Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
Are M60 and M60A1 cupolas interchangeable?
Kenaicop
#384
Joined: August 23, 2005
KitMaker: 1,426 posts
Armorama: 1,316 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 12:30 AM UTC
Picked up the Dragon M60 for a winter build, not happy with the commanders cupola. I have a few M60A1 cupolas from old conversion projects but don't now if they are interchangeable, and if not, what are the differences?
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 12:46 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Picked up the Dragon M60 for a winter build, not happy with the commanders cupola. I have a few M60A1 cupolas from old conversion projects but don't now if they are interchangeable, and if not, what are the differences?
The real thing was the same. In 1/35 scale? Who knows... But it shouldn't be too hard to make it fit.
Kenaicop
#384
Joined: August 23, 2005
KitMaker: 1,426 posts
Armorama: 1,316 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 12:47 AM UTC
Oh, if they are the same, I'll make it fit. Thanks!
KurtLaughlin
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 06:18 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Picked up the Dragon M60 for a winter build, not happy with the commanders cupola. I have a few M60A1 cupolas from old conversion projects but don't now if they are interchangeable, and if not, what are the differences?
They may be interchangeable (meaning they can be swapped out with equivalent function) but they weren't the same. The M60s I've seen used a P/N 10873386 cupola casting while the M60A1s and M60A3s used a P/N 10911791 casting. I haven't looked at the differences in any detail but the vision block opening machining looks different.
There's also this that I had forgotten about.
KL
Kenaicop
#384
Joined: August 23, 2005
KitMaker: 1,426 posts
Armorama: 1,316 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 06:30 AM UTC
Wow, that's great info, but another question, and correct me if I'm wrong. Were the modifications covered by the ballistic nylon, and if so, then I can use the cupola from an A1? The whole reason for me wanting to switch them out is because the Dragon M60 doesn't have the ballistic cover.
Bravo1102
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 08:23 AM UTC
All those changes were hidden by the cover. I always wondered about those differences when loading the M85.
I only served on M60A3 so by that time parts were mixed and matched and you could truly only tell the origin of a hull by reading the data plate in the driver's compartment.
I only served on M60A3 so by that time parts were mixed and matched and you could truly only tell the origin of a hull by reading the data plate in the driver's compartment.
BruceJ8365
Joined: December 25, 2012
KitMaker: 441 posts
Armorama: 441 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 08:50 AM UTC
The only noticeable difference is that the M60 cupola had a square welded mounting bracket for a machine gun on the left side. This was used to mount an M2 before the M85 was fully developed.
Here's a work in progress of my M60. Look for the small square with four bolt holes in the left side of the cupola.
Here's a work in progress of my M60. Look for the small square with four bolt holes in the left side of the cupola.
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 10:53 AM UTC
Just to make it clear: the cupola in Dragon M60 kit is completely inaccurate in size and shape, so if you replace it with any M60A1 or M60A3 kit or aftermarket cupola, it will be much more accurate than the kit one, regardless of small casting differences.
Removed by original poster on 09/20/16 - 06:01:58 (GMT).
mkp
Joined: November 10, 2005
KitMaker: 35 posts
Armorama: 35 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 11:53 AM UTC
On some photos of the first M60s in Germany, they had either the M2 MG mounting at the side and the comanders periscope was the old M48 style (small periscope with cover). The big vision block appeared with the newer cuppolas without the welded square. All cupoöas were later retrofitted wih the common vision block!
Bravo1102
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 01:28 PM UTC
Like the M85 machine gun, development of the tank commander's cupola sight assembly was delayed. So the M48 sight periscope was the intermediate solution as was the exterior plate to mount an M2 fifty cal. Machine gun.
Even after the introduction of the Tank Thermal Sight and TC's elbow there were a few old hands who preferred the M60A1 TC's cupola passive sight. It was less dependant on heat to acquire targets. There's a deer showing up bright and I can't see the "heated" target in the TTS.
Anyone here ever have the chance to help with unbolting the housing and removing the whole assembly?
Even after the introduction of the Tank Thermal Sight and TC's elbow there were a few old hands who preferred the M60A1 TC's cupola passive sight. It was less dependant on heat to acquire targets. There's a deer showing up bright and I can't see the "heated" target in the TTS.
Anyone here ever have the chance to help with unbolting the housing and removing the whole assembly?
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 02:29 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Just to make it clear: the cupola in Dragon M60 kit is completely inaccurate in size and shape, so if you replace it with any M60A1 or M60A3 kit or aftermarket cupola, it will be much more accurate than the kit one, regardless of small casting differences.
DRAGON does it again... This is getting OLD...
HeavyArty
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 05:22 PM UTC
I plan on using the Legend M60 Cupola set (LF1249). It looks really nice and has very nice interior details. It also has the dust cover for the M85 gun. It is a great improvement over the kit parts.
