_GOTOBOTTOM
Яusso-Soviэt Forum
Russian or Soviet vehicles/armor modeling forum.
REVIEW
Trumpeter T-62
MCR
Visit this Community
Arizona, United States
Joined: July 15, 2004
KitMaker: 464 posts
Armorama: 407 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 26, 2009 - 12:13 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Well the only dimensional issue he corrected was the loaders hatch location. Everything else where minor fixes that one would have to add to the Tamiya T-55 as well, and his model looks very nice. Only if you were armed with a set of calipers and T-62 measurements would you notice the dimensional issues. What im trying to say is that the Trumpeter T-62, is for most modelers a fair representation of the T-62, with need for minor improvements(fuel lines etc)



Yes indeed, Steve is a very talented modeler, but the errors that he did not fix are not that minor (in terms of what we expect for what are expensive kits). The whole of the rear and much in the shape of the turret are noticeably off. Nor are any of these errors that easy to "fix".
I suppose that the real issue is: should we have to correct these things on a new kit?
And after all, by and large, it isn't any more expensive to make an accurate master (don't get me started on Trump and "their" masters!) than it is to do what Trump did and go half assed and not check references. As has been said, it's not like it's hard to come by good references on the T-62.

As far as Trump correcting the kit, again, I doubt it. It isn't just a few or even a single thing that needs to be fixed; it's the whole lower and upper hull that are off.
I do not think they'll do it.

Mark


BTW; I hope I'm not coming off here as overly confrontational. That's not my intention but I do think the conversation is worth having and that's why I've chimed in!
afv_rob
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: October 09, 2005
KitMaker: 2,556 posts
Armorama: 2,199 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 26, 2009 - 12:29 PM UTC
[


BTW; I hope I'm not coming off here as overly confrontational. That's not my intention but I do think the conversation is worth having and that's why I've chimed in! [/quote]

Not at all Mark, discussions like this (as long as they are kept constructive) are interesting and useful, and im just pleased sites like this and ML allow us to do so, a few other sites actively try to stop their members having lively debates such as this for fear of irritating the manufacturers.
Jacques
Visit this Community
Minnesota, United States
Joined: March 04, 2003
KitMaker: 4,630 posts
Armorama: 4,498 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 26, 2009 - 01:21 PM UTC
Tony - Tell your friend to go looking for the kits outside Trumpeter's doors or down by the shiping docks...That is why he is finding them in stores for $20...because they come direct from the company for about $9. I did not say finding them for $9 was easy.

My club, the MMFS (Minnesota Military Figure Society...misleading name as we are a AMPS chapter now as well) has done a lot of research into how we can have such a robust model building area (the Twin Cities area in particular) and yet have so few people who come to club meeting or who enter into shows (or even just show-offs). The answer - people want to be able to do what they want, for fun, without anyone telling them what they did wrong - period. They want to build like they did when they were a kid, and they will plop down HUNDREDS to do this. This comes from my experience as a on-line seller as well as from several hobby store employee interactions with customers.

As for companies aiming for bolt counters...then how come ALL of them have screwed up so many newer kits, DML being the most notorious? I have NEVER seen Tamiya indicate they would ever rework their T-72, or add missing details for their T-55. I think they are aiming for part numbers to justify the prices the importers charge, not to make us (in particular) happy.

I am VERY happy that people like Mr. Zaloga and Mr. Cortese stepped in to do the work they did...and not only did they do it in a very informative manner, they did it in a very helpfull and non-confrontational way. I enjoy the way they did their "critiques". I think that is the way to get the attention of and proper info to Trumpeter.

Criticism/critique is not the problem, but how we handle it. What did Trumpeter base their kit on, and if indeed the kit matches the prototype, what is it? How many years did Tamiya endure withering critique of their T-72 before we found out they based it on a real, if not numerically abundant, vehicle.

And as for Gayoue's outburst, I would prefer to hear from him what he meant instead of guessing. We know there are translation issues, wether that changes his comment or not. I have given my best guess, I will let him respond.

MCR
Visit this Community
Arizona, United States
Joined: July 15, 2004
KitMaker: 464 posts
Armorama: 407 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 26, 2009 - 03:15 PM UTC

Quoted Text

As for companies aiming for bolt counters...then how come ALL of them have screwed up so many newer kits, DML being the most notorious? I have NEVER seen Tamiya indicate they would ever rework their T-72, or add missing details for their T-55. I think they are aiming for part numbers to justify the prices the importers charge, not to make us (in particular) happy.



Come now, other than their half assed efforts with the T-34 (a subject that they have made clear is NOT near or dear to their hearts) what kits would you be referring to? The worst I've seen of their line over the last ten years, and not counting the STZ fiasco, was their initial production batch of the PzKpfw IV D and they went a long way in repairing their goofs on that subsequently.
Other critiques I've heard of them have mostly been along the lines of "it's not the version I wanted" and some small, and often very esoteric, details.
Saying that they include extra sprews just to jack the price up ignores the massive level of accurate detail that they've included in kits like their Tigers, Panthers, Pz IV's, et. al.

Tamiya? Why would they rework their T-72 when modern Russian/Soviet armor (and modern armor in general) sells so very poorly? (I don't like it either but it is a fact.)
But what of their other, newer kits? Some (very) minor omissions here and there but parts fit, scale, and shape they have absolutely nothing to apologize for.
If Trumps T-62 kits were even within shooting distance in those categories we'd have nothing whatsoever to complain about.
Trumpeter's biggest problem is that they do not do much by way of original research and depend heavily on the work of other companies to produce a kit.

Mark
Gundam-Mecha
Visit this Community
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: August 05, 2009
KitMaker: 1,019 posts
Armorama: 933 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 27, 2009 - 09:51 AM UTC
Does Voyagers new PE set for the Trumpy T-62 address any of the issues raised as problems with the kit?

I've only seen box art and am not sure how far the Voyager set address corrections for the fenders for example or engine deck. Could a "quick" fix be possible with this PE set, or would more extensive surgery be required?
TonyDz
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: December 13, 2009
KitMaker: 420 posts
Armorama: 419 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 27, 2009 - 12:22 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Does Voyagers new PE set for the Trumpy T-62 address any of the issues raised as problems with the kit?

I've only seen box art and am not sure how far the Voyager set address corrections for the fenders for example or engine deck. Could a "quick" fix be possible with this PE set, or would more extensive surgery be required?



I wish. No it just copies the mistakes. I could almost live with the hull being short, it's the way the fenders set that really mess the whole thing up for me. Like I said before, to the trained eye it really looks bad.
ppawlak1
Visit this Community
Victoria, Australia
Joined: March 14, 2006
KitMaker: 1,973 posts
Armorama: 1,843 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 27, 2009 - 12:43 PM UTC
Having got the kit when it was first released (and the day it was first available in Asia on the net), I decided that I'd get stuck into it and clean up the wheels and lower hull while I'm waiting on paint to dry on my other projects.

Wheels done, lower hull subassembled, time to add the caps to the wheels......and .........

Sprue G is missing !!!

I've sent a note off to Trumpeter to see how I can get a replacement sprue....

Lets see if Trumpeters customer service is up to scratch

I'm happy to build this kit OOTB.... but the fender issue does look like a worry !

Cheers

Paul
dsfraser
Visit this Community
Alberta, Canada
Joined: October 01, 2007
KitMaker: 172 posts
Armorama: 168 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 27, 2009 - 02:44 PM UTC
LONG LIVE MEDIOCRITY!

We should all have a group hug, and feel blessed that Trumpeter has brought us a T-62 model that isn't quite as bad as Tamiya's model from thirty years ago. Whoopy-ding.

"We are a minority, and our opinion does not matter."

In forty years of modelling, I don't think I have ever encountered anyone who wanted their next model to be WORSE than their last one.

Tamiya has an excuse — when their model came out, there was no reliable information on Soviet tanks. Moreover, at that time standards in the industry were much lower, as were modellers' expectations.

Trumpeter is getting slammed for their "T-62". They deserve to be slammed. They stepped in it, it reeks, and they're going to have to live with the stink. They have no excuses. There is abundant information available from the very same people who built the tank, and the Chinese have the manufacturing ability to produce a top-notch model of a T-62.

