I have just returned to modeling after something like a 20-year hiatus. My first model was a Tamiya Panther ... went together perfectly. My second pick was Cyberhobby's T-34/76 STZ Mod. 1942 (kit 6388) and I'm having all kinds of trouble. Some of it can be chalked up to inexperience, but the poor fit of many pieces surprised me. Halfway through the build, I read the review on Perth Military Modelling and realized the kit is mediocre. So there are my questions for the Soviet armor buffs out there: 1) Which T-34 kit would you recommend for a novice? The manufacturer doesn't matter and neither does the model (although I have sweet spot for the T-34/85. 2) How would you rate the quality of the Dragon / Cyberhobby kits relative to Tamiya? I'm talking recent kits to recent kits.

Well, Dragon's T-34/85 with bed spring armour is pretty sweet.

Most of the Dragon (not Cyberhobby) T-34s go together well, and PMMS is really good for identifying where the Tweaks are in each kit. If you're not hung up on absolute accuracy, they can be built pretty much OOB.

AFV clubs T-34s are getting a good reputation as well, although I have not actually built one.

As for recent Dragon/Cyberhobby quality to Tamiya - I'm assuming you mean overall quality, as Tamiya does not have any recent T-34 kits. I find that Tamiya kits go together well, while Dragon/Cyberhobby have finer detail, but persist in using multiple pieces to build something that Tamiya would do in 2. At times, I find this can be really aggravating.

Overall, the choice of the subject tends to be my final decision maker. I like T-34s, therefore I'll pick up Dragons kits as they are newer tools and much more accurate than the old Tamiya kit. If Tamiya were to do a new tool T-34 tomorrow, I would probably grab a stack of them.

Thanks for the input - very helpful. I had noticed the kit with bedspring armor ... I'm torn about building it now and waiting until I've improved a bit. I guess I could make it twice. Anyway, thanks for the info ... I didn't realize Tamiya didn't have a recent T-34 kit on the market. I'm also amused to find that after half a build I already have the same impression of Cyberhobby / Dragon (good detail, but unnecessarily complicated to assemble). One last question for you: Do you see a difference in quality between Cyberhobby and Dragon kits? Just curious because your response hinted at that.

Honestly, you picked one of the worst kits DML has done in the last ten years (and in fact one of their worst period). Upper hull fit poor, detail poor, just a poor kit.

Any other DML T-34 will be OK (lots of potential for detailing).
AFV Club's new T-34s are less expensive but not as accurate, though you get an interior which a lot of folks like.
Tamiya make a nice 1/48th scale Factory 112 "flat" turret T-34.

As to the Tamiya vs. DML debate; Tamiya's molding and ease of assembly is still years beyond DML's.
DML tends to include more "detail" but very often in places where it makes absolutely no difference when the kit is completely assembled.
As mentioned DML will often use several parts to create an assembly that Tamiya may do with just one. Sometimes this results in a more accurate part and sometimes it's just needless extra work.
You may see someone saying that DML's Tiger I kits are better than Tamiya's. No doubt about it, but they are also something like ten years newer.
Thing is, if you add a few PE details, like engine deck screens, it can be tough to tell a Big T kit from DML unless you know exactly what to look for.
The same goes for the two companies Panther kits. DML's are the more accurate but unless you know about the problem with Tamiya's wheels, it's hard to tell them apart when they're put together and painted.

Make no mistake, I like DML's work (well, except for their T-34's all of which leave something to be desired in the detail department). Their newer kits can be spectacular (take a look at their Pz IV H), but in terms of molding technology (sharpness of detail) and ease of assembly, Tamiya beat's them in my far from humble opinion.

Mark

Ditto what Mark said on Tamiya's ease of assembly.

I'll build a Dragon kit when I feel the overwhelming desire to fiddle with small bits.

I'll build a Tamiya kit when I actually want to get the kit finished in a reasonable period of time....

Fantastic stuff, guys. Thank you.

Oh - one last question, if you're still listening. Any thoughts on the Tamiya JS-2 Model 1944 ChKZ (kit #35289)? It got a good review on the PMMS, so I thought it might be a good way to recover from the T-34/76 STZ debacle.

