Link to Item
If you have comments or questions please post them here.
Thanks!
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
REVIEW
Perfect Scale Modern US Fuel Cans
bill_c
Campaigns Administrator
Joined: January 09, 2008
KitMaker: 10,553 posts
Armorama: 8,109 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 03, 2011 - 05:17 AM UTC
Bill Cross reviews Perfect Scale Modellbau's US Fuel Cans.
Link to Item
If you have comments or questions please post them here.
Thanks!
Link to Item
If you have comments or questions please post them here.
Thanks!
seb43
Joined: August 30, 2005
KitMaker: 2,315 posts
Armorama: 2,158 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 03, 2011 - 06:25 AM UTC
Dear Bill
95% and the best modern jerrycans on the market, it is an overstatement. I will definetely score 65%~55% with the comment normal casting quality.
On your photo, i can see resin bolb under all the handles even for the water ones when only one handle is present.
You can find better ones on the market to name a few (without ranking): Voyager , ET, Real Model, PAM.
You should change your conclusion.
Cheers
Seb
95% and the best modern jerrycans on the market, it is an overstatement. I will definetely score 65%~55% with the comment normal casting quality.
On your photo, i can see resin bolb under all the handles even for the water ones when only one handle is present.
You can find better ones on the market to name a few (without ranking): Voyager , ET, Real Model, PAM.
You should change your conclusion.
Cheers
Seb
bill_c
Campaigns AdministratorJoined: January 09, 2008
KitMaker: 10,553 posts
Armorama: 8,109 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 03, 2011 - 07:13 AM UTC
Quoted Text
95% and the best modern jerrycans on the market, it is an overstatement.
Hi, Seb. Reviews are subjective by nature.
Quoted Text
On your photo, i can see resin bolb under all the handles even for the water ones when only one handle is present.
They are all fuel cans if I'm not mistaken. The photos are perhaps not indicative of the quality.
Quoted Text
You can find better ones on the market to name a few (without ranking): Voyager , ET, Real Model, PAM.
You should change your conclusion.
I stand by my conclusion. But I welcome your disagreement on this.
Can I tempt you into writing a review of one of the other products you feel are better?
seb43
Joined: August 30, 2005
KitMaker: 2,315 posts
Armorama: 2,158 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 03, 2011 - 07:51 AM UTC
Dear Bill
Please dont miss understand me but, based on the picture, you clearly need to drill holes underneath the handles for all jerrycans, then you need to glue the cap.
You can find better rendition of these jerrycans on the market.
I do agree that a comparative review section need to be created as seen on other site.
i hope that Jim can solve this out.
Cheers
Seb
Please dont miss understand me but, based on the picture, you clearly need to drill holes underneath the handles for all jerrycans, then you need to glue the cap.
You can find better rendition of these jerrycans on the market.
I do agree that a comparative review section need to be created as seen on other site.
i hope that Jim can solve this out.
Cheers
Seb
junglejim
Joined: February 18, 2003
KitMaker: 1,728 posts
Armorama: 1,629 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 03, 2011 - 08:02 AM UTC
Quoted Text
You can find better ones on the market to name a few (without ranking): Voyager , ET, Real Model, PAM.
And even then I suspect they are all copies of Dragon or AFV Club ones.
I just got the Black Dog LAV-III LORIT conversion and they went and copied the Trumpeter 2 handled one
.Jim
Frenchy
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 03, 2011 - 08:12 AM UTC
I wonder how J's Work new plastic fuel & water cans do compare to all these resin counterparts...
https://armorama.kitmaker.net/news/10050
Frenchy
https://armorama.kitmaker.net/news/10050
Frenchy
seb43
Joined: August 30, 2005
KitMaker: 2,315 posts
Armorama: 2,158 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 03, 2011 - 08:22 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I wonder how J's Work new plastic fuel & water cans do compare to all these resin counterparts...
https://armorama.kitmaker.net/news/10050
Frenchy
And thanks to Frenchy, I forgot this new producer.....
bill_c
Campaigns AdministratorJoined: January 09, 2008
KitMaker: 10,553 posts
Armorama: 8,109 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 03, 2011 - 08:53 AM UTC
There are many new items on the market or coming. Generally speaking, no styrene jerrycan can compare to a resin one, since they invariably must have two or more parts, while resin can be seamless-- except for the pour plug down the back on these, but sanding off that "seam" will not affect the look or accuracy of the item, whereas seams on styrene jerrycans often can't be fully excised.
I think it's a waste of time for us to speculate on who might've copied whom. 1-1 scale versions of these cans can be purchased over the Internet, so coming up with a viable replica isn't the same as getting the specs for an MBT.
Seb, I actually gave a shout-out in the review about this. I LIKE that feature, because it gives more definition to the separation between cap and body. But to each his own.
Armorama has a policy against doing comparative reviews, it's just not who we are. But I encourage you to write a review, either about this set or about a jerrycan you feel is superior. I never pretend to be the Final Word on any topic, and welcome dissenting viewpoints.
I think it's a waste of time for us to speculate on who might've copied whom. 1-1 scale versions of these cans can be purchased over the Internet, so coming up with a viable replica isn't the same as getting the specs for an MBT.
Quoted Text
... you need to glue the cap.
Seb, I actually gave a shout-out in the review about this. I LIKE that feature, because it gives more definition to the separation between cap and body. But to each his own.
Quoted Text
I do agree that a comparative review section need to be created as seen on other site. I hope that Jim can solve this.
Armorama has a policy against doing comparative reviews, it's just not who we are. But I encourage you to write a review, either about this set or about a jerrycan you feel is superior. I never pretend to be the Final Word on any topic, and welcome dissenting viewpoints.
junglejim
Joined: February 18, 2003
KitMaker: 1,728 posts
Armorama: 1,629 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 03, 2011 - 02:34 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Generally speaking, no styrene jerrycan can compare to a resin one, since they invariably must have two or more parts, while resin can be seamless-- except for the pour plug down the back on these, but sanding off that "seam" will not affect the look or accuracy of the item, whereas seams on styrene jerrycans often can't be fully excised.
But one thing to keep in mind is that the real ones, being plastic as well, have mold seams too so this might actually make plastic kit ones more desirable, unless the resin ones keep the seam.
Jim
jimbrae
Joined: April 23, 2003
KitMaker: 12,927 posts
Armorama: 9,486 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 03, 2011 - 08:38 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I do agree that a comparative review section need to be created as seen on other site.
Why exactly? Because another Site does it we should follow THEIR example? We've spent a lot of effort working on the 'evolution' of THIS Network (a process which still continues by the way) our success is unarguable. That's not to say we can't improve things, we could and, we will...
Comparative Reviews can be useful but it's also one of the best ways I know of pissing manufacturers off REAL quickly. Reviews are NOT 100% accurate, they are ALWAYS subjective add in comparison of two products and the problems are multiplied.
Quoted Text
I think it's a waste of time for us to speculate on who might've copied whom. 1-1 scale versions of these cans can be purchased over the Internet, so coming up with a viable replica isn't the same as getting the specs for an MBT.
Exactly. This 'he copied that model' is becoming one of the great depressives and turn-offs on the 'Net at the moment.
Oh and if anyone wants to see an exercise in Utopianism (written no doubt by those who have NEVER Reviewed) check out the 'current' indignation on ML. So much of it is so ill-informed, it has actually become quite funny...
Citizinsane
Joined: July 27, 2006
KitMaker: 463 posts
Armorama: 450 posts
KitMaker: 463 posts
Armorama: 450 posts
Posted: Friday, November 04, 2011 - 12:13 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Dear Bill
Please dont miss understand me but, based on the picture, you clearly need to drill holes underneath the handles for all jerrycans, then you need to glue the cap.
You can find better rendition of these jerrycans on the market.
