The pads on the Modelkasten tracks seem a bit narrow but closer to true than the others.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Tamiya/Italeri Sdkfz 10
165thspc
#521
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 28, 2014 - 05:30 AM UTC
Perhaps these images will help in some small way.
The pads on the Modelkasten tracks seem a bit narrow but closer to true than the others.
The pads on the Modelkasten tracks seem a bit narrow but closer to true than the others.
165thspc
#521
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 - 11:15 PM UTC
Jumping in here again - sorry. A detail I like to add to the model is the front fender bracing:
(Photos copyright 2014 Michael Koenig)
(Photos copyright 2014 Michael Koenig)
Thudius
Joined: October 22, 2012
KitMaker: 1,194 posts
Armorama: 1,077 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 - 01:23 AM UTC
Those are very helpful, thanks. Trying to decide if I have bench time today or not 
Kimmo
Kimmo
Biggles2
Joined: January 01, 2004
KitMaker: 7,600 posts
Armorama: 6,110 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 - 03:07 AM UTC
A really ancient clunker re-released by Tamiya, although I don't know why as Dragon has a much newer and better one. But then, a lot of modellers would rather have a well-crafted Tamiya kit, which just falls together. 
165thspc
#521
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 - 04:04 AM UTC
Anyone have the link to the Armorama kit review of the Dragon model D7? I would love to see it for comparison.
When I built mine all we had was the ESCI and Italeri offerings - it was that or nothing. Also no SPG only the 1 ton prime mover and the flak variant.
When I built mine all we had was the ESCI and Italeri offerings - it was that or nothing. Also no SPG only the 1 ton prime mover and the flak variant.
Thudius
Joined: October 22, 2012
KitMaker: 1,194 posts
Armorama: 1,077 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 - 05:09 AM UTC
Quoted Text
A really ancient clunker re-released by Tamiya, although I don't know why as Dragon has a much newer and better one. But then, a lot of modellers would rather have a well-crafted Tamiya kit, which just falls together.
A clunker may be a tad harsh, a gem it most certainly isn't. The outlines and size are mostly correct. The fit is at times unfortunate, but the same can be said of newer kits. Every issue so far can be fairly easily fixed, and I think a fix for the tracks might be pretty straight forward if not tedious. It all comes down to what the modeler expects and wants for the price they pay. Throw in a set of pe and you might be able to get a good looking model for much less than the Dragon offering, if you're willing to put the time in.
Quoted Text
Anyone have the link to the Armorama kit review of the Dragon model D7? I would love to see it for comparison.
Here's the Ausf A with 5 cm gun. It is not without it's share of issues either.
https://armorama.kitmaker.net/review/10403
Before we get into a which is better/worse thread (I hope that was a subtle enough hint), let me say that is always going to be a matter of expectations and preference. Some build for the heck of it and don't particularly care if something isn't right and that's perfectly fine. It's their choice. The same is equally true of someone wanting a very accurate bells and whistles kit. The same goes for pricing points, each of us is free to decide what is good value.
I don't have a problem with re-pops of kits like these. They are excellent gateway kits; not that expensive and a good starting point to take your skills to a new level. Not everybody can get their hands on other kits, or want to pay the premium for them, or want to order them from another country. What you or I do is simply what you or I do, and so on and so forth applied to everybody else.
And with that said, we'll eagerly await the next installment of bench time follies.
Kimmo
165thspc
#521
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 - 09:51 AM UTC
Thanks Kimmo - that new Dragon D7 kit has a lot to recommend it!
Mike
Mike
CMOT
Editor-in-Chief
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 10,954 posts
Armorama: 8,571 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 - 10:45 AM UTC
Very nice build you have there Kimmo.
firstcircle
Joined: November 19, 2008
KitMaker: 2,249 posts
Armorama: 2,007 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 - 11:42 AM UTC
Kimmo, as the author of that Dragon review you linked to, I have to say I laughed at the uncanny resemblance of your photo of the ill fitting wheel / sprocket arrangement to my photo of such a similar problem in the Dragon kit... 
There's obviously something very challenging about that interleaved arrangement of those wheels in such close proximity that the kit designers really struggle with.
There's obviously something very challenging about that interleaved arrangement of those wheels in such close proximity that the kit designers really struggle with.
Thudius
Joined: October 22, 2012
KitMaker: 1,194 posts
Armorama: 1,077 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 - 12:16 PM UTC
Thanks Darren. And Matthew, yes those interleaved wheels can be a pain. Not only are they tight fitting, but if the geometry or size is off, it makes it that much worse. The Bronco Pz IF had issues as well, and that was well engineered for the most part. There is almost zero room for error if you want a scale appearance with these set ups.
