For most of us we have seen a great evolution of modeling over the past decade. The kits now have details we could have only scratch build or purchase after market. But it's curious to see some of the big players (Tamiya, Dragon and Trumpeter) avoid workable link tracks. Tamiya with higher retail pricing than most in the armor market, still just offers rubber band and glue in place plastic track. Dragon (DS track and magic link) and we know DS track is prone to failure. For my purchasing dollar, if I can buy a kit that is of good quality and has workable tracks and other features. That's where my money will be spent. Just a bit an observation and a rant.

Agree with you, for me the minimum is to have individual links in the box (i'll try to transform Miniart fantastics individuals T55 links in workable tracks).
But a lot of modellers prefers old fashion tracks, and perhaps they are more than we thinks.

I like Friuls for those tanks that used a dead link, and even some that use live links if I have a good way to get the tension right, but for at least half of the models I build, one-piece tracks have come so far since the days of "melty-pins" I actually prefer them.
I've only had an issue with DS tracks one time, older Tamiya glueables twice, and I traced it a reaction with enamel paints.
I just finished the new Tamiya M3 Stuart, and to me the tracks (one-piece) are extremely good: well detailed, accurate and it took about 30 minutes to assemble and paint them.

There is no way whatsoever that I will ever again put flexible tracks on any kit I build.
I buy a kit if I want to have it, if it comes with flexible tracks I get aftermarket tracks. If there are no aftermarket tracks I will wait and hope for the best.

On the other hand: I don't care if they are workable or not. I consider workable to be a gimmick (unless it is an RC tank) and I will glue the tracks solid, straight or shaped pieces. They are workable until the glue has set.
Same with Friul tracks for tanks with live track, glue them solid.
/ Robin

Pretty much as Robin said.

"Workable" tracks? Why bother? Once completed, I don't intend to try to roll my tiny tanks around, so why fuss about whether those tracks remain movable ("working") after the thing is built and painted and mounted (if one does that) on display? Indy links are the best for modeling "dead" pinned-link tracks, and I always fix them in place once they are formed up to where I want them. "Rubber bands" are fine for those tracks which are actually more like that in reality (the non-sag hi-tension and "live" types) - but as I simply don't like R-B kit tracks, I mostly avoid those subjects and kits.

There being quite so many great kits out there, I never feel any compulsion to buy one which has major features which will require me to either pay hefty AM prices to fix now or make me wait and "hope" that a fix will eventually come along. If it's not pretty much satisfying (bar detail fixes and tweaks) right out of the box, I will skip that one and move along to another.

Cheers! Bob

Personally I prefer workable tracks for tanks that have dead pin tracks. No, I don;t intend to roll my tanks around on the carpet. But the big difference between glue together individual links & workable tracks is that workables are SIGNIFICANTLY easier to paint & weather off the tank, than glue togethers. Everyone has their preferences, but I really do not like either indy gluable tracks, or link & length tracks, because they are a bother when it comes to the painting stage. For live tracks, one piece "rubber band" tracks are fine. For all the grief Dragon DS tracks get, I have yet to have an issue with them, & the detail is pretty good regardless.

Damon.

I pretty much agree with Robin and Bob above. To me, the vinyl tracks (or other “rubberized” plastic like material) are a shortcut/cheat, designed for quick builds and novice modeling. Before I get tons of hate mail, I do see their utility though— if you’re building a kit that will be diorama based, and heavily weathered, they may be acceptable in some instances, and I’ve seen a few that have been well done, but very few— instead, manufacturers include lots of mold seams, sink marks, flash, and imperfect design (DS, too short/long, join problems, or just flat incorrect). These former seem to me to be weak points and manufacturing “shortcut junk” in kits that would otherwise be acceptable, almost like the tracks are “afterthoughts”. I also deign the term “workable” as a similar “cheat” as in “workable” isn’t really “workable” unless you’re pushing your model across a carpet or a dirt pile in the backyard, which kind of negates the “seriousness” of serious model building, and relegates the model to a toy (highly detailed RC models excepted— they are a category unto themselves). I prefer “link and length” type track as a successful cross between “rubberized” and “indie” track types, and wish manufacturers would include more of that type in model kits, but I’ve been known for assembling endless long runs of metal and plastic indie links for maximum realism in a model as well. I think Link and length is the best of all worlds though, if done right.
VR, Russ

Pretty much everything I build, whether it rides on tracks or tires, will get the aftermarket treatment. Current exception is two of my M47's (they will retain the kit vinyl tracks). Obviously I budget for such a change. Besides, aftermarket metal tracks/resin tires, accessorizes the kit to a higher level.

In the US? I haven't found that to be true since they issued their Gama Goat back in 2013. Most of their newer releases are competitively priced, if not affordable.

KL

Tamiya's M1A2 TUSK 73.00 and Meng's 58.00 both at Sprue Brothers. I'm not knocking Tamiya, but some of their kits are a higher price point than others.

Ebay is filled with the Tamiya kit you reference for around $60 US including shipping.

I find that Japanese sellers or Hong Kong sellers on Ebay are the cheapest route to go for Japanese hobby products, including anything made by Tamiya.

Not always, but usually.