I do agree that a comparative review section need to be created as seen on other site.
i hope that Jim can solve this out.
Cheers
Seb
Hey Seb,
you have a point there, I too find those 'blob's (actually more like a thin film) annoying, anyway, those 'plugs' are there for a reason. they were put there on purpose to enshure quality. which means that if you leave the gaps between the handles an cans open the molds are more likely to break. which then looks like this:
speaking of molding issues, the more often a mold needs to be changed the more expensive becomes the model... and btw. roughly 6 bucks ain't too much for a 40 piece resin set
as for the seperate caps, things like these have to be cast seperate to make shure the details stay nice and clean... also these caps do have details no other manufacturer depicted yet... (and personally I'd gladly pay 6€ for 20 accurate caps to pimp my dragon, voyager or whatsoever jerry cans
)here's a closeup showing all the details on these cans...
Jim,
regarding the seam-line, IMO the seams on injection molded cans are nowhere near the real deal, they usually show an inwards slope instead of an elevated line. also when scaled down these lines are not visible at all. adittionally think of all the dipsticks who would complain about that 'unpleasant seam line there'...
last but not least I just talked to Mr. Betzler from PSM and he told me that after these complaints he'll try to reduce the thickness of those plugs, anyway he made clear that these can not be left away or otherwise he'll have to switch molds after less than 20 casts instead of over 100.
Cheers, Max
P.S. nice review Bill, I like your style of writing
Removed by original poster on 11/04/11 - 12:28:07 (GMT).
seb43
Joined: August 30, 2005
KitMaker: 2,315 posts
Armorama: 2,158 posts
Posted: Friday, November 04, 2011 - 12:32 AM UTC
Ok Bill
I would like to say that my comments were based on your photos.
And after the post of Max and with his pictures of the caps and bottom, i have to be agree with you.
The details are great but the presence of the resins beneath the handles is disturbing.
And of course I have to share your comments that with these details, they are among the best on the market
I hope you accept my sincere apology for the 1st comments
Cheers
Seb
I would like to say that my comments were based on your photos.
And after the post of Max and with his pictures of the caps and bottom, i have to be agree with you.
The details are great but the presence of the resins beneath the handles is disturbing.
And of course I have to share your comments that with these details, they are among the best on the market
I hope you accept my sincere apology for the 1st comments
Cheers
Seb
jimbrae
Joined: April 23, 2003
KitMaker: 12,927 posts
Armorama: 9,486 posts
Posted: Friday, November 04, 2011 - 12:40 AM UTC
Quoted Text
No big deal, but I am more concern on the comment that we don't want to piss manufacturer, I have to disagree with that, if the product is bad we have to mention it.
Yes, I can understand your concerns but there is a salient point in all this. Frequently, with Reviews, there's a 'cultural gap'. Many, non-native speakers (particularly the Chinese or Japanese) see even the slightest criticism as a major affront. Mentioning THEIR products along with those of a competitor is not something which sits easy. We're not in the pocket of any manufacturer and we do give as even-handed an approach as possible - that's only fair.
Most of our Reviews aren't even 'Staff' ones either they are solicited from the Site-Users.
I assume you're talking about PMMS Reviews by the way, well, that, IMO, is completely different. TerryA has taken the 'comparative' to a VERY high-level over a period of MANY years. A Review is difficult enough, developing the skills to do a comparative is much more difficult. It also costs a LOT more time, and since our system isn't set-up for it anyway, it would require a major re-think.
I'm not saying we won't do it (in the future) i'm saying that it would require a huge effort with, IMO, limited advantages. If we haev the same subject in 2 (or more) seperate Reviews, it's only a click away the find the other. If the Review is well written, then reading the points on both should tell you the advantages and disadvantages...
KurtLaughlin
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Friday, November 04, 2011 - 12:51 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Comparative Reviews can be useful but it's also one of the best ways I know of pissing manufacturers off REAL quickly. Reviews are NOT 100% accurate, they are ALWAYS subjective add in comparison of two products and the problems are multiplied.
