Al Qahirah, Egypt / لعربية
Joined: July 23, 2004
KitMaker: 6,856 posts
Armorama: 6,363 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 03:20 PM UTC
New Jersey, United States
Joined: March 15, 2002
KitMaker: 1,745 posts
Armorama: 1,483 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 06:21 PM UTC
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 06:23 PM UTC
It looks pretty nice. Are there any interior parts; ammo bays, driver's area, turret, etc.? It will be interesting to see how the Meng one compares to it.
Field Artillery --- The KING of BATTLE!!!
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." -- George Orwell
Showcase
Oklahoma, United States
Joined: September 30, 2015
KitMaker: 2,493 posts
Armorama: 2,344 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 06:28 PM UTC
Can you post a closer pic of the "B" camo pattern, please?
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
Al Qahirah, Egypt / لعربية
Joined: July 23, 2004
KitMaker: 6,856 posts
Armorama: 6,363 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 06:30 PM UTC
Gino.. no, unfortunately no interior parts, except for the ammo bay that they've shown in the previous pics.
I'm sure the MENG kit will be excellent, and will definitely get that one too.. I'll do one Syrian and one Egyptian.. or maybe Libyan.
Hisham
Al Qahirah, Egypt / لعربية
Joined: July 23, 2004
KitMaker: 6,856 posts
Armorama: 6,363 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 06:39 PM UTC
Here are the instructions for the ammo bay parts
Hisham
Al Qahirah, Egypt / لعربية
Joined: July 23, 2004
KitMaker: 6,856 posts
Armorama: 6,363 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 06:50 PM UTC
Here's the "B" Iraqi cammo.. and another one all sand color.
Hisham
Joined: May 23, 2007
KitMaker: 109 posts
Armorama: 109 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 07:06 PM UTC
It looks a bit rough for the price TBH (e.g. like Panda 2S6 kit), so I'll wait to see how much the Meng one goes for, especially since there's no interior. I do hope its tracks won't be with separate teeth as I glued the Trumpeter 2S1 ones not so long ago so don't think I can handle another one of those for some time.
Thanks for posting the photos.
Al Qahirah, Egypt / لعربية
Joined: July 23, 2004
KitMaker: 6,856 posts
Armorama: 6,363 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 07:21 PM UTC
Quoted Text
(e.g. like Panda 2S6 kit)
Funny you should say that.. After trying to put together a couple of parts... I may have spoken too soon.
A question.. do you think that a company that got a bad rep for poor fitting parts would try to release kits under another brand name to get away from that bad rep? I'm not making any accusations and... Really, I'm just wondering
I pray it's my bad skills and conspiracy ridden mind
Hisham
Gauteng, South Africa
Joined: July 03, 2015
KitMaker: 280 posts
Armorama: 135 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 07:22 PM UTC
Hi Hisham
Thank you for posting the pics. I'm keen to get one of the new Shilka's so I'll wait for the Meng release and then decide between the two. Pricing will be a consideration as well.
Regards,
Kobus
Akershus, Norway
Joined: July 20, 2010
KitMaker: 1,709 posts
Armorama: 1,581 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 07:32 PM UTC
those separate guide teeth....crazy
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 09, 2015
KitMaker: 1,063 posts
Armorama: 1,000 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 07:55 PM UTC
The sprue attachment points look large and thick. Not good. Might just be the pics. Correct me if I am wrong please.
"No plan survives contact with the enemy." Helmuth von Moltke the Elder
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: May 09, 2009
KitMaker: 561 posts
Armorama: 553 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 07:56 PM UTC
Thanks for posting Hisham. It's interesting to see that they handled the ammo bins the same way as Mengs' CAD shows, shallow one piece inserts vs. full depth bins with seperate chutes.
http://www.kalasnyikov.hu/dokumentumok/23mmes_zszu4_onj_legv_gu_4resz_azp23_legv_gu.pdfpage 70 is part B17, the RH ammo bin and page 74 is part B19,the collant tank.
Sean
Al Qahirah, Egypt / لعربية
Joined: July 23, 2004
KitMaker: 6,856 posts
Armorama: 6,363 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 08:00 PM UTC
Quoted Text
The sprue attachment points look large and thick. Not good. Might just be the pics. Correct me if I am wrong please.
No, you're not wrong. As soon as I started getting the parts off the sprues and started cleaning them and gluing them... I started getting flashbacks of another kit I had a very bad experience with
Like I said, I hope it's just my mind playing tricks on me
Hisham
Oklahoma, United States
Joined: September 30, 2015
KitMaker: 2,493 posts
Armorama: 2,344 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 09:15 PM UTC
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
Joined: May 23, 2007
KitMaker: 109 posts
Armorama: 109 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 09:33 PM UTC
Quoted Text
No, you're not wrong. As soon as I started getting the parts off the sprues and started cleaning them and gluing them... I started getting flashbacks of another kit I had a very bad experience with
Like I said, I hope it's just my mind playing tricks on me
The sprue attachment points look rather different from Panda's, but seeing the parts breakdown, the molded on details and the green plastic, your flashbacks are quite understandable (can't comment on the fit). But, if it was the same company, it would have a bunch of PE parts as well, no? These molds look noticeably less clean that Panda's; kind of remind me of the old Dragon Soviet vehicles with the (presumably) brittle plastic which needs cleanup.
