login   |    register

Scale Modeling Sponsors

See Your Ad Here!

Armor/AFV: Modern - USA
Modern Armor, AFVs, and Support vehicles.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Italeri vs. Trumpeter 20' Shipping Containers
165thspc
Visit this Community
Kentucky, United States
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 6,535 posts
Armorama: 6,372 posts
Posted: Monday, November 13, 2017 - 02:46 PM GMT+7
I was fortunate to have recently acquired a Trumpeter 20' container which I just finished tonight. I can now confirm that both the Italeri 20' container and the Trumpeter 20' have roughly the same overall measurements. (The Italeri container is two scale inches taller.) I was very concerned that my various LHS vehicles as well as my home built CHU might not work with the different containers I can now say that all vehicles appear to work just fine with either manufacture's product.



The Italeri product is on the left, the Trumpeter on the right. The following may be of interest to some: Given the slight differences in the corrugations of the various wall panels and the layout of the parts on the sprues, I can confirm that the two offerings are produced from totally different tooling.

Comments would be: The Italeri tooling offers somewhat larger gluing areas and the container goes together a bit more easily. On the other hand the Trumpeter offering includes the four ventilator details cast into the sidewalls. The Italeri container is missing these vents.

Finally, to Italeri's credit, their container comes with three different complete decal marking sets - US Army, US Marines and Italian Army. The Trumpeter offering comes ONLY with "China Shipping" decals.
165thspc
Visit this Community
Kentucky, United States
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 6,535 posts
Armorama: 6,372 posts
Posted: Monday, November 13, 2017 - 02:53 PM GMT+7
The Italeri container:



More photos of the Trumpeter product to follow shortly.
Vodnik
Visit this Community
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,097 posts
Armorama: 3,696 posts
Posted: Monday, November 13, 2017 - 05:44 PM GMT+7
Note that both Italeri and Trumpeter are civilian pattern containers. ISO containers used by all branches of US military have some specific features not present in those two kits. Most noticeable are double forklift pockets on each side of container. Also the corrugations pattern differs from that on civilian containers - particularly on doors, what makes it difficult to correctly replicate stencilled markings there...

In my Mk28 model I only added second set of forklift pockets, as some stencils would not make sense without them.
Vodnik
Visit this Community
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,097 posts
Armorama: 3,696 posts
Posted: Monday, November 13, 2017 - 05:48 PM GMT+7


165thspc
Visit this Community
Kentucky, United States
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 6,535 posts
Armorama: 6,372 posts
Posted: Monday, November 13, 2017 - 06:13 PM GMT+7
Aah, clearly I have more research to do.
165thspc
Visit this Community
Kentucky, United States
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 6,535 posts
Armorama: 6,372 posts
Posted: Monday, November 13, 2017 - 06:26 PM GMT+7
I caught the info about needing the double forklift pockets recently while putting together my CROPS Flatrack.

If I had but known this earlier I would have corrected the two containers I built as well. Is it just a matter of adding two more pockets or is the overall spacing of the pockets different as well?

If need be I will order another container in the near future and fix this but perhaps I can retro these into the two containers already built, painted and weathered?????

Pawel you have done it yourself what do you think? Is it a fairly painless, simple modification?
Vodnik
Visit this Community
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,097 posts
Armorama: 3,696 posts
Posted: Monday, November 13, 2017 - 07:39 PM GMT+7

Quoted Text


Pawel you have done it yourself what do you think? Is it a fairly painless, simple modification?


In Italeri kit is is rather simple modification. If I remember correctly I had to remove one "rib" on each side on the bottom as it was in a place where new pockets go. Then just cut pocket holes and add additional rib (or ribs? I don't remember...) on the bottom to create "channels", although you could probably get away with only making holes and skipping the bottom channels.

Looking at your photos above I think Trumpeter container has too narrow main pockets. If you just add inner pockets it would not look right, as the outer ones should be noticeably wider. I don't know how the bottom structure of this kit looks and how ribs are positioned, so I can't tell if widening main pockets and adding inner ones would be easy or not.

