That's great,what would be useful would be an explanation.Was it a bad batch, any cautions about what not to use on the tracks.I mean let us know.

Just to let you guys know, DragonCare came through, I found a package with the tracks upon returning from a short vacation.

Cheers,

Christophe

great ! any explanation about what was wrong ?

No, sorry.

Cheers,


Christophe

Good news, kudos to Dragoncare.
I have one (okay, maybe more) observation: Anyone remember the Dragon M4A2/76, Red Army version? It had what were billed as DS tracks, but the material they're molded from is totally different than current DS tracks that I have. Those old T49 stacks were stiff and didn't glue with solvent-based cements, requiring CA instead. People here may be comparing apples to oranges.
And I'm one of those that A) has had no issue with DS tracks decomposing or breaking, B) has had no issue with paint not adhering, and I use acrylics on them, and C) actually prefer them on builds that have live tracks, like Shermans. The detail is excellent, and I don't spend my valuable modeling time assembling track links. I do however use Friuls or SpadeAce when I need sag.
I will now go back to my box o' chocolates.

I have never had an issue with DS tracks breaking or disintegrating, but have had them pretty twisted and mangled in the box.


As a general rule, I throw the things out and replace them with Friul tracks. I miss the days of magic tracks.

Hey Folks! I've got a couple of Dragon kits with DS tracks on their way to me via eBay sellers and was wondering if there was any recent updated information available on the problems with the Dragon DS tracks that some folks were experiencing. The last posts on this were back in November of last year (2014), but I've read things on the Internet which suggest problems clear back to 2008. Reports seem to vary between something inherently wrong with the DS tracks themselves (the material that is used to construct them); to the type of paint used to paint and wash them (i.e., enamel bad!); to the type of cement used to glue them (any type of super glue bad!); to avoiding putting any type of thinner on them.

Anyone have the latest and greatest scoop? Thanks!!

I don't know if you read this recent thread on Missing Lynx Axis, so here it goes :

http://www.network54.com/Forum/47207/thread/1428245834/DS+Tracks+DML


Cheers,

Christophe

WOW! What a "donnybrook" over this! I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I've had good luck with my "DS" Tracks so far. "KEY WORDS" being "SO FAR", and I'm talking YEARS, now. But in the back of my mind, "Murphy's Law" still pops up...

I like the "DS" Tracks on my DRAGON US tracked vehicles, i.e their M4 Medium-series Sherman kits, M7 HMC-series Priest kits and the M1-series Abrams kits. I've even used the "DS" Tracks on a couple of my DRAGON Tiger I kits, and I even manage to create realistic "track-sag" by coating the INSIDE surfaces with "cyano-super glues", WITHOUT the tracks disintegrating.
Gotta be careful with that stuff!!! Also, I've used DRAGON's "DS" Tracks on some of my TASCA M4s, because of the single connecting points of each track run, AND the detail...

Having had trouble with "rubber band" tracks way back in the day of "REAL RUBBER BAND" tracks, which were made out of BLACK RUBBER, not like the vinyl stuff that TAMIYA still force-feeds us today. What's up with THAT? TAMIYA's vinyl tracks will still pose problems, so I've learned that painting my tracks with acrylics are my own personal best bet/solution.

Also, IMHO, I've compared DRAGON's "DS" Tracks from my DRAGON #3536 M1A2 SEP kits with the "Magic Tracks" from my DRAGON #3535 M1A1 AIM kits, (Yes, under magnification) and I can't say that I see ANY difference between them detail-wise, except for the fact that the AIM's "Magic Track" MAGICALLY LIKE TO DISINTEGRATE, ( ) even when using a comparatively "mild" cement like TESTORS Liquid Cement... So, to cure THAT problem, I bought several sets of "After-market" BRONCO "Big Foot Tracks" to use on my DRAGON M1A1 AIMs...

