_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV: Axis - WWII
Armor and ground forces of the Axis forces during World War II.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Anyone built RyeFields new Tiger 1?
Biggles2
Visit this Community
Quebec, Canada
Joined: January 01, 2004
KitMaker: 7,600 posts
Armorama: 6,110 posts
Posted: Friday, November 20, 2015 - 08:40 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

But my motives are not the topic of this forum.


I guess not, but most Tiger enthusiasts know that you are closely affiliated with Dragon through your work on their Tiger line of kits, and that could easily make some wonder if there's not a wee bit of bias against any competing manufacturers? Which wouldn't be hard to understand at all.

I'm not saying that you are biased. Just that the very fact that you do contribute to the only true competitor to RFM, leaves that open to interpretation. I trust you to be aware of this and take it into consideration.

Best regards,

Arild


Well said, sir.
Tigermodels
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: February 24, 2012
KitMaker: 12 posts
Armorama: 10 posts
Posted: Friday, November 20, 2015 - 11:05 PM UTC
Seems to me that, if an omission condemns an entire kit, then ALL Dragon Tiger I's need to be put in the trash because they omit the entire interior.

In truth, this is probably the best compromise/value we have ever seen for a 1/35 Tiger I. To expect a Marvin the Martian shrink ray version is simply... Well, it's unreasonable. It could be done, but then the same people would be complaining about the $1000 price tag and how many parts they have to assemble.

So I will stand with Kurt on this one.
Byrden
Visit this Community
Wien, Austria
Joined: July 12, 2005
KitMaker: 2,233 posts
Armorama: 2,221 posts
Posted: Friday, November 20, 2015 - 11:12 PM UTC
Who said that an omission condemns an entire kit?

I'll tell you what WAS said and who said it. Rye Field wrote "Full Interior" on their box.

David
astralscooter
Visit this Community
Telemark, Norway
Joined: March 24, 2015
KitMaker: 69 posts
Armorama: 69 posts
Posted: Friday, November 20, 2015 - 11:28 PM UTC
Hehe, and Dragon (or anyone else) has never, ever made a bit bold statement on their box tops?

Get real, my good man.

A thousand good reasons exists that can explain why the marketing people wrote "Full interior" on the box, while the designers actually didn't deliver that.

Anyway, I believe most people now know that there's a few missing pieces from the engine compartment of this kit.

If I remember correctly, it was said at some point that RFM would issue the interior as a separate item. If so, it will be interesting to see if they add the missing pieces, or if they just move on.

Arild
M4A1Sherman
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Friday, November 20, 2015 - 11:41 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Seems to me that, if an omission condemns an entire kit, then ALL Dragon Tiger I's need to be put in the trash because they omit the entire interior.

In truth, this is probably the best compromise/value we have ever seen for a 1/35 Tiger I. To expect a Marvin the Martian shrink ray version is simply... Well, it's unreasonable. It could be done, but then the same people would be complaining about the $1000 price tag and how many parts they have to assemble.

So I will stand with Kurt on this one.


I SECOND THAT!!! For those that ARE willing to take their Tiger Is to the highest level possible, CHECK OUT THE NEW TMD! I'm not sure if Joe offers an Interior for the Tiger I, but if he does, it'll be a top-notch product. I can personally attest to the GREAT QUALITY of TMD's WWII US Upgrades and Conversions for ACADEMY's M3A1 Honey/Stuarts, DRAGON and ASUKA/TASCA M4-series Shermans, AFV CLUB M5A1 Early & Late Light Tanks and TMD's FANTASTIC M8 HMC Conversion kit!
KurtLaughlin
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Friday, November 20, 2015 - 11:52 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Who said that an omission condemns an entire kit?

I'll tell you what WAS said and who said it. Rye Field wrote "Full Interior" on their box.


OK David, given that it is impossible to reduce everything to 1/35 of actual size, what could be tolerably omitted from a kit claiming to have a "full interior" such that you would not consider that the omissions contradicted the "full interior" label?

KL
KurtLaughlin
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 21, 2015 - 12:09 AM UTC

Quoted Text

So I will stand with Kurt on this one.


Well hold on, I'm not taking any sort of stand on the RFM kit. I was talking solely about modeling in general.

"No one is denying that the issues with the kit exist. What they are questioning is whether they are relevant to their enjoyment of the model."

This comes up any time there is a discussion of accuracy. The "researchers" often come across as unnecessarily negative, while the "builders" seem to go out of their way to sound like unquestioning pollyannas.

This comment on the other hand, especially considering its source, is probably one of the better (most useful) summaries:

"It's great value for money, and with a bit of detailing it gives you a great crew compartment interior. I'd buy it - but I'd substitute a Dragon hull roof and turret shell, if possible."

