Rubicon Models
Rubicon Models => General Discussions => Topic started by: Rubicon Models on May 15, 2017, 11:08:11 pm
-
Q2/17 New Releases coming soon...
...will add more as the release date gets closer!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Misc%20Images/FB%20280046%20SdKfz%203a%20Maultier%20170508-1_zpsro9ys0b3.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Misc%20Images/FB%20280047%20SdKfz%20305-3a%20Box%20Body%20170515-1_zps1uddpxbh.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Misc%20Images/FB%20280048%20SdKfz%20250-9%20amp%20251-23%20170515-1_zpsxz60zlyg.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Misc%20Images/FB%20280049%20Willys%20MB%20US%20170515-1_zpshacrkmhj.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Misc%20Images/FB%20280050%20Willys%20MB%20UK%20170515-1_zpsrdmpfrly.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Misc%20Images/FB%20280051%20BMW%20R75%20ETO%20170515-1_zpsamctizcn.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Misc%20Images/FB%20280052%20BMW%20R75%20DAK%20170515-1_zpswofukutm.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Nice.
I have some adventurers waiting for a lift.
-
I'm so much looking forward to both these sets! Just got me 3 of the Blitz and these will complement my fledgling convoy ;D
-
I've really been looking forward to these :)
-
I'll be getting at least a couple of Maultiers.
I dunno why the vehicle with the Einheitskoffer is towing an anti-tank gun, but I guess anything is possible.
-
SdKfz 250 & 251 Expansion Set - SdKfz 250/9 & 251/23 added.
This is the last of the planned expansion sets (at least for now)!
;)
-
Another one I've been waiting for. I think this will be very popular.
If it's not too late to fix the art, the figure in the turret looks as though he's attached to the rear stowage box.
-
If it's not too late to fix the art, the figure in the turret looks as though he's attached to the rear stowage box.
At least he is not in the recoil path of the gun.
I think it is an optical illusion, I just thought he was on the right side of the gun, now I think he is a decoy ^___^.
-
Good news that the 250/9 is finally coming out. I have a need for several of these beauties.
I am also thinking about using the Ausf.B turret onto the Warlord Puma kit to make a 234/1.
I have a 1/6 scale sdkfz 250/9 ausf.A (Alte) that i am detailing and coverting to RC.
This will also be painted in the same Panzer Lehr sceme that ive been doing my recent Rubicon kits.
Tim
-
Just to let everyone know, we cannot change any of the artwork as they had been sent to the printers already... you can still comments, but nothing we can do.
;)
-
Hey Rubicon, when can we expect to get our hands on these Q2 kits?
I would like to have 1 Maultier built to tow a Nebelwerfer and 2 sdkfz 250/9 built for a big game in 5 weeks.
Cheers
Tim
-
Q2 looks as though it's going to be quite a big month!
-
Excellent.
-
BMWs and sidecars? Hopefully? 8)
-
Very nice indeed, especially liking the Brit Jeep, it will go nicely with the plastic British Airborne infantry recently released by another company. SdKfz 250/251 also catches my eye, just so iconic.
On the subject of infantry. On Dakka Dakka someone mentioned you had plastic infantry in the pipeline. Is this true and if so? Do you have any concept artwork/design you can share and which nations armies are you looking at first, hopefully all of them all at once LOL.
Would also really love to see a Brit Sherman V / Firefly kit as well as a Universal Carrier.
Keep up the great work!
-
On the subject of infantry. On Dakka Dakka someone mentioned you had plastic infantry in the pipeline. Is this true and if so? Do you have any concept artwork/design you can share and which nations armies are you looking at first, hopefully all of them all at once LOL.
Have a look at this Work In Progress (digital sculpting) thread (Soviet infantry message, others on the thread)
http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=235.msg6903#msg6903 (http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=235.msg6903#msg6903)
Would also really love to see a Brit Sherman V / Firefly kit as well as a Universal Carrier.
Have a look at the Wish list and Work In Progress threads:
http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=395.0 (http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=395.0)
The above covers general Shermans stuff.
The Universal Carriers are somewhere on the wish list threads.
