Rubicon Models
Rubicon Models => General Discussions => Topic started by: Pinky on August 20, 2017, 12:04:25 pm
-
Interesting to see what Warlord are up to in the plastic kit department.
The plastic King Tiger is out, and I'm sure it will be popular. It would have been nice if they'd sculpted a new commander and not just re-used an existing one. I wonder if the Zimmerit is better than the Tiger I's? The most interesting aspect for me is being able to build the early version.
They have an Opel Blitz/Maultier on pre-order. It includes a sprue of seated troops. They haven't been doing these kinds of figures very well - they tend to be lumpy and less detailed than their multipart infantry. This is the only subject that overlaps Rubicon. I'm going to bet Rubicon's Maultier is better.
And there appears to be a plastic Char B1 Bis on the way. That's probably the most exciting release. Finally the early war period is getting some plastic. I know Rubicon has plans for a T-26 and early Panzers. Hopefully we'll see some more, like the Somua S35 and some British types.
-
From pictures I've seen in their news letter , the Tiger II has both the Porche and Henchel turrets , with the paticuler gun mantlet that was designed for that version . You also get the snorkal cover for the engine deck of the very early Porche version ( 8 tanks maybe ? ) , but wether any other parts paticuler to the Porche are included , I'm not sure . I think Rubicon is shaking Warlord up a little with their multi version kits ,new kits like the Opal ( land the KV and Type 97 ) has extra parts to make various versions . The troops are a nice touch , but they are not 10 separate figures , but 2 blocks of 5 torsos with 10 pairs of legs and partial arms to add . I guess you could mix and match legs to make totally different figures if you had more than one set . But I think you will loose much detail if you cut them apart to make single seated figures ( tank riders !!! )
(https://s3.postimg.org/ax7kaoycv/Seated-_INfantry-2.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/ax7kaoycv/)
Also of note they have a plastic Char B kit coming . The box art shows one in German service with a German style commanders hatch ( not the French armored dome ) , I wonder if you get the choice of French heavy tank or German Flamm panzer ?
-
The Tiger II looks pretty good, (giving you both turrets is a nice touch) - the Zim is only ok, it's far too neat & regular as they've taken the 'vertical columns of horizontal ridges' pattern used on Tiger II's (among others) a bit too literally, though once you started to chip bits away it'll look better. (& as mentioned before, the cupola MG mount is the same nonsense as appears on their Panther & Tiger)
I like the look of the Maultier, & while I don't doubt that Rubicons version will prove superior when directly compared, WG have sweetened the pot by giving you the Blitz/Maultier option in the kit (plus, while a small thing, including some acetate for windows is nice). The main point for me is the inclusion of passengers - I'm hoping that they're better than the earlier 251 examples (which, being more accurately 1/56 looked a bit silly next to the standard infantry figure). I'm hoping that they're, in fact a little oversized - somewhere between Perry figures & WG & also, please let them fit in the Rubicon/WG 251 models (I'll happily accept a little judicious trimming & bending but draw the line at amputation. That the figures themselves are two part & appear to be larger than those provided previously gives me some hope - but we'll see.
-
They're kits made for warlord and not just rushed up/downscaled kits.
It's good. Companies pushing each other to increase their quality.
-
I will very likely get the Warlord Opel/Maultier, as it works out cheaper, and comes with a squad of passengers. Debating getting just one to start, or getting three and being done. Wondering if the kits are designed so the rear wheels can be removed, and the tracks put in their place (magnets perhaps) so that I have the ability to mix as needed depending on the scenario.
I actually tried to get a Rubicon Opel a few months back, and if that order had worked out, I would be getting two more from Rubicon. But the item was back-ordered, then they said they had it, but not the other stuff, and asked me to wait 3 more weeks. I waited 7, and never heard back from them, so just cancelled the order. Very frustrating. I won't deal with that company again.
I prefer working in plastic, and hope Rubicon continue to release vehicles suitable for early war. Unfortunately for them, I just acquired an Sd.Kfz 7, so their upcoming model will not be on my purchase list. I do hope they eventually work that into the Sd.Kfz 10 as that was the main hauler for so many early war bits and bobs. And nobody else has a 10, in plastic or resin.
-
They're kits made for warlord and not just rushed up/downscaled kits.
I did wonder as PSC have recently released the Blitz in 15mm (and have ceased to publish the instructions on their website).
-
I want both the Rubicon and Warlord Maultier , can never have enough transport . Plus I have a few kit bash ideas I want to build , before someone does a kit of them , and everybody has one ::). Hopefully the BA plastic troops are more to scale than those in their 251 D . Their metal seated figures look good in my Rub . Opel Blitz
(https://s3.postimg.org/z7uel1jhr/IMG_20170820_165737897.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/z7uel1jhr/)
-
They have an Opel Blitz/Maultier on pre-order. It includes a sprue of seated troops. They haven't been doing these kinds of figures very well - they tend to be lumpy and less detailed than their multipart infantry. This is the only subject that overlaps Rubicon. I'm going to bet Rubicon's Maultier is better.
Hard to say Pinky. As you can see, I have them all (both Rubicon kits and the Warlord kit).
(https://s8.postimg.org/8d9o9q6fp/Opel_Maultier.jpg)
How different are they?
Well, pretty different.
That being said, both the Rubicon kits and the Warlord kit are good kits. I can't say which is better because that would like comparing German chocolate to Belgium chocolate. To me, both are very good and worth getting.
Because I have the different ones in my hands, you might ask, "If I had to choose between the two, which one would you pick?" That is no easy answer, but instead I will look at certain aspects.
Driver and passengers:
Both kits come with drivers, but the Warlord kit comes with passengers. Is this critical? No, not at all. And if it was, the Warlord passengers can be purchased separately and added to a Rubicon build.
Plastic:
The plastics used to make the models are different. The plastic used by Rubicon seems to be better.
Decals:
Both kits come with really a nice decal sheet with lots of options, but as for decal material, I tend to like the Rubicon decals better because they have a really thin film. While this may give troubles to new model builders as well as some experienced model builders, they are easy to work with once you start learning how thin the decals are. Also, at first, I was worried that the Micro-Sol (from Microscale) would be too strong to use, and thought I would only use the Micro-set. However, Micro-sol works as it should.
Choices:
Here I think the Warlord kit pulls ahead. The Warlord kit gives you the choice to build an Opel Blitz or a Maultier while the Rubicon SdKfz 305 kit only allows you to build the Opel Blitz. However, the Rubicon SdKfz 3a Maultier kit does give you the bits to build either an Opel Blitz or Maultier even though the instructions do not tell you this and suggest you can only build the Maultier. I think Warlord has done the correct thing in that it made their kit so that either can be built.
As a Model:
Both kits build up very nicely and have pretty good details. It needs to be said that both the Rubicon kits and the Warlord kit are very easy builds. For a model building (not gamer) making dioramas, I have to say the Warlord kit does give you the possibility to assemble the kit with doors open or closed (doors are separate pieces). I built my Warlord kit with doors closed, so unless someone wants to build a vignette as a show piece or objective marker for their games showing the model with open doors, having open or closed doors as an option is not that big of a deal. Besides, Rubicon's one piece cab is probably nice for some wargamers that are not enthusiastic about building model kits.
Overall:
No matter which kit you choose, you will have a nice model for gaming or display. For me, the most deciding factor is availability because it is easier for me to purchase the Warlord kit than the Rubicon kits. On top of that, the Rubicon kits come with a shipping cost (mail order) as well. When taking cost into account, the Warlord kit is a little less expensive (for me). If I had to get lots of Opel Blitz or Maultiers, I think I would end up getting more Warlord kits than Rubicon kits.
-
Interesting and informative. Thank you.
Have you some comparison photographs.
-
I still want one of each ::) . So Tracks , what do you think of the 10 man plastic seated Germans in the Opel kit ? I got 2 sets and I'm not really sure about them . I was hoping they would work well as single figures but with most of the arms molded close to the bodies and some of the hands molded on the lower bodies ( you can't mix and match all torsos and lower bodies ), its going to take a bit more thinking on how to make these all look good as separate figures . Need to get more Green Stuff ;D Also of note, although the figures and heads match the last few BA plastic releases , size wise , the weapons seem to be a little smaller ( thinner ) , like the weapon sprue that came with one of BA's 1st plastic kits , the late war Germans . Might be true to scale but I like the size of the weapons that came in the German Paras , Panzer Grenadiers , and even the early war German box
-
I thought the Warlord Opel was an upscaled PSC kit, however the cab with open windows and doors.
How does t compare to the PSC kit?
http://www.militarymodelling.com/news/article/german-medium-trucks-in-15mm/23666 (http://www.militarymodelling.com/news/article/german-medium-trucks-in-15mm/23666)
-
Sorry ultravanillasmurf, I didn't think to take pictures of the plastic sprues of the two different kits. What I will end up doing eventually is to take pictures of the trucks side by side, but I'm not sure how Rubicon would feel if I post a picture of a Rubicon kit plus one from another manufacture, so I hesitate.
I can tell you that after being assembled and painted (especially if painted the same) it is not easy to tell the two different kits apart unless you look very closely at the details. To make them even look closer alike, you can even put the seated passengers from Warlord into the Rubicon model.
Speaking of those seated passengers. Ripley, I too was hoping they would work well as single figures. Some can be made into single figures, but this would require making sacrifices.
-
On Lead Adventures there is a thread where someone has used the passengers for Tank Riders.
http://www.lead-adventure.de/index.php?topic=105087.0 (http://www.lead-adventure.de/index.php?topic=105087.0)
-
Wow , very nice conversions . I'm saving that site for inspiration
-
it would be good if 'someone' made a set of German tank riders in winter gear, and then a set of Ruskies. Both in plastic of course.
Tim
-
I saw some German tank riders on a Stug III in the last Warlord news letter , now weather they are metal or plastic , I don't know , but it did say " coming soon " so we should find out soon enough
-
As expected, Warlord are releasing a Panzer 38t. The early war period is starting to get proper (plastic) attention. Rubicon's T-26 and early Panzers will be a major addition.
-
But will the Warlord kit be the Pz 38(t) A or B model? Probably not (which is unfortunate). The "A" is the only one that can make an appearance in Poland, and the "B" can join the "A" in France in 1940. The "C" and "D" could have made it to Sealion. But my guess is, they will release the "E" or "F" and while those can invade Russia at the start, they miss out on any action in 1939, 1940 and possibly half of 1941 as well (if it is the "F" model).
Looking forward to more details from Warlord regarding the Pz 38(t).
-
It looks like a later type. Probably, as you say, an Ausf E or F.
-
Thumbs down then. For me it would have to be a Pz38(t) A model to be of any interest. Manufacturers lack of interest in 1939 vehicles is such a frustration my next purchase is likely to be a WWI flying machine from Wingnut Wings! Admittedly nothing to do with war gaming.
-
It looks like a later type. Probably, as you say, an Ausf E or F.
My assumption is that it is at least based on if not an upscaled PSC Panzer 38(t) hence it's companion Marder III also not being what people want.
-
Thumbs down then. For me it would have to be a Pz38(t) A model to be of any interest. Manufacturers lack of interest in 1939 vehicles is such a frustration my next purchase is likely to be a WWI flying machine from Wingnut Wings! Admittedly nothing to do with war gaming.
I understand, but you have a very specialised area of interest. It's not commercially attractive to produce plastic kits of vehicles which only saw service for a short period of time. While I share your enthusiasm for the very early war period, I don't think it's realistic to expect much coverage of these vehicles outside of resin - or at least not until the more popular periods are fully covered.
