Hi Jacques, thanks for the post thats very interesting.

It's wierd about the differences in the SKIF colour kits isn't it? As you say on my dark green SKIF kit the parts fit the rear plate quite well, it's mostly the gaps at the front and upper hull rear.

I think the Sprockets are actually okay, the important thing as you say is that they work with the Masterclub tracks. In terms of detail they are fine I think. As for the Road wheels thats good news about the results with the new castings. I think the detail on them is fine though and I hadn't realised that the Masterclub Wheels were for the DML kit. That Dragon Hull really is small compared to the SKIF isn't it? Is the Dragon T-72 as bad as the T-80 range in terms of dimensions?

Also Jacques whats you're opinion on the barrels? Is the RB barrel a bad idea?

Thanks Raul that will be interesting to see the comparisons. I'm still waiting on my RB barrel.

[quote]

Jacques
The SKIF T-80 hull and turret are not true. The only true SKIF hull is T-64. You can compare it with M-Hobby and frontline illustration T-80 drawings and with Zeughaus T-64 book drawing.
All kits and conversions for T-80 family will be truly when they will be on SKIF T-64 hull based.

Taras - can you confirm with actual measurements that the T-80 adn T-64 lower hulls are the same? My understanding of their development is that the hull of the T-80B and T-80U are completely different than the T-64 series.

I have also been told by several people who have access to the real tanks that the dimensions of the SKIF kit are correct, but that the angles of the plates are not quite on...I believe that George was working on making a completely accurate hull? Sergej at SP Designs has not made an attempt to master a more accurate lower hull because most modellers do not worry about the accuracy of it since they cannot see it behind the side skirts. Only the rear plate needs extra work and while there is help already in the conversions, we know more work still needs to be done as well.

M-hobby and Frontline drawings are good, but I have not been able to get them confirmed as accurate. T-64 information is available enough to confirm the SKIF kit is indeed correct.

I know the SKIF T-80U turret is incorrect and there have been postings on that. That is why there is a SP Designs conversion for it.

John - I will be honest, I do not focus on barrel caliber. I am concerned about overall appearance for the barrels, so if they are too short compared to photos, or the bore of the barrel is too big/small, I will look into it. I am not the best one to help with the calibers of the barrel question. I like the look of the Miniarm barrel that comes with kits, I used the SP Designs barrel with my T-64U, the Model Point barrel is on my T-80U, and the RB Models barrel looks good too. I even like the Eduard T-72 barrel, even if it does look a little short, as many have noted.

As for the DML T-72's...avoid them. And the Italeri/Revell/Zvezda ones. Better to start with the Tamiya kit and go from there. The DML kits were good for their day, but have all the same problems as the DML T-80 kits. HOWEVER, as of right now, the TOS-1 system from SP Designs is made for the DML T-72 kits. Sometime in the future it will be remastered for the Tamiya T-72, but until then...and it looks good on the DML kit. That is my only recomendation for the DML T-72's (Even though I have them all and plan to build them one day myself...shhhhh).

My statements are based on a comparison of drawings from M-hobby, Frontline and Zeughaus.
Who told you about the hull differences? In what are they?

Thanks Jacques. I think I'll wait and see how the Modelpoint and RB barrels stack up. I'm not too bothered about caliber myself, I just want the best looking barrel. So as long as the lengths are okay I may go with the RB one as it really is a very nicely detailed piece.

I have no idea how noticable the differences would be in caliber on a 35 scale kit. I'm assuming it won't be noticable anyway?

Well after lots of dry fits, and shaving of the plasticard panels inside the hull I managed to finally get the upper and lower hull together and fill most of the gaps. I still have some tidy up work to do and a little more filling but at least the hull is starting to take shape.





I'm still deciding on what barrel to use for the project, but heres a dry fit of the Modelpoint barrel, its a nice barrel but lacks the extra detail of the RB barrel:



I've also finished the Blast models NVST, this took a little work to get to fit the T-80, with some of the SP Designs parts used such as brackets, the large ammo bag, and the larger ammo box. I can't recommend this MG enough, it really is fantastically detailed and was a real pleasure to build.







It's finally starting to look like a Tank! Dry fit with the Modelpoint Barrel:



Here's my latest aquistion from Minsk, some light reading, The Offical Magazine of the Belarus Armed Forces!

extremely nice work Jon!

I have to say that I'm really loving the over all look of this and it seems as if you're tackling this project seamlessly.

Very impressive to say the least. Keep up the good work and get the RB Model Barrel. I have three of them and can't speak enough about their detail. I'm sure Marcel can say the same thing with his T-72 build.

Keep in mind RB Model is made in Poland so it should take too long to get to you.

Keep up the good work

Thanks Sean, the build and its problems have certainly kept my mind busy!

As for the RB stuff I ordered it from Blast Models when I ordered my KMT-7, so both are heading over from France!

The Caliber maybe wrong on the RB version but it sure is nice and I'm tempted to use it anyway!

Hey Jon, your build is really starting to shape up. It looks like a tank now. Did you use putty or plastic on the supsension arms? I've notice there is some heavy pitting in this area even on my kit. I do have to agree with you on the barrel, I would go with the RB since it has all the straps and such and is better detailed. I still don't think you can tell a big difference between a L/48 and L/52 barrel. There was a review on a websight and I can't seem to find it, but they had all the defferent barrels lined up together and then you could tell the defference. I do like the blast NSVT and is much better looking than what sp of skif gives you. Keep the build coming, waiting for more.
Chris

Hi Chris, on the suspension arms I used Mr Surfacer 500 to fill the dents and pitting. It's actually my first time to use Mr Surfacer, I've always used Squadron White Putty in the past or Miliput/Green Stuff.

