which work great.

I run my toy trains on 3 rail track.   What does that have to do with proportion, the relative size of one object to another?  I never get that come back, well you run trains on 3 rails so obviously you should not care if the people on layout are 3" tall.  Having 3 rails on ties does not mandate that my layout appears cartoonish.  In this case identical items (Shermans) are clearly not the same size, so I find that bothersome.  

To each their own.  Who cares how many rails are on the ties?

T4TT posted:

I run my toy trains on 3 rail track.   What does that have to do with proportion, the relative size of one object to another?  I never get that come back, well you run trains on 3 rails so obviously you should not care if the people on layout are 3" tall.  Having 3 rails on ties does not mandate that my layout appears cartoonish.  In this case identical items (Shermans) are clearly not the same size, so I find that bothersome.  

To each their own.  Who cares how many rails are on the ties?

Agree. 3 rails are a given, an electrical necessity in O gauge. It's not an excuse to allow everything to look mis-proportioned and goofy looking, unless the operator doesn't care. Scale engines and rolling stock are used by many, and they pay a lot for it. It is illogical that someone would want to have scale-looking engines and cars, and yet not care that the rest of his layout is full of objects that are all different off-sizes. 

That's not to say folks can't do what they want to - some don't care if there are all different sizes of things on their layout. That's fine. But obviously the OP isn't into that type of modeling, and probably most "scale" operators looking for some measure of realism aren't either.

   I do like a cartoonish look. A whole lot too. I could stick many off scale things near each other on the layout as well and "not care". I think I might even "need" this stuff to be toyish to keep from obsessing.  E.g., "identical" loads, that are not identically sized would bother the crap out of me.

   I have a hard time mixing scale and semi-scale box cars in a row, but will happily run with a 1:32 (?) Marx military load with wheels hanging clear off the flat's sides...one vehicle per flat car( because two won't fit ). Non wheeled items in the mix, the scale of those wouldnt phase me as long as "pairs" matched 

My OCD wouldn't let me separate the tanks except to two trains. I'd notice. Boxcars are a simple shape so easier to deal with the forced perception.

  I think you and Allan ought to work out a trade Let me know if you need an outsider to flip a coin over who gets which size if you'd like. (Just don't tell me details till the deal basics are 100% done and coin is tossed)

  The problem with med.s is I won't care about anything. I can't even take an allergy pill without nodding out, or not sleeping for days. I'd rather obsess  than feel that way; at least I know I'm being silly while doing it.  I also found eating better helps tons. Not much processed crap passes to my gullet anymore. I can "feel" an eaten McBurger for about two days now . I'm sure in a decade or two, lots of this crap will come around to being sensitive to what's being put in food today for extending it's shelf life. 

  I think the ambulance vs Jeep size in a row would bother me most; but separation there would likely work better for me than the tanks because of shape differences.

The most irritating part to me is, just like Lionel, if you did something right the 1st time, how in the world did you screw it up the next time??? Like coupler gap on the new F3's. 😉

JDADDY,

Quick correction: The long barreled Sherman with the extension out the back of the turret is a Sherman Firefly, equipped with a 17 pounder, not a 3 pounder. This was one of the few Allied tanks that could take out a German Tiger at long range with one shot. Of course, it still had the normal Sherman armor, so if a Tiger hit it, it was pretty much a goner.

Chris

LVHR

LOS wrote:
The most irritating part to me is, just like Lionel, if you did something right the 1st time, how in the world did you screw it up the next time??? Like coupler gap on the new F3's. 😉

EXACTLY!  I have a good bet on why MTH screwed it up the this time around, to save a buck on the cost of the item and increase their profit margin.   To make it even more annoying in this case, this is not the second time MTH has cataloged sherman tanks on flats, it is like the 3 or 4th!!!  I bought flats from each of previous runs.  The first and second offerings had shermans one to a flat for various roads.  Next they offered them once or twice with 2 shermans on Army flats.  Each of those runs used the same dang tank (with paint variation).  Therefore I reasonably expected these to be the same tanks AND the image on the web was the same and MTH NO mention in the description that the tanks would be from a different maker.  

All the manufacturers do it and I am tired of it.  I need to stop pre-ordering.  I am done giving my money up for a toy with which I am unsatisfied.

lehighline posted:

JDADDY,

Quick correction: The long barreled Sherman with the extension out the back of the turret is a Sherman Firefly, equipped with a 17 pounder, not a 3 pounder. This was one of the few Allied tanks that could take out a German Tiger at long range with one shot. Of course, it still had the normal Sherman armor, so if a Tiger hit it, it was pretty much a goner.

