I have unboxed my DML/Black Box Saladin and have started to do some early comparisons with AA's Saladin without interior, kit number K131.

AA's kit.


While I agree the plastic DML kit has all the correct shapes and angles it does leave a lot to be desired.
The detail on the plastic is very soft and the missing kit items such as the commanders MG, MG mount and support arm are very annoying.

Anyway here are a couple of pictures and I will add more as I build the pair of them.

Accurate Armour supplies a much larger quantity of Photoetch parts and the wire mesh 'WOVEN' grill is well represented.


DML supplies one Brass item only and it is totally incorrect and too small.


In this comparison you can see (I hope) the texture of the surface and the weld seams on AA's kit, along with the raised rim around the hatch openings.
It is MISSING on the DML version who's surface is all shiny and polished (British Guards standards perhaps)...

For those of you wishing to open your hatches, that will have to be added as well as hatch interior detail.


There also seems to be a difference in angle and size of the upper front turret plate that also has the blade vein sight mounted on it.




Now the wheels and tires (tyres).. Their is an obvious difference in both height and width.
The Saladin models (Firing Line and Tamiya) both suffered from not having a 'correct' look wheels and tires when veiwed from the front or rear.
AA seems to have got it right but as you can see there is a significant difference in the height of their wheels and the Black Box ones!




Somebody will get the rulers out I'm sure. AA of course watched,photographed and measured a two year restoration of a Saladin in order to produce their kits...

This will be a slow topic, other things on the bench but I thought some of you would be interested.

Keith.

Good work. I'm afraid this is nothing more than I expected from the same innovative geniuses who brought the M103...

Kudos to AA for (as always) doing their homework. Rasperries to DML....

While I'm interested in seeing how the two kits compare in sizes and shapes, you are essentially comparing apples to oranges. Comparing a mass market, injection molded kit with a small market resin produced kit is not a valid comparison for many reasons, but the biggest is price.

Currently, the AA kit is about $115 USD, whereas the Dragon kit is $40 from Lucky. I think it is valid to use the Lucky price, since buying the AA kit would also involve shipping overseas to North America (in my case). Would I expect to get an AA quality kit for just about 3 times the price. Of course!

Even if I add in a set of DEF wheels (which are sure to come at about $20-25), a Voyager PE set ($15-20), and heck, maybe someone will do a new turret with the perfect hatch corrections (say $25-30), the total cost would still be no more then the AA kit. Will this be the AA kit's equal? Probably not, but it will get close, and probably be a bit easier to build even with all the aftermarket.

I'm not suggested that seeing the two kits compared isn't valid. What I am suggesting is that all things need to be considered before we again start tearing apart a plastic kit. Simply put, I am not going to expect that same from a $40 plastic kit that I will from a $115 resin kit, no different then I wouldn't expect the same from a $20K Ford versus a $60K Mercedes.

Jon, you make some good points but personally I feel, that even with the Price difference, AA is still the best option. There's also a certain degree of sentiment involved - i'd sooner give my ill-gotten gains to someone who actually did their research adequately...

I don't disagree Jim, and of course AA and others like them are marketing to "us" - and by us I mean that small percentage of modellers who go to websites like Armorama, ML and TL. We are also the group that will invariably buy all the aftermarket resin and photoetch updates, aftermarket tracks, etc. And there has always been an "us" in the modelling world, even before the internet, that small group of modellers who desire to build the best models (and best can mean different things to different people).

However, as much as some us may not like to hear it, we are still in the minority of model builders. Less than 25% I'm sure. The majority of model builders are still the "go to hobby shop, buy a kit and some glue, go home, assembly it on the kitchen table, brush paint it, and it's done". If it looks like the subject at hand, it's good enough. That's a bit of an exaggeration but you get the idea. While I can't say for sure, this is probably why Dragon has gotten away from Magic Tracks and started using more DS one piece tracks - it's easier for the afternoon model builder.

