I have never seen any of Amusing Hobbies kits and wondered what to expect of their upcoming T72 kit.

it s crap

Could a mod pin this as a useful reference for future visitors?

Are you saying AH moldings is or the just T-72 kit?

I have built 2 Amusing Hobby Kits.

Their Neubaufahrzeug was an excellent kit to build. Well designed and far better than the Trumpeter and Dragon offerings. Fit was excellent with no filler required from memory. The only issue on that one, was a slightly undersized cupola. Like all manufacturers, don't expect 100% accuracy. This is not a criticism, it is just that true 100% accurate, Holy Grail kits are few and far between.

Of course their Paper Panzer range is 100% accurate - not having been built in reality, you can pretty much interpret what you want!

The plastic is a soft buttery type, so it is best not to cut off the sprue right next to the part. Leave a little to trim off with a scalpel and you won't pull out a section of the part. The styrene takes glue well but a wash on soapy water first might be worth your while. Their decals are thin and have little carrier film.

As to the T 72 itself, I cannot comment as it has not been released yet, and I am not an expert on the vehicle but with a bit of reference research and a look the below threads may be a start for you to decide upon:
http://armorama.com/news/36802
https://www.themodellingnews.com/2020/10/preview-amusing-hobbys-latest-release.html

Thanks for info. I'am just started to build Finnish version of T-72M1 from Tamiya kit, but now wait Amusing Hobby kit and make East German version from Tamiya.

I have heard that in Tamiya kit turret shape is not correct but haven't compared my self it to reference photos.

I have the E100 Jagdpanzer and although I have not built it, I have cracked the box and it appears to be a nice kit. Very nice surface texture on the plastic on the big casemate and upper hull. Also, nice detail on the track links and did not see any flash or short shots. If I remember correctly, they include a nice color foldout of some hypothetical Wehrmacht'46 camo schemes with MIG Paint color callouts.

Regards,

Ian

Glad to be of some help Mikko. Welcome to the Forums.

Yes, I especially like how photos of the model are compared side-by-side with the real thing and the reviewer provides detailed explanations to back up his conclusions.



KL

I have build both the FV215b (or as I prefer to call it, the Vanquisher) and the Conqueror Mk I. I found both to be excellent kits, but with the strange lack of any clear parts.

So OK quality-wise. How about accuracy? Well the FV215b was only built as a wooden mockup, so I would rate accuracy excellent on that one! The Conqueror hull I built as-is, but I did reshape the turret front to be flatter along with some other turret details and a putty mantlet cover. So some work needed for accuracy. But it is also the only game in town for a Mk I.

I have their Conqueror Mk 2, and it's well engineered and compares well with my walkaround photos. I may add a bit of texture to some of the welds, but that is very minor.

I've built their Conqueror Mk-2 and, while being a generally fair kit, I have some complaints about the fitting of many pieces.
The gun barrel has given a lot of problems both for aligning the segments and to fit the fume extractor on it.
The demoulding angles on some parts were bigger than expected. The top of the hull was slightly warped, but it aligned correctly when glued to the lower part.
Two types of suspensions were provided, both whith moulded-on springs and with separate metal springs, but the first ones had the space between the spring and the braces closed (although visible under the skirts), and the metal springs were too thin to be credible.
I think to remember that it hadn't any clear sprue with lenses for the lights.
The most obvious pus was the mavellous quality of the track links.
On the whole the kit was not bad and turned into a good model, but inferior to the expectations for a recent kit.

I've got the Amusing Hobby Ferdinand and 16T Strabokran. I also have the Cyberhobby (Dragon) Ferdinand kit 6436. Now the kit comparisons probably don't interest you but I'll be brief. The AH hull is bit longer and the casements are almost identical in size. The Dragon has a slight texture to it, feels almost like very fine grit sandpaper. The AH pieces have a simulated rolled steel texture that is actually much more subdued than similar textures I've seen attempted on other model brands. It's almost in scale unlike other manufacturers attempts. The welds are ok, not bad, not good but the same quality as the Dragon kit. The plastic is sturdy, no warping found in all the parts and that includes the crane. It cuts cleanly, sands quite well and both Tamiya Extra Thin and the Orange cap gel work well as does MicroWeld.

I'm pleased with the quality of the kit. It is on par with, or even surpasses, Dragons. The only down check on the kit is the vinyl tracks. Such a nice kit let down by old fashioned tracks. But I'm sure that defect can be remedied.

Nice comparison review on Dragon and AH Ferdinand, Patrick. Unfortunately I already have the Dragon one in my stash. The Dragon one comes with considerable PE...does that push it on the plus side over AH's?

Sometimes the details matter. If they made an update kit for the AH I'd buy it. And it will help on the Dragon kit. But the AH kit has an interior and that brings it equal to the Dragon kit in detail in my opinion.