If you're like me you've noted Tamiya's release of the Kubelwagen and
Kettenkraftrad with renewed enthusiasm. I think there's hope; #TM32504 on page
10 of the latest Squadron flyer indicates there's now a NEW early production
Tiger I. Can I hope they do something that wasn't done by Bandai?
Cheers,
The Keeper (of too much crap!)
in article snipped-for-privacy@mb-m19.aol.com, Keeper at
snipped-for-privacy@aol.comedy wrote on 1/11/05 8:27 AM:
You can see a built-up Tiger (no paint) on Hyperscale. Pretty nice. I think
I heard that a Sherman was in the works as well.
MB
I am not a tank guy, but I do try to keep track of what is happening with
Japanese releases.
Tamiya has a 1/48th "Medium Tank Sherman Early Production" scheduled for a
1/17/05 release in Japan. Also a
1/48th "German Strumgeschutz III Aust. B" for the 22nd.
Needless to say, those release dates do not mean they will be in the US very
quickly.
Norm
Personally, I'm not too enthused about their new 1/48 line. It seems to me
that Dragon has forced Tamiya out of the 1/35 business and into other areas.
Dragon offers a lot of extras in their kits (P/E, extras and turned barrels) at
a fair price and Tamiya is falling behind. Note that Tamiya's next 1/35
release isn't WWII but rather the modern Leclerc. My problem with 1/48 is that
it will soon be the same as 1/35 with tons of detail sets and P/E being offered
because the size lends itself to the extra details. My attraction to small
scale has always been their simplicity and the illusion of more detail.
Dan
:
: Personally, I'm not too enthused about their new 1/48 line. It seems to me
: that Dragon has forced Tamiya out of the 1/35 business and into other areas.
:
I don't think DML forced anybody anywhere. Tamiya made there own
problems by not following up on their Panther G with the earlier models,
which DML finally did. Tamiya did not improve their Kubel until the
Hasegawa (now DML) version came out. They did offer a new GMC, but that
is the only thing american and new - they even short cut the Shermans
by keeping the old lower hull. That would be fine, if they had filled
the sponson gaps... Has Tamiya given any indication that they are going
to redo the very old US 'tracks? No, I hadn't heard they were either.
Tamiya seems to be too busy with R/C products to pay attention to
static models. But they, DML seemed to be too busy with dolls to pay
attention either, so you never know.
:
: Dragon offers a lot of extras in their kits (P/E, extras and turned barrels) at
: a fair price and Tamiya is falling behind.
:
Shrug. That is not a selling point to me, since I prefer the Aber
barrels with their machined muzzle breaks. OTOH, I am happy to see
DML starting to offer "rubber band" tracks, since I said from day 1
that DML was alienating modellers by only providing individual links.
:
: Note that Tamiya's next 1/35
: release isn't WWII but rather the modern Leclerc.
:
If your thing is moderm armor, you are probably excited. Since
my interest level drops exponentially the furthur you go from 1946,
my response to a LeClerc s *YAWN!*
:
: My problem with 1/48 is that
: it will soon be the same as 1/35 with tons of detail sets and P/E being offered
: because the size lends itself to the extra details. My attraction to small
: scale has always been their simplicity and the illusion of more detail.
:
I think that Bandai was way ahead of the field there. Interior
in their 1/48 scale kits? Wow! But, it is too heavy, and very hard
to see, not to mention that A/C's have more scale armor that battle-
ships, so I leave them buttoned up. :-) Besides, you don't have to
use PE. Turned barrels, however... :-)
Bruce
snipped-for-privacy@realtime.net (Bruce Burden) wrote in
news: snipped-for-privacy@enews2.newsguy.com:
Not to mention what the blockheads on eBay will bid any Bandia Sherman up
to. Ha-ha! Gonna get my M4 and M4A1 and I'm not gonna miss a car payment
to do it. Interiors are nice but judging by the prices I'm seeing out of
Hong Kong and Japan I'll be able to order both Shermies all of the Tamiys
(so far) and the Skybow Tigger with the Zimmerit get it all shipped
surface and to amortize the per unit shipping and I'll be getting the
whole shootin' match for the price of 2 or 3 Bandai kits on eBay that may
or may not have all the parts.
