Type 95 - my first Japanese armor build
North Carolina, United States
Joined: September 16, 2004
KitMaker: 1,281 posts
Armorama: 1,222 posts
Posted: Monday, December 08, 2014 - 11:56 AM UTC
North Carolina, United States
Joined: June 06, 2006
KitMaker: 4,691 posts
Armorama: 3,509 posts
Posted: Monday, December 08, 2014 - 06:27 PM UTC
Looks like a nice clean build
North Carolina, United States
Joined: May 17, 2012
KitMaker: 1,980 posts
Armorama: 1,571 posts
Posted: Monday, December 08, 2014 - 08:55 PM UTC
Great start there, Chris. Did the PE bits come with the kit?
North Carolina, United States
Joined: September 16, 2004
KitMaker: 1,281 posts
Armorama: 1,222 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 - 11:17 AM UTC
Bayern, Germany
Joined: September 30, 2013
KitMaker: 1,615 posts
Armorama: 1,500 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 - 03:13 PM UTC
Look great so far. Crisp details and a clean build...
Building logs: http://armored76.wordpress.com/
Finished projects: http://armored76.wordpress.com/portfolio/
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 - 05:23 PM UTC
Looks to be a clean build of an interesting tank. The rear of the engine compartment does not seem to sit flush.
Ideals are peaceful. History is violent.
Missouri, United States
Joined: March 19, 2014
KitMaker: 148 posts
Armorama: 148 posts
Posted: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 - 09:58 AM UTC
That is a very nice clean build you have there. Yours makes me want to go out and get the kit immediately. Please tell us what colors you mixed for the khaki base, it looks spot on to me.
When I built the old Tamiya Type 97 I sprayed the base color then used Vallejo brushed on for the remaining camo colors.
Quoted Text
Looks to be a clean build of an interesting tank. The rear of the engine compartment does not seem to sit flush.
It looks fine to me. Did you ever think maybe the real tank's deck didn't "sit flush" either?
Were you bullied as a child?
You seem to be unable to post any comment without saying something derogatory. Most often your comments make no sense.
Indiana, United States
Joined: August 19, 2007
KitMaker: 2,184 posts
Armorama: 1,468 posts
Posted: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 - 10:23 AM UTC
Hey Ian, lighten up some. it's constuctive crit. which is what the program is all about. More eyes see what only one set does. If you look at the second from last (pic from the back), it looks weird. I think it's because of that part (long thin hatch?) just past the begining of the right corner where the deck and bulk head meet. I had to look at it a few times myself. Seems to overlap the edge and throws the clean egde off some.
Chriss, looks real fine so far. I need a Japonesse tank (extra small for a vignette I want to do and this looks like it would fit the build. Did the breach come with the kit or did you scratch it up. Also wonder if the Japonesse had air paint guns like some German tanks did. From the pic's I've seen it looks like most were hand paintd.
There is no return policy on time spent
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 - 03:29 PM UTC
Ian: A few things.
First - This forum is "constructive feedback". I give it and expect
it.
Second - Chris may have missed this.
Third - I plan on building this kit and am curious about any fit
issues.
Ideals are peaceful. History is violent.
Utah, United States
Joined: December 14, 2007
KitMaker: 3,389 posts
Armorama: 2,054 posts
Posted: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 - 08:07 PM UTC
The build looks very nice. I like the aftermarket tracks for the look they provide. All the tanks I have seen good photos of look to be hand painted, although the Japanese did have access to spray guns for painting.
I found in my builds that the fit of the rear deck to the hull is a bit tricky and alignment can be the slightest bit off. This is the only real fit issue with the kit, and not hard to fix if you pay attention On my last build I missed this as everything else fits so easily. You really have to look to notice.
Bob, the gun breech is included, and with the early version there are two options for the setup.
Great nations do not fall because of external aggression; they first erode and decay inwardly, so that, like rotten fruit, they fall of themselves. The strength of a country is the sum total of the moral strength of the individuals in that country.
Ezr
Missouri, United States
Joined: March 19, 2014
KitMaker: 148 posts
Armorama: 148 posts
Posted: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 - 08:11 PM UTC
Constructive is one thing, nit picky rivet counting is another. I have no tolerance for "Captain Keyboard" types, especially when they have no clue.
British Columbia, Canada
Joined: October 16, 2006
KitMaker: 480 posts
Armorama: 399 posts
Posted: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 - 09:12 PM UTC
First off Chris this is a great looking build, as people have said very clean and well done. Have you tried using silly putty for masking? pretty quick and easy to lay out, and hey, its silly putty so its fun

