login   |    register
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Review
Dragon: Hornisse Early Version
CMOT
Staff MemberEditor-in-Chief
ARMORAMA
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 10,881 posts
Armorama: 8,536 posts
Posted: Monday, February 20, 2017 - 03:44 PM UTC


Mark Nicodemus reviews the Dragon Models Sd. Kfz. 164 Hornisse (Early Variant) in 1/35th scale.

Read the Review

If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!
americanpanzer
Visit this Community
Iowa, United States
Joined: May 12, 2014
KitMaker: 513 posts
Armorama: 510 posts
Posted: Monday, February 20, 2017 - 09:00 PM UTC
with that many errors in the instructions and re-used sprues it should clock in at $35; that being said it looks like an improvement over the old early-90's kit;
Taeuss
Visit this Community
Manitoba, Canada
Joined: January 03, 2016
KitMaker: 3,262 posts
Armorama: 3,251 posts
Posted: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 - 03:51 AM UTC
Let me assure you, there is virtually NO comparison (except names) between the two kits. The original kit (Dragon's first?) was okay if you didn't know better, but this one (and all the freakin' variants that came with it!) is Kodachrome if you're used to only seeing in B&W. No comparison. This is a serious kit with oodles of extras and more detail (and spares) than you'd think the box could hold. I've got this one and a couple of the other variants, as well as a couple of Hummels in there somewhere in my stash. Sigh...
Jmarles
Visit this Community
British Columbia, Canada
Joined: November 02, 2008
KitMaker: 1,126 posts
Armorama: 942 posts
Posted: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 - 07:39 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Let me assure you, there is virtually NO comparison (except names) between the two kits. The original kit (Dragon's first?) was okay if you didn't know better, but this one (and all the freakin' variants that came with it!) is Kodachrome if you're used to only seeing in B&W. No comparison. This is a serious kit with oodles of extras and more detail (and spares) than you'd think the box could hold. I've got this one and a couple of the other variants, as well as a couple of Hummels in there somewhere in my stash. Sigh...



There may be confusion as to what one means by "rebox". While the DML/Shanghai DML 6001 was truly terrible, this kit is a reissued version of I believe 6156 which came out around 2002, but some parts were from previous kits. It was a huge improvement of course, and was further reboxed in various forms over the years. That being said this kit is essentially fifteen years old and I certainly hope we are not expected to pay $100 for it!

Taeuss
Visit this Community
Manitoba, Canada
Joined: January 03, 2016
KitMaker: 3,262 posts
Armorama: 3,251 posts
Posted: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 - 10:00 AM UTC
Probably will have to spend that much as that's the new "norm". They're messing with us for as long as they can get away with it. Glad I won't need to buy one any more.
avenue
Visit this Community
Philippines
Joined: May 25, 2013
KitMaker: 539 posts
Armorama: 537 posts
Posted: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 - 08:07 PM UTC
is this just another rebox or which parts been alter?
Jmarles
Visit this Community
British Columbia, Canada
Joined: November 02, 2008
KitMaker: 1,126 posts
Armorama: 942 posts
Posted: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 - 10:12 AM UTC

Quoted Text

is this just another rebox or which parts been alter?



It has the '02 boxart I am guessing just a re-pop..
ericadeane
Visit this Community
Michigan, United States
Joined: October 28, 2002
KitMaker: 4,003 posts
Armorama: 3,931 posts
Posted: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 - 05:50 PM UTC
One of the biggest screw ups in this kit's directions are parts H19 and H20 -- pieces that the unknowing builder would assume are interior parts. I'm very happy that the reviewer notes this plainly.

The DML engineers MEANT for these to be place as spacers or jigs, so you would know where to mount the internal travel lock. Instead, the instructions seem to have you glue them into place. This wasn't understood by many modelers (why would they, unless they were looking at actual Nashorn interior pictures). This error made it into every published build article at the time.

It got so bad that when Revell was designing its 1/72 Nashorn by lazily using pantograph machinery on the 1/35 DML kit, they duplicated this error.
d111298pw
#456
Visit this Community
Delhi, India / भारत
Joined: September 22, 2016
KitMaker: 646 posts
Armorama: 630 posts
Posted: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 - 07:22 PM UTC
avenue, this is a completely retooled kit. Nothing is carried over from the original release.
d111298pw
#456
Visit this Community
Delhi, India / भारत
Joined: September 22, 2016
KitMaker: 646 posts
Armorama: 630 posts
Posted: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 - 07:23 PM UTC
Jmarles, This is the original 2002 kit. It is not a reissue of it.
Jmarles
Visit this Community
British Columbia, Canada
Joined: November 02, 2008
KitMaker: 1,126 posts
Armorama: 942 posts
Posted: Monday, February 27, 2017 - 08:11 AM UTC
Looks like it's going for $36 on Amazon. Not too bad.