Hey guys,
It's disapppointing that DML have dropped the ball on this one, presumably to rush out the kit for the WoT crowd. I'll fix what I can reasonably fix, and have fun building and weathering, and I'll get my AMS fix with Trumpeter's T-80BV and others. I appreciate Pawel efforts, and hope he can verify them against some of Robert's measurements to support his comments so far.
Cheers,
Olaf
Hosted by Darren Baker
DML M103A1 - disappointment
okievit
Joined: June 18, 2003
KitMaker: 225 posts
Armorama: 206 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 27, 2014 - 09:48 PM UTC
jimbrae
Joined: April 23, 2003
KitMaker: 12,927 posts
Armorama: 9,486 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 27, 2014 - 10:06 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Seriously? What's wrong with you guys? It's a great kit. For those of you that don't rivet count and actually build kits. Ignore this guy,
While Pawel and I have butted heads on several occasions over the years, personally, i've learnt that ignoring Pawel when he makes a comment on accuracy is somewhat short-sighted.
While I have little personal interest in this as a subject, it does highlight some interesting (and continuing) contradictions from Dragon. From what i've seen in Reviews and Build-logs here, it seems as if there are some extraordinary recent releases out there - a Little jump in the 'evolutionary process'?
So, simply put why, does it seem (again) that DML when, one assumes, given all the information required to produce an accurate model, they drop the ball?
We saw it before with the T34s and with several of their M4s, but don't see such a prevalence amongst their core catalog - Axis?
They seemed to do a decent job with Abrams. Why this?
sdk10159
Joined: December 08, 2005
KitMaker: 556 posts
Armorama: 433 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 27, 2014 - 10:58 PM UTC
I've got the kit mostly built now. It certainly looks like an M103 and I'm having fun building it. Great kit. No fit issues, minor flash clean up. All the parts look right.
Certainly looks like an M103.
So, I highly recommend the kit (take that for what it's worth). If you're not one of those rivet counters, this is a great kit.
If you're one of those builders who take out a caliper and measure every part, you're going to hate this kit (and every other kit out there).
Enjoy the hobby. That's all it is, really.
Certainly looks like an M103.
So, I highly recommend the kit (take that for what it's worth). If you're not one of those rivet counters, this is a great kit.
If you're one of those builders who take out a caliper and measure every part, you're going to hate this kit (and every other kit out there).
Enjoy the hobby. That's all it is, really.
retiredyank
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 27, 2014 - 11:02 PM UTC
I really do hope these aren't the same standards to which they will hold the M6.
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 12:10 AM UTC
Quoted Text
If you're one of those builders who take out a caliper and measure every part, you're going to hate this kit (and every other kit out there).
I'm not one of those either. I don't need calipers to see that the gun barrel is 10 mm too short or that wheels are not where they are supposed to be. This is the scale of problems in this kit. The kit also has a lot of small accuracy issues, but they do not bother me at all - I can fix them and have fun doing it. The things I described before (and will describe in more detail soon) are of completely different category.
But as I already wrote before, and I agree with you fully here, that the kit can be built into a good looking model, recognizable as M103A1. Not an accurate M103A1 scale replica, but a good looking model for sure.
sdk10159
Joined: December 08, 2005
KitMaker: 556 posts
Armorama: 433 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 02:15 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextIf you're one of those builders who take out a caliper and measure every part, you're going to hate this kit (and every other kit out there).
I'm not one of those either. I don't need calipers to see that the gun barrel is 10 mm too short or that wheels are not where they are supposed to be. This is the scale of problems in this kit. The kit also has a lot of small accuracy issues, but they do not bother me at all - I can fix them and have fun doing it. The things I described before (and will describe in more detail soon) are of completely different category.
But as I already wrote before, and I agree with you fully here, that the kit can be built into a good looking model, recognizable as M103A1. Not an accurate M103A1 scale replica, but a good looking model for sure.
Pawel, I take your reviews seriously and I certainly didn't intend my post to have that condescending tone to it. I just wanted to point out that, despite the issues you noted, that the kit builds well and looks the part.
So, I say, have fun at it.