It looks like a later type. Probably, as you say, an Ausf E or F.
My assumption is that it is at least based on if not an upscaled PSC Panzer 38(t) hence it's companion Marder III also not being what people want.
I think these are Italeri, not upscaled PSC, but that's solely on the basis of small photos of the finished models. I don't agree with the Marder III being a bad choice. It saw pretty wide service (including North Africa), and it's a popular vehicle in other scales.
-
I'd agree with your point Pinky, if these weapons were withdrawn after the campaign in Poland. A PzIV Ausf A would be a case in point. But most of the vehicles that fought for Germany in Poland continued for a long time. Certainly a lot longer than the late war wonder weapons. I suspect the issue is more about the biggest gun and heaviest armour wins. Whereas I am more interested in the historic accuracy of the period and the belief games at this level are more interesting when the infantry isn't dominated. I realise majority opinion measured by sales is going to be the winner however.
-
Yeah the Marder 3 is the early version, I think a lot of people wanted the M which is the later variant, but personally happier it's not! The weirder thing about Warlords Marder is, (at least unless you learned folks can correct me) is I'm pretty sure it's the Marder 3 139 - not the 138 Ausf H.....?
-
@Pinky, my thoughts on its origin are based on the similarity to the Sherman V /VC kits.
@Jimmy_P: The Marder III M needs a different chassis, the engine is moved. It certainly looks like the Soviet armed vehicle, but the PSC kit offers both the 138 and 139.
-
Yes the BA Marder III is the SdKfz 139 , with the Russian 76.2 gun . The H had a larger upper hull / crew compartment and the 75mm Pak 40/3
(https://s2.postimg.org/xvj5fqiut/594937d59b5e67247f368d4802555c4b--ww-tanks-krieg_2.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/xvj5fqiut/)
-
It is very easy to identify who make these kits for Warlord (WLG). Those with the Italeri logo are made by Italeri and licenced to WLG, whereas those with only the BA logo are PSC upscaled kits.
-
Yes the BA Marder III is the SdKfz 139 , with the Russian 76.2 gun . The H had a larger upper hull / crew compartment and the 75mm Pak 40/3
(https://s2.postimg.org/xvj5fqiut/594937d59b5e67247f368d4802555c4b--ww-tanks-krieg_2.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/xvj5fqiut/)
Thanks, yeah that's what I thought! Not sure what it says about WLG that the boxes etc for the model have Ausf H on them....? ;D
And there's no Italari logo on the Marder box, so it definitely isn't one of theirs.
-
If the 38(t) kit matches the box art , it looks like an Ausf E or F . It has less riveting on the driver's plate than a C/D but more than the Ausf G which only had 3 rivets . So its good game wise from Nov 1940 onward . I guess if you wanted to , you could remove all but 3 rivets on the driver's plate ( and the rivets on the engine covers ) and kit bash yourself a Ausf G ( Oct 41 -June 42 ), but since the Germans still had 230 38(t) of all types still in service in Sept 44 you could make do out of the box ....but where's the fun in that ;D
-
Yes the BA Marder III is the SdKfz 139 , with the Russian 76.2 gun . The H had a larger upper hull / crew compartment and the 75mm Pak 40/3
(https://s2.postimg.org/xvj5fqiut/594937d59b5e67247f368d4802555c4b--ww-tanks-krieg_2.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/xvj5fqiut/)
Thanks, yeah that's what I thought! Not sure what it says about WLG that the boxes etc for the model have Ausf H on them....? ;D
And there's no Italari logo on the Marder box, so it definitely isn't one of theirs.
If it is derived from the PSC kit, then it is possible that the box contains components for both.
-
If it is derived from the PSC kit, then it is possible that the box contains components for both.
I've seen the sprues, it does look a lot like the PSC kit but definitely only has the parts for the 139.
-
I've seen the sprues, it does look a lot like the PSC kit but definitely only has the parts for the 139.
Sprues here: http://ultravanillasmurf.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/warlord-games-marder-iii.html (http://ultravanillasmurf.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/warlord-games-marder-iii.html)
-
Well the mould makers know what it is.
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Mi7cjpsngI4/Wn1WjZOVbII/AAAAAAAADFg/5apA8AQdYxU0wo9I6GnrBBW3nqWb84H1wCLcBGAs/s1600/marder-5.png)
-
They’re repurposed. Not direct copies, but the 3d renders will be the same.
-
They’re repurposed. Not direct copies, but the 3d renders will be the same.
There are a lot more details (and parts), though no one noticed that the hull nose will not fit between the track units if they are glued to the hull tub beforehand. I have scarfed some of the rivet detail on the back of the sprocket covers. It needs to be fitted before the track units.
The superstructure sides (below the 139 sides) are incredibly thick. They are hidden so it is not an issue.
[Edit: damn you autocorrect!]
-
I appreciate the heads up about installing the hull nose before attaching the track assemblies.
-
I appreciate the heads up about installing the hull nose before attaching the track assemblies.
No worries if you do not install it before. It will be easier if you install before, but I can tell you from experience that if you install it after, it will go on just fine. You just have to slide it in a certain way to make things go easier.
-
Not sure if this will help anyone, but for those that are interested, the hull sprue for the Marder III kit and the Panzer 38(t) kit are exactly the same.
Probably not, but I wonder if someday we will see a mixed kit. That is, a kit that will allow you to build either a Panzer 38(t) or the Marder III (SdKfz 139).
Image by ultravanillasmurf:
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-HzEN27WAEN0/Wnylq6aQL4I/AAAAAAAADE4/h2hAsqPp1MkOIIKvbkF4Z0hee4sM4nMYgCLcBGAs/s1600/marder-3.png)
-
Probably not, but I wonder if someday we will see a mixed kit. That is, a kit that will allow you to build either a Panzer 38(t) or the Marder III (SdKfz 139).
It would seem to be a bit of a waste.
-
I saw it more as an initial platform for the many vehicles based upon the Panzer 38T.
First the 38T, then the Sd Kfz 139 Marder III, next the sd kfz 140/1 aufklärungspanzer 38(t).
With a sprue with a new super structure to make the Sd Kfz 140 Aus L. Flakpanzer 38T with Flak 38.
How about a Sd Kfz 138 Grille?
So one Panzer 38t hull/track sprue and a variety of others by adding a unique upper super structure sprue.
-
There was the SDKFZ 138/1 Ausf H Grille that used the Panzer 38(t) tank chassis (the Ausf K used the front/ mid engine 138 Ausf M chassis, same for the flakpanzer).
Of course they could do a 138 Ausf M, 138/1 Ausf K Grille, flakpanzer and APC kit, but would it have the necessary sales?
If they had not made such a hash of the box text etc, they could have done a real 138 Ausf H kit as well as the 139.
-
The latest news letter shows a Hetzer Zug as a coming soon item . I hope Warlord realize the Hetzer road wheels are larger in diameter ( by 10 cm ) than the standard (t)38 tank wheels. Judging the omissions on some of they're latest releases , probably not ::)
-
There will however be a AA version included based on the Bergehetzer.
-
Berge Hetzer would be cool but why the AA version ? How many did they make , only 2 of them ever found and photographed . Testing showed the gun couldn't depress to take on ground targets . Its thought that they might have been "homemade " by the Partizans who had control of the Hetzer factory , late war . Sort of just drop an AA ground mount into an open topped vehicle , and add ammo boxes . Any one know of any more info on the Berge Hetzer AA ?
(https://s9.postimg.org/w58lnwlyz/dragon-6399-1-35-jagdpanzer-38-mit-2cm-flak.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/w58lnwlyz/)
Interior Dragon 1/35 Berge Hetzer AA
-
The latest news letter shows a Hetzer Zug as a coming soon item . I hope Warlord realize the Hetzer road wheels are larger in diameter ( by 10 cm ) than the standard (t)38 tank wheels. Judging the omissions on some of they're latest releases , probably not ::)
Interesting, PSC only have OGH's Hetzer on their site and it is not in their pipeline (which is not saying much as they have forgotten to update it occasionally).
Does the newsletter have box art of models? Is it a joint Project with Italeri?
I suspect the Berge and flak options are trying to offer a reason to choose it over the Rubicon one.
-
Interesting.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BemtZwGAt-q/ (https://www.instagram.com/p/BemtZwGAt-q/)
The unpainted ones look bigger.
-
Just seen the picture from the newsletter.
http://gmortschaotica.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/warlord-games-newsletter_24.html (http://gmortschaotica.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/warlord-games-newsletter_24.html)
From the Instagram photograph it has both exhausts but only one driver's vision option.
You can see the limitation of the flak version.
-
It's nice to see Warlord improving their game and trying to get into the same league as Rubicon . As I stated before , they still forget a lot of little , but obvious details on they're tanks . That should improve IMO before they start producing all sorts of weird and wonderful toys . The box art dosen't say who's the maker of the kit , so the final product could be anywhere from meh to great . And does this mean they might also have a plastic 20mm AA gun kit in the future ,or will it be a plastic / metal / resin hybrid kit like that Japanese SPG from late last year ? Now all we need is PSC to get they're finger out , re scale their masters and give us some 28mm toys ( T-70 pls ) . Good catch on the AA version , Johan , I just breezed by the box art when I got the news letter and missed it , I guess I should pay more attention :-[
-
(https://gallery.mailchimp.com/71ca505c950f8867eb0fa9748/images/87629c3f-e005-40b9-92d9-0f3ef43eada6.jpg)
To be honest with everyone, I'm very surprised to see this. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Model and figure companies seldom like to cooperate with with each other! Its a shame because we could see something different from Warlord instead of another Jadgpanzer 38(t) (Hetzer). We already have a very good one from Rubicon Models!
I had both the older and newer resin Jadgpanzer 38(t) kits from Warlord, but I very quickly got rid of these as soon as I assembled my Rubicon Models Jadgpanzer 38(t) kit. In fact, I picked up a second Rubicon Models Jadgpanzer 38(t) kit because the model is a very good, and so much better than the old or new resin kits. Because Rubicon Models offers a really nice Jadgpanzer 38(t), I'm just a little surprised that a new plastic Jadgpanzer 38(t) kit from Warlord is coming in 2018. To bad there is no cooperation!
Just in case you are wondering what happened to my resin Jadgpanzer 38(t)s, I did not trash them. Instead, tried to give them a second chance and I sold them at a very good price. I have one more resin not painted, but it will get turned into a wreck since its close to looking like a wreck anyway. ;D
-
Rubicon's JgdPzr 38t is hard to beat - this does seem unnecessary. But Warlord included the Bergepanzer, which is a big plus. [Edit - assuming there is a Bergepanzer included; maybe I misunderstood]
-
I had not spotted the flak one in that box art.
Interestingly in the painted and unpainted ones on that Instagram post there is no sign of a Bergepanzer, just the jagd and flak ones.
-
A true Berge Hetzer kit will need more than just a body without a roof ie : lots of internal goodies , transmission , winch , tools , etc . Warlord , IMO only give you a basic outline of secondary versions in their kits , lots of bits left out that you have to scratch or find in the parts box . Now here's a couple of Berge H kits that are the full meal deal ( 1/35 ) ::)
(https://s9.postimg.org/4hewd4eej/Early.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/4hewd4eej/)
(https://s9.postimg.org/bkmrsru4r/Late.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/bkmrsru4r/)
Personally , I think Rubicon's Expansion kit idea would be the way to go on this type of vehicle . I live in hope of a Berge Panther kit somewhere in the future . Yes , there is one out now ( something 47 ? ) but they don't have the driver's compartment open so there's no internals to fill it up , and that's the iconic version IMO
-
That may be right, Ripley, but so far Rubicon seem more interested in obscure one-offs and paper Panzer when it comes to their resin expansions.
