Quoted Text
Supposedly based on 6747, which was an enjoyable kit to build, though I can't speak to historical/technical accuracy. My personal thing is to have individual tracks included as an option.
Hi, All! I question DRAGON's wisdom of supplying "DS" tracks in their German WWII subjects, although I successfully used them in building a couple of my Tiger Is- Since the "DS" tracks respond to plastic cement quite well, I was able to shape said "DS" tracks to represent the proper "track-sag".
My "secret" is simply to apply cyano-glue or liquid plastic cement to the upper inside surfaces of the "DS" track so that it doesn't show, and shape it to the required "track-sag" in the right places before the cement has a chance to dry...
I like DRAGON's "DS" tracks best on US WWII and present-day armor, since nearly all US armor makes use of "live" tracks, which require tight adjustment, i.e, virtually no "track-sag". Notable exceptions are the M113 APC and M551 "Sheridan" Light "Airborne" tanks.
In my opinion, DRAGON should have stuck with their individual "Magic Track" kit-supplied plastic indy-links, which are OK as far as I'm concerned. Many of my fellow modellers will go to the extra expense of replacing either of DRAGON's "Magic Track"/"DS" tracks by buying after-market white metal track links such as FRIULMODELISMO, etc. So the non-use of kit-supplied tracks becomes a moot point.
Naturally, DRAGON would want to save their money by replacing their "Magic Tracks" with "DS" tracks, as I'm sure many other kit manufacturers would have done, if they had the patent on styrene-based flexible tracks. To a dedicated modeller of 1/35 WWII German AFVs, the use of DRAGON's "DS" tracks becomes a decidedly retrograde step in quality. For myself, it's not a big issue, since for the last 10 years or so, I've been concentrating on 1/35 US/Allied subjects, anyway...