And these are the people that Dragon, Tamiya, Revell, etc. are catering to. They know that no matter how good the kit, we will still find issues with it and/or go out and purchase the aftermarket anyways. So they try to find the happy medium that will keep the majority of builders content, while at the same time making money. Some may suggest that it's just as easy to make a correct kit as it is to make an incorrect kit, but we don't know the details of the manufacturer's budgets. Sometimes it may simply be too late in a kit's production to make changes, perhaps they have been given incorrect information by their researchers, etc. Sometimes "good enough" will still make you money and not break the budget!

For me, I'm just happy that we are seeing subjects in plastic that we never would have imagined 20 years ago. I'm a builder, so I enjoy making the corrections, adding details, using aftermarket, etc. While major shape or dimensional errors are usually enough to make me wait for a better kit, this is usually about the only thing that deters me from a kit. Heck, I still remember cobbling together an M51 Sherman from an Italeri hull, Verlinden turret and MP Models suspension and stowage, with a whole lot of scratchbuilding. Now we have numerous choices for M50 and M51 Shermans - who would have thought?

John, I wasn't asking you to do anything.

Far from it, as I indicated, I just thought some would be interested in seeing the difference and perhaps feeling justified with buying the AA kit...... Or not.

I don't work for either company and I don't get a kickback from them

Yes you can wait for all the aftermarket items and pay shipping on them as well and you can take the time to scratchbuild what is missing or you can get it all in one box in one go!

It is all about choices. Some may never see what is in AA's kit boxes, I thought some would find it helpful, nothing more.

I have the Black Box kit on my shelves at the store I manage (HobbyTown) and for those who do not wish to put their monetary details in the Chinese outlet system it seems to me to be a high price to pay for what you do or do not get from DML.

For a kit produced in late 2014/early 2015 it certainly isn't what it could or should have been.

But again that is MY personal opinion...

What AA offer is worth the money to me (personally) and I am also here in the US (South Carolina)..

When both kits are complete, both of them may look equally as good (one can hope anyway)...

Keith.

I'm just happy to see any 1/35th Saladin kit! But I do hope some aftermarket stuff becomes available soon. I've waited so long already, I suppose I can wait a bit longer for some nice decals, hatch detail, stowage, etc.

Thanks for the comparison Keith.

Al

Concerning the raised bar (missing on DML) surrounding the turret hatch openings...are they square in section or triangular or rounded? Looks like one of the easier fixes.

I am finding this very interesting and a big thank you to Keith for taking the time to show us this. I have been wanting a better look at both kits - even more so the AA to be honest as it is hard to get good info.

As an aside, I think AA themselves could do a bit more promotion-wise. I have been personally frustrated by the lack of good clear pictures on their own site! So having this close look is just the thing.

I guess this should help :

http://svsm.org/gallery/Saladin/P1170451

H.P.

Thank you for sharing your comparison of this kit from these manufacturers. I'm sure there are some update sets in the works for dragons basic kit.

And while the accuarate armor kit is superior in accuracy and detail over the dragon kit. Its a shame as the black label line has been in my humble opinion a flop. Mediocre kits at somewhat premium prices.

And yes the dragon offering is half the price as the AA kit, but its half the kit as well.

Hmmm...not as simple as I thought. Actually two raised edges and a screwed down strip. But still do-able, even without "Razzle-Dazzle" modelling skills.

How much of that detail is visible when the hatch is closed...just the outermost raised edge?

A lot of detail is built into the hull and turret walls of the AA kit which you don't get with the DML one.. so if you were to add figures in the AA kit it would look quite nice (something else to see)..

Some love to scratch build and more power to them.

Again I am not and will not indicate how the DML kit will look when finished, I hope it does look at least reasonable and no reason why it won't...

Just too many obvious parts missing from the Black Box item and I will build it with closed hatches.

Keith..

Not even that, it seems...

http://www.primeportal.net/tanks/anon_idf/saladin_armored_car/index.php?Page=4

H.P.

Thank you for this information Keith as I am finding it of interest.

With the Hatch Closed , none as it overlaps:


A full walkaround of this vehicle is located in the AMMS Facebook galleries:
https://www.facebook.com/al.bowie?ref=tn_tnmn#!/media/set/?set=oa.332056253655289&type=1


Cheers
Al

Mil-web U.K. have a Saladin on there for sale site under armour it has a couple of pics showing the suspention exposed as there are no tin work wheel arche to block the viw cant down load the link sorry

DML obviously got their reference from a Saladin with the hatches welded shut!

