_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
REVIEW
M270A1 MLRS
brian638
Visit this Community
England - West Midlands, United Kingdom
Joined: July 24, 2004
KitMaker: 318 posts
Armorama: 263 posts
Posted: Thursday, July 23, 2015 - 03:40 AM UTC
Brian O"Donoghue takes a look at the a recent release from Dragon this time it is the M270A1 MLRS.



Link to Item

If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!
18Bravo
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 20, 2005
KitMaker: 7,219 posts
Armorama: 6,097 posts
Posted: Thursday, July 23, 2015 - 04:06 AM UTC
While I agree with you that the tracks could have been upgraded, to me the larger fail is not upgrading the wheels. They're too large in diameter, and don't have the recesses behind the face, which nearly every other company has gotten the hang of by now.
HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Thursday, July 23, 2015 - 04:43 AM UTC
A very welcomed reissue. The A1 parts will make for a nice, updated version. The tracks are easily updated w/the AFV Club M2 Bigfoot tracks. The roadwheels look the part to me. If you want to change them, Legend makes a pretty good set.
18Bravo
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 20, 2005
KitMaker: 7,219 posts
Armorama: 6,097 posts
Posted: Thursday, July 23, 2015 - 04:49 AM UTC
I have several of the Legend sets, and yes they are good, but the point is, an "upgraded" kit shouldn't necessitate the purchase of them. Hell, they could have even worked a co-operative deal (as companies have done in the past) with Meng and offered their Bradley wheels. Ultimately cheaper than retooling.

Of course, it's all moot, for those who have read my other post on this kit...
bilbobee
Visit this Community
Minnesota, United States
Joined: February 28, 2015
KitMaker: 414 posts
Armorama: 406 posts
Posted: Friday, July 24, 2015 - 03:46 AM UTC
Yes brian i agree with your review, I have one and when I opened the kit and seen the tracks I was surprised, to say the lease. I will not buy a dragon kit with DS tracks. It seems to me dragon is doing alot of re-issues with ds, and old parts. where other brands are coming out with workable tracks with their kits. Dragon was a leader without a doubt. But my question...is dragon just using their name and not what should be in the box?
mpeplinski
Visit this Community
Michigan, United States
Joined: January 17, 2006
KitMaker: 487 posts
Armorama: 182 posts
Posted: Sunday, July 26, 2015 - 01:26 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Dragon was a leader without a doubt. But my question...is dragon just using their name and not what should be in the box?



I think Dragon is/was resting on it's laurels and it's bit them.It's almost as if all their engineers and CAD operators jumped ship and went on to other companies?Could explain the new companies and products being released.

My 2 cents adjusted for inflation......

Mike
brian638
Visit this Community
England - West Midlands, United Kingdom
Joined: July 24, 2004
KitMaker: 318 posts
Armorama: 263 posts
Posted: Sunday, July 26, 2015 - 02:32 AM UTC
I think that this was a lazy release,they could have included an older set of decals and at least given the option of other nations. I built the Orange Box Abrams (IFOR/USMC) version it was a dog of a kit with only a few additions.

I think that Dragon can still produce a few stunning kits unfortunately they are mainly variations on existing German armour. I really wish that they had upgraded the tracks as this would have made a great addition.
DLDC_Sims_Guy
Visit this Community
Kansas, United States
Joined: June 10, 2014
KitMaker: 7 posts
Armorama: 7 posts
Posted: Monday, January 25, 2016 - 07:45 PM UTC
I detest this model. The sprue attachment points and ejector marks are absolutely horrid and make no sense at all. Because of these, I had to switch from a detailed interior to a buttoned-up and firing pose. I have had to do tons of cleaning, and that's just on the doors and window shields. Sure, there is detail, but at what cost? This model is in serious need of a re-tooling. I gave it a 60%, and that was being generous. I build a great many modern armor and arty, and this, by far, is the worst kit I've had the displeasure of opening in a couple of years. Even worse that any Zvezda kit I've done.
Petition2God
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: February 06, 2002
KitMaker: 1,526 posts
Armorama: 1,294 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 - 05:44 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I detest this model. The sprue attachment points and ejector marks are absolutely horrid and make no sense at all. Because of these, I had to switch from a detailed interior to a buttoned-up and firing pose. I have had to do tons of cleaning, and that's just on the doors and window shields. Sure, there is detail, but at what cost? This model is in serious need of a re-tooling. I gave it a 60%, and that was being generous. I build a great many modern armor and arty, and this, by far, is the worst kit I've had the displeasure of opening in a couple of years. Even worse that any Zvezda kit I've done.


Wow, good thing that I stayed away from this kit.
Cantstopbuyingkits
Visit this Community
European Union
Joined: January 28, 2015
KitMaker: 2,099 posts
Armorama: 1,920 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 - 07:16 AM UTC
Good thing Merit has a MLRS announced so we don't have to suffer with this sub-2000 quality trash any more.
HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 - 07:35 AM UTC
^ Just a bit over-dramatic. Sure it is an older kit, but it is not that bad of a kit. With a little TLC, it can come out looking great. I have built a bunch of these over the years and they can be great with a little work.
Cantstopbuyingkits
Visit this Community
European Union
Joined: January 28, 2015
KitMaker: 2,099 posts
Armorama: 1,920 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 - 08:50 AM UTC

Quoted Text

^ Just a bit over-dramatic. Sure it is an older kit, but it is not that bad of a kit. With a little TLC, it can come out looking great. I have built a bunch of these over the years and they can be great with a little work.


Ha, no. The original kit was good around it's 1992 release date, but this release is shockingly basic and outdated compared to modern kits in the same $60 price range even if you ignore the terrible casting flaws Curt pointed out.
HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 - 08:54 PM UTC
Whatever. Guess it comes down to how much effort you actually want to put into a build. Not every kit is going to fall together as you shake the box. Some actually take a little modeling skill. I'm sure the forth-coming Merit one will be better, but until it arrives, this one is a very buildable kit and can come out looking great when done. Like I said, it just takes a little effort.
HermannB
Visit this Community
Bayern, Germany
Joined: October 14, 2008
KitMaker: 4,099 posts
Armorama: 4,067 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 - 10:18 PM UTC
I had recently an encounter with 1/142 FA. Of course, this led me to the decision to build the M270A1. I noticed that 2020 tracks now have a DVE and a mount for Harris RF-3134 Loop Antenna. I hope that Trumpeter will add the features into a future kit.
 _GOTOTOP