Hosted by Darren Baker
New Dragon MBT 70 (KPz 70) built-up pics
cesar
Joined: August 10, 2005
KitMaker: 110 posts
Armorama: 107 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 03:31 AM UTC
DerGeist
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 735 posts
Armorama: 707 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 03:52 AM UTC
I'm no KPz-70 expert, but the infantry phone box on the rear plate appears over sized to me and they're missing the mesh screens on the engine deck. Otherwise it checks out with a quick comparison of the pics I took of Munster's KPz-70. The movable suspension is a nice touch.
Erik
Erik
kruppw
Joined: March 17, 2006
KitMaker: 1,117 posts
Armorama: 1,115 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 03:59 AM UTC
thanks for the link. Looks okay, but I'll take it with a grain of salt after seeing some of their other modern releases. I'm no expert on the subject, but two areas that stick out for me are the optics and the 20mm aamg. The optics have clear lense but nothing behind them are far optics go even though the box art shows something there. The void are under the 20mm, should this be open like that or should their be some sort of ammo feed and some sort of mechanism to raise and lower the gun?
LeoCmdr
Joined: January 19, 2005
KitMaker: 4,085 posts
Armorama: 3,917 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 06:01 AM UTC
It's nice to see some build images of the KPz 70 kit.
Your collective observations do look accurate...the tank phone being too big, the lack of engine air intake screens, and the missing details on the L85 20mm cannon.
There should be a ton more detail for the L85 cannon in the tub, the mount, and on the gun itself.
There is a great walkaround of the KPz 70 on Prime Portal...
http://www.primeportal.net/tanks/david_lueck/mbt-70_experimental_tank/
If these are the actual details in the kit and not just a build mock up then Dragon could have done a better job and an aftermarket detail set will for sure be welcomed.
Still, the kit looks like it has lots of potential.
Your collective observations do look accurate...the tank phone being too big, the lack of engine air intake screens, and the missing details on the L85 20mm cannon.
There should be a ton more detail for the L85 cannon in the tub, the mount, and on the gun itself.
There is a great walkaround of the KPz 70 on Prime Portal...
http://www.primeportal.net/tanks/david_lueck/mbt-70_experimental_tank/
If these are the actual details in the kit and not just a build mock up then Dragon could have done a better job and an aftermarket detail set will for sure be welcomed.
Still, the kit looks like it has lots of potential.
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 06:27 AM UTC
Hopefully someone who knows how to review a kit will get it soon and share his thoughts with us. It won't be me this time, as I don't think I'll get this kit anyway, because:
a) I'm not interested in KPz70 and it doesn't look like MBT70 could be build from this kit,
b) I have a gut feeling I will not be getting a sample of this kit from Dragon... And possibly of any other kit in the future. It is possible that they like me a little less recently
a) I'm not interested in KPz70 and it doesn't look like MBT70 could be build from this kit,
b) I have a gut feeling I will not be getting a sample of this kit from Dragon... And possibly of any other kit in the future. It is possible that they like me a little less recently
LeoCmdr
Joined: January 19, 2005
KitMaker: 4,085 posts
Armorama: 3,917 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 07:02 AM UTC
I'll gladly review and build this kit. I'll volunteer right now.
It's a very important tank in the lineage of modern armour and in spite of any potential issues already quickly identified an injection moulded kit of the MBT-70 and KPz 70 has been long desired.
Pawel, an accurate review is what should be strived for at all times. Model producers shouldn't expect corners cut in a review if they have not put the effort into the kit from the onset.
It's a very important tank in the lineage of modern armour and in spite of any potential issues already quickly identified an injection moulded kit of the MBT-70 and KPz 70 has been long desired.
Pawel, an accurate review is what should be strived for at all times. Model producers shouldn't expect corners cut in a review if they have not put the effort into the kit from the onset.
210cav
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 6,149 posts
Armorama: 4,573 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 07:18 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Hopefully someone who knows how to review a kit will get it soon and share his thoughts with us. It won't be me this time, as I don't think I'll get this kit anyway, because:
a) I'm not interested in KPz70 and it doesn't look like MBT70 could be build from this kit,
b) I have a gut feeling I will not be getting a sample of this kit from Dragon... And possibly of any other kit in the future. It is possible that they like me a little less recently
Pawel-- did you get a review copy of the M-6 by Dragon?
thanks
DJ
PantherF
Joined: June 10, 2005
KitMaker: 6,188 posts
Armorama: 5,960 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 09:43 AM UTC
Gee... articulating suspension too?
