Armor/AFV: Modern - USA
Modern Armor, AFVs, and Support vehicles.
Hosted by Darren Baker
DML M103A1 - disappointment
M4A1Sherman
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 22, 2014 - 09:57 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

...
The unfortunate reality of Dragon Models is...they're Chinese. The Chinese manufacturing sector, the biggest on earth and biggest ever in recorded history, is a heartless soulless monster dedicated to mass production and global sales. Period. Quality never comes into the discussion...



I don't see any problems with the size, the nationality, or a "heartless soulless" attitude to laissez faire business.

However, there is the other side of the business equation - the customer or potential customer. I don't care how big, or soulless or what nationality some company is, if the customers don't buy their products, that company won't stay in business, much less make a profit.

Model builders have to blame themselves to some degree for kits like DML's M103. Every crappy DML T28 bought and sold was just more incentive for DML to cut research and development corners with their M103. And every crappy M103 that's bought and sold continues that incentive for DML to cut corners on their next release.

Every modeler everywhere that has bought one of these M103s and who was willing to settle for less than what the kit should have been, shares some of the blame for the next DML mess (and not just DML, either...). The origins of the crappy M103 lie with the sales (i.e. modelers buying them) of the crappy T28, and if the next DML kit falls down in the accuracy area, sales of the M103 will be partly to blame.

There's a lot of complaining going on about the T28 and the M103 and a lot of pre-release angst about how accurate the M6 will be.

If you don't want crappy kits, don't buy crappy kits, and to rip apart those modelers who're willing to step up and throw the "BS flag" when some crappy kit has hit the market just makes the situation worse for us all.

Don't buy these kits, and either the manufacturer will change and give us what we want, or they'll go out of business because their kits are not selling, and some other kit maker will step up and take their place.

Nationality, size or business ethics don't really matter here. What matters is whether the kits sell or not, and every crappy kit that does sell is one less reason for the next kit to be better. Manufacturers will always try to cut corners and maximize profit, but the consumer has all the potential profit in his pocket until he makes the purchase, so he also has at least half the influence on the process.



Hm. That's food for thought... One thing, though- How are we to find out whether or not any new kit is a pile of junk without having to buy it, open the box, and actually start assembling it? Or should every single newly-released model be brought before the "Magical NAZI Model Kit Approval Board" before being allowed on the streets..?

Not going to happen.

Modelling Magazines and Websites such as ARMORAMA would be VERY HARD-PRESSED indeed, if they had to acquire, assemble, fix problems, detail and paint EVERY SINGLE MODEL, subject to customer approval. In a Utopian World, this process would be ideal, but alas, the real world dictates that we live by the admonition: "Caveat Emptor"... ("Let the Buyer Beware", for those who are not familiar with Latin)

So, my friends, we tremble in anticipation before a few brave, intrepid souls to venture forth and actually BUY THESE PIGS OF KITS, just to find out second-hand how bad they are before we open OUR stinky little mitts to shell out better than $69.00 for one of these plastic aberrations!

Yes, we're ALL GUILTY! So, what's the solution? Give up? The answer is: There isn't one...

If there is a particular model that we've all been anticipating, and if one of the "heartless, soulless monsters" decides to put said kit into production with as many faults that can possibly be stuffed into the box, why, why, (breathless panting...) YOU JUST KNOW that some of us will be overcome by desire... And buy it... Wonderfully grotesque, isn't it? (Tickets available for a limited time only, at:

www.heartlesssoullessmontsters.com- Have your Paycheck handy...)