Kimmo
Kimmo
Thudius
Joined: October 22, 2012
KitMaker: 1,194 posts
Armorama: 1,077 posts
Posted: Thursday, October 02, 2014 - 01:44 AM UTC
Found a couple of hours today. I cleaned up the road wheels, there is a bit of flash to be dealt with ditto for the sprockets, and shimmed the remaining pairs. I shaved down the right side sprocket as well, a much better fit now. I noticed a couple of areas where you can remove width from. On the inside face, the centre hub should be shaved down a bit, I hadn't marked that previously or even considered it might hinder the fit. You can cheat a little bit by removing the raised lip on the backside of the inner sprocket half. This shouldn't be seen at all once everything is in place.
I did a little thinking with the track pad issue and came up with a couple of ideas. As you can see in the pic below, the pad should extend slightly forward of the link. So, two options come to mind: glue a shim strip and profile or shave off the pad completely and replace with a new one made from strips. There are a couple of spare links to play with so I'll try both methods next time around.
I got the radiator cap and hood latches in place. Much fun was had cleaning up these parts, be very careful here. I discovered why the lip on the left side of the hood is there. The latch sits on it, the instructions make it look like it should go in the hole. Now, whether this is actually correct or not is still a bit of a mystery. The other latches are easier to mount if you shave off the locating stubs. I'll go back and do a little more seam cleaning once the glue has set.
And that's it for today. I might get another couple of hours in tomorrow but will definitely have plenty of time next week. Knock on wood.
Kimmo
I did a little thinking with the track pad issue and came up with a couple of ideas. As you can see in the pic below, the pad should extend slightly forward of the link. So, two options come to mind: glue a shim strip and profile or shave off the pad completely and replace with a new one made from strips. There are a couple of spare links to play with so I'll try both methods next time around.
I got the radiator cap and hood latches in place. Much fun was had cleaning up these parts, be very careful here. I discovered why the lip on the left side of the hood is there. The latch sits on it, the instructions make it look like it should go in the hole. Now, whether this is actually correct or not is still a bit of a mystery. The other latches are easier to mount if you shave off the locating stubs. I'll go back and do a little more seam cleaning once the glue has set.
And that's it for today. I might get another couple of hours in tomorrow but will definitely have plenty of time next week. Knock on wood.
Kimmo
165thspc
#521
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Thursday, October 02, 2014 - 06:04 AM UTC
F.Y.I. - if you unlock both sides of the hood/bonnet, two men can lift it off entirely and set it on the ground out of the way. Great help for doing heavier maintenance!
Interestingly enough, only the poor, lowly old ESCI kit bothers to model that lower second row of louvers present between the body below the hood and the inside of the fenders. (Oh AND the brand new Dragon kit!)
165thspc
#521
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Thursday, October 02, 2014 - 07:10 AM UTC
GREAT set of D7 photos in a "Prime Portal" walk-around at:
http://www.primeportal.net/transports/alan_ranger/demag-d7_sd.kfz.10/index.php?Page=1
http://www.primeportal.net/transports/alan_ranger/demag-d7_sd.kfz.10/index.php?Page=1
165thspc
#521
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Thursday, October 02, 2014 - 07:20 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Interestingly enough, only the poor, lowly old ESCI kit bothers to model that lower second row of louvers present between the body below the hood and the inside of the fenders. (Oh as does the brand new Dragon kit!)
Also the ESCI kit included the "DEMAG" badge cast delicately into the radiator cowl and much more correct front fenders and headlight brackets than the Italeri/Revell/Tamiya offering. Just saying.
Another note: If you just have to have the cloth top in the raised position the Revell kit includes a fantasticly realistic molding of same.
firstcircle
Joined: November 19, 2008
KitMaker: 2,249 posts
Armorama: 2,007 posts
Posted: Thursday, October 02, 2014 - 08:17 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Interestingly enough, only the poor, lowly old ESCI kit bothers to model that lower second row of louvers present between the body below the hood and the inside of the fenders.
Michael, it does appear however that not all of them had those louvres along the full length of that panel, as can be seen in image 94 from the Prime Portal walkaround you referred to. It is certainly noticeable that on some vehicles the louvres are clearly visible while on others they are not, though that's not to say that even those few up at the front as on the photo shouldn't still be included in the kits.
