Hi All,
Also just been measuring the Cromwell Cougar bonnets. 49.5mm long consistently across the Cougar 6x6 JERRV, UK Mastiff & Ridgback (UK versions of the 6x6 and 4x4 - same basic bonnet and armoured shell). The Panda 4x4 Cougar I have has a 50.2mm bonnet length - practically identical to the Cromwell kits.
So it looks like around 50mm is the correct bonnet length and the Meng bonnet is too long. All my bonnet measurements exclude the armoured radiator grille which is 4mm deep in all of the above.
I've also measured the armoured box for the two Cromwell 6x6's. The length from the bonnet join/lower edge of windscreen to rear door face (ex steps and the red dotted line on Vodnik's diagram) is 145.7mm for both. I don't have Meng's 6x6 to measure the same but hope this may clear up the body length issue as well as the bonnet.
Hope this helps everybody.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Pascal's Cougar 6X6 Meng 1/35
arleighburke
Joined: April 22, 2007
KitMaker: 35 posts
Armorama: 33 posts
KitMaker: 35 posts
Armorama: 33 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 22, 2015 - 02:55 AM UTC
C_JACQUEMONT
Joined: October 09, 2004
KitMaker: 2,433 posts
Armorama: 2,325 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 22, 2015 - 03:24 AM UTC
Sure does help me now I don't have to get out that Cromwell kit to measure it! 
Thanks.
Christophe
Thanks.
Christophe
terminators
Joined: February 20, 2012
KitMaker: 1,932 posts
Armorama: 1,907 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 22, 2015 - 10:30 PM UTC
Thanks for sharing those informations, arleighburke !
Hisham
Joined: July 23, 2004
KitMaker: 6,856 posts
Armorama: 6,363 posts
Posted: Friday, January 23, 2015 - 07:58 AM UTC
I sent MENG a message regarding this, and a link to this post, through their FB page and I got this reply...
"Dear Hisham, thanks very much for your information. We will forward it to our designers."
I know it's too late for this kit, but I thought.. maybe if they're planning on a 4X4 in the future it'll be more accurate
Hisham
"Dear Hisham, thanks very much for your information. We will forward it to our designers."
I know it's too late for this kit, but I thought.. maybe if they're planning on a 4X4 in the future it'll be more accurate
Hisham
pascalbausset
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 1,416 posts
Armorama: 1,379 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 24, 2015 - 02:46 PM UTC
Well, the Meng's Cougar is definitively wrong and correcting it is impossible. I have made some measurement on this kit :
Despite this, I begin to glue the first parts together. On suspension supports (yellow arrows) there is a reinforcement plate inside (there is no hole). Not represented by meng !
All parts fit very nicely:
Despite this, I begin to glue the first parts together. On suspension supports (yellow arrows) there is a reinforcement plate inside (there is no hole). Not represented by meng !
All parts fit very nicely:
HermannB
Joined: October 14, 2008
KitMaker: 4,099 posts
Armorama: 4,067 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 24, 2015 - 03:44 PM UTC
Before we get into a "interdimensional" battle, has anyone measured the real Cougar? Rob Skipper???? 
pascalbausset
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 1,416 posts
Armorama: 1,379 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 24, 2015 - 03:52 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Before we get into a "interdimensional" battle, has anyone measured the real Cougar? Rob Skipper????
If good understand, there is no battle,all people in this discussion agree that there is dimension failure!
rogerjo1
Joined: November 12, 2010
KitMaker: 950 posts
Armorama: 905 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 24, 2015 - 05:33 PM UTC
As i said earlier for me it dosen't matter if it's a little wrong but i understand that some want it correct so what are the correct measurements? Is it something more then the bonnet measurements that is wrong on the kit? 
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 24, 2015 - 06:49 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Before we get into a "interdimensional" battle, has anyone measured the real Cougar? Rob Skipper????
The manufacturer has?...
http://www.gdls.com/index.php/products/mrap-family/cougar6x6
In this case the dimensions are given with very clear information regarding the method of measurement, so are quite reliable.
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 24, 2015 - 06:54 PM UTC
Quoted Text
As i said earlier for me it dosen't matter if it's a little wrong but i understand that some want it correct so what are the correct measurements? Is it something more then the bonnet measurements that is wrong on the kit?
Have you read my posts on the previous page of this thread?...
rogerjo1
Joined: November 12, 2010
KitMaker: 950 posts
Armorama: 905 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 24, 2015 - 08:22 PM UTC
Sorry for Asking then.........
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 24, 2015 - 08:29 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Sorry for Asking then.........
Don't be, I just wanted to make sure you know what has already been written here, so that we don't repeat the same information over and over.
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 24, 2015 - 08:39 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I have made some measurement on this kit :
The overall hull length as measured by you is 207 mm from the front edge of the bonnet to the rear edge of the roof, while my measurements of the properly scaled TM drawing show approx. 193 mm here. This means that we are talking about even as much as 14 mm too long hull...
My previous estimate of ~10 mm error was very rough, as I was not able to precisely identify where the floor part (that was measured by Hisham as being 200 mm long) begins and ends in drawings of the fully assembled vehicle.