Instead, we get what we got, and will have to live with it. The quality of their models is a statement about how much they care about their product. They're not going to fix anything, and wailing about it will serve no more purpose than it would for the SKIF T-64. They don't care. Suck it up.

This model will still pass the ten-foot test (looks like a T-62 from ten feet back). All the people who don't care about accuracy will be happy. For me, this will be a useful addition to the spares box when it comes time to build my T-62.

The hull isn't that bad — it's a box, and easy to make from .040 styrene. That fixes problems with the location of the suspension and the angle of the rear hull. Many parts can be scraped off the kit to restore the details. The aftermarket guys will have a fiield day with this, and it will only be a matter of time before replacement fenders and turrets are out. At a price. This could end up costing...

Scott Fraser

-> Paul: Good luck with your missing sprue.
dsfraser
Visit this Community
Alberta, Canada
Joined: October 01, 2007
KitMaker: 172 posts
Armorama: 168 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 27, 2009 - 03:02 PM UTC

Quoted Text


... I could almost live with the hull being short, it's the way the fenders set that really mess the whole thing up for me. Like I said before, to the trained eye it really looks bad...



Aye, there's the rub! Once you see the errors, you can't "unsee" them. Maybe I have a different yardstick than others because I know Soviet tanks, but this looks 'off' and there it stands. I will never look at a model of a T-62 and NOT check to see if the builder made an attempt to fix anything, and if not that will automatically slide his model down several notches on my personal scale. It comes form studying T-34s — sometimes the only way to tell where a tank was built is to count the rivets on the back. (They're bolts, actually)

Someone other than Shakespeare said that ignorance was bliss.

Cheers
Scott Fraser

mikado
Visit this Community
Singapore / 新加坡
Joined: July 10, 2005
KitMaker: 329 posts
Armorama: 254 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 27, 2009 - 03:39 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Mark-Check this out if you think the Trumpeter kit cant be built into a good representation of a T-62 with little work



I hope Trumpeter fix the mistakes pointed out by the people who has seen the real vehicle.

But then again, I wonder if the real T-62 in Beijing that Trumpeter used as a reference, is the exactly the same as those in U.S. or the middle east? Maybe the T-62 in Beijing is somewhat a PLA modified one from the orignal for what ever reaons ....just wondering...

I am one who most likley will not ever get the see the real T-62 vehicle. I am guessing 90% of the folks to come to this forum is in the same category as me, or I could be toally wrong.

Anyway, I got one in Singapore at about US$25.

Rob, thanks for the link... After viewing what Steve Z has done, I thought I should have bought another 2 more boxes...but by the time I went back to the shop again, it was already all sold out. Got to wait for the next shippment...

Anyway, the detail on this un-build Trumpeter T-62 kits looks much better than the tamiya one that I build but put on hold for a while ...Waiting for the indi T-62 track from Trumpeter and see if it fits the old Tamiya kit...

Gaoyue, any idea if the T-62 in Beijing is a modified version of the original T-62 from the Russian factory?
ppawlak1
Visit this Community
Victoria, Australia
Joined: March 14, 2006
KitMaker: 1,973 posts
Armorama: 1,843 posts
Posted: Friday, January 22, 2010 - 02:00 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Having got the kit when it was first released (and the day it was first available in Asia on the net), I decided that I'd get stuck into it and clean up the wheels and lower hull while I'm waiting on paint to dry on my other projects.

Wheels done, lower hull subassembled, time to add the caps to the wheels......and .........

Sprue G is missing !!!

I've sent a note off to Trumpeter to see how I can get a replacement sprue....

Lets see if Trumpeters customer service is up to scratch

I'm happy to build this kit OOTB.... but the fender issue does look like a worry !

Cheers

Paul



Trumpeter have mailed me a replacement for the missing Sprue above...

I'm very happy about that !

Thanks Trumpeter !!!

Paul
ppawlak1
Visit this Community
Victoria, Australia
Joined: March 14, 2006
KitMaker: 1,973 posts
Armorama: 1,843 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 28, 2010 - 08:27 PM UTC
The Sprue from Trumpeter arrived today !