-
I wouldn't call the Calliope a one - off , or the wading stacks for the Sherman , not big kit add on kits I admit . But they are testing the waters with the 20mm turret on the Hetzer , so we'll see what happens . Company B and S&S Models also make resin / metal conversion kits , so there must be a market , even if its small . I guess it just finding the right niche to fill , or at least that one obscure version evreybodies clammering for . In just the last couple of months both Takom and Rye Field have show a full internal Berge Panther D & G , 1st new Berge P since the Italeri / ICM pos ! from the 70s ( the Dragon Berge with flak dosen't count , no Berge internals ). Just like watinig for a bus .....
-
Just noticed the decal sheet in the Marder III kit is labelled Marder III Sd.Kfz 139 and Hetzer.
-
I wouldn't call the Calliope a one - off , or the wading stacks for the Sherman , not big kit add on kits I admit
Fair point. I was talking about subjects like the resin conversions for the Jgdpzr 38t and Panzer IV, which (IMO) are very niche. The wading stacks and Calliope conversion kits are obviously very useful upgrade sets.
Judging from the other Instagram photo, it looks as though the Warlord kit is not an upscaled PSC design - the detail doesn't look heavy-handed enough. There's no sign of an actual Bergepanzer version.
-
Warlord do also have a contractor they use for producing their own kits, like Antares. It’s possible that it’s a kit made by them.
From memory they also design some of the PSC stuff.
-
Warlord are finally doing Germans in greatcoats in plastic. They seem to be relatively early war period. These will go very well with the forthcoming Rubicon Panzer III and IV (hint, hint...).
-
They look pretty good , but have you seen Rubicon's tanks crews and Infantry figures on the their face book page ? Awesome . Even if I could afford all the new stuff that's coming out ( from both companies ) I don't think I'll live long enough to build / kit bash it all ::)
-
And their Hetzer Zug is on pre-order.
And it has Italeri on the box.
-
And their Hetzer Zug is on pre-order.
And it has Italeri on the box.
It is an Italeri kit that enables you to build a late variant, or a Flammpanzer, or a Flakpanzer (which is nice). Italeri finally has to make this a THREE sprue kit just like us. Here is the link if anyone is interested: http://www.italeri.com/scheda.asp?idProdotto=2697&idCategoria=3&idSottocategoria=59 (http://www.italeri.com/scheda.asp?idProdotto=2697&idCategoria=3&idSottocategoria=59)
;)
-
And their Hetzer Zug is on pre-order.
And it has Italeri on the box.
It is an Italeri kit that enables you to build a late variant, or a Flammpanzer, or a Flakpanzer (which is nice). Italeri finally has to make this a THREE sprue kit just like us. Here is the link if anyone is interested: http://www.italeri.com/scheda.asp?idProdotto=2697&idCategoria=3&idSottocategoria=59 (http://www.italeri.com/scheda.asp?idProdotto=2697&idCategoria=3&idSottocategoria=59)
;)
We already have a very good Jadgpanzer 38(t) "Hetzer" kit from you (Rubicon Models), so it makes me ask the question. Does Italeri know of your Jadgpanzer 38(t) "Hetzer" kit?
Only if model companies would cooperated with with each other better, then maybe we could have seen something different from Italeri instead of another Jadgpanzer 38(t) "Hetzer" kit. Yes, the Italeri kit is different, and it can be assembled as the flakpanzer version with the 2cm FlaK 38 gun, but it would have been nicer to see something different and more useful from them like a Panzer II or M3 Medium tank instead of another "Hetzer" kit.
That being said, at least there is the 2cm FlaK 38 gun. Maybe it can be useful for some and their conversion project.
-
I like that they state it is a 100% new kit, differentiating it from the Panzer 38(t) and Marder kit.
There was a even worse situation with the British model railway manufacturers - all three major companies had the same locomotive on their release schedule. At £100-200 a shot retail, you can imagine the development costs.
-
Maybe my google-fu skills aren’t the best, but what variant of flakpanzer 38t have they made? I can’t find anything that looks like it.
-
This one I think.
http://www.militarymodelling.com/news/article/bergepanzer-38t-hetzer-mit-2cm-flak-38-in-1-35/24529 (http://www.militarymodelling.com/news/article/bergepanzer-38t-hetzer-mit-2cm-flak-38-in-1-35/24529)
I think this is the one Ripley was talking about.
-
There does appear to be some confusion on the web over whether it is a converted Bergepanzer or the APC (Vollkettenaufklarer).
I suspect the former.
-
I did find a photograph on here: https://modelingmadness.com/scott/misc/military/previews/dragon/63/6399.htm (https://modelingmadness.com/scott/misc/military/previews/dragon/63/6399.htm)
I am mildly suspicious as the junk on the side shouts Bergepanzer.
-
So in short, it’s not a flakpanzer 38(t), it’s a bergepanzer 38(t) with a field modification that they only made 2 of.
At least they’ve not called it a flakpanzer. They’ve just called it a Hetzer with 2cm
Flak.
http://www.materielsterrestres39-45.fr/fr/index.php/chars-de-l-axe-allemagne/227-les-bricolages/1164-bergepanzer-38-t-hetzer-mit-2cm-flak-38
This hybrid tank is designed by fitting a 20mm anti-air gun into a casemate of a Hetzer for trouble shooting.
In April 1944, mass production of the Hetzer was launched in the BMM plant in Prague. This tank destroyer named Sturmgeschütz Neuer Art with 7,5cm Pak 39 L / 48 on Fahrgestell Panzer 38 (t) takes over the modified chassis of the Czech light tank. A welded casing and slightly shielded is grafted on the platform. To compensate for the thinness of the shielding, the plates are strongly inclined in order to favor the ricochet of the projectiles. The machine gives satisfaction in tank hunter version despite the cramped space of the compartment. The manufacture of a version equipped with a 120mm mortar is envisaged, but no follow-up is given to this project. The frame is also used for the realization of a recovery tank equipped with a winch and an anchoring spade.
At the end of the conflict, a number of tanks are being built in factories. Several unfinalized tank chasers' chassis will be used unarmed by the Czech insurrection. It appears that at least two Berge Hetzer chassis not equipped with the winch and the anchor cover were converted into Flak Panzer by installing in the central compartment a 2cmFlak38. This conversion seems to be more of a makeshift joke realized in the last weeks of the conflict, than the draft of a prototype.
Characteristics
Category: Conversion of a recovery tank into a close defense tank
Shipyard: BMM, Skoda, Praha
Copies produced: NC (at least two copies photographed)
Crew: NC
Morphology
Weight: NC
Length: NC
Width: 2.63 m
Height: 2.17 m
Protection
Shielding superstructure
Front: 60 mm
Lateral: 20 mm
Chassis shield
Front: 60 mm
Lateral: 20 mm
Mobility
Maximum speed on the road: 42 km / h
Maximum speed in any terrain: 16 km / h
Autonomy
on the road: 177 km
All Terrain: 130 km
Slope: 37 °
Vertical obstacle: 0.65 cm
Trench: 1.31 m
Ford: 0.89 m
armament
Main: 1 anti air gun 2cmFlak38
Ammunition: NC
Engines
Engine: Praga EPA AC / 2
Power: 158 hp at 2,600 rpm
Radio: FuG Spr f
-
Ripley noted earlier, the gun could not be depressed to engage ground targets.
The factory supplied machine gun version had a makeshift mantlet over the missing main gun mantlet.
-
(http://www.italeri.com/gest/resize.asp?path=15767_prof-D-WEB-LR.jpg&width=800&height=600)
It appears that at least two Berge Hetzer chassis not equipped with the winch and the anchor cover were converted into Flak Panzer by installing in the central compartment a 2cmFlak38. This conversion seems to be more of a makeshift joke realized in the last weeks of the conflict, than the draft of a prototype.
Even more the reason to be disappointed. As mentioned earlier, we already have a very good Jadgpanzer 38(t) "Hetzer" kit from Rubicon Models, and because plastic kit model companies cannot cooperated with with each other, I see this as a problem. Instead of introducing something different and more useful (from Italeri) like a Panzer II or M3 Medium tank we get another "Hetzer" kit (that we don't really need), and because I suspect the sales will not be as good as Italeri will hope for, this will mostly likely influence any future releases!
Sad really. :(
-
As a Hetzer kit it's a disappointment as we already have a fantastic plastic kit available . But for the purposes of kit bashing and conversions , I'm thinking this is a winner ( Italeri plastic is much easier to slice & dice ) , you get an open top Berge hull and a 20mm AA gun , with what looks like 4 magazines . The sprue layout on the Italeri site dosn't seem to include much internal pieces , oh well , I've got a few videos saved of Hetzer internals , and I can fudge the Berge stuff . Anyone find any larger views of the sprues so more details can be seen ?
-
Seems like a pointless (and half-arsed) option to include, and I'm sure the kit will be inferior to Rubicon's. Including a proper Bergpanzer might have made it more attractive.
-
Just got there news letter and they show a M4 Sherman Crocodile . No idea if its resin or plastic . I would have thought they'ld have gone with a Churchill Croc ...oh according to Chamberlain & Ellis ( Brit & US Tanks WW2 ) only 4 made ::)
(https://s7.postimg.org/o9sbosxrr/361f50f9-37cb-4d7a-9a9f-de2f65c13a4f.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/o9sbosxrr/)
-
Is it to go alongside their bergepanzer 38(t) with 20mmadded where only one was made? ;)
-
Just got there news letter and they show a M4 Sherman Crocodile . No idea if its resin or plastic . I would have thought they'ld have gone with a Churchill Croc ...oh according to Chamberlain & Ellis ( Brit & US Tanks WW2 ) only 4 made ::)
(https://s7.postimg.org/o9sbosxrr/361f50f9-37cb-4d7a-9a9f-de2f65c13a4f.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/o9sbosxrr/)
I saw that, quite.
The problem is that the production Crocodile uses the Big Churchill (mark VII) hull not the one they have.
So you think it is the base M4 Sherman? The rig looks like an Adder, but that was self contained, no trailer (and I think, based on Sherman V hulls, though there might have been a Sherman III).
I recently read the Osprey New Vanguard on the Crocodile.
I have just noticed the turret hatches are open, would you want that when flaming?
-
I have just noticed the turret hatches are open, would you want that when flaming?
Maybe for a quick exit? These flamethrower tanks must have been as scary to use as they were to face.
-
I would have thought if Warlord was going to all the trouble to make the Croc trailer , they would have released it with the Churchill Mk VII . Its really only a few changes to the hull , round side doors and driver's visor , and a new cast turret . Its like releasing the Ferdinand hull , but instead of the SPG casement you get the early Tiger P upper body and turret , oh wait , that would be awesome , I want one ::)
-
If they put a crocodile trailer on an M4A4 then they’ve cocked it up right away! Should just be a standard M4, so either they’ll use the existing plastic kit with either plastic or resin add ons (boo, it’s rubbish..), bring out a new plastic M4 (very doubtful), have this as a fully resin kit (no issue with this) or use their M4A4 kit (wouldn’t put t past them..).