-
On the subject of infantry. On Dakka Dakka someone mentioned you had plastic infantry in the pipeline. Is this true and if so? Do you have any concept artwork/design you can share and which nations armies are you looking at first, hopefully all of them all at once LOL.
If you search the forum, you'll see various specialised infantry sets are in the design process, including Soviet tank riders and seated US infantry. My issue with Rubicon figures so far is the plastic, which makes the detail look soft (the dark colour is also harder to work with). It's also harder to convert than the soft plastic that Warlord uses. I'd really like Rubicon to use a lighter coloured, softer plastic for their figures.
Would also really love to see a Brit Sherman V / Firefly kit as well as a Universal Carrier.
There are other Sherman variants in the works, including a Firefly. Seeing as Warlord already does the Sherman V and Universal Carrier in plastic (albeit they are really upscaled PSC kits), I'd expect them to be less of a priority for Rubicon.
-
Last two of the Q2/17 new releases posted... I know, the bike licence plate number is wrong, can't do a thing now! :(
Enjoy!
;)
-
I like the artwork for the Afrika Korps version, even if the licence plate is a bit wonky.
In your blurb, the filter wasn't for 'dry weather'. It was relocated from the transmission to the top of the fuel tank in June 1942 so it wouldn't pick up as much road dust. So it's just a relocated filter.
-
Is everyone assuming the infantry will be plastic? :p
-
I need those motorcycles.
Need them badly
-
Thanks for the heads up UVSmurf, was hoping there may be some concept sprue pictures, Russian aren't my thing but will be interesting to see what comes for the Brit's and Germans. Good to see they have the Firefly in hand.
Is everyone assuming the infantry will be plastic? :p
I was LOL, think it would be a mistake if not.
My issue with Rubicon figures so far is the plastic, which makes the detail look soft (the dark colour is also harder to work with). It's also harder to convert than the soft plastic that Warlord uses. I'd really like Rubicon to use a lighter coloured, softer plastic for their figures.
I was hoping they would be the same material as the Warlord ones, not just for the reasons you mention but also because I find it easier to see lighter material. Hopefully it's not that brittle plastic :( why have they chosen this material? moulds, cost or some other limitation/design reason. Cost definitely shouldn't be a reason.
-
M/cycles and sidecars - prayers answered. Thank you 8)
-
I have had a few problems with Rubicon plastic, but only the Studebaker caused serious problems (not as bad as the Mongoose Starship Troopers plastic).
I do not like the plastic used on the Warlord/Italeri Churchill, it reminds me of Finecast resin when I was cleaning it up. It glued okay though.
I certainly understand the comment on the material colour, I find it hard to resolve details on the components.
-
Rubicon Models uses ABS plastic for our products. The most important mechanical properties of Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) are impact resistance and toughness, and because of its finer particles, it produces better detail on our products. And since our base customers are mostly tabletop gamers, we wanted our kits to be tougher to handle and be able to get knocked around a bit without getting damaged.
While some model kit manufacturers still use polystyrene (PS/HIPS plastic), we choose ABS over PS. ABS combines the strength and rigidity of acrylonitrile and styrene polymers with the toughness of polybutadiene rubber. While the cost of producing ABS is roughly twice the cost of producing polystyrene, it is considered superior for its hardness, gloss, toughness, and electrical insulation properties. Most important of all, ABS had less impact on the environment. Discarded polystyrene does not biodegrade for hundreds of years and is resistant to photolysis.
There are sporadic reports that some plastic cements don’t work on our products... which might be true because customers are using the wrong type of cement. Liquid cements that we bought for testing work well with our kits. Most liquid cement are now PS/ABS compatible, except for a few ones using older solvent formulas. Ask your hobby store to recommend a glue for you!
"Plastic Magic" from Deluxe Materials (https://www.deluxematerials.co.uk) from the UK is one of the best liquid cement we have tested so far. Highly recommended (we are not associated with them in any way)!
;)
-
Thank you for the information. That is useful to know.
Usual disclaimers: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylonitrile_butadiene_styrene (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylonitrile_butadiene_styrene)
Interesting that it can be recycled (though it is rare).