The Tamiya JS-2 is an excellent kit. If you can find one (my LHS always seemes to sell the "last one, this shipment" just before I come through the door!) I'd say have fun building it.

Scott Espin did an in-box review of the kit last year, and you can find it here.

HTH.

-YL

Well..

Indeed, Mark is right --- of ALL the DML T-34, you got the one that sucks bigtime. The upper hull is a waste of plastic. The roof of the fighting compartment is about 2-3mm too long, and that tnrows the fit of everything else out the window.

My own opinion is that the best DML T-34 is #6452, for the early Zavod 112 T-34. #6479 is not too bad, although I thing the wheels are poorly moulded.

Next would be #6418, which is for a 1941 KhPZ T-34, included cast or welded turrets, and has all the photoetch and string and other bits DML/CH now included in their T-34s (but left out of #6205, which this kit replaces.)

For a T-34-85, #6266 is a good rendition of a 1944 UTZ (Zavod №183) with bedspring armour, and #6319 includes later cast roadwheels suitable for a tank built in 1945.

I have the AFV kits too for the T-34-76 (Zavod №112) and T-34-85 (Zavod №174). The clear parts are a liability, but the interior parts are nice to have. (The interiors are not completely accurate, but are a goood starting point.) The additional parts make for complex engineering, and I haven't built either, so will reserve judgement on whose approach is better.

In general terms, and a returning modeller, there are a few things to know.

Tamiya remains king. Their engineering and moulding is unmatched, despite the pretenders.

It seems some years ago modellers were complaining about "not enough parts", which led to a rather unhappy situation where parts counts soared, and we got a few kits from DML, TriStar and other with an absolutely stupid number of parts --- 1462 parts in a Pz.Kpfw.IV (#6264)? Year, right. It's gotten better, but there are still way too many parts is some kits. It's one thing to include them when they look better, but parts for the sale of parts is silly.

You started asking about T-34s. Some things don't change. There are still precious few good kits of important Soviet weaponry, despite the years. Tamiya's IS-2 is the best of them, and there is reason to believe their ISU-152 will be just as good. The DML T-34s I listed are good, as is there (revised) SU-100. The Trumpeter KV-1s and KV-2s are also sound models, if not as sophisticated as others.

Minart's SU-76 is hard to build, and like their T-70M has inaccurate suspension, with tracks and roadwheels that are noticably too narrow. There is still no good T-26. The RPM T-50 and Techmod T-60 are relatively decent, as are the Eastern Express (now ARK) armoured cars. Avoid the Zvezda T-60 and BT-5 at all costs. The Eastern Express BTs are better, but still need lots of TLC. The Zvezda GAZ trucks are good --- the ZiS-5 from EE is an old ALAN model, and is pretty lumpy. The ZiS-5v is much better, and old TOKO mould.

There are lots of very BAD kits of Soviet armour. There are still a few good ones, so do your research before you buy, and avoid the dogs. If you can --- it isn't always easy the way they have reappeared in so many boxes.

HTH

Scott Fraser

Scott, I'm going to open a can of worms, so please bare it with me... Any reason why Miniarm released a replacement turret for the Tamiya JS-2? This turret has been loitering on Ebay (where I discovered it) for quite some time already... I noticed slight diferences between the two..

Well there is always the Italeri/Zvesda/ Maquette T-34&JS-2 kits to consider. Yes they need new tracks,but affordable replacements are out there. Older but accurate and good platforms for scratch and trials.(Another can of worms,eh? )
Cheers!
Rick

I also agree, you really picked the worst T-34 kit from DML/Cyberhobby.

I would do a somewhat different comparison of the companies:

Tamiya is about buildability. They put engineering above detail, even their "new" IS-II has some detail issues. But they build up great and if you want more detail, you can get more detail.

DML is about fine detail. They are the nut/bolt geek lovers. If you want to have a lot of fine detail included in the kit, DML is a good place to start. HOWEVER, they do tend to make some mistakes in their rush to put out a kit, some of them rather collosal...like the Cyberhobby T-34 you are beating on.

