Made a little more progress on the base. I reinforced the corners with some plastic angles from Evergreen (also hid some unsightly gaps).
Built up the rim of the shell crater with Miliput.
Made a couple of fence posts from some pieces of sprue. They were given a wood grain texture by scraping with a razor saw along them lengthwise.
Anyone know where I can lay my hands (poor choice of words) on some scale barbed wire? Al
Hosted by Darren Baker
Takom MK IV Hermaphrodite
TAFFY3
New York, United States
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Posted: Friday, November 13, 2015 - 09:32 PM UTC
TAFFY3
New York, United States
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Posted: Sunday, November 15, 2015 - 08:19 PM UTC
I've reached an impasse. Having decided to mark my tank as C 24, which was nicknamed 'Crusty', I now am waiting on some more dry-transfer sheets which I ordered from my LHS.
In the meanwhile, to pass the time, I pulled out my Whippet (which sounds vaguely obscene), the one made by Meng, and started assembly.
I was quite pleased with the ease of assembly of such a complex structure as the cab, which was made up of multiple pieces, one of which has to be bent to shape. I did end up with a small gap near the top on one side.
Probably my fault rather than the kit and easily filled with a small piece of .020 thick styrene strip. The armored fuel tank on the front has two pieces that get folded slightly, to make up the top and bottom, rather than the usual four separate pieces. If you look at the tank you can see a white stress line where the upper piece was bent.
A final shot for size comparison. The Whippet was a larger tank than I had thought.
Thanks for looking. Al
In the meanwhile, to pass the time, I pulled out my Whippet (which sounds vaguely obscene), the one made by Meng, and started assembly.
I was quite pleased with the ease of assembly of such a complex structure as the cab, which was made up of multiple pieces, one of which has to be bent to shape. I did end up with a small gap near the top on one side.
Probably my fault rather than the kit and easily filled with a small piece of .020 thick styrene strip. The armored fuel tank on the front has two pieces that get folded slightly, to make up the top and bottom, rather than the usual four separate pieces. If you look at the tank you can see a white stress line where the upper piece was bent.
A final shot for size comparison. The Whippet was a larger tank than I had thought.
Thanks for looking. Al
simonking
England - East Midlands, United Kingdom
Joined: March 02, 2011
KitMaker: 128 posts
Armorama: 124 posts
Joined: March 02, 2011
KitMaker: 128 posts
Armorama: 124 posts
Posted: Sunday, November 15, 2015 - 09:34 PM UTC
I suspect the Tank Museum Whippet has had one of the engine coveres replaced at some time as the hole for the radiator cap on the "ridge" of the engine cover is only a semi-circle rather than a full circle. If you decide to drill it out, it is necessary to add a representation of the radiator cap and overflow.
TAFFY3
New York, United States
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Posted: Sunday, November 15, 2015 - 09:42 PM UTC
Thanks for that info Simon. I'll keep it in mind when I get further into the build. Al
lentorpe
Alava, Spain / España
Joined: August 12, 2010
KitMaker: 104 posts
Armorama: 63 posts
Joined: August 12, 2010
KitMaker: 104 posts
Armorama: 63 posts
Posted: Monday, November 16, 2015 - 12:46 AM UTC
Quoted Text
(...) The Whippet was a larger tank than I had thought.
I am surprised too, I always thought it was something like one of those italian SCW/WW2 tankettes, or a Pz.I at most.
TAFFY3
New York, United States
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 19, 2015 - 12:53 AM UTC
Some basic groundwork done.
With the tank temporarily in place.
I use Durham's Water Putty. It's a fine powder that you mix with water. I mixed a dark shade of acrylic brown paint in with it for color. Once it dries thoroughly, I can start painting it. The rocks came from my yard. Al
With the tank temporarily in place.
I use Durham's Water Putty. It's a fine powder that you mix with water. I mixed a dark shade of acrylic brown paint in with it for color. Once it dries thoroughly, I can start painting it. The rocks came from my yard. Al
TAFFY3
New York, United States
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 21, 2015 - 10:58 PM UTC
My dry-transfer decals arrived and I couldn't wait to get started. The smaller ones that I used from the 1st set to do the serial numbers were a pleasure. The larger numbers and letters not so much. There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth. First up was the large '24' on the roof of the driver's compartment.
They did not want to settle down over the pistol port covers and cracked in several places requiring a little touch-up with white paint.