Oh yes, its all a big conspiracy. Dragon is in cahoots with the AM companies to keep them in business making correction sets for inferior Dragon kits. Mahwahaaa!!!
Really?? Just accept that Dragon kits are not perfect and get over it. To the average builder (read not those who are on this forum) they are great and "look" just like an M60, M103A1, M60A2, etc. The average builder who is buying these kits could care less if they are totally accurate down to a fraction of a mm. We are not Dragon's target audience. They are selling plenty of kits as they are, so they will not strive to change them or get better. If sales fall off, then they may worry. Until then, you get what you get.
Quoted Text
DRAGON does it again... This is getting OLD...
Oh yes, its all a big conspiracy. Dragon is in cahoots with the AM companies to keep them in business making correction sets for inferior Dragon kits. Mahwahaaa!!!
Really?? Just accept that Dragon kits are not perfect and get over it. To the average builder (read not those who are on this forum) they are great and "look" just like an M60, M103A1, M60A2, etc. The average builder who is buying these kits could care less if they are totally accurate down to a fraction of a mm. We are not Dragon's target audience. They are selling plenty of kits as they are, so they will not strive to change them or get better. If sales fall off, then they may worry. Until then, you get what you get.
Garrand
Joined: October 27, 2009
KitMaker: 195 posts
Armorama: 194 posts
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2016 - 10:05 PM UTC
I'm working on the Dragon M60 right now (almost done with it!), and have already tackled the cupola issue. I have an Academy Mag'ach 6 in the stash, and robbed it of its cupola (which it won't need). I built it pretty much as-is, except used the Dragon site pieces (much better than the Academy depiction) as well as the mounting plate on the side. In order to fit it to the kit, you'll need to saw off the ring that mounts it to the Academy turret. But once you do this, there should be a shallow, wider ring left, and this fits PERFECTLY into the track on the Dragon turret. The only downside is that it cannot rotate as you'll need to glue it down. But worked like a charm...
BTW, I am also using a TMD mantlet cover for the M48 kit, as well as a turned aluminum barrel. If I had planned better, I would have also picked up the toolbox latch handles for the fender stowage boxes (Academy updated the old Tamiya kit with separate pieces, Dragon molds them on...), and a set of DEF drive sprockets with the lightening holes.
I haven't tackled the IR searchlight yet, but have a Legends set in the stash, as well as the old Tamiya parts. I might look at that tonight...
Damon.
BTW, I am also using a TMD mantlet cover for the M48 kit, as well as a turned aluminum barrel. If I had planned better, I would have also picked up the toolbox latch handles for the fender stowage boxes (Academy updated the old Tamiya kit with separate pieces, Dragon molds them on...), and a set of DEF drive sprockets with the lightening holes.
I haven't tackled the IR searchlight yet, but have a Legends set in the stash, as well as the old Tamiya parts. I might look at that tonight...
Damon.
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - 08:00 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I plan on using the Legend M60 Cupola set (LF1249). It looks really nice and has very nice interior details. It also has the dust cover for the M85 gun. It is a great improvement over the kit parts.Quoted Text
DRAGON does it again... This is getting OLD...
Oh yes, its all a big conspiracy. Dragon is in cahoots with the AM companies to keep them in business making correction sets for inferior Dragon kits. Mahwahaaa!!!
Really?? Just accept that Dragon kits are not perfect and get over it. To the average builder (read not those who are on this forum) they are great and "look" just like an M60, M103A1, M60A2, etc. The average builder who is buying these kits could care less if they are totally accurate down to a fraction of a mm. We are not Dragon's target audience. They are selling plenty of kits as they are, so they will not strive to change them or get better. If sales fall off, then they may worry. Until then, you get what you get.
Hi, Gino!
FAR from a "conspiracy", just slipshod R&D, engineering, and execution, on DRAGON's part, when it comes to US and British WWII and Post-war model kits, that's all...
I seriously doubt that DRAGON is in cahoots with anyone, aftermarket manufacturers notwithstanding. DRAGON's sales are not going to fall off in any way, shape, or manner, so I seriously doubt that they have any cause to ever worry about ANYTHING- They have the HUGE "STAR WARS" toys concession, remember?
I was only making a comment, so there's absolutely NO reason to "call out the cavalry" in DRAGON's defense. You're the one who decided to take it a step further.
I really hate to bring out this old saw, but your commentary regarding my rather inoffensive statement compels me to ask this tired, worn-out old question yet again:
WHY is it that DRAGON can produce so many excellent WWII German AFVs and Soft-skins, but when it comes to US and British WWII and Post-war models, they inevitably screw them up..?
