Here is the box and a few extra bits I have collected.
There is the hull. Look at those seams - carefully!
Front fenders.
Some dry fitting of the turret:
Hopefully more to come soon!
Dmitry
Hosted by Jacques Duquette
WiP T-34/76 1942 from STZ
Kiyatkin
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 291 posts
Armorama: 284 posts
Posted: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 - 10:21 AM UTC
Hello, I just got this new Cyber Hobby kit and I think it deserves a blog. I am glad CH released it, but I think it will also require a fare bit of work to make it look good (it is not going to be a Tamiya-like experience). I have lots of extras (esp. STZ parts from CMD and Mig Productions) and most widely available printed references. Given that there are no surviving late STZ hulls, some details are hard to pin point exactly.
Here is the box and a few extra bits I have collected.
There is the hull. Look at those seams - carefully!
Front fenders.
Some dry fitting of the turret:
Hopefully more to come soon!
Dmitry
Here is the box and a few extra bits I have collected.
There is the hull. Look at those seams - carefully!
Front fenders.
Some dry fitting of the turret:
Hopefully more to come soon!
Dmitry
Yoni_Lev
Joined: September 20, 2007
KitMaker: 861 posts
Armorama: 394 posts
Posted: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 - 05:33 PM UTC
Looks like this will be a nice build, Dmitry. Looking forward to following along.
-YL
-YL
mulligan
Joined: June 14, 2007
KitMaker: 54 posts
Armorama: 51 posts
Posted: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 - 07:31 PM UTC
looking good so far, I'll be watching this as i've got one to build too. 
Cheers Ross
Cheers Ross
Kiyatkin
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 291 posts
Armorama: 284 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 06, 2007 - 12:52 PM UTC
Here I go again.
Here is a picture of the engine deck for you to ponder. No further comment:
Those nice fenders - gone:
Some work on suspension:
Now on to the wheels. I hate that part.
Dmitry
Here is a picture of the engine deck for you to ponder. No further comment:
Those nice fenders - gone:
Some work on suspension:
Now on to the wheels. I hate that part.
Dmitry
Reiter960
Joined: June 24, 2007
KitMaker: 503 posts
Armorama: 500 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 06, 2007 - 01:29 PM UTC
Boutique kit my __s. Thank you very much for this blog Dmitry, I almost bought this one last week. BTW, where do you get your Frontline Illustration copies from?
Cheers
Cheers
Kiyatkin
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 291 posts
Armorama: 284 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 06, 2007 - 01:40 PM UTC
Yeah, it is what it is. The FI I bought from AviaPress in Russia - 6 months wait after my card was billed. I also paid for express shipping.
Dmitry
Dmitry
Reiter960
Joined: June 24, 2007
KitMaker: 503 posts
Armorama: 500 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 06, 2007 - 02:56 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Yeah, it is what it is. The FI I bought from AviaPress in Russia - 6 months wait after my card was billed. I also paid for express shipping.
Dmitry
Oh just six months?
It took Club-TM some 9+ to ship Modelpoint stuff. Anyway, does decal sheet include markings for white 77 or 70?Kiyatkin
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 291 posts
Armorama: 284 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 06, 2007 - 03:57 PM UTC
What's the h**l is going on here??? This looks a lot like my Trumpeter E-25. What did I do wrong to get this huge gap???
I am at a loss!
Dmitry
I am at a loss!
Dmitry
DogEgg
Joined: October 04, 2006
KitMaker: 341 posts
Armorama: 293 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 06, 2007 - 09:41 PM UTC
You sure that's not the gap for the rear fenders to slot in? It looks a bit big for that but that's their position, right?
Kiyatkin
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 291 posts
Armorama: 284 posts
Posted: Friday, December 07, 2007 - 01:13 AM UTC
Hi Guys, I am putting this on hold until someone figures out what is going on. Other, more rewarding stuff to work on.
Here are the rest of the pics:
Here are the pictures of the real transmission housing (?). It seems pretty flush:
Here is how the front looks. There is a big gap there too:
Here, just for fun, I glued the back plate to the upper hull:
Still very crappy fit. Guys I think I may not be as stupid as I thought (except for buying 2 of these kits without reading any reviews):
Here the same bottom hull is paired with a regular 1940/41 Dragon upper hull and the fit seems perfect. No gaps in front either either:
Someone else ought to try this.
Dmitry
Here are the rest of the pics:
Here are the pictures of the real transmission housing (?). It seems pretty flush:
Here is how the front looks. There is a big gap there too:
Here, just for fun, I glued the back plate to the upper hull:
Still very crappy fit. Guys I think I may not be as stupid as I thought (except for buying 2 of these kits without reading any reviews):
Here the same bottom hull is paired with a regular 1940/41 Dragon upper hull and the fit seems perfect. No gaps in front either either:
Someone else ought to try this.
Dmitry
Jacques
Joined: March 04, 2003
KitMaker: 4,630 posts
Armorama: 4,498 posts
Posted: Friday, December 07, 2007 - 03:11 AM UTC
Man Dmitry, talk about kicking over a ant-hill.
Yeah, it looks like DML rushed this kit, or else gave it to the second-stringers to make. Pretty shamefull looking it over right now.
I have this kit, but I do not "get" it until X-mas so I will have to help in a electronic fashion.
Try comparing a regular T-34 rear hull plate with the CH one...my guess is that it is about 1/16" too long and that the fender area to top of plate is 1/16" too short. But that is from this side of the computer.
As far as the front goes, you need to trim down the "under fender" part of hte upper hull until the front fits flush with the lower hull...easy enough fix, but with a "boutique" kit...
A fix for the rear hull plate depends on how it scales out with a "regular" DML T-34/76 rear plate.
I do not have any quick, on hand references for the T-34/76 STZ so what is your take on the kit specific detail? Did they get ANYTHING correct?
Yeah, it looks like DML rushed this kit, or else gave it to the second-stringers to make. Pretty shamefull looking it over right now.
I have this kit, but I do not "get" it until X-mas so I will have to help in a electronic fashion.
Try comparing a regular T-34 rear hull plate with the CH one...my guess is that it is about 1/16" too long and that the fender area to top of plate is 1/16" too short. But that is from this side of the computer.
As far as the front goes, you need to trim down the "under fender" part of hte upper hull until the front fits flush with the lower hull...easy enough fix, but with a "boutique" kit...
A fix for the rear hull plate depends on how it scales out with a "regular" DML T-34/76 rear plate.
I do not have any quick, on hand references for the T-34/76 STZ so what is your take on the kit specific detail? Did they get ANYTHING correct?
Jacques
Joined: March 04, 2003
KitMaker: 4,630 posts
Armorama: 4,498 posts
Posted: Friday, December 07, 2007 - 03:16 AM UTC
I also see what you are saying about the fit of the two upper hulls. Take a few minutes to carefully compare the two...see what makes them different. I had to do this with the SU-100 kits to get the Premium version upp hull to sit better...and there are still a few issues with it.
It may be that the upper hull is the problem.
It may be that the upper hull is the problem.
Kiyatkin
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 291 posts
Armorama: 284 posts
Posted: Friday, December 07, 2007 - 03:26 AM UTC
Honestly everything except upper hull looks OK. The turret fit is OK, but will be a pain to get right all those welds. The small fittings are nice. More or less accurate. The top hull is terrible in many ways. The details are poorly done. Looks at those front fenders - an insult. But the fit is the main issue.
The whole reason to get this kit kit was for the hull. CMD makes a great turret already (probably better, faster, and more accurate too). Their front and back plates are very good too. All the small details are very nice in his kit too. The bad part was the interlocking on the top hull. But honestly, that would be much easier to resclupt on the old T-34 hull top then deal with this. I think Bill was going to cask a whole new upper hull, but put that on hold 2 years ago when this kit was announced.
I will measure the parts ASAP. I think Terry will also do a review soon.
Dmitry
The whole reason to get this kit kit was for the hull. CMD makes a great turret already (probably better, faster, and more accurate too). Their front and back plates are very good too. All the small details are very nice in his kit too. The bad part was the interlocking on the top hull. But honestly, that would be much easier to resclupt on the old T-34 hull top then deal with this. I think Bill was going to cask a whole new upper hull, but put that on hold 2 years ago when this kit was announced.
I will measure the parts ASAP. I think Terry will also do a review soon.
Dmitry
nicocortese
Joined: November 25, 2005
KitMaker: 65 posts
Armorama: 59 posts
Posted: Friday, December 07, 2007 - 04:45 AM UTC
Guys,
Just a very quick note to clear the air…
I’ve been getting some not so friendly emails concerning my role in this particular kit...
