bowlman

Darn this is nice would like to build mine like this .

thanks
Jimmy

Panther F

The real Panther II (like the one at the Patton Museum) would have had transport tracks, not the combat versions.

Panzerfaust77

Bigger pics?

Pzjgr

He got it from here:
http://www.rctankwarfare.com/Forums/...ic,2077.0.html

pattoncommander

Only problem is none of the Panther II designs were ever issued and none saw combat. The Chassis were captured at the factory overrun by US forces and the special "Schmalturm" was being manufactured near Kassel and the facility was captured by the British.
The turret and chassis were never married up other than a couple non operational prototypes. The only existing turret was inadvertantly dragged down range at Bovington. It was too far damaged to be refurbished and now sits as a remote display. Fort Knox has a Panther II chassis but the turret is from a Panther A (Re; curator Charley Lemons). It would have been a mean tank, with armor beefed up 25mm interrior and carrying the King Tiger's 88 with a range finder. [:@] Don't know if any upgrade was made to the Panther's Maybach engine, but that's a lot of added weight on an already strained engine.

Panther F

All true but it is a Late Panther G turret on the existing Panther II chassis.

bowlman

Yep know about all that but would like the turret any way think it looks better then the production turret at that time .

Thanks
Jimmy

rivetcounter

although the armour was to be increased the overall weight was only slightly heavier than Panther G the Panther II was to use single torsion bars as opposed to twin in the Panther G and the Panther II turret was lighter and smaller than the Panther G turret so power to weight ratio was not hampered to much

Panther F

Here's a link to the real thing:

http://www.peachmountain.com/5Star/T...erII_tank.aspx

tac23

and here's the turret it should have carried...

Panther F

Now that is the production turret for the Panther F. No turrets for the Panther II were ever produced even though they were similar, they were to be completely a different design for the Panther II.

ManMachine

About the transport tracks, is it known for sure that it was suposed to use transport tracks in combat? Most of the heavy tanks were issued transport tracks. So if you ask me it's not wrong to add combat tracks to the model

But, if the idea is to make a exact model of the one found.. then it should have transport tracks.

Beutiful model indeed, would love to see it in action

Gabriel

rivetcounter

Panther II wasn't a heavy tank like Tiger and didn't require wide tracks, the idea of using Tiger II transport tracks was they where the same width as Panther track part of the project was to standardise parts with Tiger II thus requiring the 1 set of tracks to be made for both tanks, Panther II was to use 16 tooth sprockets as oposed to Tiger II 8 tooth sprocket so Tiger II tracks wouldn't fit latter on Tiger II returned to 16 tooth single link tracks another point is the Tiger II transport tracks where designed for a 68 tone tank ad would have been strong enough for the lighter Panther II

Panther F

18 tooth sprocket, just counted them. Besides, the Panther II was to use the same running gear as the KT.

tac23

Thats correct - there seems to be some confusion about this, and no definite answer. As I understand it options for the turret were: (slightly modified) schmalturm turret from the Panther F OR the 'narrow mantlet' turret which never saw the light of day - and either could be fitted with a modified version of the existing 75mm gun OR the KT's 88 (not surehow they'd have got that to fit in the schmalturm!).

All of the above options (either turret, with either gun) are mentioned somewhere in surviving communications and memos as being 'the' chosen turret, so chances are the final decision hadnt been made as of the breakdown of government at the end of the war.

From a modelling stand-point I like the schmalturm - partly because we've a better idea what it would have looked like (1 was captured) and partly because it looks significantly different from the panther D, a and G turrets, and so marks the Panther model out clearly as 'not a Panther 1'.

Panther F

Oh, I totally agree! I really like all Panthers but the Panther F and the proposed Panther II are my favorite for sure. I hope to build both sometime next year.

edelweiss3945

This is my model ! whilst i always welcome constructive critisism and of course compliments i was amazed when i was told it had been phished and put on your forum. nothing really wrong with that but, and having read some of the comments, i think some of you really are missing the point of our hobby. on these forums we seem to be beset by so called experts on every field who nit pick the smallest detail ( you know who you are). the fact is my model is a "paper panzer" and as such no-one can say with any certainty what it would be like had it ever seen action. given the shortages and constraints of the war towards the end it could have had any number of permutations! including the tracks! so why dont we just get on and enjoy our hobby encourage each other ,especially the younger ones and stop being so pendantic. thankyou. i will now be returning to my friendly forum.

pcomm1

Pendantic (adj): overly concerned with minute details or formalisms, esp. in teaching. The system probably hasn't taught this word in USApublic education in over 50 years, so some help may be needed. edelweiss3945 your far to articulate to post on this forum, please go away. But before you do retire, your Panther model is brilliant, actually.

John

Panther F

Your build is very well made, I only pointed out that fact the real Panther II had the transport tracks. Seeing that there was a prototype made of the tank disqualifies it from being a true "Paper Panzer" it just wasn'tcompleted with the envisioned turret it was to carry.

There was no harm made by the observation nor intent of any criticism towards your effort. Thanks for stopping by.

rivetcounter

on some forums only certain people are allowed to comment all others are seen as troublesome, so when eventually some one builds an E100 Ausf B that is totally fiction based on the Trumpeter kit which was never even a "paper panzer" to point it out would be considered crass

bowlman

Well I posted these pics a month ago to show  what can be done  did not think it was going to be a problem and from the reply's still dont see a problem the model was nicely done and would like to be that good some day myself a few of use belong to other forums and want to learn from other members on how to better do this hobby of tanks from time to time there will be some heated posts a few eggs get broken thats life move on im still new at this hobby and want to learn to better my tanks and skills when I joined a year ago this and other forums was the place of a welth of info and some of the pics and articals were posted  here and there did not see that as a problem there was know rule saying you cant do that now I wonder if I should just keep to myself and just look .

Jimmy

edelweiss3945

updated Panther II ........ now with 18 tooth sprocket and transport tracks. thought i would post myself rather than have the images phished ! lol

Panther F

GREAT!! Now, got any pictures?

whyeie

Tank looks awesome, would like to see some bigger pics.

Matdragon

http://www.rctankwarfare.com/Forums/...ic,3401.0.html

edelweiss3945 has done a stunning job yet agaiN!

while your there, check ut his half track too!

Matt