ninjrk
Visit this Community
Alabama, United States
Joined: January 26, 2006
KitMaker: 1,381 posts
Armorama: 1,347 posts
Posted: Friday, May 23, 2014 - 02:14 AM UTC
Apologies for the thread drift but I think there actually is a bit of a fix for the overall problem; write reviews! I'm old enough to remember when there was no internet with reviews, so every kit was a gamble and little way to figure out what was a good one unless FSM happened to review it. Plus, you didn't have access to walkarounds and nearly as many good references (and those were often expensive and required the dreaded money order or personal check. . .). Nowadays, some poor sod will try and build most any kit that comes out and, if they could do a short review, we'd all be warned. I suspect a lot of people (myself included) had preorders in for the T28 and M103. Based on this very thread, I cancelled my M6A1 preorder; I ain't buying until some poor bastard tries to build it first! I suspect that Dragon has realized that the internet community considers the M103 kit an utter dog with often deformed parts and a turret that can't turn. Whether their behavior changes only time will tell.
ninjrk
Visit this Community
Alabama, United States
Joined: January 26, 2006
KitMaker: 1,381 posts
Armorama: 1,347 posts
Posted: Friday, May 23, 2014 - 02:16 AM UTC
And I should add, thanks for getting the barrel made properly from RB. I already ordered one because while I can live with the kit flaws (I already bought the damned thing and there's no way i care enough about the real tank to go through the detailed corrections detailed in this thread) the undersized barrel is an easy significant improvement to make.
RLlockie
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: September 06, 2013
KitMaker: 1,112 posts
Armorama: 938 posts
Posted: Friday, May 23, 2014 - 02:46 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Modelling Magazines and Websites such as ARMORAMA would be VERY HARD-PRESSED indeed, if they had to acquire, assemble, fix problems, detail and paint EVERY SINGLE MODEL, subject to customer approval.



I don't expect a reviewer to detail and paint anything to be able to tell me if it is capable, without major structural rebuilding, or being turned into something which is a reasonable replica of the real thing. They don't even need to fix all the problems, as long as they make a reasonable attempt to identify them.

That way I can make an informed decision as to whether I want to spend the time and money to fix them or not. How they choose to paint and weather their model is going to have zero impact on that decision on my part. It's interesting that the kit reviews on the PMMS site, which have a very good reputation, invariably have no painting element yet because Terry researches his subject before writing, he does spot accuracy issues that many other reviewers miss in their apparent haste to reach for the paint and weathering product de jour. As I've seen some of Terry's models, I know that he can paint well, so it's not as though he's incapable of it. It's just that apart from painting taking more time, it contributes nothing at all to the value of the review.

Not that I planned to buy an M103 anyway, but Pavel's valuable work has convinced me that if I did want one, Dragon's train wreck wouldn't be the one I'd buy. And I speak as someone with a loft full of Dragon kits, so not singling them out over other companies.
ninjrk
Visit this Community
Alabama, United States
Joined: January 26, 2006
KitMaker: 1,381 posts
Armorama: 1,347 posts
Posted: Friday, May 23, 2014 - 04:21 AM UTC
The over-riding issue for with this mess of a kit is that by merely existing it almost eliminates the chance of a better version down the line due to the sales it will have. I'm not as broken up about it as some because the M103 isn't a passionate grail kit for me. However, I get PO'd because it reinforces the potential that someone will do a plastic kit of one of my grails (ARL-44, Black prince, G1R, T29) and if screwed up will prevent me from getting a better one.

On a more subtle level, the obvious craptacular rush job on the T28 and M103 also hinders the resin guys. I know of a completed resin master for the Black Prince and a 75% complete ARL 44 that will never be released because there is a justified fear that as soon as it's announced Dragon will kneecap them by releasing a rushed inaccurate (but sale draining) injection model before they've finished pouring RTV.
tankmodeler
#417
Visit this Community
Ontario, Canada
Joined: March 01, 2004
KitMaker: 3,123 posts
Armorama: 2,539 posts
Posted: Friday, May 23, 2014 - 05:58 AM UTC
Got it totally right, Matt. Totally.
iowabrit
Visit this Community
Iowa, United States
Joined: November 06, 2007
KitMaker: 585 posts
Armorama: 557 posts
Posted: Friday, May 23, 2014 - 06:03 AM UTC
Spot on Matt. Couldn't agree more other than, the M103 WAS my holy grail (or at least one of them).
Vodnik
Visit this Community
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Friday, May 23, 2014 - 09:12 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Looks great Pawel, I'll take one of both

Thanks for your efforts!



I would like to thank Rob Skipper, as without the measurements of the real barrel length he provided, it would be impossible to make the RB Model barrel as accurate, as I believe it is.

