Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
Review
Panda: M8 AGSPosted: Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - 01:00 AM UTC
Pete Becerra reviews and builds the M8 Armored Gun System from Panda Hobby in 1/35th scale.
Read the Review
If you have comments or questions please post them here.
Thanks!
Vodnik
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - 01:08 AM UTC
Only as a static vehicle? Not necessarily
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcBIvW5HQnE
Good review, thanks Pete!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcBIvW5HQnE
Good review, thanks Pete!
Bravo1102
New Jersey, United States
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - 01:30 AM UTC
With all the Wehrmacht '46 and such there's a host of tempting what-if schemes for the M8. 2ACR, 82ABN, foreign service.
Great, comprehensive review.
Great, comprehensive review.
HeavyArty
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - 01:42 AM UTC
Looks good Pete. It will be interesting to see if/when this is accepted how different it will be. Hopefully Panda will update it in that event.
Epi
Texas, United States
Joined: December 22, 2001
KitMaker: 3,586 posts
Armorama: 2,556 posts
Joined: December 22, 2001
KitMaker: 3,586 posts
Armorama: 2,556 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - 05:18 AM UTC
Now this is how a review is supposed to be. The person writes the review to best of his knowledge and ability. After submitting it, others modelers fill in the missing pieces, if any.
In this case, I should have worded my comment about "static display" a bit differently.
Thanks Pawel for catching that. I don't know why I was only thinking static display. I guess we are all so use to building these models in their natural combat habitat that we don't think about training or trial run environments.
Stephen, great suggestion. Last night I saw a Stryker with the Dragon Wittman taking a picture set and two armored suits in the snow.
Yes Gino, some add on armor like you see in the video that Pawel posted would be nice.
In this case, I should have worded my comment about "static display" a bit differently.
Thanks Pawel for catching that. I don't know why I was only thinking static display. I guess we are all so use to building these models in their natural combat habitat that we don't think about training or trial run environments.
Stephen, great suggestion. Last night I saw a Stryker with the Dragon Wittman taking a picture set and two armored suits in the snow.
Yes Gino, some add on armor like you see in the video that Pawel posted would be nice.
LonCray1
United States
Joined: November 28, 2018
KitMaker: 55 posts
Armorama: 42 posts
Joined: November 28, 2018
KitMaker: 55 posts
Armorama: 42 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - 06:44 AM UTC
It's a nice looking model and a good review, but I can't be the only one a bit peeved that we get this but still no M88A2 Hercules in 1/35 styrene.
billwinkes
Alabama, United States
Joined: March 20, 2009
KitMaker: 33 posts
Armorama: 28 posts
Joined: March 20, 2009
KitMaker: 33 posts
Armorama: 28 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 30, 2019 - 08:17 AM UTC
Thanks so much for the review and the build. I have one on order. I’m looking forward to building it.
Taeuss
Manitoba, Canada
Joined: January 03, 2016
KitMaker: 3,791 posts
Armorama: 3,778 posts
Joined: January 03, 2016
KitMaker: 3,791 posts
Armorama: 3,778 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 31, 2019 - 11:39 AM UTC
An interesting if unexpected addition. Nice build. Good review too!
Trisaw
California, United States
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,105 posts
Armorama: 2,492 posts
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,105 posts
Armorama: 2,492 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 31, 2019 - 12:21 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Looks good Pete. It will be interesting to see if/when this is accepted how different it will be. Hopefully Panda will update it in that event.
True. The web shows that the M8 AGS contender for 2018 looks different than the Panda model. For one, the LED headlights makes it look pretty attractive.
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/25559/the-armys-search-for-its-first-light-tank-in-decades-is-down-to-these-two-designs
KurtLaughlin
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 23, 2019 - 02:52 PM UTC
I don't understand why the review considers the lack of markings or painting schemes to be a "low" in evaluating the kit:
"Lows: Very weak pins on individual track links. Not very much to do with finished vehicle due to not being in service with the U.S."
How is that Panda's fault? Why should that count against the kit's rating in the review?
KL
"Lows: Very weak pins on individual track links. Not very much to do with finished vehicle due to not being in service with the U.S."
How is that Panda's fault? Why should that count against the kit's rating in the review?
KL
knewton
New Zealand
Joined: June 19, 2013
KitMaker: 1,217 posts
Armorama: 1,092 posts
Joined: June 19, 2013
KitMaker: 1,217 posts
Armorama: 1,092 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 23, 2019 - 06:01 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I don't understand why the review considers the lack of markings or painting schemes to be a "low" [b]in evaluating the kit.
How is that Panda's fault? Why should that count against the kit's rating in the review?
KL
And you know any decals would have been incorrect anyway, given it is not in service. Nor is likely to be, either. Not really the fault of the manufacturer. Rather accurate really.
RobinNilsson
TOS Moderator
Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,693 posts
Armorama: 5,562 posts
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,693 posts
Armorama: 5,562 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 23, 2019 - 10:09 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextI don't understand why the review considers the lack of markings or painting schemes to be a "low" [b]in evaluating the kit.
How is that Panda's fault? Why should that count against the kit's rating in the review?
KL
And you know any decals would have been incorrect anyway, given it is not in service. Nor is likely to be, either. Not really the fault of the manufacturer. Rather accurate really.
Sounds like the perfect time saving kit
The whole gloss coat - decals - gloss coat - weathering - flat coat circus can be skipped. Just basic paint + flat coat and off into the display cabinet
Got to get me one of those ....
/ Robin
knewton
New Zealand
Joined: June 19, 2013
KitMaker: 1,217 posts
Armorama: 1,092 posts
Joined: June 19, 2013
KitMaker: 1,217 posts
Armorama: 1,092 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 26, 2019 - 09:41 AM UTC
Stand by kids, the M8 is being re-launched with a full suite of APS as seen at #AUSAglobal. And it looks quite the part. Now, I wonder whether Panda will do the “late” version, too. Still no mention of markings, though.
Trisaw
California, United States
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,105 posts
Armorama: 2,492 posts
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,105 posts
Armorama: 2,492 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 26, 2019 - 12:20 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Stand by kids, the M8 is being re-launched with a full suite of APS as seen at #AUSAglobal. And it looks quite the part. Now, I wonder whether Panda will do the “late” version, too. Still no mention of markings, though.
Do you have a link or new photo?
knewton
New Zealand
Joined: June 19, 2013
KitMaker: 1,217 posts
Armorama: 1,092 posts
Joined: June 19, 2013
KitMaker: 1,217 posts
Armorama: 1,092 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 26, 2019 - 06:40 PM UTC
Link as requested
http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/topic/833-m8-buford-is-back/page/3/
http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/topic/833-m8-buford-is-back/page/3/