Hmmm... Nothing about any of the issues with the hull.
I'll just say wait.

Well at least the turret should clear the back deck on this one. This was a grail kit for me and I was very disappointed after I bought it. It may be the only game in town though. I doubt any other company will kit it, it's not a panzer. So I may even get the A2 since thats the version I wanted most. I will wait and see this time though and will buy 2 RB barrels.
It will be a modelling challenge to make a cheap purse out of a sows ear. Silk is out of the question.

I have wanted to build a model of that tank ever since I saw it in Radcliff KY too many years ago. Well to quote an old First Shirt "FIDO". (F**k it drive on)

I hope they do better with the Saladin.

Tom

You can't polish a turd, but with enough elbow grease you make it a little shiny.

Wow, they are retooling the turret? That is saying something right there, I'm glad for you guys that love this tank. Interesting that they listened to the complaints, good for them.

It will have a lower back deck M60 style, and the exhausts are out the back so nothing to hit the turret bustle.

Tom

Meng M103A2=Plastic porn to me! Hey......I can dream!!!

We'll see, the statement is ambiguous enough it could be a new turret (and hopefully cannon) or not. I got a good laugh out of this though: 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.

No mention of a mantlet cover either.

Here's a copy paste paragraph from an email of mine which basically explains my feelings in a nutshell. Just my opinion and nothing more.
Absolutely agree about the fact there is an injected alternative to the Commander Models resin set. As to being a rivet counter, I am on the far left of that meter. About the only time I am tilted toward the left. This is my issue with this Joe. If one morning we woke up, and "POOF!" There's a M103 for our building pleasure. Great! I'm happy. Can't wait.
But that's not the way it happened. DML announced with, great fanfare no less, last October that there will be a new Dragon line. The coveted "Black Label" line. "Rare armor vehicles manufactured to Dragons standards at a reasonable price" I believe was the catch phrase. So.....6 months later. We are presented with a beautifully boxed.....turd. I guess they didn't think we'd catch on because on spruce "D" there's a conspicuous blank spot where an A2 engine deck would fit. When I first read Pawel Krupowicz review and comparison ( file:///Users/paulrmiles/Documents/Vodnik's%20M103A1%20kit%20information%20page.webarchive ) I thought he was beyond brutal. But after having a conversation with Mike Mummy on the matter, Pawel's right. In this day and age of access to actual existing examples and images on the web there's no excuse for this. Unless your cutting corners. And at a msrp of $72 USD's, unacceptable. Yes, it will look like a M103(A2) when I'm done. But I won't be thrilled. I guess my issue is disappointment. As mentioned earlier, if we woke up one morning and there was this kit sitting there, fine. But.............if you blow smoke up my ass for 6 month's, I had better feel real good after those 6 months.

[quote]... continues with the high standards that the Black Label series has set.[quote]

So basically this sentence means that DML will continue with the high standards of inaccuracies, lack of research, and overpricing that the Black Label series has unfortunately set.

I'm not a rivet counter in any way, shape, or form but even this appalls me.

Hey folks just for Sh#ts and giggles Amazon has the A1 for $63 along with the M6 nearly the same price with free shipping.

Tom

As a pretty much OOB modeler from the 60's and 70's I have built some fairly rudimentary kits that only had a vague resemblance to the subject matter and was happy with the results. Now as I return to the hobby the volume of research material at your fingertips is phenomenal and the quality of available kits has improved tenfold as has the variety of subject matter. Unfortunately that is where the problem comes in. Because of the available info on most equipment it is easy to see where the kit manufacturers drop the ball if you look. This should lead to better kits but that does not seem to be the case here. In this day of online schematics, and photos, precision measuring devices such as lasers and computer aided 3-D drafting programs, every kit produced by a major manufacturer should build into an accurate, miniature replica of the original.

How is it that a company like DML could make so many errors on such basic things as gun barrel length and mantlet width? As a previous poster wrote, it is just as easy for them to get the correct dimensions and make accurate tooling so why would DML put out such a poor product? Particularly when they charge as much as they do. The only answer is that they know we are at their mercy since they are the only game in town. This is just unconscionable. I appreciate the efforts of Pawel and other so called "rivet counters" even though I am not in their league. The skill you guys show in modifying and scratch building the parts needed to correct the inaccuracies is inspiring and may some day encourage me to attempt such major surgery following your step by step article. In the meantime, I will sadly forego purchasing such a flawed kit of an impressive machine.

I don't see any sign of a redesign on the turret here:

I think they added the fittings for the searchlight to the roof.

ALso, I noticed this before but forgot to mention it, there is what appears to be a round access cover on the removable panel in front of the cupola.

It is NOT an access cover, it is the armoured top of an aircleaner. The same domed kind you find on Shermans. Check to the right side of this photo of the 103 roof and you can see it sits proud of the surface with air access all around the rim.



This one shows the same area without the domed cover. You can see the air inlet pipe clearly.



You can also see how a plate of steel was roughly welded over the old sight aperture on the left side of the photo.