I guess I'm too spoiled by some of the better Trumpeter releases, not to mention Meng ones, to bring myself to getting the Panda 2S6 kit, especially for the high price it goes for. Which is a shame as it's doubtful another company will take a go at it and the BMD kits in the near future. BTW, not saying those kits are bad or anything, just that they look a bit messy to put together and perhaps not the best value given the stiffening competition.
Al Qahirah, Egypt / لعربية
Joined: July 23, 2004
KitMaker: 6,856 posts
Armorama: 6,363 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 09:50 PM UTC
The reason I thought of Panda is that Panda's parts also look really nice on the sprues.. and their kits do look great when they're built.. it's just that getting them built needs someone who has A LOT of free time and A LOT of patience. This one felt the same.. every hole a part needs to fit into needs to be widened.. any part that needs to fit somewhere needs a lot of scraping and cutting and stuff. Now, I know people say we are modelers and all that.. but really, with new companies like MENG and TAKOM and Tiger-Model making kits that fit like a Tamiya kit, there's really no excuse for a company to make a kit that fits and builds maybe worse than old East European kits used to.. and sell it for the same price like MENG's kits. I mean, they already did the research and did the molding and all that.. why mess it all up with very poor fit? I just think it's a shame.
Hisham
Joined: May 23, 2007
KitMaker: 109 posts
Armorama: 109 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 - 10:00 PM UTC
Quoted Text
there's really no excuse for a company to make a kit that fits and builds like the old East European kits used to.. and sell it for the same price like MENG's kits. I mean, they already did the research and did the molding and all that.. why mess it all up with very poor fit? I just think it's a shame.
Totally agree. The Hong's 3D model presentation looked great, but I guess no less important part of the art is converting it to the molds properly.
I considered pre-ordering it, but luckily the somewhat high price convinced me to wait and see the comparison with the Meng kit. Given what's shown here, unless the Meng kit ends up costing twice the price, I don't see myself considering this release.
Michigan, United States
Joined: July 17, 2010
KitMaker: 258 posts
Armorama: 208 posts
Posted: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 - 11:19 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text
(e.g. like Panda 2S6 kit)
Funny you should say that.. After trying to put together a couple of parts... I may have spoken too soon.
A question.. do you think that a company that got a bad rep for poor fitting parts would try to release kits under another brand name to get away from that bad rep? I'm not making any accusations and... Really, I'm just wondering
I pray it's my bad skills and conspiracy ridden mind
Hisham
To be honest, I thought the box art looked a little Panda-ish to me. I was wondering where this company came from so fast.
Al Qahirah, Egypt / لعربية
Joined: July 23, 2004
KitMaker: 6,856 posts
Armorama: 6,363 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 10, 2015 - 12:01 AM UTC
The instructions are also the same style like Panda's.. Plus a couple of parts on the sprues didn't have numbers on them.. I had to figure them out by the one next to it and it's shape
And one other thing is the style of engineering.. any part that can easily be made as one whole part, they make it into 3 or 4 very small parts that don't fit without some surgery. It's easy to do surgery on the large parts, but it's difficult enough to hold these small parts.. much less try to do surgery on them
If this is not Panda, then they are certainly trying to follow in their footsteps.
I'm really not trying to bash either company.. I really had hopes for this one.. I actually think it's a shame because Panda's kits are basically very nice - on the sprues - if they can only make the parts fit. I mean, I don't know much about the manufacturing side of things, but why can't they make parts that fit while other new companies can?
Anyway, this a sample of one of the small parts.. well, at least to my weak eyes
Hisham
Florida, United States
Joined: October 21, 2013
KitMaker: 751 posts
Armorama: 751 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 10, 2015 - 07:26 AM UTC
Well I am glad of this review.I was about to order it but am going to wait now for the new Meng kit.
Philippines
Joined: May 25, 2013
KitMaker: 544 posts
Armorama: 542 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 10, 2015 - 09:29 AM UTC
since meng about to release there own ZSU-23-4,let wait and see...
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Friday, December 11, 2015 - 08:49 PM UTC
I will still build the Hong kit, as it is en route. However, I will wait until I receive the Meng kit and do a comparison. I did has some concerns. The major one was how closely the box art resembles Dragon's old kit. Thankfully, I can still handle small parts. Performing surgery on them will be a few nights that I can afford a drink(not the cheap stuff
).
Ideals are peaceful. History is violent.
Al Qahirah, Egypt / لعربية
Joined: July 23, 2004
KitMaker: 6,856 posts
Armorama: 6,363 posts
Posted: Friday, December 11, 2015 - 09:01 PM UTC
I'm still going to build it too. Hell, I paid $53 for it
I'm just going to leave it for when I have lots of free time.
Besides, it could be just me, and you and others might actually find it a breeze to build
Hisham
Joined: May 23, 2007
KitMaker: 109 posts
Armorama: 109 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 - 04:02 PM UTC
There's an inbox review and some comparison with the Dragon kit on Cybermodeler now.
http://www.cybermodeler.com/hobby/kits/hong/kit_hong_5001.shtml
