Archives by Month

  • Snord

    I was going to do this comparison – you beat me to it! I don’t really agree with your conclusion – I think the Rubicon kit is more refined, and better detailed (the sole exception being the lack of detail on the treads). Construction of the Rubicon kit is easier, as you point out, except for the lack of locating holes for the fuel drums. Both kits lack detail on the hull sides – there were tools stowed here which should have been included as separate pieces. Similarly, there are some minor details missing from both turrets. But overall, the detail on the Rubicon kit is superior, and I think captures the real tank’s lines slightly better – I think Warlord’s is a bit more toy-like. You also didn’t mention that Rubicon provide a choice of turret variants and an optional hull flamethrower, which are nice extras – despite your criticism of their sprue layout, they actually provide more parts. However, one clear advantage of Warlord’s kit is that they include a commander figure.

    The bonus T-34/76 turret in the Warlord kit is very nicely done. It’s intended for their T-34/76 kit (and should have been included in that kit). As the T-34/76 carried on in service together with the T-34/85, this turret allows you to field both versions of this tank in late war armies.

    It’s strange that both companies provided an antenna. They both look terrible and snap off or bend at the first opportunity – why did they bother?

    • The refined detail you could well be right the Rubicon model does have some nice additions, it was not something I was really thinking about at the time of writing, it was more to do with the lack of any thing to break up the flat hull sides. The Rubicon model is very cleaver in it’s construction I think in the future we are going to see more out of this kit. The lack of tools on both kits I can live with out them, If I get really keen to add some I will get some etched brass to add them. I could do the same with the cable, infact I might do that with the 2nd Rubicon kit I have and really dress it up.
      I guess in a way we get used to seeing some versions of the Tank and expect to see those lines, I am torn between the two I really like both I think having both adds great character. Both Kits had the Flame Thrower as well.
      The Rubicon had the extra turret. and yeah I do agree with the Antenna, I am not sure how that is going to on the trip back to Aus. we shall see.
      Thanks for the input, I am working on my blog style, feedback is pretty important.

    • The refined detail you could well be right the Rubicon model does have some nice additions, it was not something I was really thinking about at the time of writing, it was more to do with the lack of any thing to break up the flat hull sides. The Rubicon model is very cleaver in it’s construction I think in the future we are going to see more out of this kit. The lack of tools on both kits I can live with out them, If I get really keen to add some I will get some etched brass to add them. I could do the same with the cable, infact I might do that with the 2nd Rubicon kit I have and really dress it up.
      I guess in a way we get used to seeing some versions of the Tank and expect to see those lines, I am torn between the two I really like both I think having both adds great character. Both Kits had the Flame Thrower as well.
      The Rubicon had the extra turret. and yeah I do agree with the Antenna, I am not sure how that is going to on the trip back to Aus. we shall see.
      Thanks for the input, I am working on my blog style, feedback is pretty important.

  • mathhammer

    I think the extra space you see on the plastic sprues is due to manufacturing. The older processes needed larger gaps (layout software down). If you compare it to some of the state of the art sprues (GW) some details become obvious. (Curved feed channels, more efficient injection points, higher density layout)

    • I could go into it, my wife does alot in this area, we are pretty critical of company’s that don’t design for manufacture. Rubicon and warlord have. I am not going to cause listening to an Engineer talk about plastic flow rates, tool design will make you fall asleep. Needless to say GW’s tools are not state of the art, but they do spend alot of money on them to fill them all they way up.

%d bloggers like this: