Gareth McGorman opens the box on the Hobby Boss Soviet BA-20 Armored Car Mod.1937 and does a build review to see just how well it builds up into a finished kit and gives us his views on just how good it is.

Read the Review

If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!

looks like a really cool subject and great addition to the interwar armored car kits out there; I have to ask though how companies with lots of kits on the market and therefore lots of years of production experience still produce rather poor-fitting or tricky kits; Hobby Boss is not alone in this; that being said still looks like a great subject to tackle

There is nothing wrong with the rear axle of the kit. I just opened mine up and assembled the differential, axle stubs, and springs. If assembled correctly the springs line up with the frame as designed.

If the axle stubs don't have the mold seams removed they will not fit into the differential far enough, which would make the axle too wide. More likely in this case is that the reviewer didn't follow the directions and mounted the springs reversed, front to rear. (They are clear in their depiction of the correct arrangement. Bottom left here.)

http://www.1999.co.jp/itbig40/10408937z2.jpg

The spring/axle connection is an off-center tab. Placed properly the springs align with the axle seats and the frame. Reversed and the springs will overhang the axle seats and will be too wide for the frame.

This problem is not the fault of Hobby Boss but of the reviewer.

So, what is Armorama going to do with this review?

KL

I built the derivative of this kit, without the wrap around antenna. I didn't recall any real fit issues besides the tight fit of the turret into the ring which is typical for Hobby Boss.

I enjoyed the kit and thought it would be make a good beginner kit as well. Less clean up and no putty compared with Trumpeter's KV-2, which I've seen recommended, and have recommended myself to beginners.

I built the 2 ba20 series before this one ,and wont guy this kit because of that ! Im not a fan of hobby boss ! These Kits was not a fun kit to build , very tricky !

There are some harsh words for the reviewer here.

I suggest there is only one thing Armorama can do in the circumstances. The reviewer must be hung drawn and quartered, and all his progeny must be sterilised to minimise the risk of future small mistakes in reviews. I am livid that this has been allowed to happen. I demand Armorama compensate me with a 1/16 KT kit immediately.

Perhaps I should demonstrate how clever I am - the kit would br a lot better if Hobbyboss corrected those obvious mistakes. (I'm not saying what they are).

{Sigh}

I tried to build the Zvezda version of this kit... now that really was a shocker. It was like going back to 1970s Airfix kits.

A ridiculous exaggeration. Here's all that was written that mentioned the reviewer:

". . . the reviewer didn't follow the directions . . ."

" This problem is not the fault of Hobby Boss but of the reviewer."

You consider this "harsh"?




More crap. What the site should do is adjust the review to account for the new information. I know some will argue that "it's his opinion and opinions can never be wrong", but that's not the case here. The opinion - and the Summary stat box - are based on incorrect information. That makes the "opinion" critically flawed. Common sense and fairness to the manufacturer demand correction of the review.

It's great that people take the time to film, write and post reviews. They ought to be correct in their statements and conclusions though. Is that too much to ask?

KL