The shapes of the hump on that large removable panel are not nearly as well defined as on the kit, the radii are larger and the contours much softer.

HTH

Paul

I take back what I said on my last post. Apparently DML was simply referring to a pre planned small alteration on the turret for the search light?

In Paul's photos, the removable panel's original gunsight molding sticks up quite a bit. That is simply not reflected on DML's panel.

The removable cover in the DML kit is completely wrong in many ways... If you look closely at the photos of the real thing you can notice that the cover top is in fact horizontal from about a fourth of its width back to the rear edge. Only the forward part is sloping downwards. In fact this cover is attached to the part of the roof that is sloping forward. In the kit the cover is on the horizontal roof and is sloping both at the front and at the rear...

You can see the difference here:

Nice work on your correction to the turret.

Greg

I know we're starting to flog a totally dead horse here, but I still can't get my head around what a completely crap kit this is. It just boggles my mind.

/quote]
I know we're starting to flog a totally dead horse here, but I still can't get my head around what a completely crap kit this is. It just boggles my mind.[/quote

What he said.

I do not agree with that. This kit is compelted inaccurate. It is actually about as far from accurate as you can get. But the kits is not "a completely crap kit"
Now before you flame me and type a long reply about this kit let me say this. I am half way through an out of the box build of this kit. I have not spent a second filling and sanding and the parts only need an ocaasional scrape with a knife to clean up the mold lines. (Yes the exhaust cover is coming) You have to ask your self if you would be happy with an accurate kit with sink holes/ejector pin marks all over. How about soft details, or even better how about one of those old gem kits were there is more flash than part?
In my book this kit scores a 2 out of 3 or 66%. Yes that is still failing and very sad for a company like dragon but far from complete crap. It competes with the best for fit and finish. Dragon even puts the attachment points on the textured areas so when you clean them up it does not mess up the texture. An average skill level modeler can very easily complete this kit and have a nice looking result. It will not look exactly like an M103 but still look nice.
So that is my two cents worth, I look at three things in a kit, accuracy is just one of the three and not all that much more important than the other two.

I did asked myself that question, and you know what? It is a piece of crap kit.

I'd take an old model with all of its sink marks and ejector marks, but fairly accurate and for a fraction of the cost of the Black Turd. All you'd have to do is to fill the sink marks, texture the turret, get a PE fret and tracks, still cheaper than this DRagon kit and accurate, also as much fun.

But you know what are we talking about now? We compare modern kit released in 2014 to kits that were released in 1980s, possibly in eastern europe (you mentioned heavy flash), and those kits are more accurate, some other from that timeframe have equally good fit, sure they lack a few details, but the dragons M103 also does, And this is what is really sad about this whole affair... I'd take Italeri M47 or M4A1 over this M103 in a hartbeat.

M103 was not a grail kit for me as it is for some, but it's a hell of a sexy tank, and I'd be even up to the challenge of making it 'fairly' accurate as Paweł did with his and using this blog as a guide, but I refuse to buy it. Not because its too much work or because I have too many kits in the stash (which I do). It's about sending a message to dragon, voting with my wallet if you will, even though it is not really likely they will hear me.

Cheers,
Greg

[/quote]
I did asked myself that question, and you know what? It is a piece of crap kit.

I'd take an old model with all of its sink marks and ejector marks, but fairly accurate and for a fraction of the cost of the Black Turd. All you'd have to do is to fill the sink marks, texture the turret, get a PE fret and tracks, still cheaper than this DRagon kit and accurate, also as much fun.

But you know what are we talking about now? We compare modern kit released in 2014 to kits that were released in 1980s, possibly in eastern europe (you mentioned heavy flash), and those kits are more accurate, some other from that timeframe have equally good fit, sure they lack a few details, but the dragons M103 also does, And this is what is really sad about this whole affair... I'd take Italeri M47 or M4A1 over this M103 in a hartbeat.

M103 was not a grail kit for me as it is for some, but it's a hell of a sexy tank, and I'd be even up to the challenge of making it 'fairly' accurate as Paweł did with his and using this blog as a guide, but I refuse to buy it. Not because its too much work or because I have too many kits in the stash (which I do). It's about sending a message to dragon, voting with my wallet if you will, even though it is not really likely they will hear me.

Cheers,
Greg
[/quote]

My response is simple, to each his own.

I hope dragon hears the screams on the net and those who speak with the lack of a purchase and produces kits that are accurate. I also agree they Wil not, but I do prefer a kit that does not need the cost of the kit in extra parts and PE to look good. I will not get into all the great numbers about this and just say. ..
In the end build what you like the way you like, it's your hobby.

You may now resume bashing the 103

Sure thing, I agree that everybody should do with their models as they please.

Cheers
Greg

As far as I can see dragon never have and never will take any notice of any criticism of their products. So I think 'voting with our wallets might be the only solution. Just one more thing, if they screw up the Saladin I swear I will never buy another dragon kit as long as I live.

The sad part is the price they charge for it. Way to expensive for the problems it has. It should be near perfect for what it costs.