_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
Bronco Panzer III A
DFord58
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: August 25, 2016
KitMaker: 1 posts
Armorama: 1 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 10:58 AM UTC
More Chinese made garbage. And I thought they couldn't make one worse than their P-40.
Cantstopbuyingkits
Visit this Community
European Union
Joined: January 28, 2015
KitMaker: 2,099 posts
Armorama: 1,920 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 11:07 AM UTC
??????????
Pedro
Visit this Community
Wojewodztwo Pomorskie, Poland
Joined: May 26, 2003
KitMaker: 1,208 posts
Armorama: 1,023 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 12:04 PM UTC
Wow! Thanks for thorough and in depth review, very informative an great, detailed photos!

Can't thank you enough, really, cheers and good luck,
Greg
jon_a_its
Visit this Community
England - East Midlands, United Kingdom
Joined: April 29, 2004
KitMaker: 1,336 posts
Armorama: 1,137 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 12:37 PM UTC

Quoted Text

More Chinese made garbage. And I thought they couldn't make one worse than their P-40.


Hmmm....

ONE post only, NO profile, NO informed content... Ignore.

And read a few Informed Reviews as here: Armorama Review The Info is out there....

PS we know Bronco kits are over-engineered, have 1000's of parts, but are at least in the UK, way cheaper than Trumpeter, and they do INTERESTING STUFF!

Lawyer1
Visit this Community
South Africa
Joined: July 22, 2015
KitMaker: 72 posts
Armorama: 67 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 01:31 PM UTC
I think David may have been referring to the built review of this kit under the review section on the Armorama home page.

My two cents worth
supaderpa
Visit this Community
Malaysia
Joined: March 28, 2016
KitMaker: 157 posts
Armorama: 140 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 02:21 PM UTC
Personally haven't built a Bronco AFV kit on account of them being really pricey even when getting them from a retailer in China or Hong Kong.

Looking at several other reviews of this same kit, I can understand how its geared towards the more experienced and patient modeler what with its hundreds of fiddly little parts but that's generally what you get for better overall detail.

Also, I wouldn't generalize all Chinese made kits as garbage considering how a good majority of popular and well regarded kit manufacturers are from China.
jon_a_its
Visit this Community
England - East Midlands, United Kingdom
Joined: April 29, 2004
KitMaker: 1,336 posts
Armorama: 1,137 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 02:51 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I think David may have been referring to the built review of this kit under the review section on the Armorama home page.

My two cents worth


Possibly, but since there is an actual "Discuss this review" button on the 'actual' review I posted, any comments could be more usefully & constructively posted there?
easyco69
Visit this Community
Ontario, Canada
Joined: November 03, 2012
KitMaker: 2,275 posts
Armorama: 2,233 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 05:03 PM UTC
Some Bronco kits are not for beginners, they are very complicated.
Here's a review of the kit.
http://www.themodellingnews.com/2016/03/build-review-ptii-paul-finishes-broncos.html
M4A1Sherman
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 05:15 PM UTC

Quoted Text

More Chinese made garbage. And I thought they couldn't make one worse than their P-40.


That's a decidedly unfair assessment. Granted, the BRONCO 1/48 P-40B/C is nothing to write home about, but to label Chinese-made kits as "garbage", is pretty far from reality...

BTW, at the bottom of Adam's comprehensive Review of this kit, the usual provision for "Comments" is absent, at least on MY computer, anyway. Perhaps this is why a separate thread has had to be opened..?

As to my opinion of the BRONCO Pz.III Ausf.A kit, I haven't built mine yet, but I don't think that it will be something that I can't handle.

Re: The PE in this kit- I wonder if Adam had annealed his PE before trying to bend or assemble it? Not being deprecating or sarcastic, just genuinely curious.

Re: The problems with the Suspension components and other assembly steps- In my own case, I'll just deal with them as I see fit. I've personally been building models for about 59 years now, and BELIEVE ME, I have built some of the ABSOLUTE WORST kits on the market during that lengthy expanse of time. If I put my mind to it and exercise some ingenuity and patience, I don't think that this BRONCO Pz.IIIA will pose many problems for me.

Comments?
M4A1Sherman
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 05:30 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Some Bronco kits are not for beginners, they are very complicated.
Here's a review of the kit.
http://www.themodellingnews.com/2016/03/build-review-ptii-paul-finishes-broncos.html


THANK YOU DAVID!

I didn't think that the BRONCO Pz.Kpfw.III Ausf.A was as bad as Adam seemed to think it was- I'm willing to give virtually ANY kit the benefit of the doubt. Notable exceptions are some of the really bad reviews of certain BLACK PLAGUE kits, which after reading the reviews and builds, I've decided not to buy them. Enough said about that.

