As I was heavily involved with the development of the original first two IDF Centurion kits by AFV (thus SabIngaMartin Publication Logo on their boxes), I can say the following things:
1) AFV Centurion kits are great, however although the team in AFV work well and implemented most of my suggestions, they ignore several times suggestions that I made to make the kits even better (Mantlet cover, full plastic wheels option, different types of turrets and hull stowage boxes and etc).
2) They also cut corners with the names, to make them more marketable (like Centurion 1967 name!!!!!) that I don't agree with but again it was not so much under my control.
3) Since I stop to work with them they introduce the Shot Kal “Gimel” and “Daled”, that based on the “Shot Kal Alef” that I helped them design with some minor additions of ERA blocks and etc. They are accurate in general but have some funny mistakes that are result of lack of info or understanding (for example placing ERA block over the loaders periscope, funny).
4) This new Shot Kal again has wrong name and probably again because of marketing attempt, it looks to me as “Gimel” and for sure it is not “Daled” since it lacks the late type barrel without thermal sleeve as well as wrong time frame (in 1982 First Lebanon War the Centurions that been operated were A, Beth and Gimels).
5) For more info look in my 3 books on Israeli Centurions by SabIngaMartin Publications: Vol 1 on first and early types of Israeli Centurions; Vol 3 on “Shot Kal Alef” and Vol 7 on “Shot Kal Gimel”.
There is no need to add additional mistakes to names.
The use of “Kal” is not wrong BUT the right one in the case of the Shot tanks. Anyone that know very well and from inside the history of Centurion tanks in IDF as well know Hebrew writing rules will agree with that, while ones that don't know such things will suggest the opposite.
To add to that use of Cal is also possible, but the right name and proffered one in English should be KAL!!!!! (will explain more if needed).
The same thing regarding the use of Magach 1 and 2, it is NOT wrong as suggested in the facebook.
I suggest the person that claims that the use of Magach 1 and 2 is wrong, to take a look on some official IDF documents from the late 60’s to find out that indeed IDF use the names Magach 1 for M48A1 tanks and Magach 2 for M48A2C tanks in its service and after upgraded both of them with 105 mm gun and diesel engines, tanks that got the name Magach 3. For full info of early Magach tanks in IDF service you can find in the books by SabIngaMartin:
1) Magach Tanks of the IDF, Magach 1 & 2
2) Magach Tanks of the IDF, Volume 2 - Magach 2 and 3 Tanks of the Six-Day War
Hope this helps
Dr. Robert Manasherobwww.SabIngaMartin.comhttps://www.facebook.com/SabIngaMartin-Publications-993784533998080/