JackG Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 Decided to join in on the Takom 'experience'. Inspiration for the build will be this period photo, though it won't be displayed knocked out: There are a few builds ongoing with the Takom kits, and wanted to see myself the fit problems - it did not take long ... There is also some measurement discrepancies compared to Dragon's smart kit of the III J. The length of hull plate (has the red bar over top) on the Takom kit, is bit deeper in depth. The weld bead in front of this looks ok, but the armour plate thickness appears to be slightly more than half that of Dragon. Since I had the hulls out, some further comparisons showed the overall lengths and widths were near equal. Not so with the locations for the return roller stands - on the Takom hull, they are several mm back, particularly the first and third locations: Anyhow, here is a little trick to introduce a weld bead. The kit parts (C6, C17) already have the plastic in place to represent the weld, but has no texture. One the part is glued in place, just run some liquid cement along the area, and stipple it with a tool - I used the tip of a needle file: regards, Jack 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 Very interesting to see the difference Jack thanks, enjoy the build. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diases Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 If you put the hulls on top of each other, the return rollers look about equal. Are the two sides produced with the rollers at slightly different positions, by the factory? Paul 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxbat Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 1 hour ago, diases said: If you put the hulls on top of each other, the return rollers look about equal. Are the two sides produced with the rollers at slightly different positions, by the factory? Paul You're right and I'd never noticed that before. I knew the road wheels were slightly offset to fit the torsion bars in but not that the return rollers weren't symmetrical either. Andy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hewy Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 Nice comparison jack, i had to trim some plastic away each side of the inner front hull to get a snug fit there , you'll have to trim off the shurzen mounting brackets from the fenders for your dak example too , Probably not a bad build , but my point is ,its a very modern kit, from usually a very good manufacturer, and it's not the fit and finish one would expect, thick and high seam lines another of the problems on my N version, all the best with it jack, 👍 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hewy Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 (edited) Btw ,are your dak markings from another kit or aftermarket Edited February 16, 2021 by Hewy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retired Bob Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 1 hour ago, diases said: Are the two sides produced with the rollers at slightly different positions, by the factory? I only noticed this when I put my StuH track assemblies side by side to take a photo and they didn't line up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackG Posted February 16, 2021 Author Share Posted February 16, 2021 My bad about the return rollers, they are ok as is. Just like the road wheels, the torsion bar system makes them offset when comparing left to right, so too the return rollers follow suit. The proper way to compare would be both left sides or right - opposite sides will not match. So here the hulls are stacked, much better result! 😉 ---------------------------- Concerning the markings, I plan to draw up my own and have them printed by an independent shop. Echelon do have this particular vehicle in one of their DAK decal sets, but for me it will be cheaper the custom printing route since I'm drawing up a sheet with a variety of subjects. Eye up about the shield mounting brackets, yes those need to be shaved off, as well as on the turret top have location marks that require removal. I'll post more about the forward hull plates - all three that make up the nose area do not quite match the Dragon kit. regards, Jack 7 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlaStix Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 Hi Jack. Great to see you here with what should be an interesting project. Interesting to see the comparisons between the kits too. Nice work on the weld texture too. Kind regards, Stix 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackG Posted February 16, 2021 Author Share Posted February 16, 2021 After comparing the plate armour heights on the nose, not much to choose from between the two kit brands. Takom has upper and lower plates about half a mm longer, while the main face plate (sloped 22 degrees) is shorter by about half a mm. Takom (dark grey plastic), also has slightly larger armoured intake covers and the base they sit on - this last detail makes it not worth while to start cutting things. Honestly, it would not be worth it just for that half mm difference. I'm still going to address that main plate thickness though. Easiest way I see is to add sheet plastic 0.13mm thick to the front, and a thin strip on the backside that butts up against the weld bead. Top edge needs a strip too of the same sheet thickness. regards, Jack 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hewy Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 Forgive my ignorance on such matters, but is the dragon kit well known for its mm accuracy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackG Posted February 16, 2021 Author Share Posted February 16, 2021 According to the hive mind over at missinglynx, Dragon Panzer III measures out quite well with the drawings published in Panzer Tracts. The only reason I started looking at the nose section, and comparing to Dragon, was the plate armour thickness looked well under the stated 50mm. 50mm @1/35 = 1.42mm Takom's plate thickness appears to be half that, that's why it stood out to me. regards, Jack 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackG Posted February 21, 2021 Author Share Posted February 21, 2021 (edited) Need to re-introduce weld beads, but otherwise the nose plate armour is sorted. It's thickness is now quite close to what Dragon has: Laying a strip of 0.13mm plastic on the inside lip also closed any gaps between it and the weld bead across the top. I did replace the indicated trapezoid piece as the kit molding looked a bit short in width: Looking ahead at the road wheels, and common problem here is the six posts on the inner side are too long. A wood carving tool with a rounded tip makes quick work of removing the shorter pins on back of the outside wheel sections. The fit is much better, but the key that helps center the attachment of wheels pairs has a lot of play, such that a visual alignment is still necessary: Have also come across an actual build review of this kit on Armorama. They have a list of 'issues' with the kit, to which I'd include the plastic is on the soft side. Though they enjoyed the build overall, I would agree that a modern tooling should not have the problems it has with so much seams to take care of. https://armorama.kitmaker.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=SquawkBox&file=index&req=viewtopic&topic_id=287257&ord=&page=2 regards, Jack Edited February 21, 2021 by JackG 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlaStix Posted February 21, 2021 Share Posted February 21, 2021 Hi Jack. Very interesting and good progress. Kind regards, Stix 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackG Posted March 21, 2021 Author Share Posted March 21, 2021 (edited) Well right or wrong, I've decided to pose the underside sealed doors opened. A set of photos in the Squadron publication shows the Flammpanzer operating with them that way. Also, the standard Panzer III has screened vents to expel engine heat. There does not seem to be the heavy rivet detail like on the kit part. So have sanded those off and added some thin strips of sheet plastic to simulate the actual rubber seal on the inside of the doors: The muffler assembly attachment points were all on the shallow side, so I relied on super glue gel for a quick set: For the lower hull details, there are four parts A44. There are seams to clean up everywhere, and one runs right through a nut detail. The nut itself was also misshaped, so decided to just lobe those off and replace with some resin ones (0.7mm) from MasterClub: regards, Jack Edited March 21, 2021 by JackG 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlaStix Posted March 22, 2021 Share Posted March 22, 2021 Hi Jack. Great to see more progress. I do like the idea of the open vents - it will add even more visual interest to your project. And nicely done replacing the bolts. Looking forward to more. Kind regards, Stix 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackG Posted March 22, 2021 Author Share Posted March 22, 2021 Thank you Plastix. More to come for sure ... ended up ordering a couple PE sets. One comprises the fenders, and those should be in later this week. regards, Jack 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigfoot Posted March 23, 2021 Share Posted March 23, 2021 Good start to this project. Nice to see the side by side comparison with the dragon kit. I like the open vents at the back, adds something a bit different and some visual interest. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now