18Bravo
Joined: January 20, 2005
KitMaker: 7,219 posts
Armorama: 6,097 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 03:35 AM UTC
Fortunately I saved some photos to my desktop, although I don't have my external hard drive with ALL of the measurements.
I have sent Pawel some of my more detailed measurements. Here are some basic ones for those who have the kit and wish to see for yourselves. Remember that smaller items are much easier to measure that things like the turret race, but they won't be off my more than a half inch or so. Barrel measurements and wheel spacings are spot on. Remember again though that the idler can move forward or back several inches, so those measurements may vary somewhat.
Turret race: 98.75" dia.
Nose of hull to center of race: 112"
Center of left idler to center of sprocket: 238.25"
Center of right idler to center of sprocket: 237.35"
Center of left idler to center line of turret race: 98"
Gun barrel, rear of bore evacuator to front of collar: 13' 7/8"
Collar: 15 1/16"
Still looking for bore evacuator measurement and muzzle, but you should have enough to busy yourselves for now...
I have sent Pawel some of my more detailed measurements. Here are some basic ones for those who have the kit and wish to see for yourselves. Remember that smaller items are much easier to measure that things like the turret race, but they won't be off my more than a half inch or so. Barrel measurements and wheel spacings are spot on. Remember again though that the idler can move forward or back several inches, so those measurements may vary somewhat.
Turret race: 98.75" dia.
Nose of hull to center of race: 112"
Center of left idler to center of sprocket: 238.25"
Center of right idler to center of sprocket: 237.35"
Center of left idler to center line of turret race: 98"
Gun barrel, rear of bore evacuator to front of collar: 13' 7/8"
Collar: 15 1/16"
Still looking for bore evacuator measurement and muzzle, but you should have enough to busy yourselves for now...
ninjrk
Joined: January 26, 2006
KitMaker: 1,381 posts
Armorama: 1,347 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 03:41 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I suspect they will be. We've been talking about Dragon's A and B teams for years and I assume will be for many more years. They will put much more effort into a heavy long term seller than a kit like the T28/M103/M6. Especially when these kits are only likely to be available in resin otherwise and people will generally buy an injection M103 rather than buying a Commander's resin and a couple of sets of AFV tracks. It's like the T28, if you really love the tank than a labor of love build like an AA resin kit makes sense. Most people will buy a plastic one for a third the price and building time and be happy with it because it will look like a T28. It's just the way it is. . .
afv_rob
Joined: October 09, 2005
KitMaker: 2,556 posts
Armorama: 2,199 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 04:07 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Enjoy the hobby. That's all it is, really.
It really baffles me how the kit assembling crowd find it so hard to understand that for those of us who care about accuracy, this is how we enjoy the hobby. Why is it they feel the need to deride those of us with an interest in striving for accuracy and assessing a release with that criteria in mind.
I very rarely encounter any abuse on the forums directed toward those who choose to just build out of the box and ignore accuracy. Yet the amount of crap (mostly completely unconstructive) directed at those who find enjoyment in discussing accuracy matters is staggering. Every thread that takes this form is usually hijacked by the 'assembling' crowd and frankly its boring.
urumomo
Joined: August 22, 2013
KitMaker: 675 posts
Armorama: 667 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 04:15 AM UTC
Completely agree , Rob .
I think James Lee made an excellent post .
Keith
I think James Lee made an excellent post .
Keith
stufer
Joined: May 25, 2003
KitMaker: 416 posts
Armorama: 342 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 04:28 AM UTC
so if I notice the wheels are in the wrong place,or the hull shape is inaccurate,or the length of the engine deck has been compromised because of these errors I'm a rivet counter???
Just off to add an extra bogie unit to my Firefly,it looks like a Vc.......
Just off to add an extra bogie unit to my Firefly,it looks like a Vc.......
Tiger_213
Joined: August 10, 2012
KitMaker: 1,510 posts
Armorama: 1,443 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 04:29 AM UTC
Looking forward to seeing what you've got to say about this kit now that you have some measurements Pawel.
I wouldn't say that I'm a rivet counter, but if I know about an issue I want to fix it. I just can not see why there have been so many issues with this kit.