The debate over "Magic Tracks" and "DS" Tracks seems to be an on-going subject on this site, with NO final outcome in sight. I guess I'm a "fence-sitter", because I happen to find merit in BOTH types of tracks. I DO like the "Magic Tracks" for their detail, and the same goes for the "DS" Tracks, but you're going to have to REEEALLY try to convince me that the detail on the "DS" Tracks ISN'T as good as found on the "Magic Tracks"...

As far as after-market tracks go, FRIULs are nice, but they sometimes cost more than the kit that they're going on. It depends on where you buy your kit from... MODELKASTENs, I dunno, sometimes they're way over-engineered, especially when it comes to M3 Light-series, M3 Medium-series, and of course, the M4 Medium-series tanks. There are a few fit-issues with some of TRUMPY's Track sets. I'll admit that I haven't tried MASTER Tracks yet, so my "personal jury" is still out on those. I like TAMIYA's "Click-able" tracks, especially on their French Char B.1 bis kit. AFV CLUB makes some nice "Work-able" Track sets, except that they're not very workable, unless you glue them together, and DON'T try to "work" them. Also, they have these really annoying "knock-outs" on the insides of their track pads, which are kind of a bugger to sand and fill, plus their plastic composition leaves a stubborn, fuzzy residue when sanding, making clean-up a real chore...

So what's the solution to these problems that we've all been encountering with various kit-supplied AND after-market track sets? I've thought about ONE "compromise" possibility, which I'm sure that A LOT of us have also thought about-

That is:

The track sets could be CAD-designed and slide-molded, (for DETAIL) with enough individual links to do a complete track-run for each side, PLUS provide sufficient "solid-lengths" of track, for the modellers who don't want to spend the extra time in assembling bottom track-runs that will lie flat on the ground, and for the upper track runs of specific vehicles with tightly-adjusted "live" track.

Naturally, this would be more costly for the manufacturer, the expense of which would be passed on to the customer. But is that such a bad thing? No. Because A LOT of us go out and buy after-market tracks anyway, EVEN IF THAT KIT DOES HAVE THE FAMOUS "MAGIC TRACKS". I'd venture to say that some of us will even spend TWICE the money that we spent on a specific kit, for a really good set of after-market tracks...

Let me also say this: IF my DRAGON "DS" Tracks ever DO decide to disintegrate, and I have A LOT of stuff that has the "DS" Tracks installed, I WILL "bite the bullet" and buy the proper after-market tracks for each and every one of my models that wind up needing them...

So what do you guys think we should petition the model companies for..? Let's hear some thoughts on that...

Same here. Can't stand those band type tracks (DS, vinyl or rubber) but Dragon seems to think nobody wants Magic Tracks anymore.

It wouldn't be so bad if they gave a choice by putting both DS and Magic Tracks in the box so people at least have a choice. Not to mention more and more companies are making snap together links. Dragon are so inconsistent

Boy,I'm happy to say that the five DS kits I have completed,the oldest being 6 years old have not developed any problems.

I probably have 3 more in the stash

I won't use them anyway as I prefer more realistic indie links or link and length but I wouldn't risk using them even if I wasn't bothered about realism. They might be ok for a decade, 2 decades but I wouldn't be surprised if there's some deterioration down the line. I've got some rubber band tracks from years ago that are ok but others that have deteriorated.

At least you're pretty much safe using styrene tracks.

Many, many thanks to all you guys who responded to my post on the latest re: DS track problems/issues!!! I like TOTALLY respect the various different opinions as to likes/dislikes on these and other track types provided by the kit manufacturers and also available as aftermarket alternatives (I started a separate post on this issue as you may recall). But aside from personal preferences as to detail, accuracy, ease of build, etc., I just feel that whatever I use should be dependable enough and have a good enough track record over time that I somehow don't feel constrained as to type of paint, and to a lesser extent type of cement/glue, that I use because I'm worrying that the tracks will eventually crumble even if they're just sitting inside a display case. Call it narrow-minded on my part, but we typically don't have the same kinds of concerns/worries on the vehicle bodies themselves (though CA glue can be a bit tricky I hear), so why the issues with the tracks? Here's hoping the point I'm trying to make comes across clear Again, many thanks for everyone's input!!!