It was interesting to see how Mr Surfacer behaved on the kit.

You know I probably will go with the RB one, and keep this Modelpoint one for future. It was quite cheap anyway so I won't lose too much sleep over putting it i the spares box!

Well I got the RB barrel and my Mig KMT-7 yesterday. The Mig kit is very nicely done and looks like it will build into a very good model. However as I mentioned on Chris' T-62 Blog the instructions really aren't that helpful and that would be my only criticism. The pictures are colour and very small, which gives two problems. Resin parts on Resin parts (cream on cream) make it hard to distinguish the parts or detail, especially when the pictures are so tiny. They basically stuck their intruction sheet on the back of the blister pack insert...

Luckily Mig have included the instructions as a Download on their website, so this will be essential to use during the build. While Mig's instruction booklets are very pretty, they aren't necessarily very practical and actually for a kit like this I' prefer a regular black and white exploding diagram or at least a larger sheet on A4 that was easier to see.

Well looks like we both have issues with our mine clearing devices. Just some how I think yours is going to be the easiest of the two. So how does the RB barrel look, I personally haven't seen one up close yet just a few photo's. At least you can down load the directions offline.
Chris

Jon, where is the Mig download. I looked on the site but could not find it...

Hey Jacques, you have to go to mig's productions main home page and not the usa one. It's right on the middle left hand side with a link that says download guides and step by step. I just checked it out myself today.
Chris

Hi Guys, yes Chris is right it's on the main mig productions website in their downloads section. Thank god they included it there!

Here's some shots of the two barrels lined up. First one shows what you get in both sets, the top set is the RB Barrel the bottom the Modelpoint. No doubt the RB Barrel is better value for money as you get more parts, but I just wish RB sold their PE sheet as a seperate part, its so useful for so many Soviet and modern russian guns!





As you can see the RB barrel is shorter, however I'm not sure which is the more correct of the two in terms of length? Jacques maybe you could help out here?

I've also managed to detail up the front hull. Removing the detail on the front storage boxes and replacing them with the PE straps and buckles. One thing I did find here was that as usual the PE set simply repeats errors on original kits and doesn't correct them. This was a problem for me as I assumed the detail of the storage boxes on the SP Hull and Skif hull would be the same and removed all the resin detail, however the long thin box next to the turret on the left side is much thinner on the skif kit so the PE straps were too short for the SP parts! I had to use some spare PE parts to fill the gaps, luckily I had a few straps left over that I could cut up, next time I'll be sure to check this BEFORE cutting up resin!



The light guards are also incorrect, and over sized. I removed the large backing screens and cut the frames shorter to fit better. Although the shape of the frames is a little incorrect I didn't fancy trying to make my own out of wire, so I'll compromise on this.

For the headlight guards, I compromise too. I do not want to make my own from wire and the PE is indeed wrong...painfully so. Looks good so far.

Not sure about the barrel length...I will compare my MP barrel with my Eduard T-72 barrel to get a better idea.

Thanks Jacques much appreciated.

My next challenge at the moment is working out how the KMT-7 mounts correctly to the underside of the front hull on the T-80. So far I havent been able to find any good reference images of this, and the instructions from mig only cover the T-72, however I'm assuming it's going to be pretty much the same? The main problem is that the Skif hull is usually hidden behind the front skirt panel, however I'll have to remove that to mount the KMT-7 which exposes the poor detail. I may have to do some work to detail the area up and fix the mine clearer attachment points.

Hey Jon, I have some photos that might help you some. Once the dust deflector is removed you have mounting bosses just above the trenching blade. This would be the same location all mine clearing devices to get attached to. It would be the same for T-55/62/64/72/80 and 90’s as the roller and plough are universal mounts. It would be a real simple fix with plastic strips and some replicated welds seems, you wouldn’t have to worry about the bolts as the mount for the kmt-7 will replace them. I hope this helps some.
Chris

Thanks Chris thats real helpful, I figured it should be like this (very similar to my T-90). I'll definately be removing the chunky Skif parts and replacing them with some Plasticard.

:)

I'm glad I could help Jon. I was surfing the net lastnight looking for ideas and came across these photos of someone who has supper detailed a T-64 hull. I know it's not the same tank as a T-80 but the details are very simular in the front hull. You can see how the trenching blade and mounting bosses are detailed better. This should help alot with trying to replace the details in this area since the dust deflector will be removed.
Chris

Is the built in entrenching blade added to all T-80? I figured if they were mounting a KMT-7 this wouldn't be present or would be removed?

I'm not sure if its mounted as standard as the majority of my reference photos have the large front dust skirt.

Hey Jon, here's another picture with a T-80 and the mine roller. You can bearly make out the entenching blade on it.


This is a UD variant, but it would be the same for even the plain U. My under standing with the entenching blade is it was standard equipment when the B's came out according to the book I have. They would of just left the blade in place even with mine clearing devices attached. Besides the blade is used for the tank to go into hull down postion and wouldn't make any sense to remove both the deflector and blade just to mount a mine plough. Everything I can did up on the subject was the blade stays in place with the mine clearing equipment.
Chris

also I forgot to tell those first two pictures I posted of the real trenching blade is from a T-80U. I don't know which model it is, but it came from a display in russia. Just incase you are asking about the mounting of the blade. But if you want I also have some more close up of the blade it's self.
Chris