It took a direct question to the writer for this to come out, however. Prior to that I believe many thought this person's view was quite different. (Which was why someone felt the need to ask . . .) That's the problem.

KL
Byrden
Visit this Community
Wien, Austria
Joined: July 12, 2005
KitMaker: 2,233 posts
Armorama: 2,221 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 21, 2015 - 12:19 AM UTC

Quoted Text

what could be tolerably omitted from a kit claiming to have a "full interior" such that you would not consider that the omissions contradicted the "full interior" label?
KL



Things that are out of sight in almost all situations, e.g. the gear wheels within the final drives, the gearbox of the Tiger (which is inside a sheet-metal box), the gears for driving the Tiger's main fans (hidden inside the large round ducts).

Things that are too small for plastic molding, e.g. loose wiring.

I would expect the interior to look complete, when any and all hatches are opened, and perhaps also when major items are taken out. A basic repair / maintenance diorama should be possible with what's in the box.

David
brekinapez
Visit this Community
Georgia, United States
Joined: July 26, 2013
KitMaker: 2,272 posts
Armorama: 1,860 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 21, 2015 - 02:06 AM UTC
I would think that anyone familiar with David and his Tiger site would understand what he primarily does is point out the inaccuracies in all published kits and provides info on how to correct those mistakes. From my viewpoint, that does not indicate he is condemning any kit to the trash pile but rather letting people who want to build a particular tank are in for in terms of making corrections--if they so desire. He also does this with the Dragon kits so I don't get the "bias" remark because that is reflected nowhere on his site.

Those who aren't that concerned are always free to buy whatever and build whatever.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 21, 2015 - 09:16 AM UTC

Quoted Text

And.... another Tiger bites the dust.

I take it that RFM should have stated that this one included 25% interior, due to all the glaring omissions which has rendered it unbuildable. Perhaps they should have included all electrical wiring too.

The quest for the 100% perfect OOB kit goes on. It'll be a long wait, not only for Tiger modellers.

Or we can just build anywway :-)


I'm setting here right now with the kit next to me. Here's my take:

* no where on the box or even in the instruction are there any mention of a full interior. Yet R.F. is supposed to offer one for this kit separately.

* tracks look similar to Model Kasten and in some was AFV like.

* have zero ideas about the fit, and usually pay zero attention to other folks having issues unless many folks are having the same issue

* the only kits to make comparison with are the Dragons in my opinion. But I have Tiger I's from just about everybody in my stash. Still an "IP" or a very early Tiger is almost a different beast.

* The instructions are not confusing or anything like that, but somewhat vague to my eyes. Could be far better. They also only give details for one tank to apply decals. But there are enough decals to do more than one hull. Figure that out!

* nice metal cable and nice plastic cable ends. Why not a metal barrel R.F.? The photo etch looks nice, but is it what I want? Not sure yet as I could have tried to decipher the instructions a little better.

* I paid $55 for my kit. Closest kit to it is from Dragon, and it's $80 (Tiger I IP). Not sure about the Zvezda, but do have the Academy kit somewhere. I bought that kit for some parts, and never planned on building it anyway. I do have a couple early Tamiya's, and the Dragon eats them. My AFV kits are late Tigers, so are a little different.

I read all thru Dave's initial build of this kit on Track Link, and that's why I bought it. Saw nothing in the build that I could deal with in time. This includes a couple fit issues he came across. The kit's not perfect, but please me one that is perfect!
gary
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 21, 2015 - 09:21 AM UTC

Quoted Text

The way the RFM kit is being constantly bashed, it would seem some people just don't want you to buy it.


or they didn't get one in advance for free
glt
astralscooter
Visit this Community
Telemark, Norway
Joined: March 24, 2015
KitMaker: 69 posts
Armorama: 69 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 21, 2015 - 02:57 PM UTC

Quoted Text

* no where on the box or even in the instruction are there any mention of a full interior. Yet R.F. is supposed to offer one for this kit separately.


Gary, are you perhaps referring to the first RFM Tiger? The Initial?

Because the present discussion concerns their second Tiger kit, recently released.



Arild
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Sunday, November 22, 2015 - 02:39 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

* no where on the box or even in the instruction are there any mention of a full interior. Yet R.F. is supposed to offer one for this kit separately.


Gary, are you perhaps referring to the first RFM Tiger? The Initial?

Because the present discussion concerns their second Tiger kit, recently released.



Arild


my kit is #5001, and is different than the box for sure. To be exact, I never knew this kit even existed! Guess you could my statements as a mini review for 5001.
gary
easyco69
Visit this Community
Ontario, Canada
Joined: November 03, 2012
KitMaker: 2,275 posts
Armorama: 2,233 posts
Posted: Sunday, November 22, 2015 - 02:42 AM UTC
no thanks.
kiyoshi
Visit this Community
Tokyo-to, Japan / 日本
Joined: September 16, 2014
KitMaker: 35 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Posted: Sunday, November 22, 2015 - 07:07 PM UTC
Well.. I bought this Tiger 1 w/ interior (RFM #5003). Previously I already enjoyed to make both RFM Tiger 1 Africa 1943(#5001) and DML Tiger 1 Africa 131 (#6820).

Tiger1 w/ interior RFM #5003 9900 JPY
Tiger1 Africa 1943 RFM #5001 6800 JPY
Tiger1 Africa 131 DML #6820 6944 JPY

This means the interior is Only 3000 JPY. so I am satisfied with the kit even though the #5003 does not have full interior and it has some mistakes.

RFM is a startup company. They can improve this kit as DML or other companies did. and I think DML or Tamiya cannot make Tiger 1 with the interior.
ivanhoe6
Visit this Community
Wisconsin, United States
Joined: April 05, 2007
KitMaker: 2,023 posts
Armorama: 1,234 posts
Posted: Monday, November 23, 2015 - 05:20 AM UTC
I agree 100% with FW and Shell about David Byrden's invaluable input. He is always willing to help anybody who asks for help building an accurate Tiger.
David, if you read this don't take some of the comments to heart. Please keep helping us who want to make the best Tigers that our skill sets can handle. AND, a great big THANK YOU for all of your input over the years !
Tom
KurtLaughlin
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 - 07:00 AM UTC
One might say that the comments about David were about equal with regard to apparent negativity and tone as David's comments about the RFM kit. If you were OK with one you ought to be OK with the other, eh?

(FYI, I thought both, in total, were fine. A few rough spots, maybe, but overall perfectly reasonable.)

KL

Rohirrim
Visit this Community
Slovenia
Joined: November 30, 2014
KitMaker: 17 posts
Armorama: 15 posts
Posted: Friday, December 11, 2015 - 02:11 PM UTC
Hey!

Given the carnage this thread has escalated into, I am not willing to start a new one, so I will just post my reply here. I have ordered my Tiger #5003 just days ago and I am not really concerned since the most of the flaws seem to be in the interior which I am not actually planning to expose (perhaps apart from some open hatches on the turret, we will see how the build goes - it is my first Tiger, after all), but I am a bit worried about the road wheels - they seem to be missing a joint? I am in no way an expert for Tigers, so could please (I would be much grateful) anyone explain to me what exactly the problem is there and whether or not it is somehow possible to fix it.

Thank you very much in advance!

Matevž
Byrden
Visit this Community
Wien, Austria
Joined: July 12, 2005
KitMaker: 2,233 posts
Armorama: 2,221 posts
Posted: Friday, December 11, 2015 - 05:14 PM UTC

Quoted Text


I am a bit worried about the road wheels - they seem to be missing a joint?


I guess you refer to this?



This joint is missing from the kit. It is visible on the first axle, though 4 of the axles per side are lacking it.

The kit provides parts D13 and P25 to represent this joint when the outer wheel is removed. But when the wheels are installed, the joint is about twice as thick as D13.

David
astralscooter
Visit this Community
Telemark, Norway
Joined: March 24, 2015
KitMaker: 69 posts
Armorama: 69 posts
Posted: Friday, December 11, 2015 - 07:13 PM UTC
BTW, is that joint arrowed in the picture present in any available kit? Can't seem to find anything like in my Dragon kits.

There's the part that goes on the end of the shaft when the outer wheel is removed, but as far as I can tell, nothing is there when the outer wheel is mounted.

So this seem to be an area for any kit manufacturer to be the first to improve upon?

Arild
Byrden
Visit this Community
Wien, Austria
Joined: July 12, 2005
KitMaker: 2,233 posts
Armorama: 2,221 posts
Posted: Friday, December 11, 2015 - 07:48 PM UTC
I'm glad you asked that.
Dragon have a part Q12 to make that joint;



It is included in the following kits;

astralscooter
Visit this Community
Telemark, Norway
Joined: March 24, 2015
KitMaker: 69 posts
Armorama: 69 posts
Posted: Friday, December 11, 2015 - 08:04 PM UTC
Cool!

I've missed that one. I've got four of the kits you mention, but haven't gotten around to build any of them yet, otherwise I probably would have known.

Arild
Rohirrim
Visit this Community
Slovenia
Joined: November 30, 2014
KitMaker: 17 posts
Armorama: 15 posts
Posted: Friday, December 11, 2015 - 09:26 PM UTC
Thank you very much for a reply! Shame I own no other Tigers, and with somewhat lacking the skills and means to scratch-build those parts, I guess I will have to just live with it

Matevž
 _GOTOTOP