Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
Hobbyboss DANA and Merkava IV out
arpikaszabo
Joined: February 13, 2006
KitMaker: 674 posts
Armorama: 637 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 30, 2010 - 08:02 PM UTC
We are modellers, this means that we can fix this inaccuracy with a razor saw and some stryrene with 2 hours of work. It is pointless to buy an Academy kit only for the lower hull.
metooshelah
#011
Joined: February 06, 2009
KitMaker: 1,507 posts
Armorama: 1,304 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 30, 2010 - 09:34 PM UTC
Quoted Text
In the eye of any manufacturer,no matter what the product is (a model kit or a swim suit),they see their products are mechandize,something to exchange money with.YOU are the one who is playing with the mechandize,not manufacturers.
They are doing business,playing with money,min output/max output is their holy job.Doing research means time consuming,time is money,With some instant resin kits available on the market,taking reference from it is the best way to do.Researching?Give me a break.
At the end of the day,no matter how 'inaccurate' it is,you are still going to buy it,right?
Making money is the only concern,manufacturers are doing business for living,they also have to pay money to their workers every day/month.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47207/thread/1293386944/Hobby+Boss+screw+ups---
Hey, I'm not denying that someone over there messed up big time, i'm just saying that i wouldn't change a kit right away, if i were the company. not without "proofs" anyway. I don't know about others, but I won't buy this kit, not until this error is corrected. I don't want to pay for a kit that later I have to "fix". perhaps if it was something small, but replacing positions for the wheels?...
hugohuertas
Joined: January 26, 2007
KitMaker: 1,024 posts
Armorama: 1,013 posts
Posted: Friday, December 31, 2010 - 05:35 AM UTC
I'll get one anyway on the next days, fix the suspension issue, and feel happy with a model that seems to be more accurate than the Academy one (which I already have, and be not so satisfied with) on the rest of the details
And we can keep ging and going on this tread...
I also read the topic at ML about the VK 1602 and other paper panzers, and really think that the whole thing is insane. Questioning the accuracy of a never built vehicle, based on -at the best- theorethical plans or blue prints???
People did not learn yet that what was supposed to be te revealed truth a decade ago late proved to be wrong?
I remember Mr. Zaloga -for whom I have the most respect- talking in one of his books of the early 80's about the soviet T-74 tank... Which ended being just another T-72 version, but for years many of us referred to it as a T-74 based on that info... until the error was discovered.
If some people prefer to get really anal with the level of "accuracy", I'm fine with that, but sometimes it seems pointless... and a bit sick.
Sorry, I went wide away from the main issues here!!! But sometimes I feel tired of reading only criticism about these manufacturers, and nothing about -for instance- Dragon's, Tamiya's or even AFV's mistakes...
And we can keep ging and going on this tread...
I also read the topic at ML about the VK 1602 and other paper panzers, and really think that the whole thing is insane. Questioning the accuracy of a never built vehicle, based on -at the best- theorethical plans or blue prints???
People did not learn yet that what was supposed to be te revealed truth a decade ago late proved to be wrong?
I remember Mr. Zaloga -for whom I have the most respect- talking in one of his books of the early 80's about the soviet T-74 tank... Which ended being just another T-72 version, but for years many of us referred to it as a T-74 based on that info... until the error was discovered.
If some people prefer to get really anal with the level of "accuracy", I'm fine with that, but sometimes it seems pointless... and a bit sick.
Sorry, I went wide away from the main issues here!!! But sometimes I feel tired of reading only criticism about these manufacturers, and nothing about -for instance- Dragon's, Tamiya's or even AFV's mistakes...
Petition2God
Joined: February 06, 2002
KitMaker: 1,526 posts
Armorama: 1,294 posts
Posted: Friday, December 31, 2010 - 09:50 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I'll get one anyway on the next days, fix the suspension issue, and feel happy with a model that seems to be more accurate than the Academy one (which I already have, and be not so satisfied with) on the rest of the details
And we can keep ging and going on this tread...
I also read the topic at ML about the VK 1602 and other paper panzers, and really think that the whole thing is insane. Questioning the accuracy of a never built vehicle, based on -at the best- theorethical plans or blue prints???
People did not learn yet that what was supposed to be te revealed truth a decade ago late proved to be wrong?
I remember Mr. Zaloga -for whom I have the most respect- talking in one of his books of the early 80's about the soviet T-74 tank... Which ended being just another T-72 version, but for years many of us referred to it as a T-74 based on that info... until the error was discovered.
If some people prefer to get really anal with the level of "accuracy", I'm fine with that, but sometimes it seems pointless... and a bit sick.
Sorry, I went wide away from the main issues here!!! But sometimes I feel tired of reading only criticism about these manufacturers, and nothing about -for instance- Dragon's, Tamiya's or even AFV's mistakes...
I share the same sentiment with you. Too much criticism too early. Let's wait and see what this HB Merk 4 looks like when we actually have it in our hands. We can take rulers and do all kinds of measurements then talk about more inaccuracies later.
