Hobbyboss DANA and Merkava IV out
Colorado, United States
Joined: February 06, 2002
KitMaker: 1,526 posts
Armorama: 1,294 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 16, 2010 - 03:30 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text
But Gaoyue, can you please address the Hobbyboss Merk 4 Wheel issue? I hope it's not too late...
Which wheel?
You means half rubber half meatl?
Hello, Gaoyue,
No, Not the wheels themselves...
The Wheel POSITION and staggered/uneven lower hull issue that everyone is disappointed of... Please see the above posted comments by Mike, Jason, Matt, Robin, and Nichola. Happy modeling!
Warning: possible addiction may occur.
Currently on the bench: Maquette T-34/76
Anhui, China / 简体
Joined: July 22, 2008
KitMaker: 354 posts
Armorama: 339 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 16, 2010 - 03:58 PM UTC
Please prove Academy is right first
Alberta, Canada
Joined: February 18, 2003
KitMaker: 1,728 posts
Armorama: 1,629 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 16, 2010 - 05:09 PM UTC
It's not the 'wheels' in themselves, it is the position of the suspension mounts and arms which in turn affects the wheel position. The Merkava 4 does not use torsion bar suspension, therefore the suspension mounts and arms can be placed directly opposite of each other. ie symetrical, not staggered.
Jim
"Fire all weapons and open a hailing frequency for my victory yodel" - Zapp Brannigan
Anhui, China / 简体
Joined: July 22, 2008
KitMaker: 354 posts
Armorama: 339 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 16, 2010 - 07:02 PM UTC
Sorry James, I will told them change the suspension of Merkava 4
Lebanon
Joined: March 05, 2009
KitMaker: 661 posts
Armorama: 652 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 16, 2010 - 07:08 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Sorry James, I will told them change the suspension of Merkava 4
so we have a new release date?
#011
Jerusalem, Israel
Joined: February 06, 2009
KitMaker: 1,507 posts
Armorama: 1,304 posts
Posted: Friday, December 17, 2010 - 02:10 AM UTC
somewhat embarrassing for HB (and god knows that i've been expecting their release ever since they announced their intentions), but it's good to see that they will make improvements. hopefully this won't delay release date too much (guys, im gonna be needing 1 of each of the series, so do a good job
)
George: "If we do happen to step on a mine, Sir, what do we do ?"
Blackadder: "Normal procedure, Lieutenant, is to jump 200 feet in the air and scatter oneself over a wide area."
Alabama, United States
Joined: January 26, 2006
KitMaker: 1,381 posts
Armorama: 1,347 posts
Posted: Friday, December 17, 2010 - 02:27 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Detail on the kit does look good, but Michael Mass pointed out what appears to be a major error over on IDF in scale: if the drawings in the instructions are correct, then the road wheel locations on the kit are staggered from one side to the other (like those on a torsion bar suspension). They should be spaced evenly on both sides.
Mike
Well, that's unfortunate indeed. And kind off surprising, there are plenty of very good photos of the suspension on even a casual Google search.
Oh, and maybe someday the IDF site will accept new meembers?! Always rubs it in when I browse that site. Sigh.
Matt
Al Qahirah, Egypt / لعربية
Joined: July 23, 2004
KitMaker: 6,856 posts
Armorama: 6,363 posts
Posted: Friday, December 17, 2010 - 04:22 AM UTC
I doubt they'll "recall"
the ones that are already in-stock and being sold at the shops in Japan!
Maybe if they were planning another version, they might fix the error on that one.
Shame that a mistake like this ruins an otherwise good model.
Hisham
Colorado, United States
Joined: February 06, 2002
KitMaker: 1,526 posts
Armorama: 1,294 posts
Posted: Friday, December 17, 2010 - 07:10 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Well, that's unfortunate indeed. And kind off surprising, there are plenty of very good photos of the suspension on even a casual Google search.Matt
I couldn't find good photos of the suspension showing the evenly spaced wheels actually. Anyone have photos of the real vehicle flipped over or showing the wheel positions underneath?
Thanks for the reply Gaoyue. Please update us with any changes on the new kit.
Happy modeling!
Warning: possible addiction may occur.