-
It’s not their Sherman V/M4A4 - it’s got the cast transmission housing. I’d guess it’s their plastic M4 with a resin trailer.
-
Don’t trust the box art though, their current M4 plastic kits has a large hatch on the front of the box..
-
Good point! I still think it will be a resin upgrade of a plastic kit though.
-
a resin upgrade of a plastic kit
I tend to agree, though I found it odd that they'd choose this version of a flamethrower M4 at all - I'd assumed that it was mostly aimed at PTO players Marine Corps forces - where there would be other choices (the M3-4-3 & M3-4-E6R3.) That you'd pick a rare M4 variant when Churchill Crocs were plentiful is peculiar - but I suppose it could be thought of as another use for the model.
-
Crocodile is a resin/metal upgrade kit for their existing M4 kit.
Which means I’ll buy it and put the extra bits on a Rubicon Sherman instead.
-
Warlord have previewed plastic 8th Army and Afrika Korps figures, and what seem to be new US Army figures.
-
They also had the sprues for their 8.8cm FlaK 36 & a pre-production PaK 43 in the 'coming soon' cabinet at Salute.
-
Interestingly enough Perry miniatures have just published some early work American infantry. Early uniform for Tunisia and Sicily. I can't see that they could not also be used as Normandy troops. As far as I know not everyone had updated uniforms at that time. Perry have a lot better to scale size of their miniatures. I personally liked their other ww2 plastic boxes. I am getting very frustrated with Warlord for their unhistorical weapon mix and size.
Sven
-
They also had the sprues for their 8.8cm FlaK 36 & a pre-production PaK 43 in the 'coming soon' cabinet at Salute.
Just too busy at Salute to go over to the Warlord booth and take a look at their coming soon display. From what I was told, the plastic FlaK 36 is just the gun without crew; and the PaK 43 is resin with pewter parts. Is this correct?
Lucky for us, ours is a FlaK 36 or 37 with both crew and carriage; and our FlaK 43 will come with crew and carriage as well.
;)
-
Interestingly enough Perry miniatures have just published some early work American infantry. Early uniform for Tunisia and Sicily. I can't see that they could not also be used as Normandy troops. As far as I know not everyone had updated uniforms at that time. Perry have a lot better to scale size of their miniatures. I personally liked their other ww2 plastic boxes. I am getting very frustrated with Warlord for their unhistorical weapon mix and size.
Sven
They had some "three ups" at Salute (for those pre-digital sculpting the physical masters are sculpted three times final size and the moulds are produced using a pantograph running over the surface, scaling down the size. There is a funny story about a company who sent the three ups for mould making and got the moulds back with 75mm size figures...).
-
RE: Perry's WW2 American...
I was talking to Alan Perry at Salute during a break, he told me they still have to do one more set of plastic mounted Agincourt Knights 1415-29 before they can do anything with the WW2 Americans. This is what he said...
"Michael was showing the very early stages of some WWII US Infantry (Mediterranean theatre) he's been working on. Only two at the moment but the will be twelve torsos (with enough frames for three squads) on the main frame plus more on the command. They are wearing the M1941 Parsons field jacket, standard in Tunisia and Italy although still seen on troops up to the end of the war, plus canvas gaiters. There will be all the weapons you'd expect on the frame and more if we have room. There is no release date for these either (mainly as Michael has only just started making them!)"
;)
-
If they’re using Renedra (which they will), it’ll be a while.
-
I'm thinking the BA Flak 88 is a re scaled 1/48 Italeri , it didn't come with a crew . Funny enough , Italeri (or maybe it was Tamiya ) re boxed it awhile go with a bunch of Tamiya 1/48 German figures and ammo boxes , but they aren't the 3 round wicker boxes usually found with the 88 because Tamiya dosn't make them , and the crew were just various Tamiya Afrcka Korp figures not actual gun crew figures .Epic fail IMO
-
A couple of the Perry US troops WIP posted on Beasts of War
(https://s7.postimg.cc/wglbtxnhj/WWII-_US-_Infantry-1-_Perry-_Miniatures.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/wglbtxnhj/)
(https://s7.postimg.cc/n8t3d8o53/WWII-_US-_Infantry-2-_Perry-_Miniatures.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/n8t3d8o53/)
-
These must be a replacement for the current US Army figures. They do look better.
-
Supposed to be the M43 pattern uniform , good for North Africa , Italy and was wore in Europe by some units till the end in 45 . Should be a nice set , 3 sprues of 12 figures ,( 3 kneeling , one prone per spue ), plus a command sprue of 4 figures . Do Perrys fit in with Rubicon's style of figures , I know Perrys look odd with the BA heroics ?
-
These must be a replacement for the current US Army figures. They do look better.
They’re the perry ones, not warlord. Although warlord are releasing new US infantry soon.
Scale wise, it’s not too bad. If warlord is heroic and rubicon is true, Perry is somewhere in the middle towards the true side.
-
I see - no wonder they look better than the current Warlord US Infantry. I assume we won't see them released in less than a year.
I think Rubicon have modelled their figures on the Perry dimensions. They're not true scale.
-
Warlord US infantry is out in the next month or so and the Perry ones, we’ll they only had 2 greens done and it’s a side project so let just say “at some point”.
Rubicon infantry aren’t the same as the perry for scale, they are noticibly more slender and to scale. That said, I think you can easily get away with mixing and matching Rubicon and Perry without too much issue.
-
The Warlord email today had some photos of their new US infantry so they will be available very soon. They looked like an improvement on the old box, eg a single sprue having the men + weapons, less odd crouching poses. Alas the heads and weapons still look pretty big or 'heroic' as elias delicately put it.
I am really keen to see the Perry box but alas it could easily be a year before we do, as Pinky says, given most of the greens are yet to be created and the backlog at the mold makers
EC
-
I got that email as well. With apologies to Rubicon for continuing to discuss Warlord's figures on their forum, I am not sure how the new US infantry are a real improvement over the previous ones. As a separate point, I wish they would include at least 1 figure on each sprue that isn't wearing webbing, which could be used as an officer or tank crewman.
-
This forum is open to any discussions and we are not afraid to face the competition head on!
Here is the new US Infantry sprue, a much improved single sprue with figures and weapons...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Digital%20Sculpt/31776089_10156363083223256_6213239676262678528_n_zpsce214isg.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
On the same newsletter, they also announced the 88mm Flak 37 and two plastic bunkers... For us, all three are a BIG letdown for their player base!
It seems like the Flak 37 is a scaled-down version of the Italeri 1/48 plastic kit and without the trailers. It also comes with 7 METAL figures and we assumed these were from their old FlaK 37 metal kit...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/AT%20Guns/31882945_10156363078678256_1654136706217017344_n_zpsxjgo46l2.jpg)
Again, these plastic bunkers are repackaged Italeri kits. WLG claimed they are 28mm (1/56) scales, but in fact, these Italeri kits are 1/72 as listed on their website. Again WLG is misleading the player base into thinking these bunkers are correctly scaled... just like the stone bridge and dragonteeth they marketed earlier!
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Scenery/31743706_187390661905936_3251887243526144_o_zpsenw6roz9.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Scenery/PROD00902_zps87p7trn7.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Scenery/31764695_187390698572599_1521541037040861184_o_zpstbv82ojs.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Scenery/6085_illustrazione_LR_zpsidu19rsd.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Do not forget the ruined building (not the ruins set). I have one partially assembled somewhere.
Italeri had it as a new item on their stand [edit - in 2016] and it is referenced somewhere on this forum.
http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=376.msg3199#msg3199 (http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=376.msg3199#msg3199)
-
Those bunkers look like they are both half of sets of paired bunkers (unless they can be built left and right handed). I have my suspicions about the flak gun on the bunker, it looks a bit small.
-
Thanks, Rubicon - those figures do look better.
Italeri's plastic wargaming terrain is actually pretty good, but it's definitely not well suited to 28mm. Particularly when you put Warlord's own heroic-scaled models next to it.
The Flak 37 looks like a bad compromise on all counts. Which is fine, because it leaves the way open for Rubicon's far superior version when it arrives.
-
Thanks Rubicon for the information.
The Bunkers:
This is easy. We (my gaming club) make our own bunkers using original WW2 bunkers as a pattern. Making our own is so much better and easier than the resin or plastic ones you can buy. Not only are they easy to make, but cost so much less. We can't see why anyone would buy them. I would like to post here an article from a wargames magazine that shows players how easy it is to make your own WW2 bunkers in any scale. More about this later. ;)
The 8.8cm Flak 37:
Because from what experience tells me, I don't think Rubicon's Flak 36/37 will not be available anytime soon, so I might end up getting one these Warlord Games plastic 88 kits (made by Italeri or PSC?) mostly because the 88 as sit would make a neat victory objective marker. That is if I get one at all. For most skirmish games like Bolt Action, Chain of Command, and Battleground II, an 88 is an over-kill or out of place for anything useful, but like I said, it would look nice as an objective marker. That being said, I would rather have the Rubicon 88 than the WG 88. ???
The new US Infantry:
Having assemble LOTS of their older plastic US infantry, I can see from the picture there are slight improvements. I need to point out that having weapons already molded in the hands and having them separate is a positive and negative situation. It is a positive in that assembly is much easier and faster, but it is a negative your choices in variations are much more limited.
I have also noticed there are two unique (and somewhat odd) poses. Nothing wrong with it, but you can only do so much with a specialize posed as opposed to what you can do with more generic pose. For example, that figure on one leg running (or tripping*) has a very limited choice of arms, whereas the more generic pose like the figure above the running man has a lot more options or arms. Also would have been nice to see a few more arm choices with M1 Garand Rifles than just three. Note that the rifle being carried in the left hand is not an M1 Garand. It looks to be a 1903 Springfield? I think it would have been better if they had made it an M1.
I believe that a better sprue design would have been to remove those single arms with only the Springfield, Shotgun, and maybe the helmet then use to precious space for some standard carrying and/or shooting arms with empty hands. Then add a 1903 Springfield, Shotgun, and of course an M1 Garand separately. This would give the assembler a better and unique choice. In short, I would have done a mix of weapons molded in hands and a few with empty hands and separate weapons to choose from (especially the unique weapons) giving the assembler a much wider range of choices to work with, and still allowing them to not bother with the empty hands if they didn't want to fuss with it. But that is just me. :o
*can easily be made into a tripping pose. :D
Okay, that is my $0.02 worth.
-
While all these new plastic sets for Bolt Action are easier to put together , most guys end up having a lot of the same figures on the game table . I still mix and match my figures using the older single figure and weapons sprues to get unique kit bashed troops . I wonder if Warlord is going to delete some of these earlier sets and weather I should pick up a few sprues during the next 2 for 1 sprue sale ?
-
Integral arms and weapons do reduce the misalignment at hands but there should be enough weapons to equip the whole sprue with the same basic weapon (or at worst all bar an NCO with an SMG). I still manage to misalign the shoulders
The "Morecambe and Wise" pose is not helpful, especially if you end up with five per box. Not as bad as half of the original plastic Vegemarines. Slightly better than the content of the old Wargames Factory survivors and zombies boxes.
I would certainly keep the separate helmet, they come in useful for putting on tanks. I do need to find the US army sprue for a helmet to go on my French Charged.
-
@Ripley - If the two sets of figure are compatible, that is probably a good plan, the separate weapons make for easier conversions.
-
Most bodies in the early sets are compatible , people do come in different heights and widths , its the late war German and Brit (BA's first plastic kits ? ) arms that are slightly off - too short and skinny IMO . I throw most of them away ::) I saw in the news release Warlord was mentioning that you get bazooka arms that actually look good . I must admit the old set was a real PIA to put together unless you did a little surgery . I think I have one arm on my figure that's made of 4 different pieces to make it fit properly and look right . Probably cut up half a dozen arms to get one the worked , ah the joys of kit bashing
-
Today's news letter says that Warlord's forums should be up and running soon . While I never bothered with the " what's wrong with the game and how it should be changed " posts , I really liked seeing what people have done conversion wise with the figures as well as the awesome paint jobs
-
Warlord's forums are finally back on line . Can't wait to see what some of the guys have painted / built in the last 6 or 7 ( ? ) months the site was dead . But I wonder how many won't be back as they found other sites to post on ?
-
Warlord have their Flak 88 gun out with their old metal crew figures , I saw one a couple of weeks ago at the Sentry Box in Calgary . Now I see on the Modelling News site , Italeri is releasing their version ( same gun kit , no wheel sets ) but with a plastic crew sprue
(https://s33.postimg.cc/f6lk4gs2j/15771_8.8_cm_FLAK_37_WITH_CREW_9.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/f6lk4gs2j/)
The guys I talked to at the LHS are ready to jump on the first plastic kit with plastic crew they can get . When does yours come out Rubicon ? Its hard for some folks to resist new shiny toys ::)
-
The inclusion of metal crew seems like a cop-out. In any event, I'm definitely waiting for Rubicon's 88. I guess Warlord wanted the crew to be in their 'house' style. Are the Italeri crew figures scaled down from another kit?
-
The guys I talked to at the LHS are ready to jump on the first plastic kit with plastic crew they can get . When does yours come out Rubicon ? Its hard for some folks to resist new shiny toys ::)
Its getting too hard for me to resist these shinny new toys.
I guess I will have more than one plastic 88 in my collection. One from Italeri (with plastic crew) and next year one from Rubicon Models.
From looking at the sprue, it looks like the Italeri figures and the Rubicon Models figures will blend in well with each other. That is, they are more anatomically correct than the "Heroics" of the Bolt Action figures.
(https://www.italeri.com/imgup/15771_tavolaLR.jpg)
-
Unfortunately, the Italeri 88mm gun crew are all wearing the mid to late war Luftwaffe field division uniforms,which will limit their use to just Luftwaffe field divisions. No other branches used a similiar jacket ,except for some late war Falschirmjager units which weren't issued the jump smocks :(
-
I guess these must be up scaled 1/72 figures , as Italeri does make a larger 1/48 scale 88 but it has no crew ( also reboxed by Tamiya with various Tamiya 1/48 Germans , but they're Infantry not Artillery crew . ) I think I could make these guys work as a LW crew on the Atlantic Wall . Thankfully its not my turn to pick up a new release , we take it in turns being the guinea pig ( sucker ) who buys the new 28mm release pretty much sight unseen . If its good , the rest of us take the plunge . I've been lucky so far all my picks have been Rubicon kits ;D
-
I do not have one of these yet, but I'm pretty sure its just a matter of time before a give into buying one. I did not buythe Warlord Games boxed kit (with metal crew), but I will end up getting the Italeri boxed kit (plastic crew).
Yes, the crew have the Luftwaffe field division uniforms. That is okay since I have Falschirmjager, but I also know that if I put this out as a non-Luftwaffe unit I will not be ejected from my gaming club. We are strict, but not that strict.
-
Are you on about the metal figures in the box? As they’re warlord sculpted ones. From their old kit I think.
-
Yes the metal crew are for the old metal 88 set . Plastic is the way to go IMO , you can build them as the instructions say , are go all out kit bashing to your hearts content . The big question , in my mind is what scale / size did Italeri make these figures . I compared 4 different Italeri made 28mm German tank commanders , and they are all different . One matches Rubicon's scale figures , one smaller than that , one heroic like the BA figures and the one from the Tiger II that dwarfs 1/48 scale figures . I'm going to wait for an unboxing video or a look in the box if one of my buddys get one
-
In my shopping list file, I have a "Wait for Rubicon!" column. That list currently includes the Flak 88 and Quad 20, SdKfz.222, M10 and UK Crew.
Unless I need a kit on a deadline for a specific event, I'm happy to wait for the Rubicon version. But it's rather squirrelly trying to find info on what's moving along the pipeline here, the info is scattered all over different threads and news announcements. I understand the double-edged sword nature of releasing production info — but once any news has been released, it would be nice if there was a master list we could find the latest news on each product that has been revealed all in one place.
-
In my shopping list file, I have a "Wait for Rubicon!" column. That list currently includes the Flak 88 and Quad 20, SdKfz.222, M10 and UK Crew.
Unless I need a kit on a deadline for a specific event, I'm happy to wait for the Rubicon version. But it's rather squirrelly trying to find info on what's moving along the pipeline here, the info is scattered all over different threads and news announcements. I understand the double-edged sword nature of releasing production info — but once any news has been released, it would be nice if there was a master list we could find the latest news on each product that has been revealed all in one place.
Cat, good news! You do not have to wait any longer. The M10 is available right now.
Actually, it has been available for sometime now (Product Code: 280029).
For more information, here is the link:
http://www.rubiconmodels.com/products.php?i=42
(http://www.rubiconmodels.com/images/product/RM%20280029%20M10-M36-160202-0120160202232810.jpg)
-
The state of play is here
http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=211.0 (http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=211.0)
-
In my shopping list file, I have a "Wait for Rubicon!" column. That list currently includes the Flak 88 and Quad 20, SdKfz.222, M10 and UK Crew.
Unless I need a kit on a deadline for a specific event, I'm happy to wait for the Rubicon version. But it's rather squirrelly trying to find info on what's moving along the pipeline here, the info is scattered all over different threads and news announcements. I understand the double-edged sword nature of releasing production info — but once any news has been released, it would be nice if there was a master list we could find the latest news on each product that has been revealed all in one place.
Cat, good news! You do not have to wait any longer. The M10 is available right now.
Actually, it has been available for sometime now (Product Code: 280029).
For more information, here is the link:
http://www.rubiconmodels.com/products.php?i=42
(http://www.rubiconmodels.com/images/product/RM%20280029%20M10-M36-160202-0120160202232810.jpg)
the UK Tank destroyer crew in metal is here
http://www.rubiconmodels.com/products.php?i=98 (http://www.rubiconmodels.com/products.php?i=98)
(http://www.rubiconmodels.com/images/product/284009%20British%20Tank%20Destroyer%20Crew%20(Set%201)20180406120202.jpg)
-
The state of play is here
http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=211.0 (http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=211.0)
Ah, thanks for that! Somehow that thread didn't jump to the top in my google-fu attempts to gather clue cards. I've now put that thread on 'Notify'.
-
For my shopping list file, I have a "Wait for Rubicon to release". Currently this list includes the SdKfz 10 halftrack, SdKfz.222, Kubelwagen, M3 Medium Tank (Lee/Grant), and some Allied AT-Guns.
I had already mentioned this before, but I hope Rubicon Models releases more AT-Guns.
There is great potential for a 57mm AT-Gun M1 AT-Gun / British QF 6-Pdr AT-Gun plastic kit because the same sprue for the AT-Gun can be setup with the needed bits and parts to build either the American or British gun (Standard or Airborne). As for crew, separate American and British crew sprues can be offered. Very similar to what Rubicon Models did with their Jeep kits.
-
According to the latest email from Warlord, they are putting out their own plastic Afrika Korps and 8th Army figures. I wonder if there will be some plastic vehicles as well to accompany the new desert campaign book.
-
I saw the new 8th Army and DAK figures from Warlord at Salute. They are predictably chunky and in the Commando comic cartoony Warlord style. Totally incompatible with the ‘true 1/56 scale’ Perry sets alas, and even more incompatible in terms of style. But yes, let’s hope they release some interesting 1/56 scale Desert War vehicles (although the Perrys and Blitzkrieg already have a lot of the usual suspects and the more esoteric items covered. But we can but hope :))
-
According to the latest email from Warlord, they are putting out their own plastic Afrika Korps and 8th Army figures. I wonder if there will be some plastic vehicles as well to accompany the new desert campaign book.
They are also selling a Desert War catalogue, which in this digital age would seem a bit cheeky (they say it has Osprey illustrations, but even so).
-
They are also selling a Desert War catalogue, which in this digital age would seem a bit cheeky (they say it has Osprey illustrations, but even so).
I received an email the other day from Warlord, telling me the catalog was free to all Mail Order Customers, as follows ...
"Coming soon & FREE for all mail order customers!
Yes! Here comes our first ever catalogue. Full colour and with fantastic Osprey artwork, it's going to be an inspiring booklet to peruse at your leisure for everything you could possibly collect from our North Africa focussed ranges... "
-
I actually miss the old days when I could sit for hours looking through Tamiya , Airfix and Italeri catalogs . Seems a little weird having a hard copy catalog when most companies have it either on their web site or as a downloadable PDF . Is a reflection on the age of most of the gamers , all old farts ? ::) Here's a picture of the new BA AK Germans ( taken from Warlord site )
(https://s33.postimg.cc/pa2c2jtp7/Afrika-_Korps-_Frames-front-_Rear-600x474.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/pa2c2jtp7/)
-
They are predictably chunky and in the Commando comic cartoony Warlord style. Totally incompatible with the ‘true 1/56 scale’ Perry sets alas, and even more incompatible in terms of style.
Maybe so, but all of my other figures are Warlord. They just became my go-to source for most WWII items. I already have an Italian force for the early desert action, but have not acquired an allied force to face them. Was facing the fact I would end up with Perry figures, and they would not really match well the Warlord Italians I had. And then that meant I would likely get the Perry DAK figures, compounding the issue.
I do like the look of the Perry figures, but they do not look quite right next to Warlord figures. And my Polish, and German, and Soviet and British BEF figures are all warlord.
I have no issues getting vehicles from places other than Warlord, but even then, I will stick to one manufacturer for a specific vehicle series, so they all have the right look and feel. I have no Pz IIIs for example, and will just wait for Rubicon. I have a Warlord Pz IV but never assembled it, and will wait for Rubicon there as well.
Anyway, I am quite happy Warlord are coming out with plastics for the desert war. The closer to their usual style the better.
-
The latest newsletter has a link to order a free PDF of the catalogue. It does mean you have to set up a login.
-
The arms should be able to fit some of the other boxed sets like the Blitzkrieg or Pioneers. The latter is the same sprue set, but with metal extras. Other than that, no difference between the two boxed sets.
-
I found pictures of the 8th Army Infantry sprues on the Warlord newsletter , as well as a WIP , Indian Pattern Armored Personal Carrier
(https://s33.postimg.cc/fmsy41t7v/8th-_Army-_Front-_Back-_WB-600x450.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/fmsy41t7v/)
(https://s33.postimg.cc/xcump4h3f/Indian-_Pattern.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/xcump4h3f/)
(https://s33.postimg.cc/6rs3tl9l7/jamshed_pur3_1490099271_725x725.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/6rs3tl9l7/)
It seems you get 6 heads in tin helmets , 6 in the Highland Infantry Tam ( what ever its called :-[ ) , its got a bobble on top , 6 Indian heads and 6 Sikhs
-
...6 in the Highland Infantry Tam ( what ever its called :-[ ) , its got a bobble on top...
Tam o'shanter.
It's good that there are Indian heads. And I like the Indian Pattern Carrier. A shame it's yet another resin model.
-
Jeez. Look at the size of the rivets on that... :-\
I have the Perry’s recent IPC -not made a start on it yet, but it’s a lovely model.
Goodness knows why Warlord would bother bringing one out straight afterwards...
Well, obviously I know why, but I doubt it’ll work out that well for them... Perry will have already hoovered up many potential sales for this somewhat niche vehicle, and I imagine, based on past experience, the Perry resin model will be a lot better than the Warlord one.
-
(https://s33.postimg.cc/fmsy41t7v/8th-_Army-_Front-_Back-_WB-600x450.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/fmsy41t7v/)
They have included fixed bayonets on all of the SMLE Mk.III rifles! That is a shame. I guess the sculptors were influenced by the propaganda photos/films because 1) uncharacteristic of Warlord to do that, and 2) it makes it damn near impossible to have no rifles without bayonets because removing (cutting) the bayonet off the SMLE Mk.III will be a very ugly affair!
I have always thought that the British SMLE Mk.III rifle was one of the most attractive rifles in WW1 and WW2 - it might be because some of the "look" was designed by an artist.
-
I have to admit to disinterest in the Warlord North African figures, I am sticking to Perry ones.
North Africa is suitably isolated that I can treat it as a separate set up.
-
(https://s33.postimg.cc/fmsy41t7v/8th-_Army-_Front-_Back-_WB-600x450.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/fmsy41t7v/)
They have included fixed bayonets on all of the SMLE Mk.III rifles! That is a shame. I guess the sculptors were influenced by the propaganda photos/films because 1) uncharacteristic of Warlord to do that, and 2) it makes it damn near impossible to have no rifles without bayonets because removing (cutting) the bayonet off the SMLE Mk.III will be a very ugly affair!
I have always thought that the British SMLE Mk.III rifle was one of the most attractive rifles in WW1 and WW2 - it might be because some of the "look" was designed by an artist.
I think they explicitly stated that they took their cues when designing this set from the classic Airfix models, which is probably where the bayonets came from.
I kind of like the look of them, but I think I may have enough Bolt Action armies on the go already before I can even think about starting yet another.
-
Its not like them to add bayonets to all the rifles. To bad they didn't give you a choice.
While fixed bayonets look nice, it comes with some issues for gaming and storage.
-
I would definitely be concerned about gaming and storage. Tiny plastic bayonets are usually quite fragile. I am already tempted to snip them off when I get mine. Might build one and test out how fragile it is by knocking it about.
-
Warlord's Japanese have bayonets on 3 sets of rifle arms with a separate loose rifle/bayonet combo . And you get 3 sets of rifle arms without bayonet and a single loose rifle sans pig sticker ;D . This combination of weapons would have been a much more realistic opr the Rats IMO . I wonder if the Brits can fix a bayonet on the Bren , like the Japanese do on the Type 99 LMG ?
-
At least you get enough of the right type of rifle...
-
I would definitely be concerned about gaming and storage.
Never mind the bayonets, I have written off a number of Warlord British with broken rifles (just in front of the left hand). Stored in Figures in Comfort boxes. The cut outs need inserts to stop movement breaking the rifles under the weight of the plastic figure..
-
Over on Lead Adventures, someone has posted that Amazon are advertising Bolt Action: Korea.
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=111571.0 (http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=111571.0)
-
Korea would be interesting. It would give Rubicon's M4A3E8 and T-34/85 kits a boost. Someone would need to do a Chaffee, an M26 and and SU-76.
I wish the Arab-Isreali wars would get more attention.
-
On the TMP site , one Warlord 's Minions ;D says they are bringing out a plastic Matilda II in the spring of 2019 . So those who play France , North Africa and Russia , could have some new toys to look forward to ( depending on the options in the box )
-
That is interesting.
-
There’s a defence of Hungary book coming out early next year too.
-
On the TMP site , one Warlord 's Minions ;D says they are bringing out a plastic Matilda II in the spring of 2019 . So those who play France , North Africa and Russia , could have some new toys to look forward to ( depending on the options in the box )
Even though it is now on pre-order, they do not tell you what options (high heels, bustle, different engine/exhaust layouts) will be in the box.
-
Hard to tell from the box art and I think the tank they show in close ups is the resin one . It would be nice to get both versions of the 2ldr gun barrel , both high and low commander's cupolas , maybe a howitzer barrel ( smoke only IRC ) , a flame thrower barrel to make an Aussie Frog , don't think they'll give us the option of single or dual exhaust ( AEC or Leyland engine ) and I can't see an option in the side skirt mud shoot doors ( Internal / external hinges ) , and I won't even mention the variations in the driver's compartment / nose casting and nose stowage box lids , tow shackles / hooks ... ops I mentioned them ::) What ever version it is I'm sure my Russians can use a couple even if I build them as knocked out
-
From what we know, it is going to be a straight build. Not sure if the info is correct... but we do have a picture of an unpainted version:
(https://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Misc%20Images/c7d883b7-7bbc-48cd-a2fa-551acb7ef217_zpshgvqtbhy.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
Well, it looks a hell of a lot better than that blob of resin they call a Matilda II.
Does anyone know if the plastic kit will be produced for Warlord by Italeri or by SG?
-
Not bad looking at all . Nice to see a driver figure . Hopefully that's the howitzer barrel , a little thick for a 2 pdr . But if that's an easy fix .
-
Not bad looking at all . Nice to see a driver figure . Hopefully that's the howitzer barrel , a little thick for a 2 pdr . But if that's an easy fix .
It is not an Italeri tank.
-
Not Italeri ? PSC maybe ? Or who ? From the look of the driver , it reminds me of Tamiya :o
-
That 2-pdr looks very log-like. I hope it is a 3-inch howitzer. It otherwise doesn't look bad at all. Any early war armour is very welcome.
-
Saw this on the Italeri 2019 catalog preview , I assume it will come out under the Warlord name as well
(https://i.postimg.cc/87FkP5bf/IMG-20190129-064555077.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/87FkP5bf)
Guess the Matilda needed an opponent to beat up on
-
Not Italeri ? PSC maybe ? Or who ? From the look of the driver , it reminds me of Tamiya :o
I have to agree with Johan, there is no Italeri branding on the box art published so far.
-
The Matilda might not be Italeri, but they are working on an Italian tank in 1:56. This was mentioned by ripley. Since they already made or make WW2 Italian tanks in 1:72 and 1:35 scale, this is not surprising. What is surprising is that they didn't do it earlier.
-
Wow - it looks as though Warlord are doing what I wanted Rubicon to do - a combination M13/40 and Semovente kit.
-
Glad matilda isn't Shitaleri.
Disappointed the M13 is Shitaleri.
-
Does anyone know who's making the Matilda ? While not as detailed ( in some places ) as Rubicon kits , the Italeri kits I've built , have actually turned out pretty good . True I had to do a little kit bashing and swapping bits from the parts box to get the result I wanted , but that's a large part of the hobby I enjoy . And I've done the same thing to Rubicon's kits . I don't think I've built a kit straight out of the box in 20 years . I look forward to Italeri's M13/40 multi kit , with the 2 variations of tank ( probably short / long fenders , maybe tool storage changes ) and the 2 Semovente versions ( short / long 75mm ) there is a multitude of vehicles I could built including kit bashing command vehicles . JUst have to buy anther shelf unit to store them on , oh and get another job to pay for my plastic addiction
-
I have found the Italeri kits a bit variable (Puma wheels, IS-2, KV-1 having a number of issues). The Warlord ones have been of a similar quality to each other - the mantlet and cupola on the M4A4 being the poorest of the models I have seen.
The Mailda looks good (not as good as Our Gracious Hosts would have supplied).
As they have not mentioned the obvious variants, it does imply that they are not present.
-
Its got be difficult to find balance in designing a kit which has to be sturdy enough and simple to build to be a game piece , as well as detailed enough to appeal to modellers , not to mention trying to get a couple of variations included on the sprues . I must admit , some of the choices and simplification or separate detail parts in both Rubicon's and Warlord / Italeri's kit have me baffled sometimes . Some parts are molded in crisp relief and others are barely there , some are separate pieces when they could be molded as one piece . But I know nothing of designing kit , I just build them . Both companies have gotten better with their kits , separate tow cables , options for guns , exhausts , open crew hatches , etc . Sometimes they do make big screw ups , missing 2 pistol ports on the KV II , wrong hatch detail /size on the KV I ( Italeri ) . That kind of stuff has been around forever in both vehicles for war games and scale models ( various resin kits of numerous scales ), you think the Italeri stuff is bad now , you should have built their kits in the 70s ::) . When you have a dozen companies producing the tank you want , you can pick and chose ( ease of build / price / detail to the nth degree ) , when you have one company releasing it in a off beat scale ( 1/56 ) , you take what you get and you make the best of it . I'm thinking if there was big money to be had in 1/56 , a whole lot of the regular model companies would be jumping on the band wagon .........so let's be thankful for what we have now . Personally if the kit is so-so I'll build just one , but if the kit is awesome , or has the basics to make it awesome with a little kit bashing / modelling skill , I'll get 3 or 9 :-[
-
I buy and build by theater. I already have a resin Matilda II for my BEF troops. If this kit is suitable for Western Desert then I shall add it to my list. If not, then I shall pass. I know there are differences between 1940 and 1941/1942 Matildas. I'd rather get it right. Or as close to right as possible.
I currently have no opposing force for my desert Italians. I have been building them up slowly over time, when models I wanted became available or went on sale. I was thinking of going Commonwealth for the desert as my next force, but I also like the idea of Finnish (so my Soviets have another force to face). No real rush, as I still have plenty of models to build and paint.
-
Good points Ripley.
EWG: I will probably buy at least one (I have one for the BEF http://ultravanillasmurf.blogspot.com/2012/12/matilda-in-high-heels.html (http://ultravanillasmurf.blogspot.com/2012/12/matilda-in-high-heels.html)), but if it has the options for both BEF and Desert I might be tempted for two (my Perry Eighth Army need some heavier support than the Crusader, especially when the Rubicon Panzers make their appearance).
-
Nicely done UVS! I have the same Warlord tank, but have yet to assemble it.
And I agree, if the plastic Matilda II can be built both ways, I would replace the resin for a plastic. If not, and it is only suitable for the desert, then I would only really need the one.
-
It's to bad Warlord don't post the CAD/ early sculpts of their tank kits and the sprue layouts like Rubicon do . A lot of the BA plastic tanks have many obvious errors/ omissions that just jump off the page to those of us who live and breathe tanks . ::)
-
Glad matilda isn't Shitaleri.
Disappointed the M13 is Shitaleri.
As compared to what? The quality of the Italeri 1/56 scale vehicles is variable, but the best ones are as good as anyone else's.
-
This is just word of mouth, but I have heard that the Italeri kits are not really 1/56. They are some other scale that they feel is "close enough" to work. And that scares me totally way from their kits.
Unless I find a review where some modeller or gamer says they are really 1/56 ... I just never even consider them. My hobby dollars are limited, and if I were to drop $30 on a kit and find out it doesn't fit with my other models, that is $30 wasted. I cannot afford that.
-
The only vehicles I have from both Italeri and Rubicon are the Panther and Tiger I . They are about as close as your going to get having 2 different companies making them . Even in 1/35 scale a Tiger by one company will have tiny size differences in various parts from the other half dozen companies making a Tiger kit . Italeri kits on left , Rubicon on right
(https://i.postimg.cc/Cn1cNhR6/IMG-20190204-093407907.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/Cn1cNhR6)
(https://i.postimg.cc/060Z1MmB/IMG-20190204-093704722.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/060Z1MmB)
Rubicon top, Italeri bottom
(https://i.postimg.cc/t1kdM0G0/IMG-20190204-093447149.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/t1kdM0G0)
(https://i.postimg.cc/QFrpNNXG/IMG-20190204-093616591.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/QFrpNNXG)
In the overhead view of the Tigers , you can see the Italeri turret has thicker sides than the Rubicon kit , thus making the turret 2mm wider , is that going to be a deal breaker ? Personally in this scale if the vehicle is close in length , width and height bu 1 or 2mm its good enough for me . Obviously something 1/2 inch too long or wide will be rejected unless it's the only game in town ( in plastic ) .For example , I found a 1/48 scale plastic T-70 tank model kit by Micro - Mir which I ordered out of the Ukraine . Until someone makes one in 1/56, this one looks like a winner to me . Hasn't arrived as yet , but kit dimensions make it a little smaller tha my 251 half tracks which the real thing was IRC . They also make a T-80 tank and a T-90 which is the 70 with a twin .12.7mm machine gun AA turret , so if this kit looks the part , I'm ordering a few more
(https://i.postimg.cc/mzyTfw2F/Micro-Mir-Soviet-Light-Tank.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/mzyTfw2F)
-
I have no problems with a few millimeters here and there, a missed rivet, a shovel missing, light on the wheel details, etc. But I have it in the back of my mind that an Italeri kit that was 1/72 was offered up by Warlord as 1/56. That is just wrong.
I buy models to game, and it is okay if they are a little on the small size (especially when compared to the rather beefier infantry figures). But 1/72 is going too far.
-
Most 1/72 scale kits don't have open hatches and very few have the molded in one piece type road wheels unless they are the war game series of kits . The Italeri kits I've built don't resemble the Italeri 1/72 scale kits I've seen . On the other hand some of the kits under the Warlord name look to be , IMO , PSC kits up scaled ( Uni Carrier , 251 , T-34s ? )
-
This is just word of mouth, but I have heard that the Italeri kits are not really 1/56. They are some other scale that they feel is "close enough" to work. And that scares me totally way from their kits.
Unless I find a review where some modeller or gamer says they are really 1/56 ... I just never even consider them. My hobby dollars are limited, and if I were to drop $30 on a kit and find out it doesn't fit with my other models, that is $30 wasted. I cannot afford that.
That is true when it comes to Italeri's buildings and coastal bunker kits released by Warlord. but not to their 1/56 vehicle kits.
I have to also agree with Pinky, that the best Italeri 1/56 kits are very good.
-
This is just word of mouth, but I have heard that the Italeri kits are not really 1/56. They are some other scale that they feel is "close enough" to work. And that scares me totally way from their kits.
The only one I have to hand is the Sherman (I and IV).
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-f-mU5vlWdKA/VM5OBGNFxkI/AAAAAAAAA3g/0GZ80SBHBEY/s1600/m4a3top.png)
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qF1As8SP5OU/VM5OByoxEkI/AAAAAAAAA3w/ueW4AdexzH4/s1600/m4a3top2.png)
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-etbVzr652oI/VM5OAVv86_I/AAAAAAAAA3Q/lnQ-BMZAFQA/s1600/m4a3side1.png)
The Sherman IV is the original Rubicon one, the Sherman I is the Italeri/Warlord M4.
I remember comparing the resin T34 and Cromwell and they are close enough to be the same scale.
I will see if I can dig out the Rubicon/Warlord T34s and the Panthers.
Of course once I get round to building the Rubicon M4...
-
Most 1/72 scale kits don't have open hatches and very few have the molded in one piece type road wheels unless they are the war game series of kits . The Italeri kits I've built don't resemble the Italeri 1/72 scale kits I've seen . On the other hand some of the kits under the Warlord name look to be , IMO , PSC kits up scaled ( Uni Carrier , 251 , T-34s ? )
... Sherman V
-
Right the Sherman V , forgot about that one . I never picked up one of those , the kit my friend built just looked off to me ::)
-
Except warlords Sherman is Plastic Soldier company.
-
Except warlords Sherman is Plastic Soldier company.
I am not sure what you are saying.
The Sherman (I) used in the comparison above is the Warlord/Italeri kit.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--G3fsnv4F24/U09dhCNkSYI/AAAAAAAAAs4/0m28Bx2n3cM/s1600/shermansprue.png)
The Sherman V is the "it looks remarkably like the PSC kit" that Ripley and I were discussing.
-
The Sherman V ( M4A4 ) was a PSC kit and it has a few problems . The Sherman I ( M4 kit ) was an Italeri model , and aside from needing a few little tweaks , its not bad at all . Don't forget it came out about 3 years ago , and boy have the 1/56 kits from everybody really improved .
-
Mantlet comparison here.
http://ultravanillasmurf.blogspot.com/2017/01/compare-sherman-gun-mantlet.html (http://ultravanillasmurf.blogspot.com/2017/01/compare-sherman-gun-mantlet.html)
I will revisit this once I have one of my collection of Rubicon M4s assembled.
-
While the M4 has a better cast effect on the turret and the bolts on the inner mantle , the M4A4 has better detail on the drivers periscopes and hatches . Now if they would combine the best bits of those 2 kits it would be awesome ....
Latest Warlord news letter says Matilda has a choice of gun barrels , meh , that's not very exciting is it ? They also showed a 25 Pdr and Quad for their new Western dessert series , but it turns out its just the old metal 25 Pdr and resin Quad in a fancy new box .....
-
I remember a time (not so long ago) that the only 1:56 scale vehicles available were resin!
And even some of the worst plastic kits are better than most if not all of those old resin kits.
-
This is just word of mouth, but I have heard that the Italeri kits are not really 1/56. They are some other scale that they feel is "close enough" to work. And that scares me totally way from their kits.
I think you must have heard that comment in the context of the Warlord plastic terrain kits, which are (apart from the ruined house) re-packaged 1:72 scale Italeri items. Some of them are almost passable, but most are simply too small. The vehicles are fine, even if the smaller details tend to be inconsisent.
-
I believe you are correct Pinky. I believe it was related to terrain kits. My take-away was "Italieri kits are 1/72" and didn't bother noting that was for terrain, not vehicles.
I have now learned that Italeri vehicle kits are okay for consideration! Which is nice.
I am TRYING to support Rubicon because I like how they do business (seek comments, make adjustments, etc). But nice to know that if I really needed a vehicle that was available from Italeri and not Rubicon, I could consider making the purchase.
-
Very true Tracks . What I find is that as a company moves forward making improvements and better detailed kits , the public expects a certain standard of product , and is vocal when said company takes what they consider a step backward . Rubicon seems to be making changes for the better in each new release , and except for the resin / pewter / plastic debate . we've really nothing to complain about ( maybe where am I going to find the $ to buy all these cool toys and where will I put them when built ::) ) Warlord's kits seem hit and miss , I guess depending who designs / produces them . I thought the Pzr III was a great kit with lots of options in the box . The KV s on the other hand while a nice kit missed some definitive features IMO . I feel the real problem is there is no way to give feed back to the Warlord guys as they don't design the kits .
-
I feel the real problem is there is no way to give feed back to the Warlord guys as they don't design the kits.
The problem with WLG is not about giving feedback to the manufacturer but the lack of knowledge and resources to commit themselves to work on these development projects. Maybe not with Italeri but even under their own brand, they are not able to follow up their projects properly... don't think those people in-charge knew anything about tanks. WLG is a trader, not a manufacturer, tbh.
-
The KV s on the other hand while a nice kit missed some definitive features IMO.
I agree with you ripley, the KV kit had some errors. That being said, 1) how many gamers know these things? 2) it is so much better than their old resin it. 3) the ones I have assembled went together very well. 4) I'm not a die-hard, rivet counter, modeller, so as long as the plastic KV kit (when assembled) looks the part for my gaming needs, its okay.
I feel the real problem is there is no way to give feed back to the Warlord guys as they don't design the kits.
The problem with WLG is not about giving feedback to the manufacturer but the lack of knowledge and resources to commit themselves to work on these development projects. Maybe not with Italeri but even under their own brand, they are not able to follow up their projects properly... don't think those people in-charge knew anything about tanks. WLG is a trader, not a manufacturer, tbh.
I would be surprised to hear if they check the work of those they make contracts with. They ask Italeri, PSC, or SG to produce a plastic model kit for their Bolt Action line, and (possibly) don't bother to check it later. Most likely because what you (RM) said. WLG is a trader and not a manufacture. Even if they did have someone on their staff that could check the details of contracted projects, would they? They are probably trusting in the expertise of the companies they are making the project contracts with.
-
I would like to think that anyone playing Historical game ( Bolt Action , right ? ) should at least have some basic knowledge of .... well maybe not . I've seen some very nicely painted fantasy WW2 armies ::)
-
Of course you can check all you like, but if you do not control the production process, you can always find that what you order and what you receive may not match up.
For an example where the company doing the ordering are modellers: https://www.modelrailforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=6723 (https://www.modelrailforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=6723)
-
I've seen some very nicely painted fantasy WW2 armies ::)
I know what you mean, and I'm not talking about Konflikt '47.
For an example where the company doing the ordering are modellers: https://www.modelrailforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=6723 (https://www.modelrailforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=6723)
Tricky business.
Age old carpentry proverb, "Measure twice and cut once."
Obviously some knowledge and skill is still needed.
-
From the look of the Matilda II photos on the WLG website, it doesn't seem to have any options...
https://store.warlordgames.com/products/matilda-ii-troop
Major variants for the A12 Matilda II:
Infantry Tank Mark II (Matilda II)
First production model armed with a Vickers machine gun.
Infantry Tank Mark IIA (Matilda II Mk II)
Vickers machine gun replaced by Besa machine gun. The "A" denoted a change in armament.
Infantry Tank Mark IIA* (Matilda II Mk III)
New Leyland diesel engine used in place of AEC engines.
Infantry Tank Mark II (Matilda II Mk IV)
With improved engines, rigid mounting and no turret lamp.
Matilda II Mk IV Close Support (CS)
Variant with QF 3in (76mm) howitzer, firing high explosive or smoke shells. In British service, these were generally used by HQ units (usually a single command vehicle), whereas entire Australian squadrons often appear to have used them – frequently in a direct fire role, against Japanese strong points.
Infantry Tank Mark II (Matilda II Mk V)
Improved gearbox. Westinghouse air servo used.
-
From the look of the Matilda II photos on the WLG website, it doesn't seem to have any options...
https://store.warlordgames.com/products/matilda-ii-troop
That is a bit annoying.
-
From what I've heard there should be a gun option ( 2Pdr / 3 inch How ) . Not very exciting IMO
-
.
The problem with WLG is not about giving feedback to the manufacturer but the lack of knowledge and resources to commit themselves to work on these development projects. Maybe not with Italeri but even under their own brand, they are not able to follow up their projects properly... don't think those people in-charge knew anything about tanks. WLG is a trader, not a manufacturer, tbh.
I would be surprised to hear if they check the work of those they make contracts with. They ask Italeri, PSC, or SG to produce a plastic model kit for their Bolt Action line, and (possibly) don't bother to check it later. Most likely because what you (RM) said. WLG is a trader and not a manufacture. Even if they did have someone on their staff that could check the details of contracted projects, would they? They are probably trusting in the expertise of the companies they are making the project contracts with.
They haven't even corrected the box of their plastic Marder III still, pretty sure they must know by now it's the wrong variant by now but obviously aren't bothered about it...
-
I disagree . I think it's great that a 1/56 scale Matilda will be released in plastic. The kit only has two options, a 2 pounder and a 3"close support howitzer, but what other options would be needed to wargame with? There were only six options listed on the previous page, I think two out of six options aren't too bad.
-
I've read that the only options are the gun barrels , I assume its just the basic 2 pdr ( of which there were 2 types )and the 3 inch howitzer . Who knows , there might be the flame thrower barrel in there to make an Australian Matilda Frog , but I won't hold my breath , any way its an easy kit bash for those of us so inclined to roast some Jap bunkers . Guess they could also include the internal lmantle with the co ax Vickers MG for a early war tank . You got options for 4 different versions in Char B kit , why not give the Brits the same amount of love ? ::) The problem being IMO is that Warlord are very closed mouth on new plastic kits , not showing the kit in development or the sprue shots when its released . Of course , since they let others design and mold their kits ( Italeri , PSC , & SK ? ) , maybe the rank and file Warlord dudes have no idea whats in the box . We know well before release , what Rubicon have included in their kits, and they are interested in our feed back on their CAD diagrams and proposed sprue layouts . Warlord tend to push on without regard to those who point out mistakes or omissions in their kits , Jimmy P's comment about the Marder box as a case in point .
-
I disagree . I think it's great that a 1/56 scale Matilda will be released in plastic. The kit only has two options, a 2 pounder and a 3"close support howitzer, but what other options would be needed to wargame with? There were only six options listed on the previous page, I think two out of six options aren't too bad.
I too think it is good that there is a Matilda in 1/56, it is just such a missed opportunity to be able to cover France 1940, North Africa and the Far East in a single kit. The key disappointment for me is there is no mention of engine options and no Vickers MG. I can understand there not being a high heels option, and the bustle is not much of a problem, but the difference in the external exhaust is as noticeable as the difference between an M4, an M4A2 and an M4A3 engine deck.
I get the feeling that Warlord's procurement methodology has not altered since the days of plastic card and milliput, they ask a supplier to design a model for a fixed price. They might supply some standard parts (YMMV) but they leave the supplier to their own devices. Once they receive the model, it is the final thing, no possibility of revision.
Rubicon has the advantage that it is an in-house development process (with us looking over their shoulders ^___^).
There is no obvious improvement plan in their models. As Ripley pointed out, there are a number of options for the Char B kit, there are none listed for the Matilda.
With the 80th anniversary next year, it seems stupid to not have a suitable option for France 1940 in the design spec.
It does make me think twice about buying the Bumper Box of Matildas, and waiting for the single box.
-
The Warlord kit is a great example of a missed opportunity. And that is a shame.
If wargame model makers just wanted a "thing" to put on the table, then we would get the following products:
Sherman
Panzer III
Panzer IV
Crusader
Matilda
Etc. No need for variety. Just one model to be the substitute for whatever it is you are fielding. But we have moved far beyond that. Gamers want the differences on their Panzer III (for example). And some kit makers (Rubicon leading the way here) are delivering this variety.
I really am surprised that Warlord continues to be so hit and miss. If they pay a flat fee for the modle to be sculpted, that may save money. But if the vehicle serves one (of six possible options) then their sales must surely take a hit. I would think it would be MUCH better if they worked with the sculpter to get more options (if possible) on those sprues.
From my perspective, Warlord is turnout out "toys" for gaming, and occasionally get lucky with a more varied kit). Rubicon is turning out "Models" that can be used by gamers and model makers and diorama builders. Their kits are generally more accurate, with more options.
It's a shame that Warlord are not more interested in raising the bar when it comes to quality.
-
I still want one. Don't really care if it has the wrong number of rivets between the Mk.I and MK.II
-
I will still get one for my Perry's Eighth Army, just not for the France 1940 (though that is on hold due to an issue with the figures I was going to use - hint: BEF 1940 hint).
-
Okay, Warlord have released the individual tank.
What is noticeable on the rear box "art" is the presence of an optional bustle and the two exhaust systems.
There does appear to be two different cupolas (YMMV).
Whether this reflects on the contents is another matter.
-
For those who wanted to see what the WLG A12 Maltilda sprues looks like, here it...
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Misc%20Images/53098640_10118755749105334_5626207175492763648_n_zpszfbgjxiv.jpg)
(http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag377/RubiconModels/Misc%20Images/52930339_10118755749090364_8440598304240173056_n_zpsqm8cbqab.jpg)
Enjoy!
;)
-
For those who wanted to see what the WLG A12 Maltilda sprues looks like, here it...
That is interesting. Taking a picture of the instructions instead of the actual sprues. Whatever works.
-
Interesting . So two turrets and gun mounts but only one commander's hatch , that's another winner .... ::)
-
What's going on with the side-skirts? It looks as though there are 2 types.
The kit looks rather good.
-
Parts 2 & 3 look to have the wheels more visible ( lowered wheels - BEF in France for more ground clearance ) plus IRC there was a difference in the mud shoot door hinges ( internal vs external ) , but what's with part 4 & 5 looking like it has molded track and parts 2 & 3 having seperate track ?
-
Thanks, that is interesting.
-
Interesting . So two turrets and gun mounts but only one commander's hatch , that's another winner .... ::)
There is only one turret base, so you can't build two turrets. They do not want you to have that option. They want you to buy more than one kit instead. Something Rubicon Models sometimes does not do to us, which of course makes happy customers.
On a related subject, but different, a long time ago I told my gaming buddies I wasn't interested in starting to building a British collection until a Matilda II was available in a plastic model kit - that ugly resin one I bought a long time ago put me off from collecting British. I wonder if my buddies remember that statement. :P
For British, we are starting to get a pretty good selection of vehicles in plastic kit form. Off the top of my head, let's see, we have the following vehicles in plastic:
- Matilda II
- A15 Crusader (Rubicon Models)
- CMP 15cwt Truck (Rubicon Models)
- Commonwealth Jeep (Rubicon Models)
- Firefly
- Churchill
- Cromwell
- Bren Carrier
and all the American vehicles the British used.
Did I miss anything?
-
I think you listed them all tracks . I also noticed that there's only the one turret base . That would have be ok by me as I've seen photos of Matilde turrets in use by the Germans ( hull completely buried ) as bunkers . You could get away with out the turret base by using it glued to plastic as a scenery piece . But not having a second commander's cupola sort of ruins that plan . Plus I notice the commander's hatch covers need to be cut apart to install the figure , hm , no separate open hatch for him or the loader ::) Probably means no internal hatch detail then either . I do like the choice of single or twin exhaust though , and the tail skid for use by the BEF in France . Still trying to find better pictures to figure out the double set of hull/ wheel cover side plates and the track situation
-
It looks to me as though you choose which way out the track skirts face, depending on whether you want a BEF Matilda or a desert version.
We are inching closer to a decent range of plastic vehicles for the Battle of France. When Rubicon release their early Panzer III and Panzer IV, the Germans will be well covered (Warlord already do the Panzer 38t). The French need another tank to accompany the Warlord Char B, such as the Somua (and, of course, some plastic infantry). And the British need the A13 in plastic. Everyone except the Germans also needs an anti-tank gun (it would be good if Rubicon started focusing on non-German artillery pieces). The desert war is also much better covered, although a plastic Grant and at least 1 plastic British armoured car would be welcome.
-
The big difference is the lower ( more visible ) wheels , changes in the mud shoot door hinges ( in red ) and the co ax Vickers ( in blue ) for the BEF
(https://i.postimg.cc/1nDm87G0/BEF.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/1nDm87G0)
(https://i.postimg.cc/9wpcp4Nr/8th-Army.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/9wpcp4Nr)
There is also the single or double exhaust pipes depending on which diesel engine it had ( IRC single pipe AEC , dual pipe Leyland ) Mostly Leyland models went to the Desert
-
Everyone except the Germans also needs an anti-tank gun (it would be good if Rubicon started focusing on non-German artillery pieces).
I second this!
-
Everyone except the Germans also needs an anti-tank gun (it would be good if Rubicon started focusing on non-German artillery pieces).
I second this!
Third!
-
Everyone except the Germans also needs an anti-tank gun (it would be good if Rubicon started focusing on non-German artillery pieces).
I second this!
Third!
Part of me wants them to finish them off (howitzers) before moving on, but a bigger part of me wants US 105mm howitzer, long Tom and 90mm AA gun with associated M4/M5 high speed tractors in plastic..
-
Cuckoo.
The German 'big cat' tamed by the British during the Battle of Holland in late 1944. In Feb. 45 the fuel pump broke and it was abandoned.
-
Didn't see Cuckoo in this mornings BA news letter , a resin re paint I assume ? They also have a Pak 43 coming out in metal ....not a fan of metal I'm afraid
(https://i.postimg.cc/QK168J3z/402212008-German-Heer-Pak-43-anti-tank-gun-GW5-RTE.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/QK168J3z)
Seems all the new releases ( and re pop's ) come in the black trim box like all the plastic kits .
(https://i.postimg.cc/7CRXSWPc/402212008-German-Heer-Pak-43-anti-tank-gun-GW5-RTE-back.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/7CRXSWPc)
-
Everyone except the Germans also needs an anti-tank gun (it would be good if Rubicon started focusing on non-German artillery pieces).
I second this!
Third!
Part of me wants them to finish them off (howitzers) before moving on, but a bigger part of me wants US 105mm howitzer, long Tom and 90mm AA gun with associated M4/M5 high speed tractors in plastic..
I have nothing against howitzers (big or small), I just know that standard AT-Guns are more useful to the common gamer.
Several members in my gaming club (including myself) that prefer plastic over metal have already replaced their metal PaK36, PaK38, and PaK40 AT-Guns with plastic ones from Rubicon Models. Granted, some members kept the metal crew figures, but the AT-Guns were replaced with the plastic ones from Rubicon Models. Not only are the plastic AT-Guns nicer looking with better details, but they have many other benefits as well.
We still have many Allied AT-Guns in metal that need replacing - subtle "hint hint" for Rubicon Models.
-
I want one of those Warlord Pak 43.
Crewed by Perry 88 crew.
With a Rubicon Sdkfz 7.
-
Warlord have finally branched out into the Korean War (I think they put out a book last year, but now the models are appearing). They appear to have sets of plastic Chinese and US infantry in the pipeline, as well as a couple of vehicles - and the characters from M*A*S*H: https://www.warlordgames.com/frontline-report-warlord-games-salute-2019/
The Centurion does not look good; I'm guessing it's resin. I still think that this is an area that Rubicon should look at. Starting with a couple of early post-war vehicles, like the Centurion and M46, and maybe a post-war version of the T-34/85.
-
Someone on Lead Adventures thinks the Centurion is from Force of Arms.
There was a Loyd carrier as well.
The book is sometime this year.
-
Yes, I'm reasonably sure the Centurion III on the Warlord stand is the Force of Arms one, they bought a bunch of their masters a few years ago. Personally I think it's a decent model, and not just because I bought one, though the tracks are a little low on detail, and I'd have to say the JTFM one is better (Richard did a marvelous job on it).
Anyway, here's a pic for comparison (I left the bazooka shields off of mine though).
(https://i.postimg.cc/xXdrFmQY/Centurion-Mk-III-complete-2.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/xXdrFmQY)