THANKS ROB!!!
rinaldi119
Visit this Community
Oregon, United States
Joined: September 22, 2004
KitMaker: 375 posts
Armorama: 282 posts
Posted: Friday, May 23, 2014 - 09:20 AM UTC

Quoted Text

The over-riding issue for with this mess of a kit is that by merely existing it almost eliminates the chance of a better version down the line due to the sales it will have. I'm not as broken up about it as some because the M103 isn't a passionate grail kit for me. However, I get PO'd because it reinforces the potential that someone will do a plastic kit of one of my grails (ARL-44, Black prince, G1R, T29) and if screwed up will prevent me from getting a better one.

On a more subtle level, the obvious craptacular rush job on the T28 and M103 also hinders the resin guys. I know of a completed resin master for the Black Prince and a 75% complete ARL 44 that will never be released because there is a justified fear that as soon as it's announced Dragon will kneecap them by releasing a rushed inaccurate (but sale draining) injection model before they've finished pouring RTV.



There is a commentary in this that the resin guys who have these fears can employ a US Patent Office copyright process to protect their investments (or similar process in the UK). It can in the least be used to prevent importation of the copied product into the country, which would even make Dragon take notice because no kits can be sold otherwise (in that country), and that includes sales from overseas dealers too.

It's a legitimate legal process and US Customs will enforce it. Believe me, (I'm not allowed to speak of the relevant details), but I have personally used this process to alter a certain kit.

It's time the resin manufacturers do more to protect themselves vs hiding in fear of what the aggressive Chinese companies will do as they clearly have little respect for such issues. There are legitimate legal processes that are not expensive (I believe less than a $100 per), and can protect their properties. In the least, this can force the competitors to create their own version and not ape the resin kits to skip ahead in line.
ninjrk
Visit this Community
Alabama, United States
Joined: January 26, 2006
KitMaker: 1,381 posts
Armorama: 1,347 posts
Posted: Friday, May 23, 2014 - 09:58 AM UTC
While very true I think we may be talking about something slightly different. At least the two resin companies I am thinking of aren't afraid that Dragon will buy one of their kits and then reverse engineer it, they're worried that as soon as they announce the release of one Dragon (or whomever) ill immediately release a CAD spec sheet "future release". Drying up their sales even if it doesn't come out and, if it does, then pretty much obliterating them.

I agree though, it is an easy step to prevent the piracy that still happens. That said, what the heck are you doing with time to post here??!! My preordered TankArt 3 isn't going to mail itself. . .
rinaldi119
Visit this Community
Oregon, United States
Joined: September 22, 2004
KitMaker: 375 posts
Armorama: 282 posts
Posted: Friday, May 23, 2014 - 10:08 AM UTC

Quoted Text

While very true I think we may be talking about something slightly different. At least the two resin companies I am thinking of aren't afraid that Dragon will buy one of their kits and then reverse engineer it, they're worried that as soon as they announce the release of one Dragon (or whomever) ill immediately release a CAD spec sheet "future release". Drying up their sales even if it doesn't come out and, if it does, then pretty much obliterating them.

I agree though, it is an easy step to prevent the piracy that still happens. That said, what the heck are you doing with time to post here??!! My preordered TankArt 3 isn't going to mail itself. . .



And the pisser for me was I sooooo wanted to do a M103 for the next Modern title, I'm a fan. Well, ironically I'll likely add the M48 in it's place.

Yes, I'm back to the bench to finish my latest project for TA 4...! Enjoy your weekend Matt.
Shermania
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: January 30, 2013
KitMaker: 537 posts
Armorama: 531 posts
Posted: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 - 10:13 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Update: my turret looked like this this morining:



I decided it's time for a coat of Mr Surfacer 1200 and to see how much my work has changed the shape of the turret. As I didn't have enough photos of the original kit turret, I contacted John Charvat, who posted a review of the kit at APMS website (http://www.amps-armor.org/ampssite/reviews/showReview.aspx?ID=2991&Type=FL) and received his permission to use his pictures. So a few "BEFORE & AFTER" shots below:








My shape isn't perfect - far from it in fact. But it is MUCH closer to correct than the Dragon's turd... I meant "turret", of course...

