I have been building the Resicast 3" Mortar Carrier conversion for the Tamiya Universal Carrier, and it's a sweet kit. But the directions leave a lot to be desired, and I wanted to "sound off," both out of frustration, and so that anyone thinking of building a Resicast kit be careful lest they get in over their heads.

The casting is excellent, but the instructions are often vague and pretty much peter out 1/2 through the build. I'm up to the point where the stowage, the mortar, the various racks, etc. get attached, and there is simply no diagrams for any of it.

The instructions have some line drawings of the real thing, some blurry photos of kit parts glued in place, but again, lack the kinds of "it goes here" specificity I want in a resin kit.

There also are missing details, such as the conduit for the headlamp(s).

I think some design choices could have been better, too, especially in the stowed mortar ammo tubes. In the real thing, they are secured with metal strips/bars, but are molded onto the rounds in resin. The result is so-so, and could easily be improved with some PE. Removing the resin retaining bars is far more work than I'm up for, so I'll leave them alone. Trying to hollow out the recesses behind the bars is also more work than I want.

Bill give Alan a shake down I am sure he can help steer you.

Thanks, Darren, that's a good idea.

Resicast need to re-think their approach. They have a spot-on product (though the kit was missing the emergency brake and the hubs for the idler wheels).

Hi Bill,

From what you said in your PM I sounds to me like you are working on the older kit and not the re-worked version?

I'll send you a copy of the the current instructions and some other data that should help.

I haven't built either the earlier or later version of the Mortar Carrier so can't comment there without sitting down to compare the parts.

I will take me a while to scan things back in as I recently had a clear out and deleted a lot of stuff.

Cheers

Al

Bill, I certainly sense your frustration with the short comings of the instructions.

I'm currently building Tasca's new M32B1 TRV. And while their kit is amazing, their instructions at times are a nightmare to follow. Some parts just appear that I've found much later in their build sequence, or following the arrows often just vaguely point to where the part should go.
Joel

Thanks, Al, it's possible I have an older version of the kit. It would be nice if Resicast could have provided new instructions to vendors of the older kit who don't necessarily know things have been "fixed." Pity, as these are very nifty kits that build up to lovely results (though the resin tracks are a bit of an ordeal, LOL).

Joel, I feel your pain. Tasca makes the best Sherman hands down, yet their instructions are often cobbled together from several kits. Language is sometimes an issue, too, with a few instances in their Hedgerow Sherman of "it might be this or it might be that."

Hi Bill,

Look at the instructions I send you. I'd have no problem building the kit, they are comprehensive and clear, so I can only assume you picked up an earlier version pre 2009.

If you need any other data let me know and I'll send it along.

Cheers

Al

Thanks, Al, I received the instructions, and it's almost a different kit: no radio in mine, the headlights are "wrong" (listed for the Canadian variant instead of the Mk 1 setup), missing pieces (the knobs above the lift handles on the engine compartment).

I'm halfway through the build now, but I'm sure R&J Enterprises where I bought the kit would be as shocked as I am at the discrepancies. If I were reviewing this kit, I'd give it a 50% or less for the shocking differences between the older and current versions.

Resicast should have alerted its vendors it was reworking this kit drastically. I would never have purchased it if I has known. Your reviews of Resicast products have been so glowing, I was expecting perfection and instead will now have to scramble to fix the problems, including having to purchase a radio.

Also on the customer service side, I emailed Resicast about the missing emergency brake handle (before I knew about the other problems), and have heard nothing back. I realize European customer service is often more casual, and that some companies are just now getting back after the New Year holidays, but again, this isn't something to make me eager to purchase a Resicast product. When placing an order for Brit jerry cans & water cans yesterday, I went with Ultracast.

Hi Bill,

The kit was re-worked around 2009 I believe so your vendor must have had an older version in stock which by then was OOP. He may or may not have known that but I would have thought he would.

Graham sends out update information to all his customers and I would assume suppliers as I have seen Resicast OOP kits listed by Historex, so I'd say the vendor should have known and pointed that out.

Either way I hope the info helps.

Look forward to seeing the finished product as I have one or two to build yet. The tracks take a bit of patience to build but the difference is worth the effort.

Cheers

Al

I remember discussing with Joy at R&J that there were newer versions of the kits, but they have a huge inventory, so it's likely any alert from Resicast was overlooked if it was sent out. It was about 2 years after the reboot that I purchased the kit.

At this point it's water over the dam: the kit is half-built, and now I've got to wrestle it to completion as best I can. It would be nice if Resicast would provide replacement parts for things like the radio, but I'm not holding my breath.