DML realize people are willing to pay for a kit reguardless they push out kits I guess.
I wouldn't say that I'm a rivet counter, but if I know about an issue I want to fix it. I just can not see why there have been so many issues with this kit.
DML realize people are willing to pay for a kit reguardless they push out kits I guess.
sauceman
Joined: September 28, 2006
KitMaker: 2,672 posts
Armorama: 2,475 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 05:07 AM UTC
Hello, my name is Rick and i'm a rivet counter.
"hi Rick!"
I agree with Rob, it seems that the OOB builders like to quickly voice their opinion with regards to accuracy with staements like, it's just a kit, it's good enough for me, etc. quickly berating the ones that prefer to build replicas. If your an OOB builder and don't care for accuracy fine, just keep it to yourself on accuracy threads such as this one and we won't spoil your OOB build threads with how you should put together a kit.
cheers
"hi Rick!"
I agree with Rob, it seems that the OOB builders like to quickly voice their opinion with regards to accuracy with staements like, it's just a kit, it's good enough for me, etc. quickly berating the ones that prefer to build replicas. If your an OOB builder and don't care for accuracy fine, just keep it to yourself on accuracy threads such as this one and we won't spoil your OOB build threads with how you should put together a kit.
cheers
warhog
Joined: November 26, 2003
KitMaker: 568 posts
Armorama: 398 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 06:56 AM UTC
Gun barrel is a easy fix I'm sure it won't be long before someone has a excellent metal one available. Other issues not so much. Got the kit going to build it was someway pricey. I Typically avoid dml kits anyway find them over complicated.
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 07:09 AM UTC
I decided to put my findings on my website. Please visit this page for more information about the kit errors (but only if you are interested in accuracy! If not, don't bother!).
http://vodnik.net/pages/M103A1/m103a1.htm
This is just the first part - I will update the page with more information soon.
http://vodnik.net/pages/M103A1/m103a1.htm
This is just the first part - I will update the page with more information soon.
18Bravo
Joined: January 20, 2005
KitMaker: 7,219 posts
Armorama: 6,097 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 07:41 AM UTC
I find it interesting that their M48A3 kit has cast hull numbers on it, while the M103A1 does not.
It's also clear by your photos that those who claimed
the kit could be cross kitted with the M48A3 are ill informed.
I say wait and see.
It's also clear by your photos that those who claimed
the kit could be cross kitted with the M48A3 are ill informed.
I say wait and see.
mparham02
Joined: September 02, 2010
KitMaker: 60 posts
Armorama: 38 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 08:34 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Hello, my name is Rick and i'm a rivet counter.
"hi Rick!"
I agree with Rob, it seems that the OOB builders like to quickly voice their opinion with regards to accuracy with staements like, it's just a kit, it's good enough for me, etc. quickly berating the ones that prefer to build replicas. If your an OOB builder and don't care for accuracy fine, just keep it to yourself on accuracy threads such as this one and we won't spoil your OOB build threads with how you should put together a kit.
cheers
Hi Rick....
That was very well said.
ninjrk
Joined: January 26, 2006
KitMaker: 1,381 posts
Armorama: 1,347 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 08:38 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Hello, my name is Rick and i'm a rivet counter.
"hi Rick!"
I agree with Rob, it seems that the OOB builders like to quickly voice their opinion with regards to accuracy with staements like, it's just a kit, it's good enough for me, etc. quickly berating the ones that prefer to build replicas. If your an OOB builder and don't care for accuracy fine, just keep it to yourself on accuracy threads such as this one and we won't spoil your OOB build threads with how you should put together a kit.
cheers
Eloquently stated. . .
dylans
Joined: March 05, 2009
KitMaker: 394 posts
Armorama: 380 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 08:46 AM UTC
Pawel:thanks for taking the time to post the comparison.