The "The Modelling News" review of the BRONCO Pz.IIIA certainly casts a different light upon this kit. At least now, I can look forward to building mine without blinding or poisoning myself with my own "prior-bias"...
27-1025
Visit this Community
North Carolina, United States
Joined: September 16, 2004
KitMaker: 1,281 posts
Armorama: 1,222 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 06:23 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Some Bronco kits are not for beginners, they are very complicated.
Here's a review of the kit.
http://www.themodellingnews.com/2016/03/build-review-ptii-paul-finishes-broncos.html


In the eye of the beholder. This review was quite favorable. You're right about Bronco being more complicated than most, but I kind of like them as they do lesser known subjects.
Mannloon
Visit this Community
Wisconsin, United States
Joined: May 18, 2015
KitMaker: 99 posts
Armorama: 97 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 06:51 PM UTC
There should have been a topic for this, sorry about that guys. There is now. As to the kit, I know I was really harsh, but I am what i'd call a moderate skill level and I want people to know this doesn't fall together like Tamiya or Dragon. Let's call it a "modelers" kit.
KurtLaughlin
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 07:12 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Some Bronco kits are not for beginners, they are very complicated.
Here's a review of the kit.
http://www.themodellingnews.com/2016/03/build-review-ptii-paul-finishes-broncos.html


Oyf. That's supposed to be a helpful "build review" of a complicated kit? Eight photos of the kit under construction, eighteen of it painted or being painted.

Article proportions are quickly approaching those of the old Scale Modeler magazine back in the 70s . . .

KL
KurtLaughlin
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 07:19 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I think David may have been referring to the built review of this kit under the review section on the Armorama home page.


??????

The "link to item" here brings up a Rye Field Tiger review.

KL
johhar
Visit this Community
Alabama, United States
Joined: September 22, 2008
KitMaker: 476 posts
Armorama: 447 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 07:36 PM UTC
Having gotten through everything up to the turret, which is most of the kit, there are some valid criticisms;
1. the road wheels need to be "corrected"
2. there are "you call these attachment points?"
3. a lot of fiddly, especially where the attachments points are closer to hints than actual points

All said, a good build so far, and the turret seems like more.
ziggyfoos
Visit this Community
North Carolina, United States
Joined: June 27, 2004
KitMaker: 199 posts
Armorama: 133 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2016 - 08:16 PM UTC

Quoted Text



??????

The "link to item" here brings up a Rye Field Tiger review.

KL


I had some confusion. The link on the main Armorama review page is correct though:
https://armorama.kitmaker.net/review/12523
M4A1Sherman
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Friday, August 26, 2016 - 12:26 AM UTC

Quoted Text

There should have been a topic for this, sorry about that guys. There is now. As to the kit, I know I was really harsh, but I am what i'd call a moderate skill level and I want people to know this doesn't fall together like Tamiya or Dragon. Let's call it a "modelers" kit.


Thanks, Adam!

I'll be following your new "Topic" thread. Just a quick question- Did you anneal the PE parts in your BRONCO Pz.IIIA? If not, then that could be the cause of your difficulties in working with it, i.e, bending it and so forth. Annealing the PE will soften the brass, and make the PE parts more pliable. You don't want to overheat the brass, as that will melt the smaller parts.

Back when I first started working with PE, ( about 200 years ago, ), I had problems with forming and bending the brass without breaking it, too. Very frustrating. Then I came upon the Late, Great Sheppard Paine's articles dealing with PE, and he explained about annealing brass. Even though brass is classified as a "soft" metal, it is VERY brittle, and breaks very easily, which leads to many modellers being "put off" by using PE. I like it very much, but it does have it's limits. I like resin replacement parts, updates and backdates, too. But, that's just my opinion and my way of building, I guess...
M4A1Sherman
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Friday, August 26, 2016 - 01:18 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Some Bronco kits are not for beginners, they are very complicated.
Here's a review of the kit.
http://www.themodellingnews.com/2016/03/build-review-ptii-paul-finishes-broncos.html


Oyf. That's supposed to be a helpful "build review" of a complicated kit? Eight photos of the kit under construction, eighteen of it painted or being painted.

Article proportions are quickly approaching those of the old Scale Modeler magazine back in the 70s . . .

KL


The author of that "/review" does offer some positive commentary in some the actual building steps of that BRONCO Pz.IIIA, which for me, shed a different light on Adam's "take" of that kit. Personally, I don't think that I'll have as many problems as Adam had- He calls himself a builder of "moderate skills"... (paraphrased)


BTW- I remember "Scale Modeler Magazine" quite well. Sure, it was pretty crude by today's standards, but modelling techniques, airbrushing, detailing and so forth have matured to the Nth degree, 40-some years later. I was a teenager back then, and some really great techniques came to the fore with "Scale Military Modeler Magazine" (from the same publisher), in the late '70s and during the '80s and '90s. It's amazing how this hobby has grown and matured...
KurtLaughlin
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Friday, August 26, 2016 - 08:10 AM UTC

Quoted Text

BTW- I remember "Scale Modeler Magazine" quite well. Sure, it was pretty crude by today's standards, but modelling techniques, airbrushing, detailing and so forth have matured to the Nth degree, 40-some years later. I was a teenager back then, and some really great techniques came to the fore with "Scale Military Modeler Magazine" (from the same publisher), in the late '70s and during the '80s and '90s. It's amazing how this hobby has grown and matured...


I didn't have a problem with it being a product of the times, but after subscribing for a few years I noticed that every kit "fills a need for a kit of this important aircraft" and the review checklist was pretty much the same. The text was usually 90% aircraft history, 5% about the lack of a kit to date, and 5% about the kit in question. I can think of one - ONE! - article that talked about building the kit, a 1/72 An-12 Cub from a Russian or East European company, about 1977. Oh, and the photos were all of the finished model (which was usually available to be seen at Archer's Hobby). I don't recall ANY in process photos.

KL
 _GOTOTOP