Hosted by Darren Baker
about the tamiya M-40 SPG...

avenue

Joined: May 25, 2013
KitMaker: 544 posts
Armorama: 542 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 - 08:44 AM UTC
it was AFV Club M-40,even the decal are same,the only different was additonal figure.

fuselier63

Joined: April 17, 2013
KitMaker: 45 posts
Armorama: 37 posts

Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 - 11:38 AM UTC
No itīs not.
If you look at the sprue lay-out, you see a lot of differences compared to the AFV club offering.
So it looks like a Tamiya own design.
Besides that, isnīt it great to see a new Korean war model?
If you look at the sprue lay-out, you see a lot of differences compared to the AFV club offering.
So it looks like a Tamiya own design.
Besides that, isnīt it great to see a new Korean war model?

Vodnik

Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts

Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 - 12:25 PM UTC
Quoted Text
it was AFV Club M-40,even the decal are same,the only different was additonal figure.
Sorry for being blunt, but this is BS. It is a completely different kit.

ivanhoe6

Joined: April 05, 2007
KitMaker: 2,023 posts
Armorama: 1,234 posts

Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 - 05:54 PM UTC
Good to hear that it's a new tool.
Thanks Tamiya !
Thanks Tamiya !

hugohuertas

Joined: January 26, 2007
KitMaker: 1,024 posts
Armorama: 1,013 posts

Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 - 06:09 PM UTC
I really can't understand this kind of nonsense posts.
If one is going to make such a definitive statement, it should be at least backed up with some base or basis.
This time it doesn't even seem that the guy had take a fast look to the sprues...
If one is going to make such a definitive statement, it should be at least backed up with some base or basis.
This time it doesn't even seem that the guy had take a fast look to the sprues...

TankManNick

Joined: February 01, 2010
KitMaker: 551 posts
Armorama: 543 posts

Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 - 06:50 PM UTC
Yeah folks make 'definitive' statements about kits all the time which are completely untrue. Example - even an old kit like the Tamiya Gepard was described fairly recently as using the lower hull and suspension from the old Tamiya Leopard. Well I've built both kits and that's not true at all - completely different! And yet somehow this - myth? assumption? persists with no evidence at all....

JohnTapsell

Joined: August 24, 2011
KitMaker: 227 posts
Armorama: 226 posts

Posted: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 - 01:29 AM UTC
Depends which 'old' Tamiya Leopard you mean.
The Gepard shared the lower hull and running gear with their Leopard 1A4 kit, which is definitely 'old' (but not as old as their even earlier Leopard 1 kit).
John
The Gepard shared the lower hull and running gear with their Leopard 1A4 kit, which is definitely 'old' (but not as old as their even earlier Leopard 1 kit).
John

Wierdy

Joined: January 26, 2010
KitMaker: 570 posts
Armorama: 553 posts

Posted: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 - 02:04 AM UTC
IMHO, the figures alone worth considering this newly-tooled kit a potentially successful candidate for wish-lists. And it is far less expensive than some might think:
http://www.hobbyeasy.com/en/data/vwf9khqi2qvyiaw6yyrn.html
http://www.hobbyeasy.com/en/data/vwf9khqi2qvyiaw6yyrn.html

hugohuertas

Joined: January 26, 2007
KitMaker: 1,024 posts
Armorama: 1,013 posts

Posted: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 - 03:00 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Depends which 'old' Tamiya Leopard you mean.
The Gepard shared the lower hull and running gear with their Leopard 1A4 kit, which is definitely 'old' (but not as old as their even earlier Leopard 1 kit).
John
Are you 100% sure?
I have at hand the ancient Tamiya Gepard, and the lower hull clearly says that it belong specifically to this model.
AFAI recall the Leopard 1A4 one says that it specifically belongs to the Leopard.

![]() |