LeoCmdr
Joined: January 19, 2005
KitMaker: 4,085 posts
Armorama: 3,917 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 24, 2015 - 10:50 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Before we get into a "interdimensional" battle, has anyone measured the real Cougar? Rob Skipper????
Well stated.
For anyone out there in the know...is there a difference in the dimensions of the original version compared to the improved raised roof version?
Just throwing it out there in case it is a possibility that Meng used a combination of technical references of two versions to create their kit.
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 24, 2015 - 11:11 PM UTC
Quoted Text
For anyone out there in the know...is there a difference in the dimensions of the original version compared to the improved raised roof version?
If the low roof JERRV technical drawings posted on the first page of this thread are any indication then the length difference was only 20mm (0.6 mm in 1:35) and it probably resulted from a different bumper.
LeoCmdr
Joined: January 19, 2005
KitMaker: 4,085 posts
Armorama: 3,917 posts
Posted: Sunday, January 25, 2015 - 12:20 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text
For anyone out there in the know...is there a difference in the dimensions of the original version compared to the improved raised roof version?
If the low roof JERRV technical drawings posted on the first page of this thread are any indication then the length difference was only 20mm (0.6 mm in 1:35) and it probably resulted from a different bumper.
Thanks, but you don't know for sure, correct?
I'm just not putting all my eggs in a basket for a comparison between a Force Protection/GDLS technical drawing and a Meng artist's rendition in a painting guide of a model kit.
I appreciate all the work gone into applying measurement formulas. I don't think we are looking at another M103A1.
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Sunday, January 25, 2015 - 12:55 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Thanks, but you don't know for sure, correct?
I am sure, but indeed I don't have fully reliable evidence now.
Quoted Text
a Meng artist's rendition in a painting guide of a model kit.
Not artist's rendition. Painting guide these days are made using these same CAD drawings that are used to cut molds. I have not cooperated with Meng, but all manufacturers I worked with do it that way. Besides more important are numbers given by Hisham and Pascal, i.e. measurements of kit parts. They match the painting diagram drawings perfectly, so I have no reason to doubt that the drawing is indeed a good representation of the kit itself.
Also if TM drawings, Panda kit and all Cromwell kits have approximately 50 mm long hoods, can you really believe that Meng kit with 55 mm long hood may be correct?...
Quoted Text
I don't think we are looking at another M103A1.
No, at least here we have very nicely detailed and well engineered kit with just one, unfortunately major and unfixable, inaccuracy.
LeoCmdr
Joined: January 19, 2005
KitMaker: 4,085 posts
Armorama: 3,917 posts
Posted: Sunday, January 25, 2015 - 01:52 AM UTC
I am not sure what it accurate and what is not on this kit. That's why I am perfectly fine with you spending large amounts of energy to prove or disprove dimensional accuracies. I truly do appreciate the effort everyone has taken.
To the vast majority of modellers who will purchase this kit they won't care about the hood/bonnet being too long. The rest of the kit looks excellent.
Hopefully Meng will get employ a math Tudor or run some system checks on their design software for the upcoming Leopard 2A4.
To the vast majority of modellers who will purchase this kit they won't care about the hood/bonnet being too long. The rest of the kit looks excellent.
Hopefully Meng will get employ a math Tudor or run some system checks on their design software for the upcoming Leopard 2A4.
18Bravo
Joined: January 20, 2005
KitMaker: 7,219 posts
Armorama: 6,097 posts
Posted: Sunday, January 25, 2015 - 01:54 AM UTC
I wish I had sent them my measurements earlier, but I had promised them to naother company. They have them now, for whatever it's worth.
henkp
Joined: September 30, 2005
KitMaker: 1,080 posts
Armorama: 1,064 posts
Posted: Sunday, January 25, 2015 - 03:07 AM UTC
hello robert just a teaser again
henk
henk
pascalbausset
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 1,416 posts
Armorama: 1,379 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 29, 2015 - 07:46 PM UTC
my Cougar is now totally assembled :
ArtyG37B
Joined: August 13, 2009
KitMaker: 420 posts
Armorama: 416 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 29, 2015 - 07:53 PM UTC
Wow, issues aside it is a good looking truck.
Hisham
Joined: July 23, 2004
KitMaker: 6,856 posts
Armorama: 6,363 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 29, 2015 - 08:18 PM UTC
NICE!! I bet it was a lot easier than the 4X4 kit
I'm waiting to get some free time from work so I can start on mine
Hisham
I'm waiting to get some free time from work so I can start on mine
Hisham
rogerjo1
Joined: November 12, 2010
KitMaker: 950 posts
Armorama: 905 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 29, 2015 - 08:25 PM UTC
Looks really good did the kit parts fit well together?
Nice to see the kit build...
did the kit parts fit well together?Nice to see the kit build...
Recon
Joined: October 19, 2002
KitMaker: 1,571 posts
Armorama: 764 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 29, 2015 - 08:46 PM UTC
I have this kit on order and the "mm" does not bother me. Has anyone in the USA got theirs yet (from their LHS)?
I am waiting for my LHS to get mine.
Everyone have fun building this kit.
Mike
I am waiting for my LHS to get mine.
Everyone have fun building this kit.
Mike
 |
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.