small-scale build. **CHANGED to SU-122**

The Battle of Kursk, Operation Citadel. Any participating German or Russian aircraft, armor, figure, etc.
Runs July 5th to August 18th, the approximate dates of the main battle.
GBL: Chris
User avatar
Softscience
Staring out the window
Posts: 7380
Joined: April 5th, 2011, 4:34 pm
Location: Maryland, near Washington DC

small-scale build. **CHANGED to SU-122**

Post by Softscience »

I was initially going to work on my Tiger I for this GB, but I'm not sure I can finish a 1/35 tank in the time allowed.

So instead I'm going to begin with something small(er). I picked Dragon's Panther D from my stash. I'm also going to take a chance with some of the Caesar Miniatures figures that I got.

Image

The Dragon kit is something of a letdown after seeing some of their truly beautiful 72nd scale tanks.

Some of the details are very fine...
Image

but then you see all the short-cuts Dragon took with things like the hatches being molded shut, and the solid lift rings on the turret.
Image

Nothing a little modeling expertise can't fix, but once again, compared to other recent releases by Dragon, this one seems to be a step backwards.

The Caesar Miniatures however, are fantastic! Eleven figures in at least seven poses for $10 USD.

Image
User avatar
Chris
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 2917
Joined: March 15th, 2013, 7:18 pm
Location: In your head
Contact:

Re: warm-up build

Post by Chris »

The figures look really cool.
Honcho of ASMMF
User avatar
BWP
Got in under the wire
Posts: 774
Joined: April 28th, 2011, 2:23 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: warm-up build

Post by BWP »

Softscience wrote:compared to other recent releases by Dragon, this one seems to be a step backwards
It definitely is, but all of their recent 1/72 armour releases are treading the same path: simplified construction, minimised parts count, shortcuts in detail -- but of course, all still sold at the "Armor Pro" price.

They're picking some interesting subjects and a simplified kit with silly inaccuracies is better than no kit at all, but I don't think that they are really doing themselves any favours by charging premium prices and crowing about how fabulously accurate they are, when the contents of the boxes neither justify the price nor demonstrate any particular accuracy at all. In some cases the box information actually lies about the kit -- a recent truck kit shows off CAD drawings about fabulously detailed wheel parts, but the actual parts are quite different, and worst of all, hollow at the back, like an old Matchbox die-cast vehicle.

In the case of this particular kit it's not bad overall but it features some details that seem unnecessarily soft, and in terms of accuracy it features a mix of production features, not all of which were ever present on an individual vehicle at one time, and the tracks are a late type that is inaccurate for any Ausf D. If it was advertised (and priced) as a quick-build kit for wargamers it would be celebrated as a marvel, as an "Armor Pro" display model it falls distinctly flat. I'm sure, however, that you will make something very nice from it!
Bruce Probst
Melbourne, Australia
"I want to decide who lives and who dies."
My Model Profile
User avatar
Softscience
Staring out the window
Posts: 7380
Joined: April 5th, 2011, 4:34 pm
Location: Maryland, near Washington DC

Re: small-scale build. Panther Ausf. D

Post by Softscience »

Oof! I didn't know about the track!

Blast! Dragon used to be the king of armor kits. Its a shame to see them taking the same path as Tamiya. That is to say, producing a lesser product but riding on the brand name. Do you know if this holds true for the recent 1/35 scale releases as well?
User avatar
ntrocket88
Active Participant
Posts: 827
Joined: July 2nd, 2012, 11:49 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA

Re: small-scale build. Panther Ausf. D

Post by ntrocket88 »

At least the figures look very good. The guy on the left looks like the Panther has just broken down for the tenth time that day...
Neil

'With every model I learn a little more...and then the next one takes longer!'
ShaunW
NOT the sheep
Posts: 26118
Joined: November 26th, 2011, 6:11 pm
Location: Pontefract West Yorkshire

Re: small-scale build. Panther Ausf. D

Post by ShaunW »

ntrocket88 wrote:At least the figures look very good. The guy on the left looks like the Panther has just broken down for the tenth time that day...
Indeed, he looks most upset at having been charged a premuim price at his local Panther dealer for something that hasn't quite lived up to the promise - like the in tank entertainment sub-woofers being totally pants for instance :grin:
Doing - Tamiya 1/35th Universal Carrier.