Reviews may be subjective but a side-by-side comparison of models of the exact same subject and the real thing - ESPECIALLY for something as simple as this - are not. People don't really care if the reviews are a accurate. They care if the models are. Whether you consider yourself a rivet counter or a close-enough modeler, if you see four models of the same thing sitting in a row next to a photo or verified drawing of the real thing, you aren't going to buy the one that is 30% larger than the others, the one that has the wrong details, or the one that costs twice as much with no discernable differences than the fourth.
And you are concerned that this comparison would piss off the manufacturers because . . . Well just why exactly? I'm not talking about ill-informed guesses by half-wit "/reviewers", but comparisons that could actually be mute, with just arrows or balloons highlighting the differing depictions of features on several products compared to reality. I think all modelers would benefit from something like that. The manufacturers, well not so much, but what's the purpose of the review: To provide a service of value to the reader or sell ad space on the site or publication?
KL
KurtLaughlin
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Friday, November 04, 2011 - 12:56 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Yes, I can understand your concerns but there is a salient point in all this. Frequently, with Reviews, there's a 'cultural gap'. Many, non-native speakers (particularly the Chinese or Japanese) see even the slightest criticism as a major affront. Mentioning THEIR products along with those of a competitor is not something which sits easy.
Again: You care . . . because? They are trying to sell their products to the Western market via an english-language, USA-based website. Shouldn't they be trying to fit in with our culture, instead of us adapting to theirs?
KL
jimbrae
Joined: April 23, 2003
KitMaker: 12,927 posts
Armorama: 9,486 posts
Posted: Friday, November 04, 2011 - 01:15 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Again: You care . . . because? They are trying to sell their products to the Western market via an english-language, USA-based website. Shouldn't they be trying to fit in with our culture, instead of us adapting to theirs?
No, I don't like it. On the other hand I don't think that there's that much compromise actually made. If it's a dog, it gets classified as such. We don't (unlike others) lay an editorial policy about the products of manufacturer 'X'.
Quoted Text
The manufacturers, well not so much, but what's the purpose of the review: To provide a service of value to the reader or sell ad space on the site or publication?
Quite obviously the Site-User comes first. We've rarely (if ever) had a conflict with an advertiser over how their product was rated. There are exceptions obviously, but at the end of the day, the Review Editors can see an ambush coming and act accordingly.
I'll repeat it again, if we were to introduce Comparative Reviews, then it would need a degree of re-coding on the Site. Personally, I like them (sometimes) when it's examples like the Sd.Kfz 7 (faults on all sides) the Staghound advantages over the Italeri one regarding ease of construction compared to Bronco's and Bronco's higher accuracy in areas like the gun and IMO, turret.
There are examples when its a no-brainer. In fairness you couldn't put Tamiya's M3 H/T against DML's, you could though, put DML's Jeep against Tamiya's (the latter would win hands down).
A comparative Review on the best modern U.S. POL cans would be precisely the kind of material which should be given a comparative perhaps though as a Feature rather than Review?
c5flies
Joined: October 21, 2007
KitMaker: 3,684 posts
Armorama: 2,938 posts
Posted: Friday, November 04, 2011 - 02:02 AM UTC
It's not fair to the product, the review or the reviewer when these discussions take place in the review thread...if people want to talk about reviews in general then that should take place in it's own thread.
But I feel compelled to add a couple of quick points:
I am not concerned with who gets pissed off due to reviews, and we have already pissed off a few with the reviews we published. I am sure not going to brag about what vendors we pissed off, and who refuses to send us review samples. We will still review their products just like everyone elses since many of our reviews are purchased items and not dependant on review samples.
We are not set up for comparison reviews due to the format of the site and the amount of reviewers we have. What works for a one man show does not work for us, apples to oranges.
(and now I'm late for work...that pisses me off :-) )
Again, this should be discussed in a separate topic if needed and not in the discussion thread of a specific review.