Still a cool looking tank, I just like the other version much better. You know, the one AURORA did in 1/48th.
Jeff
Still a cool looking tank, I just like the other version much better. You know, the one AURORA did in 1/48th.
Jeff
chnoone
Joined: January 01, 2009
KitMaker: 1,036 posts
Armorama: 1,033 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 09:54 AM UTC
It looks like a KPz70 to me .... so I will buy it.
I will go through my refs from Koblenz and Munster but I am not expecting any substantial indifference's ... since it was only a prototype.
Cheers
Christopher
I will go through my refs from Koblenz and Munster but I am not expecting any substantial indifference's ... since it was only a prototype.
Cheers
Christopher
JPTRR
Managing Editor
#051
Joined: December 21, 2002
KitMaker: 7,772 posts
Armorama: 2,447 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 11:07 AM UTC
Quoted Text
...I just like the other version much better. You know, the one AURORA did in 1/48th.
Hi Jeff,
Me too!
Aurora MBT-70
LeoCmdr
Joined: January 19, 2005
KitMaker: 4,085 posts
Armorama: 3,917 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 11:34 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Gee... articulating suspension too?
It would be a major problem if the kit did not have the articulating suspension. That is a major feature of the tank.
Tamiya did it way back with their Type 74...not a big stretch in engineering the kit.
LeoCmdr
Joined: January 19, 2005
KitMaker: 4,085 posts
Armorama: 3,917 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 11:39 AM UTC
Quoted Text
It looks like a KPz70 to me .... so I will buy it.
I will go through my refs from Koblenz and Munster but I am not expecting any substantial indifference's ... since it was only a prototype.
Cheers
Christopher
I agree Chris. There were a total of 14 (combo of MBT-70 and KPz 70)of the beasts built as prototypes so I would expect some differences across the series that were probably not captured in this kit. Too bad they did not make production status.
LeoCmdr
Joined: January 19, 2005
KitMaker: 4,085 posts
Armorama: 3,917 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 05:13 PM UTC
The kit build appears to be about four horizontal rear grills short and the top of the circular exhausts should actually cut into the bottom grill.
This is interesting since Dragon is stating they had access to the Munster KPz 70.
This is interesting since Dragon is stating they had access to the Munster KPz 70.
C_JACQUEMONT
Joined: October 09, 2004
KitMaker: 2,433 posts
Armorama: 2,325 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 06:42 PM UTC
I've read the Black Label series are being developed by a separate team, well it seems they still have a steep learning curve compared to those who made say the Smart Kit StuG III Ausg G early or the Abrams kits for Dragon...
Kind of disapointed (understatement) that important AFVs won't get a proper treatment in plastic because this Black Label team failed to deliver. And the vehicles portrayed are available to photograph and measure, no excuse for sloppy work. It wasn't catastrophic for the T-28 because of the Accurate Armour resin kit but for the others it's really a shame...
Kind of disapointed (understatement) that important AFVs won't get a proper treatment in plastic because this Black Label team failed to deliver. And the vehicles portrayed are available to photograph and measure, no excuse for sloppy work. It wasn't catastrophic for the T-28 because of the Accurate Armour resin kit but for the others it's really a shame...
jimbrae
Joined: April 23, 2003
KitMaker: 12,927 posts
Armorama: 9,486 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 08:53 PM UTC
This is clearly directed at a specific group of customers (as was the M103A1) - the enthusiast rather than the casual buyer.
Unfortunately, releases like this seemed to be also aimed at the success of Takom and Meng. the pity is that DML seem to having serious problems with maintaining a high-quality (accurate) product in an increasingly competitive and demanding market.
So, one would asume, that DML would pull out all the stops to ensure that THEIR product would be superlative. From what I can gather this doesn't seem to be the case. While I share the dislike of the 'instant' Review based on a handful of photos, those who know this vehicle, seem to be somewhat skeptical?
Bringing out a subject like this, aimed at the most demanding sector of the market, is a very risky undertaking unless the manufacturer is prepared to do research properly.
Tasca did superb work with the M4 series - DML didn't and it looks as if it's the same story again.
Unfortunately, releases like this seemed to be also aimed at the success of Takom and Meng. the pity is that DML seem to having serious problems with maintaining a high-quality (accurate) product in an increasingly competitive and demanding market.
So, one would asume, that DML would pull out all the stops to ensure that THEIR product would be superlative. From what I can gather this doesn't seem to be the case. While I share the dislike of the 'instant' Review based on a handful of photos, those who know this vehicle, seem to be somewhat skeptical?