A little more work completed on the DML Black Box Saladin.

Having started this kit with a feeling of, this isn't a well engineered kit, I am no longer surprised at the back dated quality of yesteryear I am experiencing.

The plastic is very soft and some (quite few) of the pour plugs are very badly placed... Take for instance these three on the rear lip of the upper rear deck. Care is needed or you will remove the lip and have to rebuild it.


The convoy light cover is totally incorrect (upper round item) BUT I am building this out of the box or at least 99% of it! I will replace the antenna bases.

Those horrible and plentiful pour plugs (that's what I call them) again, the one missing is where the suspension piece was attached to the fret (frame)..
As for seams, there more seams present that need to be sanded, scraped and removed than the number of seams I have seen on the trousers of the Brigade of Guards Trooping the Colour.


Having a working knowledge of the suspension helps and it is noted that some parts must not be glued at this point if you want the wheels to be level and angled correctly? Not sure of what I am saying? Google it!


The pins holding the torsion bar, front and rear, to the hull should be removed after the glue has set because they are far to obvious. (not hard to do)..


I will be happy when this thing is done because it has so much detail missing and the quality is not up to modern day standards. Again I am NOT saying the thing won't look pretty good but there is far too much detail missing for a 2014/15 kit.

Keith.

Thanks for the side-by-side comparisons and the blow-by-blow on the DML kit build-up, Keith.

Very useful and interesting information all around.

I must say, though, although the detail has been simplified to a great degree on the DML kit, the only really troublesome observation so far has been the difference in overall wheel sizes between the AA and DML offerings. One might presume, based on their respective records, that the AA kit wheels are more accurate. It would be nice to know the dimensions from the actual vehicle.

(I can see a replacement set of resin wheels from someone like Hussar.)

Aside from that, I think that if I were so inclined, either kit could find a place on my workbench. I don't think the DML simplifications and omissions are beyond fixing with good references and modeling skills.

It seems to me that the engineering and design on the DML Saladin kit is very "Tamiya-esque." Lots of molded on details and simplified assembly - all characteristics of Tamiya's armor models. This is why I'm not Tamiya's biggest fan, but those simplified qualities do appeal to a lot of modelers, no doubt about that.

Total speculation on my part, but I do wonder if DML is looking at a shift in their approach to kit design. No excuses or passes for the shoddy research and accuracy on the other Black Label kits (gotta give Tamiya credit for basic accuracy), but perhaps a deliberate attempt to capture some of that market share drawn to Tamiya's simpler approach to kit design.

Anyways, thanks for sharing your observations and the detailed DML "Salad-Tin" build!

Mike, you are correct of course and your observations on the nose.

I have yet to add the fenders/catwalks but again I suspect I will have to chop off the ends of the torsion bars because they protrude to far forward and to far to the rear of the hull.

A look at the link showing the Aussie Saladin will confirm my observation

They may look right when the side walks and fenders are in place and that may well then indicate the front and rear fenders are not correct but need extra space for the wheels.

Keith.

Thank you Keith for this thorough analysis.




Mike, Def Model have stated on FaceBook that they would release a set of resin wheels for the Dragon Saladin.

Cheers,

Christophe

Thanks for the alert, Christophe.

What would be most interesting to know right now are the actual dimensions and tire (tyre) size for the Saladin. With that information, we could measure each kit's wheels (AA and DML) to compare them with the prototype.

Someone with access to a British spec museum or collection example or with a copy of the applicable maintenance publication could perhaps provide some "ground truth" on the matter.

Absent actual information, it's really just speculation as to which set of kit wheels is most correct and accurate.

It's even possible that both are correct for the reference vehicle example used by AA or DML for their kits. A vehicle restorer or collector or museum or non-British military example could very well have non standard sized tires installed. If such a vehicle was used as the primary reference for either kit, the kitted wheels could be "accurate" for that vehicle and still be "wrong" for the standard British Army version.

There was surely an "as manufactured and delivered" correct tire and wheel size. AFAIK, we just don't have that size or dimension information available yet to compare the kit parts (AA and DML) against.

Cheers,
Mike