Humbrol claim liquid poly works on ABS (I find it does in general, though I suspect a newish pot works best).
-
However...
ABS plastic used by Rubicon is hard and more difficult to cut and shape than the soft polystyrene used by Warlord (and GW and Preiser). This is a real issue when converting figures. The dark green colour is not ideal for figures either, because the details are harder to make out. This is why Warlord and GW figures are a light grey colour, and Preiser's figures are white.
I maintain that this ABS material does not bond well with Warlord or Tamiya polystyrene, at least when using Tamiya liquid cement. I have tried this multiple times using new bottles of cement, and the result is the same - the pieces can be pulled apart as they don't weld together. I hope the results are different with Plastic Magic.
My point is that while ABS has real advantages for vehicle kits, it's less well suited to figures.
-
ABS plastic used by Rubicon is hard and more difficult to cut and shape than the soft polystyrene used by Warlord (and GW and Preiser). This is a real issue when converting figures. The dark green colour is not ideal for figures either, because the details are harder to make out. This is why Warlord and GW figures are a light grey colour, and Preiser's figures are white.
These current plastic figures are our first batch of releases. We are still experimenting with various material and colour for them. We will continue to review and listen to feedback...
-
I agree that the light grey ( or sand ) colored plastic seems to show more detail for ease of painting than the darker stuff , of course it could also be the small size of the kit pieces and a pair of 60 year old eyes ;D . And yes the BA plastic , being softer is much easier to carve and sand for conversions , but except for adding some open driver hatches , I've not had to do too much to " fix " Rubicons kits , unlike major work on the BA stuff . So far the only Rubicon figures I've dealt with have been drivers and all they needed IMO was a head swap to match the rest of the troops in their unit . I'm going to pick up and build a couple of sets of the new Rubicon figures before I pass judgement . Glue wise , both Testors tube and Tamiya liquid White seem to work for me .
-
Surely the colour is just pigment and can be made lighter/darker?
Back in my GW days, they made it grey or whatever colour they wanted. When we did test frames we'd use whatever plastic was around and would have some interesting tie dye coloured models sometimes!
Will get some plastic magic. Currently I use Tamiya and it can be pretty hit and miss.
-
On the subject of plastic, I was looking through my figure boxes yesterday and my British rifles have suffered 30-40% casualties, which is a bit irritating. Hopefully the ABS would be stronger.
Not sure if I will have to scrap them.
-
My observed experience with plastic figures mirrors uvs' casualties. Broken extremities. Metal figures are so much better at absorbing battle damage.
-
Cannot agree about metal vs plastic being better, my experience has been the opposite and since advancements in plastic moulding the detail and poses are right up there now and easily supercede their metal or resin counterparts. As for breakage, none of my plastic 40k minis have ever broken anything on a drop, which wasn't the case on the metal ones I had prior, the slightest drop or knock on a thin extremity usually resulting on it bending badly or snapping off. I don't think GW would have gone down the plastic route (or any of the main minis producers for that matter) if there wasn't demand or indeed it was the better long term material for gamers or the company concerned. Customisation options are also way higher on plastic. Still I understand some may prefer metal for their own reasons/preference. Personally I think any minis company who produces all their range in plastic is a serious player in the market. The others can ignore it but like any company who ignores or resists change to market requirements, it usually ends in their demise, especially when a serious disruptor enters the same market offering a stronger product suite.
-
Metal vs Plastic vs Resin , the debate has been going on for ever ;D Some guys have luck with one regarding ease of build and non breakage and horror stories with the other types . I don't play BA so I rarely transport my figures , but others do all the time . One guy puts his in a large plastic snap lid container with tissue paper layers and comes down to the LHS by city bus with no problems . And another guy , who has all those foam pull / pick trays custom made and labelled , arrives with a hand full of broken and bent weapons everytime . Do the dice gods smile upon one and not the other ? I don't know , I've dropped plastic tanks with full crews and stowage , resulting in total destruction or sometimes just a broken radio aerial wtf!. The same debate rages over multi part or one piece figures / or paint before or after assembly ::) . We all find our comfort zone and thats how we hobby . Oh course MY way is the right way to hobby and YOURS is the wrong way :o lol
-
I'd always prefer plastic, but I think something you need to consider before saying everything needs to be plastic is the time and cost aspect.