I had to accept some compromise with markings of doors. As you can see in photos above military containers only have two (most commonly) or three "grooves" on doors and a lot of flat surface for markings, unlike civilian ones like those in Italeri and Trumpeter kits. I was not able to replicate original door markings from US Navy Seabee container, as there was not enough flat space for them, so I improvised somewhat
165thspc
Visit this Community
Kentucky, United States
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 6,535 posts
Armorama: 6,372 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 12:09 AM GMT+7
Is there a special page in the book of Murphy's laws for modelers? One that says "you will find the research you need only after committing yourself and your model to doing it the WRONG way."

I think I could cover up the extra unwanted corrugations in the container doors with very thin acetate. However, I received this new information literally MINUTES after completing the decaling of the doors and clear coating them!
RobinNilsson
Visit this Community
Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 2,478 posts
Armorama: 2,202 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 01:11 AM GMT+7

Quoted Text

Is there a special page in the book of Murphy's laws for modelers? One that says "you will find the research you need only after committing yourself and your model to doing it the WRONG way."

I think I could cover up the extra unwanted corrugations in the container doors with very thin acetate. However, I received this new information literally MINUTES after completing the decaling of the doors and clear coating them!



That's life
KurtLaughlin
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 1,814 posts
Armorama: 1,795 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 05:57 AM GMT+7

Quoted Text

I was fortunate to have recently acquired a Trumpeter 20' container which I just finished tonight. I can now confirm that both the Italeri 20' container and the Trumpeter 20' have roughly the same overall measurements. [I](The Italeri container is two scale inches taller.)[



But which one is right? The ISO height tolerance is +0/-5mm or +0/-3/16 inch, so a two inch difference means one is demonstrably wrong. (Length tolerance on a 20-footer is +0/-6mm or +0/-1/4 inch; width tolerance is +0/-5mm or +0/-3/16 inch, so there should not be any visible dimensional difference in a row of 1/35 containers.)

A single container with this size of discrepancy will still look OK and be fine for most modeling purposes but this difference can matter when making other items to fit like your CHU and trucks and trailers, or if the two brands are placed side-by-side in a model. It would also be good to know which one was better as a start for conversions and such.

KL
RobinNilsson
Visit this Community
Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 2,478 posts
Armorama: 2,202 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 06:13 AM GMT+7

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

I was fortunate to have recently acquired a Trumpeter 20' container which I just finished tonight. I can now confirm that both the Italeri 20' container and the Trumpeter 20' have roughly the same overall measurements. [I](The Italeri container is two scale inches taller.)[



But which one is right? The ISO height tolerance is +0/-5mm or +0/-3/16 inch, so a two inch difference means one is demonstrably wrong. (Length tolerance on a 20-footer is +0/-6mm or +0/-1/4 inch; width tolerance is +0/-5mm or +0/-3/16 inch, so there should not be any visible dimensional difference in a row of 1/35 containers.)

A single container with this size of discrepancy will still look OK and be fine for most modeling purposes but this difference can matter when making other items to fit like your CHU and trucks and trailers, or if the two brands are placed side-by-side in a model. It would also be good to know which one was better as a start for conversions and such.

KL



Hi Kurt,
And what are the nominal measurements?
Yes I know, I'm too bl**dy lazy too look it up myself
and since you have the tolerances I assume that you also
have the nominal values for length, width and height
/ Robin
Vodnik
Visit this Community
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,097 posts
Armorama: 3,696 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 09:28 AM GMT+7

Quoted Text


And what are the nominal measurements?
Yes I know, I'm too bl**dy lazy too look it up myself
and since you have the tolerances I assume that you also
have the nominal values for length, width and height
/ Robin



http://containersolutions.net/specifications/
MikeyBugs95
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Joined: May 27, 2013
KitMaker: 2,096 posts
Armorama: 1,605 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 09:30 AM GMT+7
Measurements for a 20ft ISO container:
Imperial:
Length: 20ft (obviously)
Width: 8ft
Height: 8.6ft

Metric:
Length: 6.096 m
Width: 2.44 m
Height: 2.59 m
RobinNilsson
Visit this Community
Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 2,478 posts
Armorama: 2,202 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 09:44 AM GMT+7

Quoted Text

Measurements for a 20ft ISO container:
Imperial:
Length: 20ft (obviously)
Width: 8ft
Height: 8.6ft

Metric:
Length: 6.096 m
Width: 2.44 m
Height: 2.59 m



which in 1/35th comes to
Length: 174.17 mm tolerance +0 / -0.17mm
Width: 69.71 mm tolerance +0 / -0.14mm
Height: 74 mm tolerance +0 / -0.14mm


Now we can only wait for the jury, i.e. Mike,
to come back with the verdict about which container is correct: Italeri or Trumpeter or maybe none of them ??

