We've just posted our review of DMl / Cyberhobby's T-34 STZ to the AMPS site at: http://www.amps-armor.org/ampssite/reviews/showReview.aspx?ID=108&Type=FL


Hope you find it useful.

Regards,

Danny Egan

Very usefull - I have 2 of these in the mail from Japan right now

Thanks for posting the review.

Thanks for the review Danny, very handy for when my kits arrive.

Hi,

There is another review here for those interested?

T-34-76 STZ Review

Cheers
Terry A

good~~~

Great review mine still sits in it's box.

Not opened yet either.

Wish they would of done the hull a little different with the welded style as I have an old Armo which has the same hull and cost as much as this kit.

But still no welded hull with the interlocks.

I hear you on the interlocked hull; it would be very cool to have that kit. If you look at the empty places on the DML STZ model 41 turret sprues, which include unused part numbers, I think it is kind of obvious that they plan additional STZ variants.

The type of hull in the DML STZ kit is correct for the early version they are selling.

Having said that, their very first T-34-85 kits from the late 1990s had the separate fillets at the hull rear so that the same hull pan could be used for Model 41s, and it took almost - what? ten years or so? - to take advantage of that feature, so I have no idea whether we'll see the STZ odel 41/42 next month or next decade.

Here's hoping

Danny Egan
President
AMPS
http://www.amps-armor.org

Hey Danny,
I may have misunderstood what you wrote in your review of the kit so please forgive me if so, but I wanted to correct one small item; you mention the new fifth station suspension arms as having finally been corrected on the STZ kit. This is absolutely correct. BUT, the style of arm provided in the kit is correct only for early models of the T-34 (i.e., pre Nizhni Tagil Factory 183 and STZ).
From 1942 and onwards the "simplified" arm as provided in all other DML kits was used by every manufacturer of the tank (Factory 112, ChTZ, Factory 174, etc.).

All in all a fine review and a nice kit (there are still some shape issues with the rear deck I'd like to see corrected but, hey, maybe we'll get that in the next kit!).

Mark