Next the rear armor over the gas tank received its markings.
A little easier as the area where they were applied was smooth. Next, the name "Crusty" applied to the bow.
It was difficult because of the tight quarters. The nice thing about dry-transfers is that they're easily removed with a piece of tape if you mess up. I messed up, several times. It was a tough fight, but worth it in the end. It adds a bit more visual interest.
There should be a 'C-24' on each side, between the track adjuster and the sponson. While each sheet contained a lot of letters, they only gave you two of each number in each size. Not a lot of room for error. I ran out of numbers due to mistakes. Guess I'll have to order another sheet and be more careful. Also managed to get a coat of paint on the base.
The contrast between the browns is not as stark as it appears in the photo, and it is just the base coat. Thanks for looking, all comments or questions are welcome. Al
They did not want to settle down over the pistol port covers and cracked in several places requiring a little touch-up with white paint.
Next the rear armor over the gas tank received its markings.
A little easier as the area where they were applied was smooth. Next, the name "Crusty" applied to the bow.
It was difficult because of the tight quarters. The nice thing about dry-transfers is that they're easily removed with a piece of tape if you mess up. I messed up, several times. It was a tough fight, but worth it in the end. It adds a bit more visual interest.
There should be a 'C-24' on each side, between the track adjuster and the sponson. While each sheet contained a lot of letters, they only gave you two of each number in each size. Not a lot of room for error. I ran out of numbers due to mistakes. Guess I'll have to order another sheet and be more careful. Also managed to get a coat of paint on the base.
The contrast between the browns is not as stark as it appears in the photo, and it is just the base coat. Thanks for looking, all comments or questions are welcome. Al
Posted: Sunday, November 22, 2015 - 01:16 AM UTC
Great work Al, I really like how that Mk IV turned out! Only just returned to the site, so will have to catch up on the build log from day one. Will be interesting for me, as I only just got the new Mk I Male review sample assigned for a build log.
Cheers!
Stefan
Cheers!
Stefan
TAFFY3
New York, United States
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Posted: Sunday, November 22, 2015 - 01:44 AM UTC
Thanks Stefan, still have a little way to go, but it's getting there. Looking forward to seeing your build. Al
TAFFY3
New York, United States
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Posted: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 - 06:21 PM UTC
Got a chance to get down and dirty, 'Crusty' is starting to look, well, crusty.
I'm still getting used to working with pigments. I was a little late to the ball. But, I'm definitely liking them. Tried MIG's "Dark Streaking Grime", which is kinda like a wash, and really liked how it flowed. Better than my own washes did. I want a worn look, not a worn out look, so I'm not going to go too heavy with the dirt and grime. This base is temporary, just for handling purposes. Still working on the actual base shown earlier. Then on to the figures. Al
I'm still getting used to working with pigments. I was a little late to the ball. But, I'm definitely liking them. Tried MIG's "Dark Streaking Grime", which is kinda like a wash, and really liked how it flowed. Better than my own washes did. I want a worn look, not a worn out look, so I'm not going to go too heavy with the dirt and grime. This base is temporary, just for handling purposes. Still working on the actual base shown earlier. Then on to the figures. Al
Beastmaster
United Kingdom
Joined: January 27, 2009
KitMaker: 592 posts
Armorama: 588 posts
Joined: January 27, 2009
KitMaker: 592 posts
Armorama: 588 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 03, 2015 - 02:31 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextLookin great but which part of the tracks would you say is the weak point?
Thanks David, The tracks snap together and I've had either the pin or the ring (that the pins snap into) break. As long as you don't apply any extra stress to them after assembly they'll be fine. The links can be separated with care and Takom gives you plenty of extras if you need to replace a broken link. But I found a little super-glue and a drop of accelerator works very well to join the links to repair a break. Al
I don't know if you've built the Tamiya MKIV also but it sounds as if the track links are weaker than Tamiya's. Touch wood I haven't had any break with that kit.
Beastmaster
United Kingdom
Joined: January 27, 2009
KitMaker: 592 posts
Armorama: 588 posts
Joined: January 27, 2009
KitMaker: 592 posts
Armorama: 588 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 03, 2015 - 02:33 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text(...) The Whippet was a larger tank than I had thought.
I am surprised too, I always thought it was something like one of those italian SCW/WW2 tankettes, or a Pz.I at most.
Same here and I thought it was a small little tank. I've never seen one in the flesh and it shows how deceptive photos can be at times.
TAFFY3
New York, United States
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 03, 2015 - 04:12 AM UTC
I don't know if you've built the Tamiya MKIV also but it sounds as if the track links are weaker than Tamiya's. Touch wood I haven't had any break with that kit. [Quoted]
Haven't built the Tamiya Mark IV, but I have built the motorized version of their Char B1 bis. Have run it, removed the tracks to change batteries, then ran it some more, with no ill effects. Takom's tracks probably wouldn't stand up to that kind of handling. But with a little care they aren't that bad. I think their plastic may be a little more brittle than Tamiya's. Al
Haven't built the Tamiya Mark IV, but I have built the motorized version of their Char B1 bis. Have run it, removed the tracks to change batteries, then ran it some more, with no ill effects. Takom's tracks probably wouldn't stand up to that kind of handling. But with a little care they aren't that bad. I think their plastic may be a little more brittle than Tamiya's. Al
Beastmaster
United Kingdom
Joined: January 27, 2009
KitMaker: 592 posts
Armorama: 588 posts
Joined: January 27, 2009
KitMaker: 592 posts
Armorama: 588 posts
Posted: Friday, December 04, 2015 - 12:21 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I don't know if you've built the Tamiya MKIV also but it sounds as if the track links are weaker than Tamiya's. Touch wood I haven't had any break with that kit. [Quoted]
Haven't built the Tamiya Mark IV, but I have built the motorized version of their Char B1 bis. Have run it, removed the tracks to change batteries, then ran it some more, with no ill effects. Takom's tracks probably wouldn't stand up to that kind of handling. But with a little care they aren't that bad. I think their plastic may be a little more brittle than Tamiya's. Al
Sounds that way. I'd like to build the Char as motorised too. I've built the non motorised version but is the motorised version an easy build?
The MKIV motorised is a fairly easy build but is a bit tricky bringing it all together with painting etc.
TAFFY3
New York, United States
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Posted: Friday, December 04, 2015 - 03:25 AM UTC
I'd like to build the Char as motorised too. I've built the non motorised version but is the motorised version an easy build? [Quoted]
Very easy build, the only quibble comes when it's time to change the batteries. You have to loosen two screws to take the tension off of the tracks and then remove the tracks to separate the hull for a battery change. Other than that it's easy as can be and runs like a champ.
http://vid1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee378/AlBubnis/Char%20B1%20bis/MVI_0403_zpsfgjmocvq.mp4
Mounted mine to a base for display.
http://vid1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee378/AlBubnis/Char%20B1%20bis/MVI_0407_zpsfwitf8rk.mp4
Like the Energizer Bunny. Al
Very easy build, the only quibble comes when it's time to change the batteries. You have to loosen two screws to take the tension off of the tracks and then remove the tracks to separate the hull for a battery change. Other than that it's easy as can be and runs like a champ.
http://vid1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee378/AlBubnis/Char%20B1%20bis/MVI_0403_zpsfgjmocvq.mp4
Mounted mine to a base for display.
http://vid1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee378/AlBubnis/Char%20B1%20bis/MVI_0407_zpsfwitf8rk.mp4
Like the Energizer Bunny. Al
TAFFY3
New York, United States
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Posted: Friday, December 11, 2015 - 03:37 AM UTC
Got a chance to play in the mud and mount the tank to the base.
I had drilled a hole in the bottom of the tank and also one through the base. I ran a screw through both and used a wingnut to secure it underneath. For the mud, I used a mixture of Liquitex 'Textured Gel with Resin Sand' and brown paint. I used it to fill in around the tracks and to build up some areas, or to add more texture where needed. The camera makes the contrast in the shades of brown appear more acute than it is in reality. The water in the shell hole is 'Realistic Water' from Woodland Scenics. It looks cloudy because I just poured another layer, but will dry clear. They suggest pouring it in layers of about 1/8 of an inch. I ordered some PE barbed wire to add the posts. Nothing says WW1 like barbed wire and mud. Thanks for looking. Al
I had drilled a hole in the bottom of the tank and also one through the base. I ran a screw through both and used a wingnut to secure it underneath. For the mud, I used a mixture of Liquitex 'Textured Gel with Resin Sand' and brown paint. I used it to fill in around the tracks and to build up some areas, or to add more texture where needed. The camera makes the contrast in the shades of brown appear more acute than it is in reality. The water in the shell hole is 'Realistic Water' from Woodland Scenics. It looks cloudy because I just poured another layer, but will dry clear. They suggest pouring it in layers of about 1/8 of an inch. I ordered some PE barbed wire to add the posts. Nothing says WW1 like barbed wire and mud. Thanks for looking. Al
TankManNick
California, United States
Joined: February 01, 2010
KitMaker: 551 posts
Armorama: 543 posts
Joined: February 01, 2010
KitMaker: 551 posts
Armorama: 543 posts
Posted: Friday, December 11, 2015 - 03:48 AM UTC
That looks cracking! Very WWI as you say...
