# Fujimi Chi-Ha OOB - Classic armour kit!



## Faust (Dec 1, 2012)

It’s not only in cars and planes that I have a love for the weird and wonderful; I also like to get kits of oddball armoured subjects! While there’s nothing wrong with Shermans and Panthers, it’s nice to have a few less common vehicles to compare them too. Thankfully, when it comes to 1/76 armour, both Matchbox and Fujimi seem to have covered a lot of the bases!

A perfect example of this is the 1/76 Fujimi Type 97-Kai “Chi-Ha”. This was one of Japan’s “heavier” tanks of the war, and it makes an interesting, if not anemic, counterpoint to its much more powerful contemporaries. I managed to pick this little old gem up at a model show, so I didn’t even have to pay much for it!

Check out the kit out of box at the link below. Even if it’s not your thing, you’ll have to admit it looks pretty good for its age and size!

*https://adamrehorn.wordpress.com/fujimi-176-type-97-kai-shinhoto-chi-ha-oob/*


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

Those are nice kits. I built the Shinhoto (Improved) Chi Ha that you have, years ago. All three of the Fujimi Japanese tanks are well done for the size and era. Note that the machine guns should be pretty simple - what you are seeing are smooth metal jackets that cover the machine guns inside. 

Vallejo Model Air makes the appropriate Parched Earth base color for Japanese tanks, too.


----------



## Faust (Dec 1, 2012)

I've got the Ho-Ni too, but I wanted to build the Chi Ha first. I don't have the old, undergunned (whatever that means in this context) Chi-Ha. 

I've got some other Fujimi kits, and they're all nice too, like the Hetzer and the 251 half-track. 

Oh, that's cool about the guns barrels. I didn't know the guns were sleeved! Cool!

Thanks for the paint tip, too!


----------



## StarCruiser (Sep 28, 1999)

The original Chi-Ha was a typical tank for the era - infantry support was it's main task. The short 57mm gun was actually decent for that time. The longer 47mm gun on the Shinhoto gave that model better anti-tank capability (pitiful compared to the Sherman though).


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

The earlier 57mm was not that bad and when the improved Shinhoto went into production, redundant early 57mm turrets were fitted to the old Type 95 tanks to improve their firepower. I forget if Fujimi provdes the late style upper hull for their Shinhoto, or if they use the early hull from their 57mm version (both would be accurate).

The Ho Ni is an odd duck. While similar to the German Marder in appearance, the gun is really a field gun with fairly limited anti tank capabilities. It would be more like the US M8 Howitzer Motor Carriage or M7 Priest. It was also used only in limited numbers.


----------



## Faust (Dec 1, 2012)

The Ho-Ni reminds me of some of the italian "tank destroyers", just a light tank chassis with an exposed gun on top. Not even as good as a Priest!


----------



## Xenodyssey (Aug 27, 2008)

I built the Tamiya 1/35 Chi-Ha recently...One of my earliest built kits decades ago was an Airfix Chi-Ha. Still have it in the model cupboard.


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

Like I said the Ho Ni isn't meant to fight tanks its a self propelled field gun. And the Fujimi kit is an early type Ho Ni 1. They had later II and III versions with enclosed superstructures and different guns. Only a couple early types saw combat. I recall they were on Luzon in the Philippines. None of the later types saw combat as they were held in Japan as reserve to fend off the invasion.

The little Airfix 1/72 Type 97 Chi Ha isn't a bad kit either. In some ways it is better than the Fujimi kit, although the turret seems a bit flat to me. But, it is a very small kit and fairly old as well.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

It was always interesting to me how far behind Japan was in terms of tank development. I know it has many reasons (resources, transportation, mainly island jungles for battlefields and so on) but you would have thought that with the desire to conquer China and Korea more consideration of land battles and tactical needs would have happened. 

Anyway, I always admired the box art on Fujimi kits. I had their A-6 Intruder (1/48 I think?) and man, that was worthy of framing.


----------



## StarCruiser (Sep 28, 1999)

Initially - Japan had no real need for tanks even in China and Korea. Just like we found out in the Korean war, Korea is not very fun country for tanks (mountains and more mountains).

Until Japan ran into the Soviet Union, they really didn't see much need. The old Type 89 medium and type 94 tankette seemed to do fine, until that point.


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

To be fair, the tanks the Japanese faced in China were not that great either. The Chinese had old German Panzer I's (equipped with two machine guns) and old Russian T-26 tanks. Aside from some fighting in Mongolia there were not really many tank vs tank encounters in China until the Russians steamrollered the Japanese in 1945. Even in the early Island fighting like Guadalcanal and Makin, the US was using vehicles like the M3 Stuart and M3 Lee, which could be knocked out by Japanese tanks. 

The Japanese were, actually, rather interested in having a modern tank force (along with everyone else) following World War I. They bought examples of the most modern or promising western types for technical evaluation (and trial use in China) to see what would work best for them. 

The bigger failing on the Japanese, in the end, was not using tanks to their full potential. Japan always used them to support infantry, doing infantry-related tasks. So, they never concentrated their tanks all together, and didn't really have tanks capable of head to head fighting with other tanks either. By mid-war the Japanese did have some promising new designs (based largely on the improved Type 97 Chi Ha chassis) with more armor and larger, dedicated, anti tank guns. A good number of such tanks were built, but kept in Japan for the anticipated Allied invasion, so they never saw combat.


----------