Great service Trumpeter....

Thanks !!
jimbrae
Visit this Community
Provincia de Lugo, Spain / España
Joined: April 23, 2003
KitMaker: 12,927 posts
Armorama: 9,486 posts
Posted: Friday, January 29, 2010 - 03:46 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I said 90% not because it is super accurate, but because that is what the average model builder woudl rate it, someone who does not care that the fenders do not slope or the fan housing is wrong. We represent the "tip of the spear", not the average.



Thanks Jacques . Yep, average modelers - well worth bearing it mind with some of the more extravagant comments that are getting thrown around this thread...
Jacques
Visit this Community
Minnesota, United States
Joined: March 04, 2003
KitMaker: 4,630 posts
Armorama: 4,498 posts
Posted: Friday, January 29, 2010 - 03:09 PM UTC
Glad to see my philosophy and the Sites philosophy match on this. Glad to help out.
CMOT
Staff MemberEditor-in-Chief
ARMORAMA
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 10,954 posts
Armorama: 8,571 posts
Posted: Friday, January 29, 2010 - 04:39 PM UTC
After reading all this and understanding some of it, are most of you saying that no T62 with these dimensions excists? and if that is correct what did Trumpeter measure and examine before making the masters for this kit. I cannot accept that any company makes an inaccurate model on purpose unless of course it has something to do with future releases and getting the most from the master, or heaven forbid a rug runner.

Having now read all that is wrong with this model could someone please take the same time to point out what is right with it.
Jacques
Visit this Community
Minnesota, United States
Joined: March 04, 2003
KitMaker: 4,630 posts
Armorama: 4,498 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 30, 2010 - 05:00 AM UTC
OK.

First off, it is 1/35 scale, not 1/32.5 scale.

Second, the turret seems to be accurate for a VERY early T-62, even the canted hatch. However, even if it is correct, it would be for very few actual tanks. But the overall turret shape is very close to the T-62 if not spot on, and this is a big deal because rendering the T-62's complex and conplicated turret shape is no easy thing. Even if minor changes, like dealing with the loaders hatch, have to be done, the shape fo the turret to start with is solid.

The lower is, in all honesty, only a problem if you want it to be. Anyone who is bothered by the fenders, for example, is probably going to replace them with brass anyhow. The angle of the rear plate to the deck is something that you have to go looking for, and if you are looking for that, you are not appreciating the rest of the kit.

Honestly, I do not know what Trumpeter based their kit on. I would assume it was based on a real tank, but for all we know it is one that the Chinese captured from the Russians in some border dispute, or it was a one-off museum piece...ala shades of the Tamiya T-72. I am going to assume that since things have been pointed out to them, the next versions will have corrections. Or not...they have not fixed the problems with the MAZ transporter, for example.

So there is a start. It is not a perfect kit and Trumpeter could have done better by NOT having these detail issues. BUT...it is also a kit that is light years better than the Tamiya T-62 in every aspect.
CMOT
Staff MemberEditor-in-Chief
ARMORAMA
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 10,954 posts
Armorama: 8,571 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 30, 2010 - 05:15 AM UTC
Thank you Jacques. So it is possible it is a reaonably accurate model of a very rare T62. That last statement sounds like some of the DML kits that have been let loose. rare, very rare
Jacques
Visit this Community
Minnesota, United States
Joined: March 04, 2003
KitMaker: 4,630 posts
Armorama: 4,498 posts
Posted: Sunday, January 31, 2010 - 04:39 AM UTC
OOB I would agree that this would be, in terms of accuracy, a very rare beast.

I would call this a bit more than reasonably accurate, but it is definately NOT perfect (and I feel the need to say that over and over to appease my seriously detail oriented fellow modellers).

If Trumpeter would just do a couple of small tweaks (in my mind anyhow, not sure how hard retooling a kit is) they would be hitting a home run with this kit. The lower hull (detail and angle of rear hull plate), the fenders, and the turret top (loaders coupola anyhow). Those changes are the only ones that really need to be dealt with, the rest is far too picky for the investment of their time.
 _GOTOTOP