Яusso-Soviэt Forum
Russian or Soviet vehicles/armor modeling forum.
Russian or Soviet vehicles/armor modeling forum.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Jacques Duquette
DMl T-34 hex turret?
Finch
New York, United States
Joined: August 03, 2005
KitMaker: 411 posts
Armorama: 273 posts
Joined: August 03, 2005
KitMaker: 411 posts
Armorama: 273 posts
Posted: Monday, November 17, 2008 - 09:47 AM UTC
Anyone seen the kit yet? if so what do you think of it?
Yoni_Lev
Washington, United States
Joined: September 20, 2007
KitMaker: 861 posts
Armorama: 394 posts
Joined: September 20, 2007
KitMaker: 861 posts
Armorama: 394 posts
Posted: Monday, November 17, 2008 - 10:10 AM UTC
MCR
Arizona, United States
Joined: July 15, 2004
KitMaker: 464 posts
Armorama: 407 posts
Joined: July 15, 2004
KitMaker: 464 posts
Armorama: 407 posts
Posted: Monday, November 17, 2008 - 12:03 PM UTC
Unfortunately , Cookie makes one miss-statement and misses a major detail:
First, the cast Gayka turrets (with the exception of the pressed steel type) were not welded from two sections but were cast as a single piece. The rough "weld bead" the Cookie mentions is in fact a casting seam. Excess steel that seeped through the upper and lower sections of the mold were cut off by torch which accounts for the very rough line seen on most of these turrets.
Second, he missed that the DML upper hull is not entirely correct for one of these T-34s, Factory 183 (as well as Factory 174 and ChKZ) having switched to the simplified engine deck even before the introduction of the larger turret (the deck was more similar to the T-34-85 than the Model '40, '41, or Factory 112 made -76s.)
Among the less noticeable faults I'm finding with the kit is that the all steel wheels are poorly done; those provided in the old Tamiya kit, though too wide, look better. A real shame considering how well they did the STZ wheels.
Even so, the hull probably won't be that difficult to correct and I'll probably buy at least two.
Mark
First, the cast Gayka turrets (with the exception of the pressed steel type) were not welded from two sections but were cast as a single piece. The rough "weld bead" the Cookie mentions is in fact a casting seam. Excess steel that seeped through the upper and lower sections of the mold were cut off by torch which accounts for the very rough line seen on most of these turrets.
Second, he missed that the DML upper hull is not entirely correct for one of these T-34s, Factory 183 (as well as Factory 174 and ChKZ) having switched to the simplified engine deck even before the introduction of the larger turret (the deck was more similar to the T-34-85 than the Model '40, '41, or Factory 112 made -76s.)
Among the less noticeable faults I'm finding with the kit is that the all steel wheels are poorly done; those provided in the old Tamiya kit, though too wide, look better. A real shame considering how well they did the STZ wheels.
Even so, the hull probably won't be that difficult to correct and I'll probably buy at least two.
Mark
Kiyatkin
Maryland, United States
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 291 posts
Armorama: 284 posts
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 291 posts
Armorama: 284 posts
Posted: Monday, November 17, 2008 - 12:46 PM UTC
Still waiting for them to arrive here. I hope it will be soon. Would be a good SBS here on this site.
Overall, except for the rear engine plate like Mark mentioned, it seems that t Dragon made a good effort.
The wheels look crummy too but there are many suitable replacements for the die hard accuracy fans.
The fenders are probably also not quite right, but in my opinion all T-34 plastic fenders must ne replaced with metal ones anyway
Here are the sprue shots:
http://www.militarymodelling.com/news/article.asp?UAN=1358&v=1
Overall, except for the rear engine plate like Mark mentioned, it seems that t Dragon made a good effort.
The wheels look crummy too but there are many suitable replacements for the die hard accuracy fans.
The fenders are probably also not quite right, but in my opinion all T-34 plastic fenders must ne replaced with metal ones anyway
Here are the sprue shots:
http://www.militarymodelling.com/news/article.asp?UAN=1358&v=1
Yoni_Lev
Washington, United States
Joined: September 20, 2007
KitMaker: 861 posts
Armorama: 394 posts
Joined: September 20, 2007
KitMaker: 861 posts
Armorama: 394 posts
Posted: Monday, November 17, 2008 - 09:24 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Unfortunately , Cookie makes one miss-statement and misses a major detail:
First, the cast Gayka turrets (with the exception of the pressed steel type) were not welded from two sections but were cast as a single piece. The rough "weld bead" the Cookie mentions is in fact a casting seam. Excess steel that seeped through the upper and lower sections of the mold were cut off by torch which accounts for the very rough line seen on most of these turrets.
Oddly enough, he mentions the turret "casting joint" at the beginning of the review, and later talks about the "weld bead". I didn't notice that until after I read your post.
Even with the incorrect engine deck and questionable road wheels, I'm looking forward to getting my hands on one of these at some point in the near future.
-YL
Kiyatkin
Maryland, United States
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 291 posts
Armorama: 284 posts
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 291 posts
Armorama: 284 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 20, 2008 - 03:10 AM UTC
Hey Guys, Just got mine from HK today. Nothing unexpected, but I must say that the many new parts are very exciting. This might almost motivate me to do a SBS contruction here. I did not finish the last 3 I started, but maybe this will be different.
Removed by original poster on 11/20/08 - 23:30:32 (GMT).