The M-ATV Discussion Thread
California, United States
Joined: October 21, 2007
KitMaker: 3,684 posts
Armorama: 2,938 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 01, 2012 - 12:57 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Shame an honest review isn't 'good' enough anymore...
Jim
Jim, all I'm waiting for is more answers. For those of us that
do not have the kit the review doesn't cover everything that's needed. For me to make an educated decision on this, (or any), kit I would like more info...not just that something is not worth it. When I took a closer look at the photos in the review I noticed that they may have been showing areas that would not be seen and lacked the areas that would...such as the inner door panels. This, and other issues, made this review incomplete as it stood.
The review isn't being 'blocked', I made a mistake and published it too quickly without thoroughly checking the contents in detail, it didn't help that I'm unfamiliar with the subject. Being what I would consider an important subject for the modern modeler I feel that the review had me asking more questions than it answered.
EditAlso, I'd like to pose a question... with the seemingly popular subject that this appears to be judging by the requests that it be a pinned thread, and the Panda kit along with this one drawing (to me) much criticism, would it have been better that these two kits were not released?
Alberta, Canada
Joined: February 18, 2003
KitMaker: 1,728 posts
Armorama: 1,629 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 01, 2012 - 03:44 PM UTC
Ahh, gotcha. Thanks for the explanation, hopefully there will be a build comparison between the two someday - and which one is closer to the real dimensions.
Jim
"Fire all weapons and open a hailing frequency for my victory yodel" - Zapp Brannigan
California, United States
Joined: October 21, 2007
KitMaker: 3,684 posts
Armorama: 2,938 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 01, 2012 - 04:15 PM UTC
Thanks for understanding Jim, and everyone else. I think we're all eager to see reviews of both the Kinetic and Panda kits of the M-ATV. Personally I'm very happy to see two 'new to armor' companies coming out with this subject in styrene. And I'm sure both companies will be open minded on where they can improve their future releases. A promising 2012 I hope.
We'll have at least 2 reviews of the Kinetic kit and 1 of the Panda...with builds hopefully following shortly after.
Thanks again for being patient!
Moselle, France
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 1,416 posts
Armorama: 1,379 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 01, 2012 - 07:44 PM UTC
Quoted Text
We'll have at least 2 reviews of the Kinetic kit and 1 of the Panda...with builds hopefully following shortly after.
Thanks again for being patient!
My Panda's M-ATV is already finished and you can see it here :
https://armorama.kitmaker.net/forums/184705&page=1 
Missouri, United States
Joined: October 15, 2005
KitMaker: 283 posts
Armorama: 110 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 01, 2012 - 08:10 PM UTC
I know that this is unrelated to the model itself but I think this picture should be removed. Once I get back to my base I can send all kinds of good reference to those that might like to have them.
C trp 1/3 ACR 93-95
HHC 1/72 AR 2 ID 92-93
M Co 3/3 ACR 90-92
E trp 2/11 ACR 87-90
C Co 17 Engr 2AD 85-87
A btry 2/377 fa 84-85
Christchurch, New Zealand
Joined: January 11, 2006
KitMaker: 438 posts
Armorama: 359 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 01, 2012 - 11:12 PM UTC
I agree with tankfixer and also look forward to his photo's
Cheers
Thomo
On the Workbench
Verlinden 120mm Red Devil, Arnhem
Academy 1/35 "Honey"
Dragon 1/35 Tank Riders
NZ M5 Recce
Connecticut, United States
Joined: May 12, 2010
KitMaker: 546 posts
Armorama: 538 posts
Posted: Friday, March 02, 2012 - 03:08 AM UTC
Fair enough, I have no problem with the mods removing it. That was found on google btw, it is not a personal picture.
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Friday, March 02, 2012 - 03:31 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Also, I'd like to pose a question... with the seemingly popular subject that this appears to be judging by the requests that it be a pinned thread, and the Panda kit along with this one drawing (to me) much criticism, would it have been better that these two kits were not released?
No, I don't think so. I welcome any new modern piece. As has been stated, both models will build into a reasonably good representation of an M-ATV. The kits are designed for different levels of builder though. They both have a few
minor flaws, but are far from junk as they have been protrayed by some.
I do wish the companies had spent a little more time on their instruction sheets though. A small delay in these hitting the market to ensure the instructions were correct would have been nice.
In the end, it is up to the builder which company's kit they want to do. In the Panda one, you have a more accurate, but harder to build kit. The Kinetic one is a little less accurate and has a lower level of detail, but is easier to build. The modeler can decide which fits his style.
Field Artillery --- The KING of BATTLE!!!
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." -- George Orwell
Showcase
Connecticut, United States
Joined: May 12, 2010
KitMaker: 546 posts
Armorama: 538 posts
Posted: Friday, March 02, 2012 - 03:39 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text
Also, I'd like to pose a question... with the seemingly popular subject that this appears to be judging by the requests that it be a pinned thread, and the Panda kit along with this one drawing (to me) much criticism, would it have been better that these two kits were not released?
No, I don't think so. I welcome any new modern piece. As has been stated, both models will build into a reasonably good representation of an M-ATV. The kits are designed for different levels of builder though. They both have a few minor flaws, but are far from junk as they have been protrayed by some.
I do wish the companies had spent a little more time on their instruction sheets though. A small delay in these hitting the market to ensure the instructions were correct would have been nice.
In the end, it is up to the builder which company's kit they want to do. In the Panda one, you have a more accurate, but harder to build kit. The Kinetic one is a little less accurate and has a lower level of detail, but is easier to build. The modeler can decide which fits his style.
I agree with Gino on this one. I will say, one thing that is very positive to come out of this is we have seen these companies, who are new to the armor game, being very willing to adjust their tooling and where possible pricing in order to fit what the customers are asking for. That said, the reviews are all spot on from what I've seen. My Kinetic kit arrived with parts not fully injected, and not small parts either. I'm still waiting on replacement parts which they have been extremely receptive about providing so I cannot fault their customer service.
Choices in this hobby are always a good thing, but it cannot be forgotten that these are new companies, and the fact they made it at all is a good thing but much like Trumpeter when they first came on the scene, I believe they will fire and adjust as they go and their coming releases will get better and better.
Praha, Czech Republic
Joined: April 03, 2006
KitMaker: 2,450 posts
Armorama: 2,409 posts
Posted: Friday, March 02, 2012 - 10:13 AM UTC
I agree with Gino and Steve. Panda is very difficult and complicated to build. Weekend modeler will have problems with this model. Panda is for advanced modelers. Kinetic is easier to build.
Hope you like it and "watch those negative waves"
Christchurch, New Zealand
Joined: January 11, 2006
KitMaker: 438 posts
Armorama: 359 posts
Posted: Friday, March 02, 2012 - 10:22 AM UTC
I got the kit (panda)not so long ago and I was looking forward to the the build....until I got to read the thread......however I am now please to hear its no a bit of junk. The final product and the good comments on this thread have made me again look forward to the build. All the feedback and info on this has been most helpful.
Cheers
Thomo
On the Workbench
Verlinden 120mm Red Devil, Arnhem
Academy 1/35 "Honey"
Dragon 1/35 Tank Riders
NZ M5 Recce
Connecticut, United States
Joined: May 12, 2010
KitMaker: 546 posts
Armorama: 538 posts
Posted: Friday, March 02, 2012 - 10:29 AM UTC
Just to update my previous post, my wife just told me I received a package from Hong Kong containing a replacement parts tree from Kinetic. I contacted them about 15 days ago, so to get something from HK I'm pretty pleased with their customer service.
Virginia, United States
Joined: August 24, 2005
KitMaker: 348 posts
Armorama: 256 posts
Posted: Monday, March 05, 2012 - 03:15 AM UTC
I live in the Washington DC Metro area, and there's an awful lot of military and contractor folks around here. I was in my LHS (Piper Hobby in Chantilly, VA) buying the Panda MRAP, and got into a conversation with the guy behind me in line (who was buying something wingy). He mentioned that he works for BAE Systems, and his company builds the MRAP. Seems they keep pictures of every one of their vehicles that has been destroyed in war - autographed by the soldiers who survived the destruction. Just something to keep in mind - all this plastic represents the lives and sacrifices of soldiers past and present. I now return you to your regular modeling channel.
Washington, United States
Joined: September 21, 2010
KitMaker: 1,846 posts
Armorama: 1,509 posts
Posted: Monday, March 05, 2012 - 03:47 AM UTC
I have exclusively built modern armour since I was about 13 or so when I got my first Tamiya M1 (yes the O.G. one), back in the day. I recently picked up the Panda M-ATV in January on a whim and was excited about getting into something "out of my comfort zone" of 80's and 90's armour. Then I began reading some of the feedback about it and saw one build log, Pascal's which, is a hugely fantastic build log and I am sure I will be referencing it often. I believe that Nigel in the UK is also doing one that is quite impressive as well and also makes some good modifications to the kit.
Having said all that, I am NOT at the same building level as many of you and the prospect of fumbling and fitting parts most of the day and sanding and filling what does not fit, is not my ideal day of building. But I am going to tackle this kit soon and I am going to write a build log as well. My though is that if I can make it look like a good and fairly accurate representation with my skills then maybe it will encourage others to attempt it as well.
No offense to anyone here, God knows that I admire most of you for your talent and knowledge and willingness to share info, but the hobby in general and modelling sites in general can be quite intimidating to the "weekend" hobbyist or youngster that wants to just learn to build better looking kits. I am not suggesting that anyone is being derisive but I know that my first post here I was handed my lunch after someone stomped on it.
My point is that the reviews good or bad, are there to help all of us, experienced or not, build better models. I appreciate the build logs and reviews and have made buying decisions on them. I also appreciate James taking the time to re-read these reviews and make sure that they are answering those questions and giving a big picture look as well as the rivet counting. Reviews can give you a good overall feel for how the kit is produced and designed. The build logs are the practicum and get down to the "nuts and bolts" of how things actually fit and look. So thank you to all of you who have contributed reviews, builds and threads like this that help all of us experienced or not build better models. Cheers. (am I rambling?. . . )
On the workbench:
Trumpeter Faun SLT 56
Tamiya A- 10 1/48
Academy 1/700 USS KITTY HAWK
Czech Republic
Joined: March 04, 2012
KitMaker: 3 posts
Armorama: 2 posts
Posted: Monday, March 05, 2012 - 06:41 AM UTC
M-ATV built. It was difficult. Draft nice, lower
processing
photo here
http://gallery.kitmaker.net/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/50072
Connecticut, United States
Joined: May 12, 2010
KitMaker: 546 posts
Armorama: 538 posts
Posted: Monday, March 05, 2012 - 07:37 AM UTC
Looks good, keep up the good work. I love the wheel chocks, it's those little details that I really dig.
Washington, United States
Joined: September 21, 2010
KitMaker: 1,846 posts
Armorama: 1,509 posts
Posted: Monday, March 05, 2012 - 12:40 PM UTC
That is really nice and I like the chains, they look real! Was this the Panda or the Kinetic kit?
On the workbench:
Trumpeter Faun SLT 56
Tamiya A- 10 1/48
Academy 1/700 USS KITTY HAWK
Czech Republic
Joined: March 04, 2012
KitMaker: 3 posts
Armorama: 2 posts
Posted: Monday, March 05, 2012 - 05:25 PM UTC
It was Panda. It has better detail than Kinetic.
Praha, Czech Republic
Joined: April 03, 2006
KitMaker: 2,450 posts
Armorama: 2,409 posts
Posted: Monday, March 05, 2012 - 07:34 PM UTC
Hope you like it and "watch those negative waves"
Northern Ireland, United Kingdom
Joined: March 20, 2011
KitMaker: 128 posts
Armorama: 125 posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - 11:32 AM UTC
Would anyone have any pictures of the CROWS II on the MATV from the rear, mount and hatch areas?.
Chris.
Connecticut, United States
Joined: May 12, 2010
KitMaker: 546 posts
Armorama: 538 posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - 01:18 PM UTC
On the way
Connecticut, United States
Joined: May 12, 2010
KitMaker: 546 posts
Armorama: 538 posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - 01:23 PM UTC
Connecticut, United States
Joined: May 12, 2010
KitMaker: 546 posts
Armorama: 538 posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - 01:26 PM UTC
Moselle, France
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 1,416 posts
Armorama: 1,379 posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - 05:02 PM UTC
The M-ATV roof hatch is different from the RG31. Here a pics from a SF M-ATV:
The Blast Model kit is totally right
Connecticut, United States
Joined: May 12, 2010
KitMaker: 546 posts
Armorama: 538 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 08, 2012 - 01:33 AM UTC
Thanks for the correction, I always thought they were the same.