But I feel compelled to add a couple of quick points:
Quoted Text
Quoted Text
Comparative Reviews can be useful but it's also one of the best ways I know of pissing manufacturers off REAL quickly. Reviews are NOT 100% accurate, they are ALWAYS subjective add in comparison of two products and the problems are multiplied.
And you are concerned that this comparison would piss off the manufacturers because . . . Well just why exactly? I'm not talking about ill-informed guesses by half-wit "/reviewers", but comparisons that could actually be mute, with just arrows or balloons highlighting the differing depictions of features on several products compared to reality. I think all modelers would benefit from something like that. The manufacturers, well not so much, but what's the purpose of the review: To provide a service of value to the reader or sell ad space on the site or publication?
KL
I am not concerned with who gets pissed off due to reviews, and we have already pissed off a few with the reviews we published. I am sure not going to brag about what vendors we pissed off, and who refuses to send us review samples. We will still review their products just like everyone elses since many of our reviews are purchased items and not dependant on review samples.
We are not set up for comparison reviews due to the format of the site and the amount of reviewers we have. What works for a one man show does not work for us, apples to oranges.
(and now I'm late for work...that pisses me off :-) )
Again, this should be discussed in a separate topic if needed and not in the discussion thread of a specific review.
bill_c
Campaigns AdministratorJoined: January 09, 2008
KitMaker: 10,553 posts
Armorama: 8,109 posts
Posted: Friday, November 04, 2011 - 05:08 AM UTC
Seb, there is no reason to apologize, your comments have engendered a very lively and I believe, useful dialogue about this set, fuel can accuracy, resin vs. styrene, etc. This is part of what makes Armorama a fun site to be at.
Regarding comparative reviews, I think they're just not who we are here. While some might think it's part of our job to piss off manufacturers, that's not really germane to the discussion. First of all, a kit I think is inferior might be just fine for a whole legion of modelers based on a variety of evaluation points, including price, availability, ease-of-assembly, etc. Hey, Tamiya's done very well with kits I find below today's standards and requiring MAJOR fixes.
I CAN say that I've never told a reviewer to raise a score, soften a critique or otherwise avoid "telling it like it is." As James alludes to, this doesn't sit well with some companies, who either can't see the faults of their products, or feel that supplying a review sample entitles them to a rave. We don't work that way here, and if we did, I'd quit. My integrity is important to me.
I also have never upped the score of a review to aid a manufacturer, even ones I work with regularly. Every item you release can't be a winner, life just doesn't work that way.
But finally, I think it's important to keep in mind THIS ISN'T ROCKET SCIENCE. Reviews are subjective, and no two reviewers will react the same. That's why it's vital to read LOTS of reviews and get as much information as you can before making a purchase decision. Don't let the reviewer think for you.
Regarding comparative reviews, I think they're just not who we are here. While some might think it's part of our job to piss off manufacturers, that's not really germane to the discussion. First of all, a kit I think is inferior might be just fine for a whole legion of modelers based on a variety of evaluation points, including price, availability, ease-of-assembly, etc. Hey, Tamiya's done very well with kits I find below today's standards and requiring MAJOR fixes.
I CAN say that I've never told a reviewer to raise a score, soften a critique or otherwise avoid "telling it like it is." As James alludes to, this doesn't sit well with some companies, who either can't see the faults of their products, or feel that supplying a review sample entitles them to a rave. We don't work that way here, and if we did, I'd quit. My integrity is important to me.
I also have never upped the score of a review to aid a manufacturer, even ones I work with regularly. Every item you release can't be a winner, life just doesn't work that way.
But finally, I think it's important to keep in mind THIS ISN'T ROCKET SCIENCE. Reviews are subjective, and no two reviewers will react the same. That's why it's vital to read LOTS of reviews and get as much information as you can before making a purchase decision. Don't let the reviewer think for you.
staff_Jim
Publisher
Joined: December 15, 2001
KitMaker: 12,571 posts
Armorama: 6,599 posts
Posted: Friday, November 04, 2011 - 05:26 AM UTC
As this site is now almost 10 years old we are not exactly *new* to this sort of thing. In fact we have probably produced more internet content (news stories, reviews, features, etc) than any other site and perhaps even all the major sites combined. Sorry if this sounds like me touting the site, but as a matter of fact, this site is actually the product of all these folks, not a handful of people.
As for site policy, etc. we did indeed adopt an informal policy not to do comparative reviews after we had a bit of a debacle with one about 5 years ago. The infamous Etch-mate vs. Hold and fold article. Ironically this was done as a feature and not as a review. Mainly because as James pointed out, our review system is designed to do products individually and not as comparative or grouped items.
That all said if someone wants to submit an article that is a comparative study of different kits of the same subject, I would take a look at it honestly and, unless there was an obvious bias towards one kit or manufacturer, publish it.
Jim
As for site policy, etc. we did indeed adopt an informal policy not to do comparative reviews after we had a bit of a debacle with one about 5 years ago. The infamous Etch-mate vs. Hold and fold article. Ironically this was done as a feature and not as a review. Mainly because as James pointed out, our review system is designed to do products individually and not as comparative or grouped items.
That all said if someone wants to submit an article that is a comparative study of different kits of the same subject, I would take a look at it honestly and, unless there was an obvious bias towards one kit or manufacturer, publish it.
Jim
gcdavidson
Joined: August 05, 2003
KitMaker: 1,698 posts
Armorama: 1,563 posts
Posted: Friday, November 04, 2011 - 06:57 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I just got the Black Dog LAV-III LORIT conversion
Jim
YAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRR MATEY!!!!
Grumpyoldman
ConsigliereJoined: October 17, 2003
KitMaker: 15,338 posts
Armorama: 7,297 posts
Posted: Friday, November 04, 2011 - 12:14 PM UTC
Once again I have to look at this thread with some amusement
The reason why--- I can hear you all asking!
Well, it's very simple really.
On EVERY REVIEW PAGE there is a button that clearly states "YOU REVIEW THIS ITEM" yet over the years I have rarely ever seen another review of an item by another reviewer. And I really do wonder why.
Since at least 98% of the reviews I've done, were purchased by my wallet, my reviews are honestly MY OPINION of that item, and yes I do try to inject a little humor in each one. But again it's MY OPINION, and we all know about opinions--- everybody has one.
So the perfect solution is --- (If there is ever a perfect solution or kit) is for members to simply click on that magic button "YOU REVIEW THIS ITEM" and there is your somewhat comparisons review. Same item, two different view through two different sets of eyes, and perhaps knowledge levels.
OH--- but that would require participation-----
Do any of you actually think for a minute, that when I do a review, I would be upset if someone more knowledgeable than myself on that subject also wrote a review of the same kit or item? I truly believe that any member that writes a review is doing his best and giving his honest OPINION on the item. I truly believe they are doing it to help fellow members and modelers.
Remember the "YOU REVIEW THIS ITEM" button.
What a novel idea.
The reason why--- I can hear you all asking!
Well, it's very simple really.
On EVERY REVIEW PAGE there is a button that clearly states "YOU REVIEW THIS ITEM" yet over the years I have rarely ever seen another review of an item by another reviewer. And I really do wonder why.
Since at least 98% of the reviews I've done, were purchased by my wallet, my reviews are honestly MY OPINION of that item, and yes I do try to inject a little humor in each one. But again it's MY OPINION, and we all know about opinions--- everybody has one.
So the perfect solution is --- (If there is ever a perfect solution or kit) is for members to simply click on that magic button "YOU REVIEW THIS ITEM" and there is your somewhat comparisons review. Same item, two different view through two different sets of eyes, and perhaps knowledge levels.
OH--- but that would require participation-----
Do any of you actually think for a minute, that when I do a review, I would be upset if someone more knowledgeable than myself on that subject also wrote a review of the same kit or item? I truly believe that any member that writes a review is doing his best and giving his honest OPINION on the item. I truly believe they are doing it to help fellow members and modelers.
Remember the "YOU REVIEW THIS ITEM" button.
What a novel idea.
redleg12
Joined: March 11, 2007
KitMaker: 872 posts
Armorama: 831 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 05, 2011 - 12:35 AM UTC
WOW....all this on the review of jerry cans....
A quick comment....
no one here is perfect...
everyone here has his own niche in the hobby....
opinions are like a-------, everyone has one but they are all different...
Lastly and most important, this is supposed to be fun
In this world where time is almost as valuable as money (and as you get older time is worth even more), someone takes the time to photograph, write and submit a review should be applauded. This thread should be used to ask questions of the reviewer or just thank him. If you disagree with the review, like Grupy states, poney up to the bar and write your own review. And remember a review is an opinion, not a statment of fact.
An educated consumer is the best customer....if you are worried about shelling out $XX for something, read as many reviews as you can. If the subject is more important, than screw the review, its what you want.
Lastly, on the comparitive review....why. Unless 2 compaines put out the excat model in the same year it is like comparing a 2005 Ford to a 2011 Chevy. The technology changes make the compaison useless.
To the staff and ALL who contribute here....thanks, don't change a thing
OK...thats my 2 cents
Rounds Complete!!
A quick comment....
no one here is perfect...
everyone here has his own niche in the hobby....
opinions are like a-------, everyone has one but they are all different...
Lastly and most important, this is supposed to be fun
In this world where time is almost as valuable as money (and as you get older time is worth even more), someone takes the time to photograph, write and submit a review should be applauded. This thread should be used to ask questions of the reviewer or just thank him. If you disagree with the review, like Grupy states, poney up to the bar and write your own review. And remember a review is an opinion, not a statment of fact.
An educated consumer is the best customer....if you are worried about shelling out $XX for something, read as many reviews as you can. If the subject is more important, than screw the review, its what you want.
Lastly, on the comparitive review....why. Unless 2 compaines put out the excat model in the same year it is like comparing a 2005 Ford to a 2011 Chevy. The technology changes make the compaison useless.
To the staff and ALL who contribute here....thanks, don't change a thing
OK...thats my 2 cents
Rounds Complete!!
KurtLaughlin
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 05, 2011 - 02:37 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Lastly, on the comparitive review....why. Unless 2 compaines put out the excat model in the same year it is like comparing a 2005 Ford to a 2011 Chevy. The technology changes make the compaison useless.
No one is looking for or expecting that sort of obvious mismatch. Rather than the example you give, people want to see is a comparison of Company A's 2006 kit of a 1940 Ford vs Company B's 2009 kit of a 1940 Ford vs. Company C's 2011 kit of a 1940 Ford. Or Pz IVD, or M4A1 direct vision, or 105mm howitzer, or jerry can.
I don't see many companies - well, any, actually - changing the contents of a kit while keeping the same stock number. There are plenty of "old" items for sale in shops, at shows, and by individuals. People what to know if the kit is worth getting. And sometimes, the older item is better than the new one. So, a comparison of various brands of kits of the same subject would be useful, I'd think. Maybe Armorama/Wargaming.net doesn't want to do it, but there is a lot of value in it, and people will seek them out.
KL
P.S. The saying is, "Opinions are like [auto-censored]s: Everyone has one and most of them stink." Without that last bit, one might as well say opinions are like noses, or belly buttons, or xiphoid processes. Everyone has one of those as well. There's a reason the word "asshole" was used . . .
Grumpyoldman
ConsigliereJoined: October 17, 2003
KitMaker: 15,338 posts
Armorama: 7,297 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 05, 2011 - 04:11 AM UTC
There you go again Kurk, using those big words again that I had to look up.
"xiphoid processes"
My xiphoid processes has been out of alignment ever since my last, and third open heart operation. 
"xiphoid processes"
My xiphoid processes has been out of alignment ever since my last, and third open heart operation.
 |
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.