Of course they did. They did with Tamiya the same thing they are currently
doing to AFV Club. Matching them release for release and providing more value.
Maybe not for you, but for many who don't want to buy the extras it is a
selling point. Not everybody wants to buy a $22 barrel to add to the their
tank and not all barrels have muzzle breaks. I use Aber barrels where the
extra detail makes sense, but a simple barrel provided by Dragon is just as
good.
Dan
I wonder how many 1/35 builders Tamiya will entice over to 1/48 with a retail
price of $30 (at my local shop anyway) when the average Dragon 1/35 tank with
the extras runs about $30?
Dan
I haven't quite figured this out yet, but apparently somebody has decided there
is a market for it, most likely in Japan. We tend to forget that the bulk of
Tamiya's kits play to the home markets and not foreigners.
The British market was assessed recently by Tamiya as so poor, for example,
that they were moving to drop imports. Needless to say that rumor (no matter
what the validity) sent ripples out in the UK.
All that aside, with the current popularity of 1/48 aircraft my guess is that
somebody in marketing made a "2 + 2 = 4" equation and went for it. Bandai did
it in the early 1970s to see if they could garner a market niche and, while it
was one of the grander efforts, eventually failed at it. A shame, as the kits
were cheaper (and better) than anything else on the market at the time.
As for duking it out, I talk to all of these folks and they go where they see
the market being, not where we would like them to go. I keep arguing for new
1/35 US halftracks and a new series of Centurions but to no avail so far.
Cookie Sewell
You are most likely right. It really makes me laugh that one of the arguments
is that the new line is in a popular aircraft scale so that the tanks can be
used in dioramas with 1/48 aircraft. How realistically can the two be
incorprated together in a diorama? I can't ever remember seeing a Tiger and a
Bf-109 together in a period photograph. A Challenger/Abrams and a helicopter,
maybe but the believability of numerous WWII aircraft and tank dioramas is a
stretch.
Dan
Dan
Well, lots of interesting opinions..........I myself have always been a die
hard 1/48 guy. I have all the Bandai stuff and a few of the odd ball kits in
the same scale. There really is a pretty sizeable group of 1/48 modellers. Go
to a web site "Track48" for a good look at some of the work being done in this
scale. I would never go so far as to say it's ever going to catch up with 1/35
scale but there are a lot more 1/48 "treadheads" than you think. There are a
few other sites pertaining to 1/48, but you will find links to them at the
Track48 site. For me storage was a issue, and also the challenge of
scratchbuilding many items in 1/48 not available as readilly as 1/35.
I've affordable 1/48 scale US armor for years-- to go aboard RC landing
craft of the larger vessels, where a model in 1/35 would just be too big.
At $30 a pop, I'll keep waiting....
I'm semi encouraged by this .Now, if we might see the soft skins, like say,
Federal tractors and the Fueler Semi-trailer or some of the German and
Japanese stuff, or Austin Ambulances for airfield dioramas, I'd be ecstatic
over this.
Some of this exists in (expensive) resin,but tends to be a pain to find.
Yeah, I'm considering getting the Gasoline conversion for the Sturmtiger but
I'm not on fire yet. I'd love to see some Japanese equipment or a Somua in
1/48.
Cheers,
The Keeper (of too much crap!)
Strictly speaking, either spelling is accepted as correct, though "brake" is
probably preferred. I'm used to you on the WWI list, so no, I don't hate
smartasses.
Dan Hartz
"DNSH" wrote
Where did you get that idea? The purpose of the device is to slow or reduce
the recoil of the tube when firing. It "puts a brake on it", so to speak.
"Brake" is correct, not merely "accepted". "Break" is just wrong, unless
you are talking about a catastrophic malfunction. The fact that people
can't spell and pass it off with "Well, you know what I meant. . ." does not
mean it is accepted as "correct". Likewise, just because people write and
say "turrent" does not change the reality that the word is "turret".
KL
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.