I was doing a bit of digging too Bill and found the following from various sources According to Maple Leaf Up "There are only minor variations between them. These variations include style of handrail around the crew compartment, minor differences in armour arrangement, the fender skirts, stowage, and towing capabilities. " From the airfixtributeforum: "The most obvious difference between Mk 1 and Mk 2 is the headlights, Mk1 had two large ones fitted on the front `wings` whilst the Mk 2 had a single one mounted on the front left armour plate to the front of the gunner. Also on the rear `step` the Mk 1 had a large battery box in the centre, the Mk 2 didn`t. " And from a post on TRACK 48 DISCUSSION GROUP: According to "Universal Carriers, Volume 2" by Nigel Watson: "The stowage arrangement on the MkII was the main difference. Accommodation for the extra crew was made available by repositioning the large kit locker from above the left mudguard, in the rear compartment, to along the rear protection plate. Onto this was hung a canvas bag in which was stored the camouflage net. A variety of stowage bins were also provided in the footwells of the rear compartments and above each fuel tank." "The firing rests around the perimeter of the rear compartments are now made of a steel tube welded to the armour plate." "Note the 4" smoke discharger now mounted inside the front compartment instead of the outside as on the MkI." "On the right protection plate in the rear compartment there are three brackets located. This side of the furthest forward bracket there are four bolts in a square slightly angled. This was the fixing for the 4" smoke discharger bracket on the MkI." "The retention of the "shepherds crook" track adjusting tool...is another indication (of a MkI status)." "On the rear protection plate...just above the right hand side...along the back, there are another four bolts in a square. These were used to fix the rear Bren gun anti-aircraft stem bracket to." "The use of two headlights...is consistent with the MkI arrangement." "The early MkIIs retained the MkI style of sandguard...The early MkII sandquard had an angled front section but otherwise was a plain sheet of metal supported by the crew step. The later MkII guard had a pressed imprint on it for strengthening." "The MkI had its towing attachment mainly fitted in the field or where possible REME workshops but for later MkIIs it was to be factory fitted." "The gunner's or commander's seat on the MkII is a non-adjustable seat which is set higher than the MkIs and accommodates the crews ration box below it."

We got a fully restored Mk II at my work. Drives amazing. Little loud on the pavement thou. But still rocks. Arte Et Marte!!

Thanks, it arrived day after Christmas and the resin wading kit before, LOL. It looks fantastic. Not as good as Al's, but he's the boss when it comes to UCs. And thanks, Pat, for the primer on the Mk. I. Looks like it would be a good one to pair with the French UC in a BEO 1940 scenario?

Wonderful announcement! Long, long overdue though... Only 'damper' is the thought of Indie-tracklinks for a Universal Carrier. Let me save up first for that corrective eye-surgery i've always wanted...

Different strokes for different folks ... Personally this is what makes this interesting for me. Id considerbuying this model now ... but would have skipped over it if it came with one piece plastic/vinyl tracks. That only add extra cost in my books.

I simply can't wait for this. Its the announcement of the year for me and I probably be buying a bunch I have some resicast conversions for the Tammy kit, I'm sure with a little work they will work will on this too Chris

@Frank. No the indy-tracklinks don't bother me as there really is no alternative to them. Hopefully, announcing the Mk. 1 first, that means they intend doing the Mark II and III consecutively? Here's a fairly complete Walkround of a Mark II should anyone need it: http://armorama.com//features/2256

Thanks, Jim, for posting that link. I have seen some UCs with a multi-color camo pattern. Are there some profiles for the UC, or were they mostly Allied green?

If it was a bigger company ... maybe we could think like this ... but as they are relatively new, it could be case of "depending on what sales are", before they commit to the other versions ... or maybe they have thought like this originally, so they get more milage out of their tooling??? I don´t know enough about this vehicle to speculate .. the differences between the versions might not be that big?? Thanks for the link to the walk-around... I´m sure that´ll come in very handy.