Ian chill out, I really don't think pointing something out about a possible fit issue (though it apparently was not) is rivet counting. This is constructive criticism and Ive been happy to have people point fit issues out on my builds. Sometimes another set of eyes helps us see things we're blind to from staring at it for so long.
Chris, Cant wait to see how this progresses!
Eric.
North Carolina, United States
Joined: September 16, 2004
KitMaker: 1,281 posts
Armorama: 1,222 posts
Posted: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 - 09:59 PM UTC
Firstly, no offense taken with any criticisms or observations. I think the angles and lighting in the photos might be the culprit. The panels on the rear, both the angled top and vertical plate are flush. As to fit, its about as good as it gets. Dragon was on their A-game when they did this one. The only error was when they did the DS tracks - way too long. Went with Friul so it wasn't an issue.
Hate assembling Friul tracks but love the way they look once they're done.
I used Tamiya Khaki thinned 40/60 and added one drop of Red Brown and three or four drops of white. I was trying to match the color in my Gunze paint set and its close.
Liked this kit enough to buy the second 'early' version.
Removed by original poster on 12/11/14 - 17:14:59 (GMT).
Indiana, United States
Joined: August 19, 2007
KitMaker: 2,184 posts
Armorama: 1,468 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 11, 2014 - 07:00 AM UTC
Chris, good to know about the tracke too, what kind of money did they run you? They really do improve the overall look. I'll have to keep an eye at the A.M.P.S. show in Auburn this year for a set.
Russ Thanks, good to know as much as I can before it's bought and then have to do a bunch of extra work or change the ides around. bob d.
There is no return policy on time spent
Indiana, United States
Joined: June 10, 2005
KitMaker: 6,188 posts
Armorama: 5,960 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 11, 2014 - 02:48 PM UTC
I went on a spending spree buying a few of the Japanese armor kits so now I know what to expect.
I think your Ha-Go is looking great so far. What plans for paint are you thinking Chris?
Jeff
North Carolina, United States
Joined: May 17, 2012
KitMaker: 1,980 posts
Armorama: 1,571 posts
Posted: Friday, December 12, 2014 - 09:51 AM UTC
Darn! It looks like I missed all the excitement yesterday.

Good looking build so far, Chris. Like Matt said, the rear section does seem a bit off in the picture, but as you have the piece sitting right in front of you, and say it's fine, it must be.
For those not wanting to shell out the $35 or $40 for aftermarket tracks, can the idler be repositioned enough to take up the slack in the DS tracks, or will the DS need more serious surgery to be used?
North Carolina, United States
Joined: September 16, 2004
KitMaker: 1,281 posts
Armorama: 1,222 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 13, 2014 - 09:55 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Darn! It looks like I missed all the excitement yesterday. 
Good looking build so far, Chris. Like Matt said, the rear section does seem a bit off in the picture, but as you have the piece sitting right in front of you, and say it's fine, it must be.
For those not wanting to shell out the $35 or $40 for aftermarket tracks, can the idler be repositioned enough to take up the slack in the DS tracks, or will the DS need more serious surgery to be used?
Maybe I'm missing something, to my eye it looks flush but I do also have to wear glasses

. Are we talking about the flat vertical plate or the sloped on with the little access hatch?
Removed by original poster on 12/14/14 - 04:58:19 (GMT).
North Carolina, United States
Joined: September 16, 2004
KitMaker: 1,281 posts
Armorama: 1,222 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 13, 2014 - 10:00 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I went on a spending spree buying a few of the Japanese armor kits so now I know what to expect.
I think your Ha-Go is looking great so far. What plans for paint are you thinking Chris?
Jeff
Going to mix my colors using Tamiya paints. Think I can spray a tight pattern for the brown and green and then hand paint the yellow stripes.
North Carolina, United States
Joined: September 16, 2004
KitMaker: 1,281 posts
Armorama: 1,222 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 13, 2014 - 10:03 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Chris, good to know about the tracke too, what kind of money did they run you? They really do improve the overall look. I'll have to keep an eye at the A.M.P.S. show in Auburn this year for a set.
Russ Thanks, good to know as much as I can before it's bought and then have to do a bunch of extra work or change the ides around. bob d.
I got them off eBay and paid 30.00 plus shipping from Poland. Saved maybe $10.00.
North Carolina, United States
Joined: May 17, 2012
KitMaker: 1,980 posts
Armorama: 1,571 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 13, 2014 - 08:13 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Maybe I'm missing something, to my eye it looks flush but I do also have to wear glasses
. Are we talking about the flat vertical plate or the sloped on with the little access hatch?
Can't speak for Matt, but I was looking at the sloped plate. Obviously, it's only an illusion and not an actual problem area.
Keep up the good work!
ColinEdm
Associate EditorAlberta, Canada
Joined: October 15, 2013
KitMaker: 1,355 posts
Armorama: 1,229 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 13, 2014 - 08:14 PM UTC
Looking good so far! The more I see these little Japanese tanks the more I like them, I think I'm going to hve to pick one up soon.
The voices are back.....excellent....
Utah, United States
Joined: December 14, 2007
KitMaker: 3,389 posts
Armorama: 2,054 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 14, 2014 - 02:21 AM UTC
Bob, the tracks are too long even if the kit idler is all the way to the rear. You will have to trim a couple of links to get a proper fit, or else there is just way too much sag. The Fruil tracks are beautiful. Modelkasten offer some, or you can save up and get 98 tanks and have enough of the spare links they provide for a complete set of tracks for one tank.
Chris, I look forward to your paint work.
Great nations do not fall because of external aggression; they first erode and decay inwardly, so that, like rotten fruit, they fall of themselves. The strength of a country is the sum total of the moral strength of the individuals in that country.
Ezr
North Carolina, United States
Joined: September 16, 2004
KitMaker: 1,281 posts
Armorama: 1,222 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 14, 2014 - 02:24 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text
Maybe I'm missing something, to my eye it looks flush but I do also have to wear glasses
. Are we talking about the flat vertical plate or the sloped on with the little access hatch?
Can't speak for Matt, but I was looking at the sloped plate. Obviously, it's only an illusion and not an actual problem area.
Keep up the good work!
Thanks, and to all if something looks screwy chime in, that's the way I learn and maybe build a better model. It keeps me occupied and that makes my wife happy.