Trumpeter is a mixed bag. They seemt o be running the middle road between detail and buildability. They also are the ones who are willing to take "risks" on kit subject. They can make some mistakes, and sometimes detail is soft, but they offer good kits. They offer enough in the kit to build something respectable without aftermarket or extra work, but often they can use something aftermarket, Their KV series is a good example. Also, Trumpeter is the company that has improved the most over the last 7 years...with about 3 phases of kits, from just above toylike (T-55's) to moderately nice (IS-3), to most modern (T-62).

What will be fun for you depends on what part of the hobby is "fun" for you. So...

If you enjoy painting most, I would recomend Tamiya's IS-II.

If you enjoy building "challenges" the most, I would recomend any of the T-34's mentioned above OR Trumpeter's 1/16 scale T-34's.

If you want a kit that you need to do some work on to bring it up to standard, a "modifier's" type of build, which it seems you are not, then the kit you have is a good one to work with. There are several places to help with info on what needs fixin'.

NOW -as to the Miniarm IS-II turret. It was developed, along with the roadwheels, for the DML kits. AND IS-II turrets had some discrepancies, even among the same variants, depending on the plant the turret was made in. I am not sure that it would really "upgrade" the Tamiya kit other than to add a few small details that are not present on the Tamiya turret, certainly nothing to justify the expense.

Hi

My apologises in advance to any modeller who has shown their built example of the Tamiya JS2 over here on armorama but if you fancy this kit and want to see how well it can be built take a look at this example done by Rick Lawler shown over on planetarmor.com

Rick's JS2

I managed to buy a Tamiya JS2 off of ebay and got it for a very good price. I think the shop price is a bit too high since the rises introduced this year but if compared to the price of kits by other makers then its not far off the mark. I think they are all too much these days but thats another debate

Hope you get the JS2 and if you want to push the boat out on extras get the replacement barrel from Aber. I know I will.

Barrel review on PMMS

Alan

Now Jacques, in fairness to DML, The T-34 kit #6452 (early 1942 Krasnoe Sormovo) is actually very good, builds straight out of the box into an accurate T-34, even for the detail freaks. It HAS the early front swing-arms the KhPZ T-34 kits (6096, 6205, 6418) lack, it has the correct p.e. fret to match the engine deck screen, has individual links of the correct type (close, anyway - they're an optional pattern) and really only lacks the wierd claw tow hooks at the rear. There are small changes that will tie in to specific production dates, but on the whole it is their best T-34 by quite a margin.

Mark's comment about ALL of DML's T-34s having annoying shortcomings and omissions is too true. However, from the box, this one (#6452) and their UTZ T-34-85 (#6266) are the ones that need the least additional work. Either can be tackled without trepidation.

Enjoy.

I was referring to kit 6388 from Cyberhobby. I bought it early and DML did a BAD job on it, both onthe correct detail AND on the buildability.

I agree that the other DML T-34 kits are much better ( I have almost all the T-34's).

But kit 6388 still has me pissed at DML...

Ach, so... alles klar.
6452 is sublime.
6388 is ridiculous.
So geht DML.

Cheers
Scott

Thanks Jacques, in all honesty I haven't been catching up with the reviews on Tamiya's JS-2 (only briefly at PMMS). I had DML's kit with Tamiya's JS-3 entire lower suspension sprue spares so until I wasn't keen on another M until I finished this one. I believe you right on the Miniart set - I relooked at the set on ebay and realised that it was the seller who was trying to push the set for the Tamiya kit with his header (it wasn't mentioned on the box). I had to ask. :-) And since you've brought up detail discrepancies between plants, in that case I'll be keen to get the Tamiya kit when I'm ready to (after I get rid / or built the DML kit with all the updates).

Thanks Alan for the build up link, I'll head over there right after this for the eye candies.

Hi

Glad to help. Yes, only finished build images though, still superb. Sam Dwyer also did a vbench blog on his one, it's not complete but may be of interest as it has some additional detail added to the Tamiya kit. Hopefully he'll finish it to his usual high standard soon.

Sam Dwyer's JS-2

Alan