And my turret can rotate full 360 degrees...




OMG!!! Okay, there is no way I would even attempt to do something like this. Unbelievable effort and kudos to you for even knowing where to start to pick and choose what areas of the original turret you could even work with. That really is a remarkable difference and I noticed from reading here that even the hard core "it's good enough for me" folks have backed off.

This reminds me of the Tamiya Jumbo turret issues except that kit had a usable hull if you were willing to putty up the final drive cover. So this is what, 30 years later(?) and many times worst when you consider that you are doing to the hull what you did to the turret and perhaps will be using an engine deck off another kit too, right?

Oh, wow, get the resin folks to make a master out of your build. That way the next time DML decides to copy a resin company mold at least they'll have something solid to start from

Amazing stuff Pawel, look forward to seeing what you post on the M6A1. I wonder if that one is as bad as this too, WOW!
KurtLaughlin
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 - 11:03 PM UTC

Quoted Text

The over-riding issue for with this mess of a kit is that by merely existing it almost eliminates the chance of a better version down the line due to the sales it will have.



How is it possible then that we have three Obj. 279 kits in plastic, two KV-5s, two K(5)Es, Bronco going ahead with their 8-rad armored cars long after AFV Club released theirs, a second company releasing a Horsa glider after the first one was cancelled as unprofitable, two sets of 105mm howitzer kits, two series of SU-152 kits, and follow-on 57mm and pack howitzer kits after tolerable if not good models have been released?

KL

1.90E_31
Visit this Community
Tennessee, United States
Joined: December 24, 2004
KitMaker: 252 posts
Armorama: 154 posts
Posted: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 - 01:55 AM UTC

Quoted Text

While very true I think we may be talking about something slightly different. At least the two resin companies I am thinking of aren't afraid that Dragon will buy one of their kits and then reverse engineer it, they're worried that as soon as they announce the release of one Dragon (or whomever) ill immediately release a CAD spec sheet "future release". Drying up their sales even if it doesn't come out and, if it does, then pretty much obliterating them.



I will provide two specific examples of when this has happened, and why Matt is absolutely correct. Back in the late 1990's, Trumpeter began acquiring resin ship kits. These specific kits (North Carolina, South Dakota, Indianapolis, San Francisco, etc.) were purchased from a hobby shop going out of business, and one of the employees let out on the internet that these kits were going to Trumpeter. Almost immediately, the sales of these kits in our line ceased. Now, the kits didn't appear for some years (the Indianapolis, for example, was just released last year), but there were NO sales for years because this knowledge was out there. The second is a rumor started by a "friend" of ours that there was going to be a plastic kit of HMS Rodney produced. There was no announcement by any company of this, but the rumor evaporated any sale of this kit. This happened five years ago. In the intervening time, a company name was associated with the rumor, and even though we know they have no plans of producing this subject, the rumor is still out there, and people still believe that this kit is going to be produced. Therefore, no sales, and the our kit will not be produced until the rumor goes away (in other words, not again).

Finally, two of the major plastic companies have learned something from the ship market. No matter what the quality or accuracy of the product, the kit will sell since it's less expensive than the equivalent resin kit. Trumpeter's Indianapolis has serious accuracy errors in the hull (the stern is more akin to the San Francisco than the Indianapolis) and they are well known. But, they also know that modelers will buy their kit over the resin kit, since the resin kit costs $245, and the plastic kit costs $80. Accuracy is immaterial considering they have that same resin kit, and the hull plan, and still didn't get the stern right. Plus, there are fit problems with the parts (the engineering of the assembly is problematic), but the kit will be the basis of a 1944 version with minimal parts added, even though the Indianapolis was refitted in early 1945, and the superstructure changed (similar to getting a Pz IIIA from a Pz IIIJ without replacing the suspension). They know it will sell simply because the modeler will buy theirs rather than the resin kit built to the 1944 design. So, you question their attention to accuracy, but they know that the release will be bought simply because the price is lower than a resin kit, and the accuracy is immaterial.

