Paul Howard takes a quick look at the Takom Mk. I Female offering in 1/35th scale.
Link to Item
If you have comments or questions please post them here.
Thanks!
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
REVIEW
Mk. I FemalePosted: Friday, December 25, 2015 - 04:34 AM UTC
acebatau
Colorado, United States
Joined: February 10, 2008
KitMaker: 730 posts
Armorama: 616 posts
Joined: February 10, 2008
KitMaker: 730 posts
Armorama: 616 posts
Posted: Friday, December 25, 2015 - 06:14 AM UTC
Nice review, thanks
dylans
British Columbia, Canada
Joined: March 05, 2009
KitMaker: 394 posts
Armorama: 380 posts
Joined: March 05, 2009
KitMaker: 394 posts
Armorama: 380 posts
Posted: Friday, December 25, 2015 - 08:25 AM UTC
I love Takom's WWI kits. I agree that the painting guides are a problem. the Mig paints are not even available in my local shops. colour matches to Vallejo or Tamiya paints would be nice. also I have learned the hard way that they arent always accurate.
now that I got that off my chest, I am having a great time building 2 MKI kits one female and one male.
now that I got that off my chest, I am having a great time building 2 MKI kits one female and one male.
PRH001
New Mexico, United States
Joined: June 16, 2014
KitMaker: 681 posts
Armorama: 603 posts
Joined: June 16, 2014
KitMaker: 681 posts
Armorama: 603 posts
Posted: Friday, December 25, 2015 - 09:25 AM UTC
I'm doing a build review for the site on this kit. Still early in the process, but it's been a treat so far.
Paul H
Paul H
ironhull
Venezia, Italy
Joined: November 23, 2013
KitMaker: 134 posts
Armorama: 134 posts
Joined: November 23, 2013
KitMaker: 134 posts
Armorama: 134 posts
Posted: Friday, December 25, 2015 - 11:02 AM UTC
The biggest problem of Takom Mk I is the drive cab width which is the same of Mk IV when actually it was large as the hull. This means it should be 6mm larger then Takom did. They simply reworked their Mk IV cab without changing dimension. The narrow cab appeared from Mk II onward so Takom cab is a good start point to built a Mk II but not for a Mk I.
In my opinion this is a bad issue because the larger cab was a distinctive feature of Mk I and it is hard to rebuild.
Otherwise it's a good kit with only minor shortcomings
In my opinion this is a bad issue because the larger cab was a distinctive feature of Mk I and it is hard to rebuild.
Otherwise it's a good kit with only minor shortcomings
dylans
British Columbia, Canada
Joined: March 05, 2009
KitMaker: 394 posts
Armorama: 380 posts
Joined: March 05, 2009
KitMaker: 394 posts
Armorama: 380 posts
Posted: Friday, December 25, 2015 - 03:53 PM UTC
Quoted Text
The biggest problem of Takom Mk I is the drive cab width which is the same of Mk IV when actually it was large as the hull.
well that's disappointing, do you have any pictures showing the correct drivers cab?
I suppose someone might make a resin replacement. it would be pretty simple to graft on the the front of the top hull piece.
unfortunately it is too late in my builds to fix the problem.
that really shows poor research on Takoms part. all of the pieces for the cab and hull roof had to be all newly tooled.
ironhull
Venezia, Italy
Joined: November 23, 2013
KitMaker: 134 posts
Armorama: 134 posts
Joined: November 23, 2013
KitMaker: 134 posts
Armorama: 134 posts
Posted: Friday, December 25, 2015 - 06:20 PM UTC
widely discussed here
http://landships.activeboard.com/t61196567/first-look-at-takoms-135th-mk1-male-tank/
http://landships.activeboard.com/t61196567/first-look-at-takoms-135th-mk1-male-tank/
bilbobee
Minnesota, United States
Joined: February 28, 2015
KitMaker: 414 posts
Armorama: 406 posts
Joined: February 28, 2015
KitMaker: 414 posts
Armorama: 406 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 26, 2015 - 03:53 AM UTC
nice review, thanks... a great kit for my ww1 diorama