TAFFY3
New York, United States
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Posted: Friday, December 11, 2015 - 05:42 AM UTC
Thanks Nick,I appreciate the compliment. Al
Beastmaster
United Kingdom
Joined: January 27, 2009
KitMaker: 592 posts
Armorama: 588 posts
Joined: January 27, 2009
KitMaker: 592 posts
Armorama: 588 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 13, 2015 - 12:36 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I'd like to build the Char as motorised too. I've built the non motorised version but is the motorised version an easy build? [Quoted]
Very easy build, the only quibble comes when it's time to change the batteries. You have to loosen two screws to take the tension off of the tracks and then remove the tracks to separate the hull for a battery change. Other than that it's easy as can be and runs like a champ.
http://vid1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee378/AlBubnis/Char%20B1%20bis/MVI_0403_zpsfgjmocvq.mp4
Mounted mine to a base for display.
http://vid1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee378/AlBubnis/Char%20B1%20bis/MVI_0407_zpsfwitf8rk.mp4
Like the Energizer Bunny. Al
It sounds as if it's more tricky to change the batteries than the MKIV as the kit wasn't designed to be motorised in the first place. Do you have to snap open the tracks to remove them or does the track tensioner allow you to just slip them off?
You're diorama and tank look fantastic by the way.
TAFFY3
New York, United States
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 13, 2015 - 04:50 AM UTC
It sounds as if it's more tricky to change the batteries than the MKIV as the kit wasn't designed to be motorised in the first place. Do you have to snap open the tracks to remove them or does the track tensioner allow you to just slip them off?
You're diorama and tank look fantastic by the way. [Quoted]
Hello David, It's true it wasn't designed to be motorized, but the way Tamiya went about it is quite clever. The tracks can just be slipped off once you take the tension off of them. No need to separate them. The gap between the sponsons and the fenders is a little tight so some care is needed when removing them. I've had mine off several times with no ill effect. Thanks for the compliment, really appreciate it. Al
You're diorama and tank look fantastic by the way. [Quoted]
Hello David, It's true it wasn't designed to be motorized, but the way Tamiya went about it is quite clever. The tracks can just be slipped off once you take the tension off of them. No need to separate them. The gap between the sponsons and the fenders is a little tight so some care is needed when removing them. I've had mine off several times with no ill effect. Thanks for the compliment, really appreciate it. Al
dioman13
Indiana, United States
Joined: August 19, 2007
KitMaker: 2,184 posts
Armorama: 1,468 posts
Joined: August 19, 2007
KitMaker: 2,184 posts
Armorama: 1,468 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 13, 2015 - 06:20 AM UTC
Hey Al. Looks fantastic. I really like the mud and wet look through out the base. Waiting for your usually great looking figures to populate the area. Oh oh, echoes from the past. I'll never. Maybe I'll not finish that. bob
TAFFY3
New York, United States
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 13, 2015 - 07:16 AM UTC
Thanks Bob, Kinda like the way the mud turned out myself. Be starting on the figures soon. Al
Posted: Sunday, December 13, 2015 - 07:29 AM UTC
Excellent looking tank and dio!
Thirian24
Oklahoma, United States
Joined: September 30, 2015
KitMaker: 2,493 posts
Armorama: 2,344 posts
Joined: September 30, 2015
KitMaker: 2,493 posts
Armorama: 2,344 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 13, 2015 - 08:42 AM UTC
Very nicely done!
TAFFY3
New York, United States
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Joined: January 21, 2008
KitMaker: 2,531 posts
Armorama: 859 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 13, 2015 - 05:35 PM UTC
Thanks Gary, Dustin, for your kind words. Must admit though, I'm not sure whether we're talking about the Mark IV or the Char B1 bis. Al