Specifically, just to mention a few, their M103A1, T28, Conquerer, M6A1, WWII US Jeep and especially, their M60A2, come to mind at the moment. T%here ARE others, but they are really too numerous to mention at this point. There are CERTAINLY enough of these vehicles and reference material out there that they could have spent a little bit more time and attention into getting them done properly, instead of the way that they did. Their WWII German models are not fraught with so many errors in detail, shape, etc, as they seem to lavish upon the "other players"...
If you would be so kind Gino, kindly go back and read some of my posts where I am PRAISING DRAGON's latest 1/35 StuG.III Ausf.Cs, Ds, and their Hetzer-based kits. These comments are in no way negative as to DRAGON's abilities in producing fine, "quality" merchandise. I've also stated that in my opinion, DRAGON's Tiger Is are still the "Kings of the Hill", when comparing them to the latest RYE FIELD and the older TAMIYA and ACADEMY kits, despite the fact that some of these other Tiger I kits include Interiors...
The "average builder" probably doesn't pay much attention to what we have to say on this particular site, so positive or negative commentary amongst ourselves, regarding the various "pluses & minuses" of any given kit, is perfectly valid here, in my opinion...
Again, I only made a comment, just as others on this site do, and nothing more...
"Peace", Gino...
HeavyArty
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - 08:12 PM UTC
I'm not defending Dragon or any other model company. All companies make good and bad kits. I also have no idea why Dragon focuses more on German WWII subjects, I assume it is because that is what sells the most in the Asian market.
Exactly!!
My comments are because I am sick of every post that talks about Dragon evolving into how Dragon is letting us down, why can't they make their modern/Cold War US subjects better...etc., etc., etc... It is just getting really old. As I said, either get over it and accept it, or just stop buying Dragon kits. Continuing to piss and moan about it helps no one.
Quoted Text
I really hate to bring out this old saw...ask this tired, worn-out old question yet again...
Exactly!!
My comments are because I am sick of every post that talks about Dragon evolving into how Dragon is letting us down, why can't they make their modern/Cold War US subjects better...etc., etc., etc... It is just getting really old. As I said, either get over it and accept it, or just stop buying Dragon kits. Continuing to piss and moan about it helps no one.
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - 08:23 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I'm not defending Dragon or any other model company. I also have no idea why Dragon focuses more on German WWII subjects, I assume it is because that is what sells the most in the Asian market.
My comments are because I am sick of every post that talks about Dragon evolving into how Dragon is letting us down, why can't they make their modern/Cold War US subjects better...etc., etc., etc... It is just getting really old. As I said, either get over it and accept it, or just stop buying Dragon kits. Continuing to piss and moan about it helps no one.
It was ONLY a comment, Gino. I never set out to derail DRAGON by making my original comment. All I inferred, was that DRAGON's errors in producing US and British WWII and Post-war kits ARE "getting old". That's all, and nothing more...
BTW- I'm going to follow your advice in regards to using the LEGEND Cupola on mine, when I get around to building it...
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - 08:47 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Continuing to piss and moan about it helps no one.
Continuing to piss and moan about others pissing and moaning doesn't help anyone either...
HeavyArty
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - 09:25 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextContinuing to piss and moan about it helps no one.
Continuing to piss and moan about others pissing and moaning doesn't help anyone either...
Right, lets just declare this a No Pissing and Moaning Zone.
Kenaicop
#384
Joined: August 23, 2005
KitMaker: 1,426 posts
Armorama: 1,316 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - 11:33 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextQuoted TextContinuing to piss and moan about it helps no one.
Continuing to piss and moan about others pissing and moaning doesn't help anyone either...
Right, lets just declare this a No Pissing and Moaning Zone.
jeez, I know, I started this thread now I'm afraid to even comment in it!
But thanks for all the good info guys
Tankrider
Joined: October 07, 2002
KitMaker: 1,280 posts
Armorama: 1,208 posts
Posted: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 - 12:01 AM UTC
James,
Thanks for bringing this question up as I have a resin CMD M60 Turret that will soon find a home on that second AFV Club kit that I have residing in the "Closet of Dreams" AKA the stash. Based on the opinions of the participants here, it seems that the M19 cupola in the kit would be accurate, maybe with a bit of work...
John
Thanks for bringing this question up as I have a resin CMD M60 Turret that will soon find a home on that second AFV Club kit that I have residing in the "Closet of Dreams" AKA the stash. Based on the opinions of the participants here, it seems that the M19 cupola in the kit would be accurate, maybe with a bit of work...
John
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 - 05:18 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextQuoted TextContinuing to piss and moan about it helps no one.
Continuing to piss and moan about others pissing and moaning doesn't help anyone either...
Right, lets just declare this a No Pissing and Moaning Zone.
OK. I'm "in", too!!!
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.