Jon
djohannsen
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: June 24, 2005
KitMaker: 364 posts
Armorama: 355 posts
Posted: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 - 02:53 AM UTC
Thank you Pawel, Jon, Paul, and all others who contriubted so much to this thread. There is a lot to chew over in these pages: the initial discussion of the accuracy issues, Pawel's incredible modeling skills, Jon's (and other's) discussions of the realities of the small resin makers and the impact of the plastic companies entering (or even rumors of them entering) a particular segment. This thread has been a (bitter sweet) delight, from beginning to end.


Dave
KurtLaughlin
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 - 04:10 AM UTC

Quoted Text

So, you question their attention to accuracy, but they know that the release will be bought simply because the price is lower than a resin kit, and the accuracy is immaterial.



One should not discount the fact that resin is essentially a "last resort" media for people who want a subject but can't or don't want to scratchbuild. The reputation is well earned because of the almost universal issues with the media and its suppliers:

- Poor availability.
- Poor communication with customers and potential customers.
- Poor directions.
- Incomplete kits (no decals or tracks or wheels, or with parts that are so bad they have to be replaced).
- Poor engineering and fit.
- A lower level of detail.
- Difficult assembly because of the absence of locating features or the use of white metal or other horrible materials.
- The high incidence of mis-molded, warped, or missing parts.
- The extra effort needed just to get to the point where plastic kits are on the trees.

. . . And the fact that it is resin is no guarantee that it accurate anyway.

Now not every resin kit or company has these problems and some have conquered them quite nicely, but people know that there's a good chance that some or all of these issues are going to be in any resin kit they buy. The fact is, when you add these negatives to the big negative of price you get to the point where even a "D" grade plastic kit can look like it will provide a better hobby experience than an "B" grade resin one. If you start comparing the "A" or "B" plastic to the "A" or "B" resin, there's no contest. Most people wouldn't choose a resin kit over a plastic one with equivalent accuracy even if the price was the same. I don't think many would even consider the resin unless it was at least half the price of the plastic.

There's a reason resin kits are so vulnerable to even the hint of a plastic kit, and the reason is their overwhelmingly negative reputation, not just that they are more expensive.

KL
Mini_Bolo
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: March 07, 2014
KitMaker: 4 posts
Armorama: 4 posts
Posted: Thursday, July 17, 2014 - 11:45 AM UTC
Oh well, maybe in 30 years or so I'll be able to finally make an accurate M103 kit.

On the subject of resin kits, how is Commander Model's M7 Medium tank? I really like that tank and would like to make one.
Zarkus
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: July 05, 2014
KitMaker: 18 posts
Armorama: 18 posts
Posted: Friday, July 18, 2014 - 02:53 AM UTC
Thanks for the great critique, Pawel! I just bought the RB barrel and will implement many of the fixes. I'm really surprised at how far off the kit is! I think it actually took purposeful effort to screw it up this bad. No one can make that many mistakes by accident.
Shermania
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: January 30, 2013
KitMaker: 537 posts
Armorama: 531 posts
Posted: Thursday, July 24, 2014 - 08:56 PM UTC
I'm surprised the prices on this haven't fallen since all these issues came to light.
Vodnik
Visit this Community
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Thursday, July 24, 2014 - 09:10 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I'm surprised the prices on this haven't fallen since all these issues came to light.



I wouldn't expect them to come down. Only if there will be large unsold stocks left at distributor's warehouses a few months from today, they might consider reducing prices to get rid of them. Dragon will certainly not change their prices.
djohannsen
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: June 24, 2005
KitMaker: 364 posts
Armorama: 355 posts
Posted: Thursday, July 24, 2014 - 09:16 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I'm surprised the prices on this haven't fallen since all these issues came to light.


I, too, have noted that the price has not come down. I think that we can only infer that the kit is selling well. It would seem that the person who strolls into a hobby shop or who casually buys a kit on-line is not someone who frequents these boards and/or is not overly concerned with crafting a miniature and accurate replica of the real vehicle. Interesting that Tasca (who gave us the most accurate Sherman kits ever) went away and Dragon (who gave us this M103) seems to be enjoying brisk sales...
okievit
Visit this Community
Cadiz, Spain / España
Joined: June 18, 2003
KitMaker: 225 posts
Armorama: 206 posts
Posted: Thursday, July 24, 2014 - 10:25 PM UTC
[quote]
Quoted Text

Interesting that Tasca (who gave us the most accurate Sherman kits ever) went away and Dragon (who gave us this M103) seems to be enjoying brisk sales...