Currently on the bench: Maquette T-34/76
RobinNilsson
TOS ModeratorStockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,693 posts
Armorama: 5,562 posts
Posted: Friday, December 17, 2010 - 10:05 AM UTC
Maybe we should hold our horse a little:
I checked some images found on the internet and my impression is that there is a slight difference in the road wheel positions on the left and the right side (staggering) but maybe not so much as in the HobbyBoss kit. Hard to tell since I don't have a completed kit to compare with ...
http://www.militarymodelling.com/news/article.asp?a=4088 Check the positions of roadwheel nr 2 compared to the sideskirts on the left and the right side (second and third image from the bottom of the album)
http://www.militarymodelling.com/albums/member_album.asp?a=4018 I also found some other images where there seemed to be a slight difference in the angle at which the track goes upward in front of the first roadwheel.
http://www.militarymodelling.com/sites/1/images/member_albums/1461/glplas12aug08_004.jpg http://www.militarymodelling.com/sites/1/images/member_albums/1461/glplas12aug08_003.jpg Private message sent to Gaoyue.
/ Robin
In memory of Al Superczynski:
"Build what YOU want, the way YOU want to....
and the critics will flame you every time"
Alberta, Canada
Joined: February 18, 2003
KitMaker: 1,728 posts
Armorama: 1,629 posts
Posted: Friday, December 17, 2010 - 12:16 PM UTC
Hmm, I dunno. Keeping in mind that the photographs are taken from different positions (one slightly to the front and one slightly to the rear) the distance seems pretty close, especially the last road wheel to the idler wheel. The center of the first road wheel is roughly in the middle of the second skirt section. I suppose there's lots of variables at play: tension of tracks/position of idler wheel, prototype vehicle. I guess the best pic would be one from the lower front that shows the position of the front suspension mounts.
Jim
"Fire all weapons and open a hailing frequency for my victory yodel" - Zapp Brannigan
Hauts-de-Seine, France
Joined: October 10, 2005
KitMaker: 432 posts
Armorama: 429 posts
Posted: Friday, December 17, 2010 - 10:28 PM UTC
Hello
Since the hull sides are differents i thinks that you can't use side skirts as references. The gun should be a better reference if the turret is at 0°!
It's clearly shows that the angle used by photographer is far from being the same in these two photos (not sure about my english i hopes you'll understand) so it's impossible to judge!
I don't knows if academy's lower hull is totaly right but HB one is suspect (not as usual
)
When Michael Mass says it's wrong , i guess he knows it far from us.
Too bad, i planned to get the HB's kit (i hopes their tracks are more accurate than Academy's) now i'll wait their MK4 LIC and hopes a retooled lower hull.
just my 2 cents of Euros
Stéphane
Roma, Italy
Joined: April 15, 2010
KitMaker: 163 posts
Armorama: 86 posts
Posted: Friday, December 17, 2010 - 11:35 PM UTC
Found this pic on the internet whoch should somehow clear the issue on wheel staggering:
http://ljplus.ru/img/s/h/shaon/merkava4.jpgTaking into account the distance the pic was taken from, they do not look much staggered to me.
On top of that I agree with Stephane that Mr. Mass definately knows what he is talking about (I think he also helped HB develop their kit, too bad they probably forgot to ask about this little detail...).
I also went to look back at old threads and found this:
https://armorama.kitmaker.net/forums/154904#1298244they do not look staggered in their development...I wonder what made HB change their mind...or maybe there is hope?
Ciao!
Georgia, United States
Joined: November 21, 2002
KitMaker: 1,966 posts
Armorama: 1,635 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 18, 2010 - 03:26 AM UTC
Quoted Text
On top of that I agree with Stephane that Mr. Mass definately knows what he is talking about (I think he also helped HB develop their kit, too bad they probably forgot to ask about this little detail...).
No, unfortunately Michael did not help HB with their Merk 4 kit, it wasn't from lack of trying though. Michael said he sent several messages to them but never received an answer (maybe due to a language barrier
). And yes, as the curator of the Armor Museum at Latrun, and someone who has spent a large part of his life in the IDF, involved with armor, Michael definitely knows what he is talking about.
Best,
Mike
Jerusalem, Israel
Joined: May 16, 2007
KitMaker: 133 posts
Armorama: 130 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 18, 2010 - 05:22 AM UTC
Dear friends,
The atttempts of several members here to try and justify the HB kit with the different location of the arms, is obvious and according to the urge of modelers to reaserch and find the desired details.
What I do not understand is why there is a need to change the hull so dramaticaly from the "old" Academy kit?