Soz, tried to include a link, but I think they have a link defending thing going on. It's on page 5, fourth row down.
Thudius
Joined: October 22, 2012
KitMaker: 1,194 posts
Armorama: 1,077 posts
Posted: Thursday, October 02, 2014 - 08:53 AM UTC
Michael, that's one of the walk arounds I'm using for refs. I thought the louvers or lack thereof were early/late identifiers? And it is a shame that this kit really isn't up to Italeri's usual standards, at least in terms of molding quality.
Kimmo
Kimmo
165thspc
#521
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Thursday, October 02, 2014 - 09:35 AM UTC
Not sure about the early/late question but will do some more research.
I do want to also point out that the second row of louvers is only on the passenger side of the D7.
I do want to also point out that the second row of louvers is only on the passenger side of the D7.
firstcircle
Joined: November 19, 2008
KitMaker: 2,249 posts
Armorama: 2,007 posts
Posted: Thursday, October 02, 2014 - 11:57 PM UTC
Michael / Kimmo, also on the subject of "DEMAG" being stamped on the radiator cover, I wouldn't get too hung up on that either as I don't believe all of them had it.
Try this image: http://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/halftracks/sdkfz-10/sd-kfz-10-early/
Something to bear in mind is that around 14000 of these were built, partly why there are so many photos, but also of course why it can get so confusing trying to pin down what is a "correct" feature and what isn't. Many aspects of the vehicles were changed through time partly by deliberate design and partly expediency. Remember too that various companies built them, and i've wondered before if that is part of the explanation for some apparent inconsistencies in some kits, for example the shape of the front fenders.
Try this image: http://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/halftracks/sdkfz-10/sd-kfz-10-early/
Something to bear in mind is that around 14000 of these were built, partly why there are so many photos, but also of course why it can get so confusing trying to pin down what is a "correct" feature and what isn't. Many aspects of the vehicles were changed through time partly by deliberate design and partly expediency. Remember too that various companies built them, and i've wondered before if that is part of the explanation for some apparent inconsistencies in some kits, for example the shape of the front fenders.
Thudius
Joined: October 22, 2012
KitMaker: 1,194 posts
Armorama: 1,077 posts
Posted: Friday, October 03, 2014 - 12:27 AM UTC
Bang on Matthew, I had mentioned upthread that I don't know what version/example Italeri based these kits on so I didn't unduly worry about the front fenders or nameplate. The rear mud guards are also slightly different then what my refs indicate, no doubt it's another case of these could have been done like this.
Kimmo
Kimmo
Biggles2
Joined: January 01, 2004
KitMaker: 7,600 posts
Armorama: 6,110 posts
Posted: Friday, October 03, 2014 - 02:59 AM UTC
Quoted Text
It all comes down to what the modeler expects and wants for the price they pay. Throw in a set of pe and you might be able to get a good looking model for much less than the Dragon offering, if you're willing to put the time in.
Kimmo
I wouldn't be too sure about that. Dragon USA lists their SdKfz 10 A with Pak 38 at $36.98. Tamiya USA lists their kit at $35.35. A whole $+1/2 cheaper...of course, no AT gun. If you want to throw in some PE for the Tam kit, then add $10. I'm not knocking your build (I've built this one myself around 25 yrs ago), but if you want a somewhat better looking kit OTB, with the AT gun (admittedly it's an old one), and less corrections,for almost the same price, it's not much of a contest.
Thudius
Joined: October 22, 2012
KitMaker: 1,194 posts
Armorama: 1,077 posts
Posted: Friday, October 03, 2014 - 03:30 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextIt all comes down to what the modeler expects and wants for the price they pay. Throw in a set of pe and you might be able to get a good looking model for much less than the Dragon offering, if you're willing to put the time in.
Kimmo
I wouldn't be too sure about that. Dragon USA lists their SdKfz 10 A with Pak 38 at $36.98. Tamiya USA lists their kit at $35.35. A whole $+1/2 cheaper...of course, no AT gun. If you want to throw in some PE for the Tam kit, then add $10. I'm not knocking your build (I've built this one myself around 25 yrs ago), but if you want a somewhat better looking kit OTB, with the AT gun (admittedly it's an old one), and less corrections,for almost the same price, it's not much of a contest.
As I said, it's a bit subjective. Not everyone is going to be able to get the Dragon offering cheaper, or possibly want to, and many will add etch to the Dragon. OOTB, there is no real contest as to which is the nicer looking kit. And with that said, let's put the comparison issue to rest for this blog, it is supposed to be about the latest incarnation of this kit, warts and all as the saying goes.