Bringing out a subject like this, aimed at the most demanding sector of the market, is a very risky undertaking unless the manufacturer is prepared to do research properly.
Tasca did superb work with the M4 series - DML didn't and it looks as if it's the same story again.
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 08:54 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Pawel-- did you get a review copy of the M-6 by Dragon?
thanks
DJ
No, I only get samples from them these days when I'm somehow involved in the kit design. In case of M103A1 I helped them somewhat in the road wheel design, although they did not use most of my suggestions, so the wheels are only marginally better than those in M48 kit (yes, they were slightly modified, but you have to look veeeery closely to see it...). I was not involved in any way in M6 and KPz70 kits design.
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 30, 2014 - 10:02 PM UTC
Quoted Text
http://www.dragon-models.com/d-m-item.asp?pid=DRA3550
Maybe I'm missing something here... Some modellers are saying that the new DRAGON MBT 70 (KPz 70) can't be built as an MBT 70..? If that's the case, why is DRAGON announcing this kit as an MBT 70 (KPz 70)..?
Or is this just more of DRAGON's inattention to accuracy and/or detail..?Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Monday, March 31, 2014 - 01:05 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Maybe I'm missing something here... Some modellers are saying that the new DRAGON MBT 70 (KPz 70) can't be built as an MBT 70..? If that's the case, why is DRAGON announcing this kit as an MBT 70 (KPz 70)..?
I'm not entirely sure, but I think that the whole international project was called MBT70 and actual US and German prototypes were called MBT70 and KPz70 respectively. So probably the kit name is not entirely wrong, but you can only build a German prototype from the parts included.
LeoCmdr
Joined: January 19, 2005
KitMaker: 4,085 posts
Armorama: 3,917 posts
Posted: Monday, March 31, 2014 - 01:37 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Maybe I'm missing something here... Some modellers are saying that the new DRAGON MBT 70 (KPz 70) can't be built as an MBT 70..? If that's the case, why is DRAGON announcing this kit as an MBT 70 (KPz 70)..?
I agree that it is more of a generic nomenclature for the overall vehicle project. The U.S. prototypes differ from the German ones in several ways including a completely different rear hull so additional parts would have to have been included in the kit...but not the case as the sprue shots would indicate.
We'll have to wait and see what is actually in the production box.
Maybe Dragon will also release the U.S. version?
Chuck4
Joined: November 13, 2013
KitMaker: 403 posts
Armorama: 401 posts
Posted: Monday, March 31, 2014 - 11:19 PM UTC
From pictures, I think there was't one definitive American MBT 70 configuration. There were a lot more dramatic differences between the different American prototypes of MBT-70 then there were between different German kpz70. So I think dragon could make several MBT-70s if it wanted to.
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Thursday, April 03, 2014 - 06:37 AM UTC
Quoted Text
From pictures, I think there was't one definitive American MBT 70 configuration. There were a lot more dramatic differences between the different American prototypes of MBT-70 then there were between different German kpz70. So I think dragon could make several MBT-70s if it wanted to.
Well, that's the thing with DRAGON- They'll advertise, engineer and sell without doing the necessary R&D, leaving us with no better than ambiguity...
EXCEPT for their WWII German stuff- They'll produce umpteen different Tiger Is just because there was a different type of bolt that may or may not have been used on the interior of one of the access hatches in the belly pan. I don't expect DRAGON to go nuts with the MBT 70/KPz-70 kit, but it WOULD be nice if they included OPTIONAL PARTS to build a US or a German version. Maybe one of the After-market companies like LEGEND, TANK WORKSHOP, NEW TMD, etc will help us out with a resin & PE Conversion kit. Unless another "mainstream" plastic kit manufacturer beats them to it- But I have my doubts about that ever happening...
But it would be too simple for DRAGON to grasp that concept. It's OK to release "early", "mid" and "late" versions of Pz.Kpfw.IIIs Ausf.E thru Ausf.N, plus "Trop" and "Russian Front" versions, rather than waste 30 seconds of consideration for an entirely new CAD & Slide-molded M3 Stuart-series or an M8 HMC. For Pete's sake, DRAGON won't even correct their US M3/M16 Half track kits which they erroneously molded with bolts standing proud of the body panels instead of the counter-sunk screws that these vehicles are supposed to have...
DRAGON pays A LOT more attention to their German WWII vehicles than they do to their US/ALLIED products. It would be nice if blah, blah, blah, blah.....
 |
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.