Work is the curse of the modelling classes!
IPMS#12300
User avatar
Softscience
Staring out the window
Posts: 7380
Joined: April 5th, 2011, 4:34 pm
Location: Maryland, near Washington DC

Re: small-scale build. Panther Ausf. D

Post by Softscience »

Eh to hell with this kit.

I tried looking for a set of PE mesh for the engine grills and all my options cost as much as the kit did.

Given all of its other inaccuracies, it just isn't worth it. I'll probably just cannibalize this model for parts for the Revell Panther G that I have.

The cool figures will go with a Dragon Tiger I have. Unfortunately it is a post-Kursk version, so I can't use it for this build.

This build is effectively ended
User avatar
BWP
Got in under the wire
Posts: 774
Joined: April 28th, 2011, 2:23 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: small-scale build. Panther Ausf. D

Post by BWP »

Softscience wrote:Blast! Dragon used to be the king of armor kits. Its a shame to see them taking the same path as Tamiya. That is to say, producing a lesser product but riding on the brand name. Do you know if this holds true for the recent 1/35 scale releases as well?
That's a more complicated question. I don't think there's any evidence to show that they're simplifying their 1/35th line but I think (this is just my opinion) that they've gotten just a little bit lazy and are not making much in the way of any special effort. Other companies are beginning to regularly demonstrate that they can take Dragon on in the 1/35th market in terms of kit complexity, detail and accuracy -- Bronco, Tasca (who have just renamed to "Asuka Model"), newer companies like Meng and Vulcan, for instance. Tamiya are clearly not keen to go down the "complexity" route but have lifted their game enormously in recent years in terms of accuracy and detail. Personally I'm also not particularly encouraged when a company keeps releasing new kits of the same subject -- it's one thing when it's an older mould with known issues that's being replaced, but when it's a not-so-old kit with just a few changes, there's a strange "this time we've got it right!" vibe going on (I suspect they just want to keep popular subjects in the catalogue, but they make all these fine-tuning efforts to entice their previous customers to buy the kits all over again -- a tactic that actually seems to work pretty well).

There doesn't seem to be any real overlap between the strategies of their 1/35 armour line and their 1/72 armour line. I think they use the reputation of the former to boost the sales of the latter, but there doesn't seem to be anything deeper than that.
Bruce Probst
Melbourne, Australia
"I want to decide who lives and who dies."
My Model Profile
User avatar
Softscience
Staring out the window
Posts: 7380
Joined: April 5th, 2011, 4:34 pm
Location: Maryland, near Washington DC

Re: small-scale build. Panther Ausf. D

Post by Softscience »

BWP wrote:
Softscience wrote:Blast! Dragon used to be the king of armor kits. Its a shame to see them taking the same path as Tamiya. That is to say, producing a lesser product but riding on the brand name. Do you know if this holds true for the recent 1/35 scale releases as well?
That's a more complicated question. I don't think there's any evidence to show that they're simplifying their 1/35th line but I think (this is just my opinion) that they've gotten just a little bit lazy and are not making much in the way of any special effort. Other companies are beginning to regularly demonstrate that they can take Dragon on in the 1/35th market in terms of kit complexity, detail and accuracy -- Bronco, Tasca (who have just renamed to "Asuka Model"), newer companies like Meng and Vulcan, for instance. Tamiya are clearly not keen to go down the "complexity" route but have lifted their game enormously in recent years in terms of accuracy and detail. Personally I'm also not particularly encouraged when a company keeps releasing new kits of the same subject -- it's one thing when it's an older mould with known issues that's being replaced, but when it's a not-so-old kit with just a few changes, there's a strange "this time we've got it right!" vibe going on (I suspect they just want to keep popular subjects in the catalogue, but they make all these fine-tuning efforts to entice their previous customers to buy the kits all over again -- a tactic that actually seems to work pretty well).