I fall into the non rivet counter modeler category, but I do appreciate knowing how well a kit was produced. and there might be a few things that I can easily fix.
mine is still on a slow boat from hong kong. I have a set of spade ace tracks for it (as long as they are the same as the M48) and I might wait for a metal barrel to come out.
please don't be discouraged by some of the comments. you are giving us a very constructive critique, by giving us helpful examples of what is wrong with the kit.
keep up the great work, I will be following your blog.
cheers
Dylan
I fall into the non rivet counter modeler category, but I do appreciate knowing how well a kit was produced. and there might be a few things that I can easily fix.
mine is still on a slow boat from hong kong. I have a set of spade ace tracks for it (as long as they are the same as the M48) and I might wait for a metal barrel to come out.
please don't be discouraged by some of the comments. you are giving us a very constructive critique, by giving us helpful examples of what is wrong with the kit.
keep up the great work, I will be following your blog.
cheers
Dylan
Belt_Fed
Joined: February 02, 2008
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,325 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 08:49 AM UTC
Hey Pawel,
Perhaps you should add some photos of the actual M103 and M48 to your site to aide in your description comparing the two kits. I think this small change would help viewers TO further understand and visualize the demensions a bit more clearly.
I look forward to seeing more built up pics and commentary.
Perhaps you should add some photos of the actual M103 and M48 to your site to aide in your description comparing the two kits. I think this small change would help viewers TO further understand and visualize the demensions a bit more clearly.
I look forward to seeing more built up pics and commentary.
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 09:06 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Perhaps you should add some photos of the actual M103 and M48 to your site
I will, but it is actually quite hard to see the differences in hull lengths on real tank photos. You need drawings and measurements to show such things clearly. Too many factors can contribute to the distorsion of photographs - the lens focal length, the distance from the object, the angle etc.
But I will use actual tank photos wherever they help to see the issues.
CMOT
Editor-in-Chief
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 10,954 posts
Armorama: 8,571 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 09:10 AM UTC
Regardless of if you consider yourself a rivet counter or not thier views are as valid as anyone elses. The case in point is that Pawel is making others aware of his displeasure at this model and clearly states his reasons for that opinion. I fall somewhere in the middle as regards accuracy, but regardless of your position it is good to have the information available on a products weakness.
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 09:14 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Gun barrel, rear of bore evacuator to front of collar: 13' 7/8"
13' 7/8" = 3985 mm => 114mm in 1/35 scale
And the kit barrel length from the rear of bore evacuator to front of the collar is 100.4mm... So we are 13.6mm short in this part of the barrel. And my comparison with dimensions provided by Hunnicutt suggests that another 6mm is lost in the bore evacuator/muzzle area...
ceerosvk
Joined: November 25, 2013
KitMaker: 171 posts
Armorama: 170 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 09:21 AM UTC
Well you are welcome to wait another 10 years (if ever) for another company to make this tank in 1/35 if some little proportional mistakes are THAT much of an issue for you. Its not like its such a scamp that you can tell serious inaccuracies when looking at it for the first time right away. Of course it would be great if it was 100 percent accurate but if you want to go as far as to start measuring proportions with drawings of the real tank and comparing it with the real thing and than deciding not to buy it because of some minor issues, go ahead, but for me this is a hobby not a life depending matter. P
I personally am glad as hell that some company found balls to make a kit of this quite unknown machine just as they did with T28 and i am not going to complain and not buy it just because some little flaws. In the end of the day it is a mass produced plastic model not some kind of replica or what. It DOES look like an M103, it is a mean looking machine and i am sure it will look pretty impressive once fully built.
Anyways i advise you all heavily to read this little article.
http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/01/02/on-is-4-model-accuracy/
I personally am glad as hell that some company found balls to make a kit of this quite unknown machine just as they did with T28 and i am not going to complain and not buy it just because some little flaws. In the end of the day it is a mass produced plastic model not some kind of replica or what. It DOES look like an M103, it is a mean looking machine and i am sure it will look pretty impressive once fully built.
Anyways i advise you all heavily to read this little article.
http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/01/02/on-is-4-model-accuracy/
stufer
Joined: May 25, 2003
KitMaker: 416 posts
Armorama: 342 posts
Posted: Friday, February 28, 2014 - 09:29 AM UTC
yep,WoT being a one stop,100% accurate,fully knowledgeable reference point.I'll stick to trawling my usual guides ( this site included) and try and avoid the fantasy......
 |
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.