/ Robin
165thspc
Visit this Community
Kentucky, United States
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 6,535 posts
Armorama: 6,372 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 10:24 AM GMT+7
Please note Pawel's earlier comments:


Quoted Text


In Italeri kit is is rather simple modification. If I remember correctly I had to remove one "rib" on each side on the bottom as it was in a place where new pockets go. Then just cut pocket holes and add additional rib (or ribs? I don't remember...) on the bottom to create "channels", although you could probably get away with only making holes and skipping the bottom channels.

Looking at your photos above I think Trumpeter container has too narrow main pockets. If you just add inner pockets it would not look right, as the outer ones should be noticeably wider. I don't know how the bottom structure of this kit looks and how ribs are positioned, so I can't tell if widening main pockets and adding inner ones would be easy or not.

I had to accept some compromise with markings of doors. As you can see in photos above military containers only have two (most commonly) or three "grooves" on doors and a lot of flat surface for markings, unlike civilian ones like those in Italeri and Trumpeter kits. I was not able to replicate original door markings from US Navy Seabee container, as there was not enough flat space for them, so I improvised somewhat



Clearly there is more to consider than just a single height measurement being a little off. As Pawel points out, both these containers represent a civilian ISO spec product, NOT military. There is currently no true "military" spec container available to the hobby market. - Forklift pockets are wrong, door corrugations are wrong and I suspect the general layout of the corrugations throughout both containers are wrong for a mil spec container. In fact the corrugations on each container are totally different so which is MORE correct? At this point I have no idea!
RobinNilsson
Visit this Community
Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 2,478 posts
Armorama: 2,202 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 10:30 AM GMT+7
The measurements?
Get those vernier calipers and get us some measurements ....
The suspense is killing me
/ Robin
165thspc
Visit this Community
Kentucky, United States
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 6,535 posts
Armorama: 6,372 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 11:07 AM GMT+7
After more careful measurement the Italeri corner block holes are only off vertically by somewhere between a scale inch to an inch and a half.

Again the scale width between the corner block holes is right on the money!

In my mind I do not consider this a problem and according to Pawel the Italeri offering appears to be closer
(with some modifications *) to a mil spec container than the one Trumpeter sells.


* I will be ordering ANOTHER Italeri container in the near future and making the alterations that Pawel has suggested.
165thspc
Visit this Community
Kentucky, United States
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 6,535 posts
Armorama: 6,372 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 11:13 AM GMT+7
- The fact that Italeri actually offers multiple sets of military decals with
their container model seals the deal for me!
-
KurtLaughlin
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 1,814 posts
Armorama: 1,795 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 11:58 AM GMT+7

Quoted Text

Measurements for a 20ft ISO container:
Imperial:
Length: 20ft (obviously)
Width: 8ft
Height: 8.6ft



It might seem obvious, but no. The US typically buys ISO 1496 Type 1C or 1CC containers. The nominal dimensions are 19 ft 10-1/2 inches long, 8 ft wide, and 8 ft (1C) or 8 ft 6 inches (1CC) tall. (Only the 40 ft and 45 ft containers are their nominal lengths. The smaller containers are all shorter.)

KL
KurtLaughlin
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 1,814 posts
Armorama: 1,795 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 12:41 PM GMT+7

Quoted Text

Clearly there is more to consider than just a single height measurement being a little off. As Pawel points out, both these containers represent a civilian ISO spec product, NOT military.



The US military buys standard ISO containers. They simply exercise some options that others don't. (This does not apply to shelters or BICON/TRICON/QUADCON containers.) From the container inspection Standard:

"The most common type of freight container is the general purpose dry cargo type. This container completely encloses its contents by permanent steel structures and provides cargo loading access through end opening doors.