 

Chris

LVHR

Yes, thank you for the correction. My point being is you could buy the larger tanks and display them as scale M4 tanks... but its seems to have been lost in the argument.  

I try to make the best of what we have in the O gauge world ... otherwise we should be moving to O scale... 

I suggest that you separate the two sizes with a flat car having other vehicles. There were many versions of the M4 Sherman in including major changes in their hulls and suspensions. The early Shermans had welded steel hulls whereas later versions had cast hulls. Check this page

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia....w2/US/M4_Sherman.php

T4TT posted:

I run my toy trains on 3 rail track.   What does that have to do with proportion, the relative size of one object to another?  I never get that come back, well you run trains on 3 rails so obviously you should not care if the people on layout are 3" tall.  Having 3 rails on ties does not mandate that my layout appears cartoonish.  In this case identical items (Shermans) are clearly not the same size, so I find that bothersome.  

To each their own.  Who cares how many rails are on the ties?

Simple - with 3 rails you are tolerating a larger range of the definition of scale, The viewer is going to notice the 3rd rail quicker than a slightly larger tank...

T4TT, are you sure they are 1/43 scale and not 1/35 scale?  They do look rather large.  If they are 1/43 scale I would be happy to make a  trade with you.  I like to run 1/43 scale military equip on my trains.  I have a 1/48 scale Sherman and have been trying to locate a 1/43 scale Sherman.  I only have 1 to trade for 1 but I would be willing to buy the other one from you if the price isn't to high.  Mine is brand new only out of the box 1 time.  Just like you, when I saw the size difference it went back in the box.  Send me an email if interested at campbell14731@comcast.net .  P.S.  Not interested in buying the flat car unless it is 2 rail.

Rick

I was more disappointed in the overall quality of the Shermans...old and new versions. MTH advertised the older ones as being made by Solido, but they pale in comparison to my memory of what Solido once made. I guess everything gets cheapened over time, especially as production moves to China for these things.

When I started building my army train, the Corgi Sherman tanks were too heavy and made the flat cars top heavy. The Tamiya tank kits were expensive. AMC Dave showed me a new re-release by Revell of an inexpensive snap together kit. The paint job is terrible. but they are accurately sized, exact 1/48 scale, and very inexpensive.

Here's one on eBay.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Revel...rstClass!94062!US!-1

RoyBoy posted:

When I started building my army train, the Corgi Sherman tanks were too heavy and made the flat cars top heavy. The Tamiya tank kits were expensive. AMC Dave showed me a new re-release by Revell of an inexpensive snap together kit. The paint job is terrible. but they are accurately sized, exact 1/48 scale, and very inexpensive.

Here's one on eBay.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Revel...rstClass!94062!US!-1

 

This is one of those that I built.

Compared to the Tamiya version [on the left].

Revell                                                                Tamiya

Yep.  That's why I pass on the 1:43 military models.  I can't accept that on my layout.  I think that the catalog tells you or gives you clues that these are 1:43.  If it doesn't say so you can probably tell by the pictures.

Alan

RoyBoy posted:

When I started building my army train, the Corgi Sherman tanks were too heavy and made the flat cars top heavy. The Tamiya tank kits were expensive. AMC Dave showed me a new re-release by Revell of an inexpensive snap together kit. The paint job is terrible. but they are accurately sized, exact 1/48 scale, and very inexpensive.

Here's one on eBay.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Revel...rstClass!94062!US!-1

 

A little Testors Olive drab will take care of the "terrible" paint job...

Mark Diff posted:

RoyBoy posted:

When I started building my army train, the Corgi Sherman tanks were too heavy and made the flat cars top heavy. The Tamiya tank kits were expensive. AMC Dave showed me a new re-release by Revell of an inexpensive snap together kit. The paint job is terrible. but they are accurately sized, exact 1/48 scale, and very inexpensive.

Here's one on eBay.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Revel...rstClass!94062!US!-1

 

A little Testors Olive drab will take care of the "terrible" paint job...

 

Yup. That's what we did.

RoyBoy posted:

When I started building my army train, the Corgi Sherman tanks were too heavy and made the flat cars top heavy. The Tamiya tank kits were expensive. AMC Dave showed me a new re-release by Revell of an inexpensive snap together kit. The paint job is terrible. but they are accurately sized, exact 1/48 scale, and very inexpensive.

Here's one on eBay.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Revel...rstClass!94062!US!-1

 

Just an fyi, I think Revell filed for bankruptcy recently. I think Hobbico may have bought them, but ultimately a Germany company bought both. Speculation was to expect a substantial increase in prices.