Jacob Hederstierna-Johnsen review Dragon Models new 1:35 Panther ausf D V2 Versuchsserie.
Read the Review
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
Dragon: Dragon Models Panther ausf D
CMOT
Editor-in-Chief
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 10,954 posts
Armorama: 8,571 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 29, 2016 - 02:10 PM UTC
Jacob Hederstierna-Johnsen review Dragon Models new 1:35 Panther ausf D V2 Versuchsserie.
Read the Review
If you have comments or questions please post them here.
Thanks!
WAYNEO
Joined: January 24, 2016
KitMaker: 42 posts
Armorama: 40 posts
Posted: Friday, December 30, 2016 - 02:23 AM UTC
Good to see a reviewer tells what he thinks and why ,good or bad. Well done
Taeuss
Joined: January 03, 2016
KitMaker: 3,791 posts
Armorama: 3,778 posts
Posted: Friday, December 30, 2016 - 03:46 AM UTC
It seems that this is the same corner-cutting, surgery-necessary piece of *#%** that the previous prototype Panther offering from Dragon turned out to be. When the first review came out I specifically asked if anyone could tell me what the differences were between these two kits and if Dragon had gotten wise and corrected the many short-comings of the first one. No one answered. Now that I have one in my possession I can safely say that, apparently, the only difference worth mentioning is the unique two-into-one muffler system unique to this version. Same necessary surgery, same cookie-cutter sprues. While it does offer a good start on modelling this unique tank, Dragon did indeed drop the ball on this one and I'm profoundly disappointed in their cheap approach to what is now a pricey kit.
Jmarles
Joined: November 02, 2008
KitMaker: 1,138 posts
Armorama: 953 posts
Posted: Friday, December 30, 2016 - 04:03 AM UTC
Pretty lazy attempt here. As usual for Dragon these days, using old kit parts to make Frankenpanzers. This kit will probably cost like $75 and features 1990 Maquette style surgery requirements. For a few more bucks I can pick up the SS100 tractor and V2 kit. 
Taeuss
Joined: January 03, 2016
KitMaker: 3,791 posts
Armorama: 3,778 posts
Posted: Friday, December 30, 2016 - 04:26 AM UTC
Kind of different subject matter, but I agree that its a beast that is rather lacking considering that its over $67USD which hits me at just over a hundred CDN. Ouch! Especially considering that there is no interior and that you have tout and file while mix and matching parts from who knows which generation of earlier Panther releases. Oh well, now that I have one I'll just have to soldier on and make it work.
Hederstierna
#247
Joined: January 03, 2008
KitMaker: 1,102 posts
Armorama: 1,018 posts
Posted: Friday, December 30, 2016 - 02:27 PM UTC
Guess it's becoming sort of a gamble with Dragon kits. I too really love their kits, but when they are constantly milking their "cows", something like this is bound to happen. Personally I think it's a wrong path they are taking, because all these negative feedback might remove the focus from their brand new and really excellent kits.
Just my two cents worth.
Jacob
Just my two cents worth.
Jacob
tatbaqui
News Writer
#040
Joined: May 06, 2007
KitMaker: 2,713 posts
Armorama: 2,451 posts
Posted: Friday, December 30, 2016 - 05:28 PM UTC
Good review Jacob, thanks I greatly appreciate the frank, no non-sense write-up. And I thought they would have come up with the appropriate hull by this second release... Cheers, Tat
PanzerKarl
Joined: April 20, 2004
KitMaker: 2,439 posts
Armorama: 1,980 posts
Posted: Friday, December 30, 2016 - 06:59 PM UTC
Been a great admirer of Dragon kits for a long time but now they are really scrapping the bottom of the barrel with these kits their sending out.
You would think they would be upping their game what with the kits Takom and Meng are producing.
You would think they would be upping their game what with the kits Takom and Meng are producing.
gregcctrn
Joined: January 09, 2013
KitMaker: 329 posts
Armorama: 91 posts
Posted: Friday, December 30, 2016 - 10:24 PM UTC
Now that Dragon has the Marvel Super Hero Series line my hunch is that military kits are going to be set aside.....
Jmarles
Joined: November 02, 2008
KitMaker: 1,138 posts
Armorama: 953 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 31, 2016 - 01:14 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Kind of different subject matter, but I agree that its a beast that is rather lacking considering that its over $67USD which hits me at just over a hundred CDN. Ouch! Especially considering that there is no interior and that you have tout and file while mix and matching parts from who knows which generation of earlier Panther releases. Oh well, now that I have one I'll just have to soldier on and make it work.
I am sure it will build into a fine kit and the surgery is simple. My gripe is that should not be needed in 2016 on a kit that puts you back a Canuck note. Not too sure about those missing details that come off with the amputated parts though...
Chuck4
Joined: November 13, 2013
KitMaker: 403 posts
Armorama: 401 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 31, 2016 - 04:10 AM UTC
I have the kit. Other than the lack of clear parts and the asymmetrical barrel travel lock, I have no complaints. I got it on eBay for $41 plus free shipping.
The instruction to shave off the external covers for the external starter and track tensioner is puzzling to me. But I have found no photo of the prototype vehicle shot from behind to contradict it. It seems not entirely impossible the back plate of the prototype is really devoid of those openings. The prototype may not really need an external starter. The track tensioner may conceivably be accessed through the firewall from inside the vehicle.
One detail the kit did miss is the torsion bar swing arms is arranged wrong for the prototype. The kit replicated the swing arm configuration of the production vehicle, in which the second swing arm from the front is beefed up. This arrangement reflects the fact that the hydraulic damper in the production vehicle is connected to the second pair of road wheels on each side. In the prototype, the dampers were connected to the first pair. Hence the beefed up swing arms, if there at all, ought to be on the first pair of road wheels.
The instruction to shave off the external covers for the external starter and track tensioner is puzzling to me. But I have found no photo of the prototype vehicle shot from behind to contradict it. It seems not entirely impossible the back plate of the prototype is really devoid of those openings. The prototype may not really need an external starter. The track tensioner may conceivably be accessed through the firewall from inside the vehicle.
One detail the kit did miss is the torsion bar swing arms is arranged wrong for the prototype. The kit replicated the swing arm configuration of the production vehicle, in which the second swing arm from the front is beefed up. This arrangement reflects the fact that the hydraulic damper in the production vehicle is connected to the second pair of road wheels on each side. In the prototype, the dampers were connected to the first pair. Hence the beefed up swing arms, if there at all, ought to be on the first pair of road wheels.
Hederstierna
#247
Joined: January 03, 2008
KitMaker: 1,102 posts
Armorama: 1,018 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 31, 2016 - 05:17 PM UTC
Chuck: I have to say that I don't agree with you on the no opening's on the rear plate theory. Especially about the track tension issue, which really doesn't make any sense to me, sorry 😉
But if anyone has pictures to prove which one of us are right, please do enlighten me.
Jacob
But if anyone has pictures to prove which one of us are right, please do enlighten me.
Jacob
urumomo
Joined: August 22, 2013
KitMaker: 675 posts
Armorama: 667 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 31, 2016 - 07:07 PM UTC
There is no way the track was tensioned from the fighting compartment .
no way
you'd need to go thru the entire cooling system somehow ..
.. swinging a giant wrench in the fighting compartment -- pretty unheard of ,,
and I have no proof
I know , operationally , the engines in all Wehrmacht armor were to be started via hand-crank , centrifugal starter normally ... not by the electric start .
Seems unlikely they would test a platform devoid of a manual starter -- a different access plate maybe , sure
no way
you'd need to go thru the entire cooling system somehow ..