Kimmo
firstcircle
Joined: November 19, 2008
KitMaker: 2,249 posts
Armorama: 2,007 posts
Posted: Friday, October 03, 2014 - 05:35 AM UTC
Yeah, I think I'm right in saying this is actually a review sample...
Checking out eBay UK it is the case that the Dragon kit with the pak is around £10 more than the Tamiya kit can be had for, around 40 as opposed to 30. Not sure what the connection between Dragon USA and the parent is, but I suppose it might not be totally surprising that the price differential is less when they're selling both kits.
Not sure what details you specifically want the PE for, but in my review of the Dragon kit I think implied that much of what is supplied i s a bit pointless. That's me though...
Checking out eBay UK it is the case that the Dragon kit with the pak is around £10 more than the Tamiya kit can be had for, around 40 as opposed to 30. Not sure what the connection between Dragon USA and the parent is, but I suppose it might not be totally surprising that the price differential is less when they're selling both kits.
Not sure what details you specifically want the PE for, but in my review of the Dragon kit I think implied that much of what is supplied i s a bit pointless. That's me though...
Thudius
Joined: October 22, 2012
KitMaker: 1,194 posts
Armorama: 1,077 posts
Posted: Friday, October 03, 2014 - 08:27 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Not sure what details you specifically want the PE for, but in my review of the Dragon kit I think implied that much of what is supplied i s a bit pointless. That's me though...
I didn't have anything specific in mind, TBH I haven't given your review more than a skim so I don't know what etch is needed if any. I guess I was just generalising that some people feel the need to get an etch set if one is available.
Kimmo
165thspc
#521
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 05, 2014 - 02:14 AM UTC
[quote]Michael / Kimmo, also on the subject of "DEMAG" being stamped on the radiator cover, I wouldn't get too hung up on that either as I don't believe all of them had it.
Try this image: http://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/halftracks/sdkfz-10/sd-kfz-10-early/
Something to bear in mind is that around 14000 of these were built, partly why there are so many photos, but also of course why it can get so confusing trying to pin down what is a "correct" feature and what isn't. Many aspects of the vehicles were changed through time partly by deliberate design and partly expediency. Remember too that various companies built them, and i've wondered before if that is part of the explanation for some apparent inconsistencies in some kits, for example the shape of the front fenders.[/quotes]
I am right there with you guys on this statement. Some had a"Demag" badge, some had nothing at all on the radiator and then some (not all) built by Saurer had their Eagle badge in front of the radiator cap.
Try this image: http://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/halftracks/sdkfz-10/sd-kfz-10-early/
Something to bear in mind is that around 14000 of these were built, partly why there are so many photos, but also of course why it can get so confusing trying to pin down what is a "correct" feature and what isn't. Many aspects of the vehicles were changed through time partly by deliberate design and partly expediency. Remember too that various companies built them, and i've wondered before if that is part of the explanation for some apparent inconsistencies in some kits, for example the shape of the front fenders.[/quotes]
I am right there with you guys on this statement. Some had a"Demag" badge, some had nothing at all on the radiator and then some (not all) built by Saurer had their Eagle badge in front of the radiator cap.
Thudius
Joined: October 22, 2012
KitMaker: 1,194 posts
Armorama: 1,077 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 05, 2014 - 03:07 AM UTC
Going through the gallery I found these 3 examples of different fenders:
http://www.worldwarphotos.info/wp-content/gallery/germany/halftracks/sdkfz-10/Sd_Kfz_10_early.jpg
http://www.worldwarphotos.info/wp-content/gallery/germany/halftracks/sdkfz-10/german_halftrack_SdKfz_10_12.jpg
http://www.worldwarphotos.info/wp-content/gallery/germany/halftracks/sdkfz-10/german_halftrack_SdKfz_10_4_10.jpg
So I guess we will have to give Italeri the benefit of the doubt on the front fenders.
Kimmo
http://www.worldwarphotos.info/wp-content/gallery/germany/halftracks/sdkfz-10/Sd_Kfz_10_early.jpg
http://www.worldwarphotos.info/wp-content/gallery/germany/halftracks/sdkfz-10/german_halftrack_SdKfz_10_12.jpg
http://www.worldwarphotos.info/wp-content/gallery/germany/halftracks/sdkfz-10/german_halftrack_SdKfz_10_4_10.jpg
So I guess we will have to give Italeri the benefit of the doubt on the front fenders.
Kimmo
 |
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.