Hi Bill,

The kit you bought was 35.129 3 inch Mortar Universal Carrier, there is a review of the kit on PMMS, no date but page was created in 2005, so let see that's 7 years ago, so the kit was probably released about 8 years ago.

This is the last part of the review:

quote
Instructions:
The twelve page booklet lists all the parts by number for easy identification and has text notes on the construction supplemented by small black and white photos of the model during construction. You will need to study these photos in conjunction with the text notes carefully to fully understand the assembly.
Also included are reproductions of the Tamiya instruction steps indicating any alterations needed to fit the new hull and mortar parts.
As a bonus there are internal layout drawings and the layout of the rear hull showing the mortar and tool stowage from the technical manual plus two overall manual drawings that indicate the general layout of the 3inch Mortar Carrier that will help greatly in fitting the parts.

The other conversion/update sets from Resicast for the Tamiya Universal Carrier are;
32.128 Universal Carrier update set
32.130 Vickers machine gun carrier
35.136 WASP Mk.II C
35.174 WASP Mk.I C

Conclusion:
Another excellent update set from Resicast with crisply cast and detailed parts for the basic Carrier and the 3inch Mortar conversion.
This update offers an interesting conversion for the Tamiya Universal Carrier as well as generic update/detail parts for the kit that is sure to be welcomed by Allied modellers.

Highly recommended
unquote

link here:


http://www.perthmilitarymodelling.com/reviews/vehicles/resicast/resicast35129.htm

So clearly at that time the kit was well thought of.

The current kit is 35.1207 3inch Mortar Carrier No 1 Mk I and is the kit I reviewed here some time back.

I can see you might be a bit miffed having bought the older kit but that is not Resicast's fault. The information on both kits has been available on the net for many years now.

It's a fair point to make people aware the older version is still around but I kinda feel you're going a bit OTT here as even with the older version you should still be able to build up a very decent model and I know you have the skill to do this.

If Resicast haven't responded to you then it is quite likely Graham is not there at the moment.

On the Radio - none is provided in either kit, I sent you a diagram in case you might need it as I know you have an interest in these vehicles. Each vehicle in a Platoon would be fitted out according to it's role. A Pl Commanders vehicle would most probably have a radio, but not a section vehicle which is what you have here in the basic kit.

I've bought from Resicast for 7 years now and never had anything but good service. Your remark about "When placing an order for Brit jerry cans & water cans yesterday, I went with Ultracast" implies there is something wrong with the Resicast ones which I can assure you there is not.

I have every sympathy for you Bill, but in truth the error is yours and R&J Enterprises, who sold you the older kit as the information on both kits was easily available.

I am sure Resicast will provide you with any missing parts, but as you have dragged this into my review of 35.1207 I now have to go and repeat it all over again.

Patience Grasshopper, patience!

Cheers

Al

Al, we both know that PMMS doesn't build every kit he reviews, and the review you reference is like one of Armorama's "In Box" reviews: it lays out the parts and draws a conclusion based on how something seems. The kit looked fine when I opened it, too.


Al, I know you are very close with Graham and a big booster for Resicast, but I'm shocked you would say it's my fault (below) for buying an inferior kit! Graham didn't refund the money to R&J, nor recall it, and I bought it thinking "wow, Al has been so high on Resicast, I can't WAIT to build this!" Resicast is a regular company, not a fly-by-night outfit, and if they have significantly upgraded a product (as they clearly have here), then some sort of Red Alert should go out to its vendors or be included on its own website.


Al, I'll leave it to the reader to decide if I am OTT. Perhaps I'm a victim of the enormous praise you've heaped on Resicast over the years, with reviews that go to 95%. Did I expect too much? Is that my fault?


I hope I will hear from Graham. I'd like to have this cleared up. Blaming the modeler doesn't seem like the right answer, Al.


Thanks for clearing that up. I really appreciate it.


Al, people who bought Cromwell Models products LOVED the quality, but HATED the customer service. I am not equating Resicast with poor Cromwell, but want you to see that a company is more than just its plastic, and if I can be fooled once, I don't want to be fooled again. I did not mean to imply (and don't believe I did) there is anything wrong with the quality of the Resicast product (I also have their UC stowage set, which has very fine molding). What I AM disappointed with is that Resicast apparently had a poor kit, upgraded it, and did not recall it or otherwise make consumers aware of the improvement. We roast companies for this kind of oversight all the time.

I think Resicast's quality can stand up to a reality check without your going a bit OTT in their defense.


