_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV: Modern - USA
Modern Armor, AFVs, and Support vehicles.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Panda M1 Abrams- sprues
trakpin
Visit this Community
Nova Scotia, Canada
Joined: November 03, 2012
KitMaker: 667 posts
Armorama: 639 posts
Posted: Monday, November 06, 2017 - 10:25 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


if it is, it's about 2mm longer than tamiyas, but it DOES have a proper MRS . besides, ain't that what AM is for?

Yes, it is longer than VERY short Tamiya barrel, but still a few mms too short.

The problem with AM is that there is no AM barrel for M1. You can use parts from DEF "late" barrel for M60A3, but not the whole barrel...

Besides, you mentioned tracks to be a problem - ain't that what AM is for?


I imagine someone'll eventually release a proper 105. the tracks I used I took off tams M1 and are trumpeter T156, AFter I had already gotten another set off evilfleabay. got another one I'm waiting on, where I'll put your tires to good use. the kit tracks are, on the inner surface, T158

what parts of the DEF 105 aren't used, other than the mantlet bellows
Vodnik
Visit this Community
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Monday, November 06, 2017 - 11:23 PM UTC

Quoted Text


what parts of the DEF 106 aren't used, other than the mantlet bellows


Only the bore evacuator and the part of the barrel forward of it is useable (and you need to add MRS). Parts behind the bore evacuator are not correct for Abrams - not just the mantlet bellows, but also that barrel segment itself is different (or actually the thermal cover to be exact).
trakpin
Visit this Community
Nova Scotia, Canada
Joined: November 03, 2012
KitMaker: 667 posts
Armorama: 639 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 07, 2017 - 12:45 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


what parts of the DEF 106 aren't used, other than the mantlet bellows


Only the bore evacuator and the part of the barrel forward of it is useable (and you need to add MRS). Parts behind the bore evacuator are not correct for Abrams - not just the mantlet bellows, but also that barrel segment itself is different (or actually the thermal cover to be exact).

so with a little surgery it could work, assuming all aft of the kit part evacuator is suitable, or just wait for one
trakpin
Visit this Community
Nova Scotia, Canada
Joined: November 03, 2012
KitMaker: 667 posts
Armorama: 639 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 16, 2017 - 05:41 PM UTC
will this be suitable for an early M1? it's intened for Leopard1s, but this hasn't got the thermal shroud

Bravo1102
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 16, 2017 - 06:24 PM UTC

Quoted Text

will this be suitable for an early M1? it's intened for Leopard1s, but this hasn't got the thermal shroud


No thermal shroud and a different bore evacuator. It's an L7 not the US M68.

But it does give a new AM gun barrel for tanks with the L7 like Centurion and Magach.

Um Legend, Def-- an update set for the Panda M1 please?
Vodnik
Visit this Community
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Thursday, November 16, 2017 - 07:26 PM UTC

Quoted Text

will this be suitable for an early M1? it's intened for Leopard1s, but this hasn't got the thermal shroud

M1 does have a thermal shroud on M68A1 barrel, it is just very different from the one used on Leopard L7 guns. The front part of the shroud is identical as on late type guns on M60A3 tanks, but the rear part of the shroud is different. Plus of course M1 has MRS on the muzzle end, while M60A3 does not.
trakpin
Visit this Community
Nova Scotia, Canada
Joined: November 03, 2012
KitMaker: 667 posts
Armorama: 639 posts
Posted: Friday, November 17, 2017 - 03:21 AM UTC
thx. guess I'll have to wait and see if voyager, or whoever else, puts out a proper version
JoeJ2130CS
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: December 16, 2017
KitMaker: 3 posts
Armorama: 3 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 17, 2017 - 08:39 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Since the end section is effectively hidden inside the mantle, the gun barrel length is an easy fix with a plastic shim.

No, because the barrel is too short between the bore evacuator and muzzle, not between mantlet and evacuator...


The muzzle is a separate piece; put the shim just behind that. A tiny bit of filling and sanding and you should be good.
tankerken6011
Visit this Community
New Mexico, United States
Joined: December 04, 2013
KitMaker: 84 posts
Armorama: 81 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 26, 2017 - 10:00 AM UTC
IIRC; and I do, I checked my photos, original M1s had an anti-slip coating. It was very thin, just sand mixed in the paint. Hard to notice, and pretty useless.
Ken.
JoeJ2130CS
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: December 16, 2017
KitMaker: 3 posts
Armorama: 3 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 26, 2017 - 01:39 PM UTC

Quoted Text

IIRC; and I do, I checked my photos, original M1s had an anti-slip coating. It was very thin, just sand mixed in the paint. Hard to notice, and pretty useless.
Ken.


Did that have enough texture to be visible in 1/35?
HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 26, 2017 - 05:22 PM UTC

Quoted Text

IIRC; and I do, I checked my photos, original M1s had an anti-slip coating. It was very thin, just sand mixed in the paint. Hard to notice, and pretty useless.
Ken.


They did not come from the factory that way. Many crews added sand to paint and applied it in areas that they walked on; hull in front of driver's hatch, top of turret, etc...
Bravo1102
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 26, 2017 - 05:38 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

IIRC; and I do, I checked my photos, original M1s had an anti-slip coating. It was very thin, just sand mixed in the paint. Hard to notice, and pretty useless.
Ken.


Did that have enough texture to be visible in 1/35?

It would look like a grainy cast surface.

When the M1 went through their life extensions at Anniston they got the sand anti-slip. It was like that on the M60A3. Better than nothing but not much and definitely not the coarse sandpaper of later coatings.

Wee-- THUD! Hey top another newbie broke his wrist/ankle!
tankerken6011
Visit this Community
New Mexico, United States
Joined: December 04, 2013
KitMaker: 84 posts
Armorama: 81 posts
Posted: Sunday, January 14, 2018 - 10:51 PM UTC
That was spring 1982. These were brand new tanks out of the factory, the first batch sent to Germany. The anti-slip coating was real fine, I don't think you could see it in 1/35 scale, you could barely see it in real life.
It did not work worth a crap either, when it rained the tanks got very slippery. This was at Vilseck during M1 transition training. The instructors were always on us about maintaining "3 point contact" on the vehicles so we wouldn't fall off.
Ken.
 _GOTOTOP