With DML, like Tom Cockle and Gary Edmundson, I only give technical assistance which is on a volunteer basis…I don’t engineer the kits and I don’t have any input other than giving them the correct research info which I think was pretty spot on.
Concerning this particular STZ kit, all the pertinent info was given for the proper changes, which in this case, many items didn’t get the proper treatment I feel should have gotten.
Having said all this, I’ve already gotten in touch with them about these problems.
Best,
Nick Cortese
Just a very quick note to clear the air…
I’ve been getting some not so friendly emails concerning my role in this particular kit...
With DML, like Tom Cockle and Gary Edmundson, I only give technical assistance which is on a volunteer basis…I don’t engineer the kits and I don’t have any input other than giving them the correct research info which I think was pretty spot on.
Concerning this particular STZ kit, all the pertinent info was given for the proper changes, which in this case, many items didn’t get the proper treatment I feel should have gotten.
Having said all this, I’ve already gotten in touch with them about these problems.
Best,
Nick Cortese
Kiyatkin
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 291 posts
Armorama: 284 posts
Posted: Friday, December 07, 2007 - 04:53 AM UTC
These look like production/QC issues. Not research problems.
But it would be nice if they redo that upper hull. As you said, it is not just the fit that is off.
Dmitry
But it would be nice if they redo that upper hull. As you said, it is not just the fit that is off.
Dmitry
Kiyatkin
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 291 posts
Armorama: 284 posts
Posted: Friday, December 07, 2007 - 01:57 PM UTC
Hi Guys, This blog is closed. I am putting this in its box and back on my shelf. I am disappointed. Of course it is fixable, but I am not in that sort of mood now. I am on to my first T-55 and then the Tamiya IS-2 is hitting the shelves around the world.
Best regards and happy holidays to you,
Dmitry
Best regards and happy holidays to you,
Dmitry
DAK66
Joined: April 28, 2006
KitMaker: 286 posts
Armorama: 120 posts
Posted: Friday, December 07, 2007 - 02:47 PM UTC
Wow i ordered this kit earliier and after seeing this i couldn't cancel the order fast eough this is disapointing what a screw up .
GALILEO1
Joined: April 18, 2006
KitMaker: 1,794 posts
Armorama: 1,431 posts
Posted: Friday, December 07, 2007 - 03:27 PM UTC
Oh, pretty dissapointing considering I really wanted to get one of these. Well, maybe when they reissue with the problems fixed.
Thanks forpointing the issues on this one Dmitry.
Rob
Thanks forpointing the issues on this one Dmitry.
Rob
nicocortese
Joined: November 25, 2005
KitMaker: 65 posts
Armorama: 59 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 08, 2007 - 03:01 AM UTC
Dimitry,
After looking at your photos...I think what you did was quite obvious, in terms of the rear plate placement!
Since you eagerly removed the fenders you should've attached/adjusted the rear plate and the lower plate at that time….it looks too pushed in!
Since removing the back fenders, too...you removed an area which would normally have the rear plate sitting at a proper height.
You can see by the side fender retaining strip..that it should line up!
Here is the LINK to M.L. WITH some photos to explain in better detail…
http://www.network54.com/Forum/110741/message/1197124593/some+anwsers....
Nick
After looking at your photos...I think what you did was quite obvious, in terms of the rear plate placement!
Since you eagerly removed the fenders you should've attached/adjusted the rear plate and the lower plate at that time….it looks too pushed in!
Since removing the back fenders, too...you removed an area which would normally have the rear plate sitting at a proper height.
You can see by the side fender retaining strip..that it should line up!
Here is the LINK to M.L. WITH some photos to explain in better detail…
http://www.network54.com/Forum/110741/message/1197124593/some+anwsers....
Nick
Kiyatkin
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 291 posts
Armorama: 284 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 08, 2007 - 03:27 AM UTC
Hey Guys, Looks at the pictures, they look pretty good. I must be an idiot. I still destroyed my hull and will stop torturing the kit now 
Dmitry
Dmitry
Jacques
Joined: March 04, 2003
KitMaker: 4,630 posts
Armorama: 4,498 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 08, 2007 - 07:29 AM UTC
Ok Dmitry, take a breath...