Tasca didn't go away. Tasca became Asuka, and is releasing again. Some boxes have Asuka stickers on them, newer ones have proper Asuka labels.

http://asukamodel.com/

Olaf
Shermania
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: January 30, 2013
KitMaker: 537 posts
Armorama: 531 posts
Posted: Friday, July 25, 2014 - 03:05 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

I'm surprised the prices on this haven't fallen since all these issues came to light.


I, too, have noted that the price has not come down. I think that we can only infer that the kit is selling well. It would seem that the person who strolls into a hobby shop or who casually buys a kit on-line is not someone who frequents these boards and/or is not overly concerned with crafting a miniature and accurate replica of the real vehicle. Interesting that Tasca (who gave us the most accurate Sherman kits ever) went away and Dragon (who gave us this M103) seems to be enjoying brisk sales...



Brisk sales? Sounds like a good theory and makes sense. Unfortunately, if true, that might seal the deal on another company putting a better one out.

I guess it only matters to beat competitors to market. Way down on the list of priorities is making a decent model. Sad really since it seemed that in the last 8 or so years the overall trend has been to produce more accurate kits. Does DML deserve kudos for understanding the infusion of fad WOT modelers wouldn't care?
djohannsen
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: June 24, 2005
KitMaker: 364 posts
Armorama: 355 posts
Posted: Friday, July 25, 2014 - 04:34 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Brisk sales? Sounds like a good theory and makes sense. Unfortunately, if true, that might seal the deal on another company putting a better one out.

Does DML deserve kudos for understanding the infusion of fad WOT modelers wouldn't care?



Of course "brisk sales" is me blowing smoke, so don't give the comment any real credence (just my guess since I don't see the M103 discounted by any retailer).

I do (begrudgingly) think that Dragon does deserve some credit for seeing the casual modeler and WoT player as an untapped resource. Again, I have no insight with Dragon, but it seems likely that we are seeing kits of these relatively obscure tanks (M6 and M103) only because they feature so prominantly in WoT. It was probably a pretty sound business decision for Dragon not to spend any time or money (on research and elaborate tooling) in getting these kits to market.
C_JACQUEMONT
Visit this Community
Loire-Atlantique, France
Joined: October 09, 2004
KitMaker: 2,433 posts
Armorama: 2,325 posts
Posted: Saturday, July 26, 2014 - 03:48 AM UTC
Hi,

Don't know if this was mentioned but a M103A2 is in the way. Here's Dragon's blufb, don't laugh at the last sentence!


Quoted Text

M103A2


The first Black Label item to be released was a rendition of the 65-ton M103 Heavy Tank that served with the US Army and US Marine Corps (USMC) during the height of the Cold War from 1957-1974. That kit has now been joined by another variant - the modernized M103A2. The whole design of the M103 series was predicated on the need to counter Soviet heavy tanks, and thus the tank boasted a rifled 120 mm M58 cannon for long-distance engagements. This gun fired a separate-loading round, which required two loaders, thus requiring five men in the crew. The armor was up to 180 mm thick on the front of the turret. Some 300 T43E1 tanks were built, of which 219 were later converted to M103A1 standard. Of particular interest is the M103A2 version represented by this kit, with 153 rebuilt into this configuration for the USMC beginning in 1964.
Dragon’s kit of the M103A2 builds upon Black Label’s previous M103A1. New parts like rear panel, fender/bracket, traveling lock, storage boxes, turret handrails are incorporated onto this new plastic kit. The irregular form of the turret is modified accurately in shape. The cast texture on the hull is also beautifully recreated. This tank has been produced with modeling convenience in mind too, with such features as easy-fitting DS tracks. With Dragon’s know-how and technological skills applied to this subject, this M103A2 Heavy Tank continues with the high standards that the Black Label series has set.



Cheers,

Christophe