.. swinging a giant wrench in the fighting compartment -- pretty unheard of ,,
and I have no proof
I know , operationally , the engines in all Wehrmacht armor were to be started via hand-crank , centrifugal starter normally ... not by the electric start .
Seems unlikely they would test a platform devoid of a manual starter -- a different access plate maybe , sure
Scarred
Joined: March 11, 2016
KitMaker: 1,792 posts
Armorama: 1,186 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 31, 2016 - 08:00 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Now that Dragon has the Marvel Super Hero Series line my hunch is that military kits are going to be set aside.....
They're also doing Star Wars vehicles and perhaps they have too many irons in the fire. So maybe this is their new business model, re-release old kits and make them worse than they were originally.
BTW..... where is the 1/35 AT-AT at?
Chuck4
Joined: November 13, 2013
KitMaker: 403 posts
Armorama: 401 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 31, 2016 - 08:15 PM UTC
Interesting the box art shows a normal configuration of access plates on the rear hull.
Taeuss
Joined: January 03, 2016
KitMaker: 3,791 posts
Armorama: 3,778 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 31, 2016 - 08:39 PM UTC
Weird that I posted a comment on this kit the other day, pointing out that for its cost surgery shouldn't be expected, and how this is simply a two-into-one muffler version of the earlier prototype release, and when I came back to review reactions today I find my posted comment GONE! Weird. Why?
urumomo
Joined: August 22, 2013
KitMaker: 675 posts
Armorama: 667 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 31, 2016 - 08:45 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Weird that I posted a comment on this kit the other day, pointing out that for its cost surgery shouldn't be expected, and how this is simply a two-into-one muffler version of the earlier prototype release, and when I came back to review reactions today I find my posted comment GONE! Weird. Why?
What ??
Still drunk from last night ?
See your posts above ?
I see your 2 posts above about that --- shake your monitor ,, they're probably stuck up in there somewhere ...
Biggles2
Joined: January 01, 2004
KitMaker: 7,600 posts
Armorama: 6,110 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 31, 2016 - 09:04 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextNow that Dragon has the Marvel Super Hero Series line my hunch is that military kits are going to be set aside.....
They're also doing Star Wars vehicles and perhaps they have too many irons in the fire. So maybe this is their new business model, re-release old kits and make them worse than they were originally.
BTW..... where is the 1/35 AT-AT at?
DML could really use new management!
firstcircle
Joined: November 19, 2008
KitMaker: 2,249 posts
Armorama: 2,007 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 31, 2016 - 11:03 PM UTC
Just a further nit pick, the interlocking join between the turret sides and the front plate should be dove tailed, as per the Ausf D, not square cut as per the Ausf A.
easyco69
Joined: November 03, 2012
KitMaker: 2,275 posts
Armorama: 2,233 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 31, 2016 - 11:07 PM UTC
the DS tracks should not be considered a low....some people prefer them over magic tracks. Wow 60% score lol. I guess I will avoid this one. At least this kit contains the PE grills.
Taeuss
Joined: January 03, 2016
KitMaker: 3,791 posts
Armorama: 3,778 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 - 08:04 AM UTC
Shook the monitor and it didn't help at all, my earlier posting is just gone. Oh well, the point is that Dragon -again- took a powder rather than offer an ace after the goof-up that was the other V1 offering of this prototype. Fixing it would have cost money and time and they were interested. Though the kit does cost about a c-note up here in Canada. Ouch!
Hederstierna
#247
Joined: January 03, 2008
KitMaker: 1,102 posts
Armorama: 1,018 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 - 09:05 PM UTC
Frank: I might have solved the mystery of the missing replies. If you look under the topic, and not under the review itself, you'll find them still there.
Jacob
Jacob
Taeuss
Joined: January 03, 2016
KitMaker: 3,791 posts
Armorama: 3,778 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 - 01:03 AM UTC
Thanks, I was getting worried that I had offended and was being bleeped!
 |
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.