I agree, maybe you should do a nice, easy Tamiya T-55, have some fun, and then go back to the STZ. It is too important a T-34 version to so lightly toss aside! Also, it may be able to teach some advanced trouble soving skills in preparation of your future in scratchbuilding!
Seriously, can anyone comment on how ACCURATE the kit is, and what it's potential faults may be? I am going to be building one whether I like it or not so if there are fixes that NEED to be made, I would be gratefull not to be the gunea pig.
I agree, maybe you should do a nice, easy Tamiya T-55, have some fun, and then go back to the STZ. It is too important a T-34 version to so lightly toss aside! Also, it may be able to teach some advanced trouble soving skills in preparation of your future in scratchbuilding!
Seriously, can anyone comment on how ACCURATE the kit is, and what it's potential faults may be? I am going to be building one whether I like it or not so if there are fixes that NEED to be made, I would be gratefull not to be the gunea pig.
DAK66
Joined: April 28, 2006
KitMaker: 286 posts
Armorama: 120 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 08, 2007 - 08:27 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Dimitry,
After looking at your photos...I think what you did was quite obvious, in terms of the rear plate placement!
Since you eagerly removed the fenders you should've attached/adjusted the rear plate and the lower plate at that time….it looks too pushed in!
Since removing the back fenders, too...you removed an area which would normally have the rear plate sitting at a proper height.
You can see by the side fender retaining strip..that it should line up!
Here is the LINK to M.L. WITH some photos to explain in better detail…
http://www.network54.com/Forum/110741/message/1197124593/some+anwsers....
Nick
Thanks Nick for the link but i still think the kit doesn't fit right and i will leave it up to somebody who's into torture
.I was really wanting one of these i hope Dragon Rectifies the problem .
timroberts8
Joined: August 01, 2004
KitMaker: 105 posts
Armorama: 94 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 08, 2007 - 12:03 PM UTC
Hi
Your post caused a lot of panic, I nearly cancelled my order, lots of others seem to have. Thanks for posting anyway, as it alerts people to a potential problem.
Good that there is a solution.
Well actually now that Terry Ashleys review is on line, we can see the kit is a pile of crap.
CMD to the rescue? Please Bill bring out a corrected upper hull for what sounds to be a deserving winner of the Worst Kit of 2007 Award.
Your post caused a lot of panic, I nearly cancelled my order, lots of others seem to have. Thanks for posting anyway, as it alerts people to a potential problem.
Good that there is a solution.
Well actually now that Terry Ashleys review is on line, we can see the kit is a pile of crap.
CMD to the rescue? Please Bill bring out a corrected upper hull for what sounds to be a deserving winner of the Worst Kit of 2007 Award.
JimRosekelly
Joined: April 06, 2006
KitMaker: 3 posts
Armorama: 2 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 08, 2007 - 01:00 PM UTC
for any accuracy or clarity challenges the kit presents, reference material in T-34 Vol 2 from Wydawnictwo militaria helped me immeasurably when I built the CH model 41 STZ a few months ago. Basic dryfitting the parts revealed upper to lower hull fit problems that were readily solved by thinning the mating surface on the glacis plate. Turret fit issues are best dealt with by pressing stretched sprue into the joints and texturing to match after flowing liquid cement down the seam. I prefer Tamiya super thin. I just got my '42 today and am in love. In 1980 I slaved over a Tamiya T-34 model 1942 way too long to mod it to what essentially fell out of the box I got today.
Kiyatkin
Joined: September 15, 2005
KitMaker: 291 posts
Armorama: 284 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 08, 2007 - 02:27 PM UTC
Quoted Text
for any accuracy or clarity challenges the kit presents, reference material in T-34 Vol 2 from Wydawnictwo militaria helped me immeasurably when I built the CH model 41 STZ a few months ago. Basic dryfitting the parts revealed upper to lower hull fit problems that were readily solved by thinning the mating surface on the glacis plate. Turret fit issues are best dealt with by pressing stretched sprue into the joints and texturing to match after flowing liquid cement down the seam. I prefer Tamiya super thin. I just got my '42 today and am in love. In 1980 I slaved over a Tamiya T-34 model 1942 way too long to mod it to what essentially fell out of the box I got today.
There must have been no ref materials for this in STZ, except the Steve's Squadron book maybe in 1980. Good luck on the 1942 one. Please share progress.
Dmitry
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.