Enough has been said about the kit based only on the sprue photos and instruction sheet photos on the internet.. Happy new year everyone!
entlim
Joined: May 02, 2008
KitMaker: 156 posts
Armorama: 50 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 01, 2011 - 12:11 AM UTC
Well, if it lookks like a duck................ 
stephane
Joined: October 10, 2005
KitMaker: 432 posts
Armorama: 429 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 01, 2011 - 06:46 AM UTC
Well i thinks some gentlemen here are very hard about academy's kit. Their MK4 isn't a bad kit, it just need detailling as i thinks HB's will need too.
HB's MK4 will need less detailling work but will need a major surgery, so...
Anyway, what a pleasure to speak about 2 differents plastic MK4!!!
Lucky we are...
Happy new year and happy modelling you all.
Regards from France
SH
HB's MK4 will need less detailling work but will need a major surgery, so...
Anyway, what a pleasure to speak about 2 differents plastic MK4!!!
Lucky we are...
Happy new year and happy modelling you all.
Regards from France
SH
ALBOWIE
Joined: February 28, 2006
KitMaker: 1,605 posts
Armorama: 1,565 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 01, 2011 - 10:11 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Anyway, what a pleasure to speak about 2 differents plastic MK4!!!
SH
Absolutely, we really have become spoilt regarding kits. When i think of the old Lindberg T55, Esci T72 etc that we are so much better served.
Unti lsomething better comes along it will do; it's better than nothing
Cheers
Al
hugohuertas
Joined: January 26, 2007
KitMaker: 1,024 posts
Armorama: 1,013 posts
Posted: Sunday, January 02, 2011 - 04:16 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text
Anyway, what a pleasure to speak about 2 differents plastic MK4!!!
SH
Absolutely, we really have become spoilt regarding kits. When i think of the old Lindberg T55, Esci T72 etc that we are so much better served.
Unti lsomething better comes along it will do; it's better than nothing
Cheers
Al
Ditto, my friend...
js2mtank
Joined: December 08, 2010
KitMaker: 10 posts
Armorama: 9 posts
Posted: Sunday, January 02, 2011 - 08:24 PM UTC
you can enjoy academy's
system
Joined: November 24, 2008
KitMaker: 364 posts
Armorama: 363 posts
Posted: Monday, January 03, 2011 - 08:02 AM UTC
Hi guys - i got my HB kit just after christmas courtesy of HLJ. Having had time to compare it to some high quality reference (the Tankograd and Desert Eagle books, plus some others) I have to say I'm disappointed. Yes, it's highly detailed, but there look to be a number of errors, not just the staggered suspension: the sprockets have too many lightening holes and too many teeth; the upper turret looks too flat; the mantlet mount for the 50 cal looks wrong, the gunners primary sight doors are oddly-shapped and there are a number of other minor details that don't seem to square with the reference. The are probably people on this forum better qualified to judge it's accuracy than I am, but so far it doesn't look great to me.
There are also some great features, like the idlers, the side skirts, the exhaust and the turret ball and chain, so it's a mixed bag. Some modellers will build it into a great replica, but overall the new Academy LIC kit looks like a better bet.
There are also some great features, like the idlers, the side skirts, the exhaust and the turret ball and chain, so it's a mixed bag. Some modellers will build it into a great replica, but overall the new Academy LIC kit looks like a better bet.
_Viper_
Joined: April 15, 2010
KitMaker: 163 posts
Armorama: 86 posts
Posted: Monday, January 03, 2011 - 09:12 AM UTC
Hello there,
I've been witnessing the debate grow to now three pages in the past days.
First I would just like to say that I am as well very glad we are speaking about two, pardon, three styrene Merkava IV (Academy now has two in the count).
So kudos to both HB and Academy for having listened to the plea.
Second, yeah, maybe the criticism is/was early,but we ought to recognize many had been waiting for the HB kit to appear, so expectations were big and the attention also.
Third: no, I will not buy the HB kit to build it. 35€ from HK + s&h is too much for the mistakes it has. I might consider it as a source of "detailing parts" for the Academy LIC kit (rear turret basket and rear hull baskets all with shimsonit covers, a more realistic ball and chain than Academy's, a more PE comprehensive set, some other small detail to scavenge), like a cheaper,styrene aftermarket omnipack that otherwise I would have to source mainly from Legend and I prefer the former medium over resin.
In any case, although I have already posted it in another thread early on, hereare some more images of the Academy LIC kit:
http://www.mmzone.co.kr/mda/docview.php?id=179
Enjoy.
I've been witnessing the debate grow to now three pages in the past days.
First I would just like to say that I am as well very glad we are speaking about two, pardon, three styrene Merkava IV (Academy now has two in the count).
So kudos to both HB and Academy for having listened to the plea.
Second, yeah, maybe the criticism is/was early,but we ought to recognize many had been waiting for the HB kit to appear, so expectations were big and the attention also.
Third: no, I will not buy the HB kit to build it. 35€ from HK + s&h is too much for the mistakes it has. I might consider it as a source of "detailing parts" for the Academy LIC kit (rear turret basket and rear hull baskets all with shimsonit covers, a more realistic ball and chain than Academy's, a more PE comprehensive set, some other small detail to scavenge), like a cheaper,styrene aftermarket omnipack that otherwise I would have to source mainly from Legend and I prefer the former medium over resin.
In any case, although I have already posted it in another thread early on, hereare some more images of the Academy LIC kit:
http://www.mmzone.co.kr/mda/docview.php?id=179
Enjoy.
 |
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.