I don't usually do modern armor, especially Russian, but this was on sale and I wanted to see ModelCollect's quality.













Very well-detailed model, but this particular kit has a die-cast lower hull. The tracks look like Dragon DS material but they're stiffer and don't stretch, and don't hold acrylic paint well. Overall, this model is better than Dragon's latest 1/72 releases, but not quite as nice as Flyhawk.

Leo,

Always interesting to see this ModelCollect stuff but a Blog hi-lighting aspects of the build would have been super appreciated. I am working on the Zvezda T-90 and it has very good detail too but a few glitches with its engineering that could be "smoothed out".

BTW, I notice that you've hosted these images on PhotoBucket, are you aware of the hoopla with them cutting off image hosting unless you pay US$400 per year! They just got to me today but they been cutting off people for a while now. Read all about this mess they have created in this forum here.

Cheers,
Jan

Yeah, I'm aware. If PB tries anything funny I'm cancelling my subscription. I still have all my photos on my hard drive.

Unless you have the so called "500" account you won't be able to have your images linked in your previous posts. I too have all my images from my posts backed up on two external drives. Unfortunately, we can't edit our old posts to make any corrections here on the Kitmaker sites after a certain period of time. As far as I'm concerned, unless PB amends their policy they are history to me.

Cheers,
Jan

Last time I posted pics on Track 48, you were able to post pics directly from your files without need of a hosting site. What are the disadvantages of that, if any? The possibility of someone being able to hack into your files, and your computer??
Anyway, now I starting upload some photos to Flickr.

The point is that if you are hosting your images on PB that are on Kitmaker, then even if you find a new host you won't be able to edit the picture URL's here. Even if you host the images on your Armorama free hosting space you still can't edit the picture location in their original thread.

Cheers,
Jan

Nice build. I'm surprised about the diecast hull. Does it include all of the wheel arms and other lower bits?

I just realized that "lower bits" might have multiple meanings. Especially to this largely British crowd

I include all my lower bits, thank you! And so does the ModelCollect T90. They're all cast on the lower hull part, which is really very well detailed - unlike the older Dragon 1/72's with die cast parts. BTW, I just got Revell's T55 and the MG (which I think is the same type as mounted on the T90) is much better detailed.

Really? What is your opinion of the rest of the kit? I saw it at the LHS, and based on the box photos it looks a bit "flumfy"

Don't know exactly what you mean by "flumfy", but it's a typical Revell build. I only assembled a few parts so far because I'm building several other kits. So far parts go together fairly well - no putty needed...yet. Alternate parts included for making versions used by different nationalities, as well as the associated decals. I've seen better, more well-defined detail, but this is Revell, and I have also seen much worse. As I said in an above post, the turret mounted MG is very well detailed, and IMHO, is better than the ModelCollect one.
Here is a review on the kit: http://www.onthewaymodels.com/reviews/RevellAG/Revell_T55A_3304.htm

Not The Same machine gun, totally different, the T 55 uses the DshK and the T 90 the Nsvt, apart from that the Revell kit has the wrong profile for a T 55 and the engine deck is too short, good for spares though