To make a mould takes a lot of time, which I think is one of the main reason there has been a bit of bottleneck in Rubicon's releases. A mould also costs a lot, you have to sell a lot of kits to make the money back and have the initial capital to produce them. Warlord's advantage is that they are the game and new players will see their kits. Rubicon on the other hand (despite being better for the vast majority of kits) are discovered either via word of mouth, advertising or at stores.
Metal and resin kits in the other hand, the moulds are relatively cheap and easy to replace. They're great for items you know aren't going to sell in huge amounts (which is a great sign for lesser know and rarer tanks done by Rubicon is resin). its why warlord's infantry are (for the most part) plastic, but all the teams are metal.
Rubicon have not confirmed if the infantry will be plastic or metal, but they have hinted something to do with metal in a previous post. They also showed their design for bases, which have dimples on to assist with gluing (why would you need these for plastic?).
You could put good money on some tank crews and infantry being metal and not plastic. For a company with experience in making plastic tanks, an initial plunge into infantry in metal would probably be better for them. Making plastic infantry is a whole different ball game than tanks.
Does metal put me off? A bit. I'm not a fan of painting metals, but if I could get US infantry in a Perry Miniatures scale I would use them. No more melon heads and gorilla arms!
But as ripley said, metal vs plastic vs resin... it'll always be debated and no one will be right or wrong whatever you think. It's just your preference.
-
A thoughtful response elias. Chimaera and I obviously have our minds made up and whatever we see reinforces our opposite opinions on the metal versus plastic debate.
By the way a decent primer on the metal should make them as easy to paint as anything else.
-
Elias makes a number of good points.
I love Crooked Dice and Hasslefree metals, they are my standard for metal figures, they are clean castings, the multipart figures go together easily and are a joy to paint.
Other ranges in metals seem to suffer, possibly due to continuing to use moulds past their sell by date, nice figures but poor castings (a Weird War range springs to mind).
Plastic multipart figures are fun to build (and I build many more than I get round to paint).
Some ranges (Gates of Antares being the obvious example) I am only buying the plastics (subject to change).
The entry point for plastic infantry does seem to have lowered, the number of non game tied figures (promoted via Kickstarter etc) indicates the market is there, whether it is long term is another matter.
On the subject of survivability, it is only the Warlord British that have suffered, the Perry British are fine. I need to add some additional padding to stop the figures moving within their individual cells.
-
"Consider the Lilly. Ahhhh."
I always prime models before painting them no matter the material, the metal phobia is just a hang over from when I was a kid and never varnished models because I wasn't allowed a spray and painting varnish on by hand was boring. So many hours wasted when stuff got scratched. Add into that the sometime horrendous 1-2mm mould slip you get with some companies that you can fix no matter how you try!
When Rubicon release their infantry I will get some (whatever material). If I like it, then I would consider replacing all my current infantry as I have never been happy with the Warlord (Italieri) plastics. I would prefer it if it was plastic or resin, but metal wouldn't put me off especially as it would be quicker for me to get them to the table!
-
Until recently I had not worked with many resin figures, Forge World mainly (I have no completed Finecast).
-
Finecast was ok, as long as you got a good one. You could definitely see more details. The issue was they were using the same techniques as when they made metal mould and the material was too soft. We had a model on a Horse in the front cabinet of our store (Gandalf I think) and one sunny day he just flopped over!
Now there are companies out there that have proven that you can spin cast resin really wel. (looking at raging heroes with toughest girls in the galaxy. Some of the best resin model IMO. If Rubicon haven't made their mind up yet, I would seriously recommend they make contact and have some dialogue. They're technique and material would be perfect. And raging heroes CAD design everything as well.
(https://thumb.ibb.co/chtaVv/IMG_4339.jpg) (https://ibb.co/chtaVv)
-
The thing with resin is all the sprue parts are garbage after removing , while you can shred / chip up plastic into pellets and reuse it . Which is more cost effective in the mold design and plastic / resin materials , I don't know
-
Elias - Rubicon have a lot of experience with resin. I think anything they did with resin would be of the highest quality.