"Typical end opening steel containers can be 10, 20, 40, or 45 feet long by 8, 8-1/2, or 9 1/2 feet high. The standard width of an ISO container is 8 feet. The walls of a typical steel container are usually constructed of corrugated sheet steel panels that are welded to the main structural steel top and bottom side rails and end frames. The end frames are fitted with standard corner fittings (steel castings) at all eight corners that are welded to the four corner posts, top and bottom side and front rails, and rear door sill and header. The roof is usually constructed of either flat or corrugated sheet steel panels welded to the top side and end rails and door header and may have roof bows for support. The doors are usually either shaped steel frame with steel panels or plymetal (steel faced wood) panels fitted with locking and anti-rack hardware and weather-proof seals (gaskets). The flooring may be soft or hard laminated woods, planking, plywood, or composition material either screwed or bolted to the floor cross members. The floor cross members may be box, C, Z, or I shaped steel beams bolted or welded to the bottom side rails. Some containers are configured with all-steel flooring or a combination of wood and steel.

"An ISO freight container is primarily handled via connection with its internationally standard corner fittings; however, many steel containers are also provided with empty and/or loaded capacity forklift pockets to improve container handling versatility. Performance specifications for a typical 20 foot long end opening steel container are provided by commercial item description A-A-52032."

That CID was recently replaced by A-A-59272 which covers 1C containers with “PROPERTY OF U.S. ARMY” stenciled or letter decaled on each side wall, a minimum of 6 inches high. The exterior finish color is lusterless desert tan with an interior finish color of light gray. The 1CC containers under the old CID used 3 inch high lettering with a 8 x 12 US flag on each side.They were color 33446 or as ordered and could be light gray or white on the inside.

For a model, about the only visible thing that a military container has that a basic commercial container doesn't are the empty and loaded forklift pockets. None of the specifications require any specific corrugation pattern for the sides or doors. (The top has to be corrugated, though, not flat.)

KL
amoz02t
#192
Visit this Community
Kentucky, United States
Joined: November 25, 2009
KitMaker: 996 posts
Armorama: 972 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 01:51 PM GMT+7
This is awesome info! Thanks guys
KurtLaughlin
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 1,814 posts
Armorama: 1,795 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 02:07 PM GMT+7

Quoted Text

The US military buys standard ISO containers.



Just found . . . From A-A-59272:

"1. SCOPE. This commercial item description (CID) covers 20 foot (ft) x 8 ft x 8 ft (6.1 meters (m)) x 2.44 m x 2.44 m), reusable, International Organization of Standardization (ISO) 668 1C, end and side opening, cargo containers for the transportation, distribution, and storage of military supplies."

"3.2.1 Standard product. Except as otherwise specified herein (see 7.1), the container shall be the standard product of the contractor. The container shall be new and unused. New and unused containers shall be sealed at the factory and shipped without cargo to the final destination."

7.1 merely states how to order a container that *isn't* standard. It does not define any differences from a standard container.

Any visible differences between some arbitrary DOD container and a non-DOD container (besides the fork lift pockets) are the result of different fabrication methods by different suppliers.

KL
165thspc
Visit this Community
Kentucky, United States
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 6,535 posts
Armorama: 6,372 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 03:10 PM GMT+7
Kurt, thank you for all the GREAT information.

Question: Any chance you have come across specs for the size and placement of the four forklift pockets on a mil spec container?
Vodnik
Visit this Community
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,097 posts
Armorama: 3,696 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 05:43 PM GMT+7

Quoted Text

None of the specifications require any specific corrugation pattern for the sides or doors. (The top has to be corrugated, though, not flat.)


Kurt, I only base my comments on checking photos of large numbers of containers and the point is that those used by the US military (al least most of them, as they show on most photos I found) differ in style of corrugations on doors from what is included in Italeri and Trumpeter kits. Maybe indeed it is not a matter of military specification, but just a feature that particilar contractor was using on their "civilian" containers, but the fact remains that those kits do not represent the most common container type as used by US military.
Vodnik
Visit this Community
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,097 posts
Armorama: 3,696 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 - 05:57 PM GMT+7
This photo nicely illustrates possible different heights of ISO containers: