_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Review
MiniArt: captured SU-85
CMOT
Staff MemberEditor-in-Chief
ARMORAMA
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 10,954 posts
Armorama: 8,571 posts
Posted: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 - 07:56 PM UTC


Andras Donaszi shares with us a review of the 8.5cm Sturmgeschutz auf Fgst. T34 Jagdpanzer SU-85(r) with crew by MiniArt in 1/35th scale.

Read the Review

If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!
Taeuss
Visit this Community
Manitoba, Canada
Joined: January 03, 2016
KitMaker: 3,791 posts
Armorama: 3,778 posts
Posted: Thursday, April 20, 2017 - 11:15 PM UTC
Thanks for the detailed review. Looks like another great kit. While I can appreciate that it might be more difficult to produce a kit with a complete tub chassis I personally appreciate the effort and here the kit loses some of its appeal. This is the case with all so-called-"flat pack" kits so common of some companies. I like building with everything aligned and true right from the start. Don't know how it compares with the Dragon offering (which is several years old) but this one seems to have better instructions.
spongya
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
MODELGEEK
Visit this Community
Budapest, Hungary
Joined: February 01, 2005
KitMaker: 2,365 posts
Armorama: 1,709 posts
Posted: Friday, April 21, 2017 - 03:08 AM UTC
I was thinking a lot about this flat-pack design (good name, by the way), and I think it might be intentional: the amount of detail included makes the walls and bottom into sub-assemblies. I'm building the Tamiya T-55 with CMK interior now, and to be honest, it's easier to work on the sides if they are separate. But I might be wrong.
Bravo1102
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Posted: Friday, April 21, 2017 - 05:07 AM UTC
Think about it this way: single piece tubs need to have thicker side walls for the molding process. So interior bits typically need to be undersized to fit into them. All flat panels allows for easier assembly of details and floors and thinner side walls with stability coming from bulkheads. Interior bits can be more true to life with the floors and bulkheads full sized as opposed to paired down to fit in artificially thick side walls.

Even though I usually mis-align them I still prefer flat pack to tub. I have building flat pack forever. I cut my teeth on ancient Airfix, Fujimi and ESCI small scale armor; all flat multi-piece hulls, and those with tubs were Bandai 1/48 scale armor where the bulkheads and floors wouldn't fit.
spongya
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
MODELGEEK
Visit this Community
Budapest, Hungary
Joined: February 01, 2005
KitMaker: 2,365 posts
Armorama: 1,709 posts
Posted: Friday, April 21, 2017 - 10:12 PM UTC
That is indeed a good point; I have not thought about the thickness issue. Thank you for the insight
165thspc
#521
Visit this Community
Kentucky, United States
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Saturday, April 22, 2017 - 09:47 AM UTC
Apparently working coil springs are becoming quite easy to create using a three part slide mold. Starting with the standard two part mold and then adding a sliding rod that comes in to form the open center of the coil spring.

spongya
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
MODELGEEK
Visit this Community
Budapest, Hungary
Joined: February 01, 2005
KitMaker: 2,365 posts
Armorama: 1,709 posts
Posted: Sunday, April 23, 2017 - 03:09 AM UTC
It's still pretty cool. Thanks for the information; it seems like I'm learning a lot on this review
 _GOTOTOP