Thanks Christophe! Excellent reading which highlights my concerns REALLY well. Thanks for providing the link!!!

Well, there it is... Some of us have trouble with them, and some of us don't. People that don't like the "DS" tracks are going to buy after-market tracks, no matter WHAT DRAGON decides to do to fix these, let me say, "intermittent" problems. "Intermittent", being the case, because as I said, some modellers have problems with them, and some of us don't. I guess we'll see as time goes on. Some of us that haven't experienced any problems with "DS" tracks may YET get problems down the road...

DAM Sheit

So what happens to all the stash hoarders who have bought dragon kits with DS tracks . Open them up and check every on a regular inspection schedule ? Or just give up and purchase replacement tracks since you don't know if the DS will fail later on .

Good point as the new Dragon M1A2 SEP V2 3556 kit DS (tan colored) tracks seem very flexible now. Dragon even put the little dowel on the fold to keep the kink out while in the box. I still went with the Bronco Bigfoot tracks on mine as I thought it would be easier to paint. Will be interesting when Yaroslov issues his "wear damaged pad" M1A1 links from Live Resin. That LR resin material seems to be more brittle for things like the guide horns?

Lol! It wouldn't be so bad if it was easy to get replacement Magic Tracks but it isn't.

GOOD Question, Edmund!

My answer, FWIW, is; "DON'T "hoard" or stash kits with these DS tracks!" Regardless of individual preferences and opinions about DS versus links, it is clearly pretty well documented - even right in this thread - that some or many folks have had various break-down issues with aging un-used DS tracks. Whether it's due to specific DS batch chemistry, differences in stash climate-control, differences among kit-lines or subjects, does not matter. There ARE looming potential problems with DS tracks - a mine-field for builders and for stashers.

Dragon may well not care at all about whether its kits last longer or less when in a stash. Buyers, however, should care A LOT. It's your money.

I suggest being cautious and conservative - I have a large stash. Very few of which have DS tracks. Because I don't like DS band tracks - not because of this break-down issue. But as I learn more about the possible issues, I am ever less inclined to add DS-track kits to my pile. I KNOW that I'll never get to build most of them - that my heirs will sell or give away piles of new kits. If nothing else, I don't want to add to their miseries by leaving them kits which folks buy up, only to angrily return complaining about fragmented DS tracks! And I certainly don't want to open a box a few years out only to have to replace another set of rotten tracks myself. I'll be old enough that simply opening that box - let alone getting the burst of sprue-trees back in once I free them, or, God allow, actually cutting and cementing pieces - will be sufficient challenge!

Why invite trouble and challenge the plastic gods?

Bob

They should sell-off their kits cheap! ... with a DS disclaimer.

maybe it was on a memo during one of dragons meeting . The tracks are not that good so dont sell them . One said great well call them DS tracks and go on ahead and put them in the boxes . Well deal with the fallout by not responding to the issue .

Or dragon can just close up shop , reopen later under a different name and phone number and address . Also a different email . Simple enought

I have to eat some crow,two of my DS builds from 2011 and 2012 have tracks that are cracking.They are a Panther and a Jagdpanther with no skirts,so they should be easy enough to replace if I want to.Four others are holding up so far.

Lately I have been replacing them on current builds with Fruils and MT'S that I have been collecting from folks who don't use them.

So beware guys,as they get older,they may go on you,even if they are good now.

I won't buy Dragon kits with DS tracks. Given that they are increasingly making them their "standard" offering, that means I rarely by Dragon any more. Their competition has grown in recent years, so I don't know what they are thinking. Tracks are pretty basic to a tracked AFV and shouldn't have to be routinely aftermarketed.