What information is so easily available, Al? You quote the PMSS review, which makes this older kit sound just fine. Where is the information that the new kit is a big improvement? Tell me what I overlooked?

Again, this all sounds like your heart overruling your head. My purpose in making this post is to warn modelers who might pick up the older version of this kit at a show or from a private sale (likely for significant jack, as these kits aren't cheap). I want them to know what they're in for, especially with so many older resin kits in circulation and turning up on the F/S boards here & on other sites.

If it's the modeler's responsibility to be vigilant as you say, then consider this thread a blow for transparency.

Hi Bill,

If you contact Graham directly by email he will sort out any problem you have.

My heart's not overruling my head Bill, the error was yours, the product you bought was produced over 8 years ago and has been OOP since 2008, it was re-worked and re-issued in 2009. I'm not blaming you for any errors in the kit but what I am saying is that you had a choice and the information was freely available.

The Resicast kits, which I've reviewed are, with one exception, outstanding. I cannot comment on a kit I have never reviewed although I have it in the stash to build. Clearly when it was released it was seen as a good conversion and clearly errors were found and it was re-worked to a higher standard. I'd say that was good practice on the part of the manufacturer.

I don't have a problem with you telling other about the kit.

I do have a problem with your remarks about customer service, the link to Cromwell and the implication that Resicast are not a first rate company as it is simply not true.

As far as alerts go, I've commented on that already.

I could go on but I won't, if you contact Resicast, Graham will sort you out. In fact you'll not find a nicer more helpful person.

Al

I have emailed Graham a second time and look forward to hearing back from him.


Where? A quick search of "Resicast 3" mortar problems" came up empty.


Yes, but it would be good if there was some indication of the new tooling.


Al, you want this to be my fault. I'm trying to show you that Resicast, as the manufacturer, bears the responsibility for the problem. You want me to recognize R's quality (which I have), but ignore their obligation to rectify a problem they created by selling this kit (or not recalling it from their vendor). I used Cromwell as an example of how the quality of a company's plastic is not the sum total of how we view them.

I admire your passion for Resicast and your dedication to promoting their products. I will leave it to the reader to decide whether it's my fault or Resicast's.

Hi Bill,

My Apologies the kit is even older than I though a quick search on ML found a post for 16th September 2001 and many subsequent discussion threads

http://www.network54.com/Forum/47208/thread/1000660888/3+in-+Mortar+Carrier

So it could well have been around since the 90s and I dare say many Model Magazines have similar articles.

Took 30 seconds to find. Not really my place to provide the links for research you should have done.

Just one extract highlighting that there were old and new sets from here on site.
quote
"The third and fourth example are two Deep Wading Carriers constructed from the basic model and the Resicast Deep Wading Set one from the older set and the second from the newer and the much more user friendly kit. The new set includes the alternative suspension units for that nose up effect often seen on the carriers."
Unquote

"but ignore their obligation to rectify a problem they created by selling this kit (or not recalling it from their vendor)"

Re their obligation to fix the kit, didn't they do that with the re-worked version?

I find this totally bizarre. The kit you bought has been around for more than 10 years, built to a standard that was well in advance of its time, and as you said yourself, still has terrific detail. When model companies issue a new version of a kit do they recall all the old stock on shelf? I think not.

If you read the reviews I have done on older Resicst kits, plenty here on site, you will see that I have made specific mention of the poor quality of the older instructions when I came across them.

This has nothing to do with whose fault it is Bill. It merely puts into perspective the fact that you made a purchase without doing your homework and that the kit in question has been around for a long, long time.

If I bought a 10, 20 or 30 year old kit, I wouldn't expect it to be perfect. The Tamiya 30cwt Chevy for example. Do I blame Tamiya for producing the kit, ask them to pay for all the fixes and upgrades I need to do, tell them it must be taken off the shelf etc etc.

You could have always asked a question here on site and I am sure you would have gotten the current view,isn't that what goes on here most of the time?

As you say people will decide for themselves.

Al

Al, you and I will not agree on this, and so I will say again that I was so jazzed by the things you have said about Resicast that I was expecting something truly marvelous. You are a TERRIFIC modeler, and it was singularly your enthusiasm for the UC and the Resicast products that led me two purchase TWO UCs and the necessary upgrades.

I will not continue to beat this dead horse. If I had purchased an old kit from an expired manufacturer, I would have taken more care. But I (wrongly) assumed from all you said about Resicast in general and the 3" mortar carrier in your excellent review of it that I did not have to take the same sort of caution I would with a kit from the 90s.

Clearly I was wrong.

I apologize if I have offended you. That was not my intention.