There doesn't seem to be any real overlap between the strategies of their 1/35 armour line and their 1/72 armour line. I think they use the reputation of the former to boost the sales of the latter, but there doesn't seem to be anything deeper than that.
very interesting observations. You seem to have your finger on the 72nd scale pulse than I do. From the recent releases, what is good and what is not?
User avatar
BWP
Got in under the wire
Posts: 774
Joined: April 28th, 2011, 2:23 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: small-scale build. Panther Ausf. D

Post by BWP »

I don't know about that. I just browse forums, look at reviews and comments from people who buy the kits, etc. Some people of course are perfectly happy and the kits sell regardless of their problems, so there's not much reason for Dragon to re-evaluate their policy, and less reason for other companies to strive to do better (in injected plastic; resin kits are a different matter of course). I fear that Dragon's "we can do less!" policy is the driving cause behind Airfix's drastic drop in quality between the Cromwell and the King Tiger. Revell still seem interested in keeping their kits at a higher level, but they produce only 1 new kit a year, at best. Zvezda are probably the most "interesting" company in 1/72 at the moment -- they want to produce what are largely "quick-build" kits, but they do so while sacrificing an absolute minimum of detail. Their T-34 from a couple of years ago is only marginally less detailed than say, a Dragon T-34 (which are very good kits) -- but can be built without glue! Their Tiger and Panther D kits are not quite that good but still pretty decent, and they're doing a whole bunch of tiny infantry-only kits (with various field artillery items). They're aiming at the wargamers but the display modellers will still be pretty happy with most of their product.
Bruce Probst
Melbourne, Australia
"I want to decide who lives and who dies."
My Model Profile
User avatar
Softscience
Staring out the window
Posts: 7380
Joined: April 5th, 2011, 4:34 pm
Location: Maryland, near Washington DC

Re: small-scale build. Panther Ausf. D

Post by Softscience »

The overall impression I get is that 72nd armor reached its apogee around 2005-2009 and then began to backslide.
User avatar
Softscience
Staring out the window
Posts: 7380
Joined: April 5th, 2011, 4:34 pm
Location: Maryland, near Washington DC

Re: small-scale build. **CHANGED to SU-122**

Post by Softscience »

I decided to switch topics and work on this wee Eastern Express SU-122 SPG.

The only prior work I had done to it was to cut away the main hatch. I hope you won't fault me on that. I slapped together the gun mantlet and lower hull sides in the last half hour.

The kit is rather typical of Eastern Euro small scale armor. The detail is nice, but the engineering is not as user-friendly as things coming out of Asia. That's just fine with me.

Image
User avatar
Chris
Modelling Gent and Scholar
Posts: 2917
Joined: March 15th, 2013, 7:18 pm
Location: In your head
Contact:

Re: small-scale build. **CHANGED to SU-122**

Post by Chris »

Sounds great, glad to have you back in the game with a kit you like better.
Honcho of ASMMF
ShaunW
NOT the sheep
Posts: 26118
Joined: November 26th, 2011, 6:11 pm
Location: Pontefract West Yorkshire

Re: small-scale build. **CHANGED to SU-122**

Post by ShaunW »

An excellent choice, I'm a bit of a fan of these Soviet assault guns.
Doing - Tamiya 1/35th Universal Carrier.

Work is the curse of the modelling classes!
IPMS#12300
User avatar
BWP
Got in under the wire
Posts: 774
Joined: April 28th, 2011, 2:23 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: small-scale build. **CHANGED to SU-122**

Post by BWP »

I hope the upper and lower hull have a better fit than on my T-34!
Bruce Probst
Melbourne, Australia
"I want to decide who lives and who dies."
My Model Profile
Locked

Return to “Kursk, 70th Anniversary”