I agree with Chimaera's views on this. I also don't think we need another metal figure manufacturer in the mix. I don't like using metal components on plastic vehicles either. I hope Rubicon stays focused on vehicles and specialised figure sets (in plastic). We know they are planning some resin releases, and it would be fine if they used resin for more obscure subjects, and maybe conversion kits and even terrain.
-
Just to clarify. I am not advocating Rubicon become a manufacturer of metal figures. I would just prefer they concentrate on the vehicles. Preferably in plastic but agree with Pinky resin has a place for subjects that might not sell well, or for conversions. Terrain is another possibility but as with the figures I think this is a diversion from Rubicon's core talents. In the event they ever reach saturation point with WWII vehicles I would prefer to see them expand into vehicles of other periods instead of figures and terrain.
-
Thanks for some of the insight guys and all points are well met and respected.
Would still hope Rubicon would stick with plastic for everything though :(
Maybe they could use Kickstarter to bring some tanks to plastic life quicker? Sure if they did a Sherman V/Firefly kit or a Churchill kit they would both be successful if promoted correctly. Would maybe take some of the design/production expense away from their cashflow and allow them to bring some tanks to their range quicker, may even work for Infantry sets if they get to that point. How much would the design/production of say a Sherman V/Firefly kit cost. Would be interesting to know as I am not in the know. Would then allow you to work out the amount of backers required and pledge level. Maybe as bonus targets they could have 4 crew (possibly 2 for tank & 2 standing) and then maybe a Allied stowage set 2? Plenty of possibilities if it was well backed. Say for example it cost 50k then you would only need 1700 backers at £30 to make it work, surely the global community would have this amount of backers. Anything over this would be bonus territory i.e maybe 2000 backers you got the crew and 2500 you got the stowage set. The 30 quid spent would then be great value. Anyway just throwing it out there, doesn't have to be the Sherman V or Churchill, may work for other tanks/kits, Tiger 2 may be another good candidate.
I see numerous companies using kickstarter on the DakkaDakka.com forum under news and rumours but Mantic sticks out as a prolific user of Kickstarter to achieve their aims. No reason why Rubicon couldn't, they just need to come with the right offering. This could even be an equipment/terrain offer, doesn't have to be vehicles. Mantic did an interesting one on plastic dungeon terrain recently (see link below) and no reason a WWII couldn't be done?
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1744629938/terraincrate-plastic-affordable-fantasy-terrain?ref=hero_thanks (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1744629938/terraincrate-plastic-affordable-fantasy-terrain?ref=hero_thanks)
-
Anyway, back to the topic in question.
Rubicon, when can we hope to get these new Q2 releases?
Cheers
Tim
-
Stuff tends to come out towards the end of the quarter
-
While we are attending UKGE in Birmingham, why not showing you the final box arts for our upcoming Q2/17? A total of SEVEN new boxes for you to choose from. What is your preferences?
If you are going to UK Games Expo this weekend, we are at stand A11, as you come through the main doors we are just on the right, next to the bring n buy.
We have new prototypes (the latest being the Panzer IV with SEVEN variants) plus the Q2/17 previews on display. Hope to see you there!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Misc%20Images/RM%20Q2-17%20New%20Releases%20170528-1_zpsjg7z9fgy.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Looking forward to seeing pictures of the prototypes.
-
So if I just want a SDKFZ250/9 it'll cost me $45? At that price I think I'll be looking elsewhere.
J
-
So if I just want a SDKFZ250/9 it'll cost me $45? At that price I think I'll be looking elsewhere.
J
Not quite sure where you got your prices from, but The Plastic Soldier Company quote £18 for a half track and £10 for a single sprue PAK 40 set, £28 or $36 at an exchange rate of £1 : $1.29 (exchange rate from Google this morning).
You might find combi-bargains if you buy the two together (or someone who wants a 251 variant).
-
The Warlord resin/metal hybrid SdKfz 250/9 is £20. Even if UVS's calculations are correct, I guess that's quite a lot less, but it's greatly inferior as a model.
-
From the Rubicon US website $29 for the 250 and the price f previous expansion kits is $16 so I assume the new kit will be the same s $29 + $16 = $45. I would rather pay the $29 for a straight SDKFZ250/9 than have to pay extra paying for a additional kit that has a bunch of parts I don't need.
-
I had not thought to look at the Rubicon USA site, you are correct.
The joys of a collapsing currency (ours not yours).
-
From the Rubicon US website $29 for the 250 and the price f previous expansion kits is $16 so I assume the new kit will be the same s $29 + $16 = $45. I would rather pay the $29 for a straight SDKFZ250/9 than have to pay extra paying for a additional kit that has a bunch of parts I don't need.
Or get another SdKfz 250/1 kit and build 2 SdKfz 250/9s. It's more money, but twice the fun.
Seriously, I understand your point, but the SdKfz 250/9 version requires more parts than a basic vehicle, so it was always going to cost more.
-
NWS Wargaming Store ( Florida USA ) has the 250 for $23 and the detail kits for $13 . Shipping costs could be a problem depending on where in the world you are and how quick you want it . I go the surface mail route as the Post takes a week ( or 4 :: ) to get to me here in western Canada . Always had great service
-
@Pinky can't do two s50/9s the box has parts for one 250/9 and one 251/23
@ripley I already know abut and have ordered from NWS. You don't seem to get the point no matter the actual price I would have t pay a premium in order to have a 250/9 by having to buy two kits in order to make one model.
-
It has parts for both an alte and neu SdKfz 250/9. Have a look at the sprue photo. So it's 3 kits to make 2 models, provided you don't mind having 2 versions. It doesn't fully address your concern, but I'm also wondering what you're comparing this to.
-
I guess it depends on if you want to model the early gun on a pedestal or the later hanging version . Looking at the pre production sprue shots it looks like you can just add the roof and hanging turret , thus you can use the 250 as both a troop carrier or gun track . If you want to go the whole hog and do a complete early gun track interior with pedasal , you only can use it one way . And yes it sucks that certain versions are only available as extra add- ons , but I really can't see too many gamers wanting all these special versions like us modellers do . so its either Rubicon put it out as an extra ( big thumbs up to Rubicon ) or we have none . I can see myself getting most of the add on kits , wether its the radio set just for the seated figures , or the Stummel set to add to a plastic Puma body to make a 234/3 . Hey how about using the hanging turret on the Puma to make a 234/1 ? Damm , now I need another Puma ::) Rubicon dosn't have to release all these kits with a choice of versions , they could have released 3 complete Tiger kits , both a SU-85 and a SU-122 kit , and what was in the box , 3 or 4 versions could be made from the Stug III kit ? Other companies nickel and dime you to get the vehicle you want , personally I think they are giving us great modelling / gaming value for our money. :)
-
Hi all, I am wanting to build 2 of the sdkfz 250/9 Alte to go with my existing 250/1 to make an aufklarung section for my 28mm Panzer Lehr force.
I am going to use the spare turrets to convert 2 of the Bolt Action plastic sdkfz 234/2 Puma into 234/1.
(https://s13.postimg.org/gqyeabu5f/download.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/gqyeabu5f/)
Cheers
Tim
-
I am going to use the spare turrets to convert 2 of the Bolt Action plastic sdkfz 234/2 Puma into 234/1
Swamprat33, that is an excellent idea that hadn't occurred to me, consider it stolen! :)
-
I am going to use the spare turrets to convert 2 of the Bolt Action plastic sdkfz 234/2 Puma into 234/1
Swamprat33, that is an excellent idea that hadn't occurred to me, consider it stolen! :)
I was thinking the same thing. Although I don't like the Puma's hollow wheels.
-
Don't like them either pinky , so I got a circle template from the Staples office supply store and traced / cut disks out of plastic sheet . Boring .... but the final result looks good
-
I filled mine with Milliput.
I thought I had a photograph of the filled wheels, but only found I had not after I had glued them in.
-
I have not yet built any Puma, although i did paint one for a mate a few months ago.
I did notice the hollow wheels and i plan to fill with milliput when i build mine.
I am planning to build 2 as 234/2 puma and 2 more as 234/1 so will have a lot of wheels to re-profile.
Cheers
Tim
-
I also stuffed them full of Milliput (never really understood why they released them like that, at that size, casting them whole shouldn't have been too much of a challenge, even if you reduced the detail on the rear - or cast them in two pieces, either would have been preferable) - anyway, good catch Swamprat33.
-
It's a scaled down 1/48, that's probably why.
-
Is it a scaled down 1/48 ? I don't think they make a Puma in 48 , in fact their catalogue in 48 is very small . Last I looked they had a couple of Opel based trucks , a couple of Italian Auto Belindas and a Flak 88 . I have their 1/35 Puma and although it has a lot of the smaller details of the 28mm kit , ( tie rods etc ) it has a few more that I thought would have been great to have in 28 . For example the hull roof is separate so all 4 versions of the 234 series can be modeled with driver seats and steering wheels included in each kit . You get the ammo boxes and crew seats on a separate sprue if you get the 75mm gun kits . Italeri / Warlord really missed out on an opportunity to release all 4 types IMO , thankfully Rubicon makes the bits we need to covert easily to a 234/1 , and all little more work ( cutting off the hull roof ) to make a 234/ 3 or 4.
-
You can probably get away with doing just the front and rear wheels, I chose my best ones for those.
When I rephotograph my puma, I will have a go at showing the wheels.
-
It was scaled down from a larger scale then, i thought it was 1/48 but it might be the 1/35.
It was one of the early italeri kits where they rushed to get as many out as possible.
-
The 35th scale one has been around since the late 70s , I was still in high school when I built my 1st one . Its not a total scale down , as a lot of things that are separate pieces on the 35 kit are molded as one piece on the 56 kit , unlike the BA plastic Universal Carrier which looks to me like a straight upscale version of the PSC kit ( if only they did the other plastic versions ;D ) I guess in the rush to get the kit out , they didn't think it through , if the hull roof was removable , all 4 versions of the 234 could have been kitted out on the one basic hull . They're loss , we can get Rubicon detail kits and add them to the Puma hull and make which ever version we want ;D . Oh , I guess we still have to buy the original kit though , so maybe they win , ::). Well what ever they did , they made some short cuts in the kit that most gamers will over look and most modellers will work at trying to fix . Half the fun of these 56 scale kits, for me , compared to the 35 scale kits I used to build , is getting to add extra detail and various bits from the parts box to really bring the kit to life . Not much left to add to most of the new 1000 piece plus 35th scale kits out now , start to feel like a kit assembler rather than a kit builder , if that makes any sence
-
The universal carrier is indeed an upscaled PSC kit
-
Hi Rubicon, Not much info from you guys recently.
Can we please have an update for the Q2 release.
Ive completed my 1/56 backlog and am now looking for some more from you to build.
Hope to see you at the Battle Group South show at the Tank Museum this weekend.
Cheers
Tim
-
Another week or so, apparently. I met the UK rep at Bovington Tank Museum today - lovely chap. It's a shame the new releases weren't available. I saw the prototypes though.
-
Hey Pinky, ive been down at Bovy all weekend running a large 28mm Eastern Front Bolt Action game.
Wish id been able to say hi to you as well.
Agree about Steve - Top Bloke.
Cheers
Tim
-
Tim - it was the big game in the entrance hall, right? If so, I walked past several times while you guys were playing. Very impressive set up, and excellent models. You should put up some photos.
-
That was the one.
We fielded a German Kampfgruppe in 28mm with a company of 13 251 halftracks plus 3 more support 251.
A company of tanks which included 4 panzer 1v, 3 panthers and then a Tiger & a King Tiger.
The last company was 3 platoons of Luftwaffe Field Division, Volksgrenadiers & infantry.
The Germans pushed through the Soviet defences and were then halted by the Soviet armoured counter attack with included a company of T34s with a platoon of SU100s.
A very enjoyable game.
Steve Perry took quite a few pix but not sure where he posted.
Cheers
Tim