In my forum I've posted some drawings and photos that might clear the point.
I simply do not know how to upload pictures to the Armorama forum (can somebody be kind and explain?) (
[email protected]).
look here:
http://idf-in-scale.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2153&start=10If somebody want, he can upload the pictures from idf-in-scale here.
Thank you Mike, Jim and Stephane for your trust and support.
Happy modeling
Michael Mass
Georgia, United States
Joined: November 21, 2002
KitMaker: 1,966 posts
Armorama: 1,635 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 18, 2010 - 07:29 AM UTC
Colorado, United States
Joined: February 06, 2002
KitMaker: 1,526 posts
Armorama: 1,294 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 18, 2010 - 07:47 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Please prove Academy is right first
Thanks Michael and Kelly! Gaoyue, there is a clear proof.
Happy modeling!
Warning: possible addiction may occur.
Currently on the bench: Maquette T-34/76
RobinNilsson
TOS Moderator Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,693 posts
Armorama: 5,562 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 19, 2010 - 10:46 PM UTC
Thanks for the extremely valuable images to prove beyond doubt that the wheels are not staggered. The images that I managed to find didn't convince me totally that there was no stagger whatsoever and I considered it counterproductive for all of us if HB were to get it wrong again by not checking
with those who really know. If HB were to take our words for the truth and it causes them to make an expensive mistake it would erode our credibility.
Now we have the data to finally prove the truth (and HB should fix the chassis)
Those images also provide enough information to ba able to correct the
kit, shouldn't be too much work for the experienced modeller ;-)
Just looking at pictures on the internet can lead to incorrect conclusions, witness my previous post ...
Regards / Robin
In memory of Al Superczynski:
"Build what YOU want, the way YOU want to....
and the critics will flame you every time"
Hauts-de-Seine, France
Joined: October 10, 2005
KitMaker: 432 posts
Armorama: 429 posts
Posted: Monday, December 20, 2010 - 12:49 AM UTC
Normally HB has allready the accurate lower hull since the first photos of the test MK4 showed it with accurate belly armour.
the problem for HB is the kits that are now on the market. Will they modify the second batch of kit or just wait a future MK4LIC to fix the error?
To be continue
Odessa, Ukraine / Україна
Joined: December 08, 2010
KitMaker: 17 posts
Armorama: 16 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 - 09:17 AM UTC
New Jersey, United States
Joined: March 15, 2002
KitMaker: 1,745 posts
Armorama: 1,483 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 - 10:35 AM UTC
The reason Hobby Search has the kit so expensive is duty Japan places on Toy products coming out of other countries. Nothing to worry about as seen with pricing on other items...the lower hull issue is another ball of wax all together!
Jerusalem, Israel
Joined: May 16, 2007
KitMaker: 133 posts
Armorama: 130 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 - 07:43 PM UTC
Shalom Igor,
In the image you posted of the anti-slip texture by HB, you can see in the left, a hinge that do not connected to any foldable part. I mean, there is no engraved folding line... Starnge
Michael Mass
Odessa, Ukraine / Україна
Joined: December 08, 2010
KitMaker: 17 posts
Armorama: 16 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 - 10:18 PM UTC
Oh, the Chinese, the Chinese...................
Al Qahirah, Egypt / لعربية
Joined: July 23, 2004
KitMaker: 6,856 posts
Armorama: 6,363 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 - 11:11 PM UTC
There's two of those hinges.. another one under the "glare" of the plastic bag. I guess they just had to release it by a certain date, or something.. they just messed up a great looking kit with some silly mistakes
Oh well, maybe the next variant they do will be better.
Hisham
RobinNilsson
TOS Moderator Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,693 posts
Armorama: 5,562 posts
Posted: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 - 12:11 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Shalom Igor,
In the image you posted of the anti-slip texture by HB, you can see in the left, a hinge that do not connected to any foldable part. I mean, there is no engraved folding line... Starnge
Michael Mass
So the big question is: Should the hinges be removed or a folding line engraving added? Should there be some kind of folding part or hatch in this area?
Igor: Where would this piece of plastic end up on the finished kit?
Could you scan that part of the instruction sheet nad mark the location so that someone who knows the vehicle (Micahel Mass) could say if the hinges should be removed or a hatch/door/folding part be marked in that location.
Regards / Robin
In memory of Al Superczynski:
"Build what YOU want, the way YOU want to....
and the critics will flame you every time"
