I mean, don't they even compare their kits to their own box art?
Hosted by Darren Baker
Black Label T54E1 - Dragon gets it wrong
jcneel
Joined: June 13, 2004
KitMaker: 135 posts
Armorama: 124 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 01:22 AM UTC
This is going to take some work. Think I'm done with Dragon's Black Label....
I mean, don't they even compare their kits to their own box art?
I mean, don't they even compare their kits to their own box art?
MattSz
Joined: January 06, 2013
KitMaker: 98 posts
Armorama: 98 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 01:27 AM UTC
Next black plague witch black label series.
To be honest this is not first time when box art shows more than we can find inside the box, unfortunately...
To be honest this is not first time when box art shows more than we can find inside the box, unfortunately...
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 01:39 AM UTC
What the heck!?!... It looks like they tooled the original crappy CAD version, not the corrected one, reworked with Ron Volstad's assistance... Complete f%$#up... 
By the way: good luck attaching the stowage boxes to fenders with this turret base...
By the way: good luck attaching the stowage boxes to fenders with this turret base...
jcneel
Joined: June 13, 2004
KitMaker: 135 posts
Armorama: 124 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 01:55 AM UTC
I'm thinking I'm going to have to cut the turret base down to the correct size (make it round) and then fill in the area to create the overhand. Might even be able to use what I cut from the base to fill the the underside of the overhang bottom side. Depends on how high I need to come of the get the dimension right.... if possible.
Like I said, gonna take some work...
cn
Like I said, gonna take some work...
cn
tanknick22
Joined: February 19, 2009
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 1,100 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 02:53 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I'm thinking I'm going to have to cut the turret base down to the correct size (make it round) and then fill in the area to create the overhand. Might even be able to use what I cut from the base to fill the the underside of the overhang bottom side. Depends on how high I need to come of the get the dimension right.... if possible.
Like I said, gonna take some work...
cn
Dragon really screwed the pooch on this one
Chuck4
Joined: November 13, 2013
KitMaker: 403 posts
Armorama: 401 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 03:14 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextI'm thinking I'm going to have to cut the turret base down to the correct size (make it round) and then fill in the area to create the overhand. Might even be able to use what I cut from the base to fill the the underside of the overhang bottom side. Depends on how high I need to come of the get the dimension right.... if possible.
Like I said, gonna take some work...
cn
Dragon really screwed the pooch on this one
Did they truly miss the turret overhang? Did the get the hull turret ring right?
tankmodeler
#417
Joined: March 01, 2004
KitMaker: 3,123 posts
Armorama: 2,539 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 03:23 AM UTC
Is it the photo perspective or is the turret too high, as Well?
JSSVIII
Joined: March 28, 2007
KitMaker: 1,169 posts
Armorama: 1,067 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 03:34 AM UTC
WOW! I had such high hopes for this one, I thought Dragon had turned a corner when they revised the cad drawings. Well at least that looks like an easier fix than some of their other mistakes, but I wonder what other problems there might be? What a shame!
Cantstopbuyingkits
Joined: January 28, 2015
KitMaker: 2,099 posts
Armorama: 1,920 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 04:03 AM UTC
The [auto-censored] is this? It looks the same as their original CAD they were supposed to have fixed.
27-1025
Joined: September 16, 2004
KitMaker: 1,281 posts
Armorama: 1,222 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 04:52 AM UTC
Quoted Text
WOW! I had such high hopes for this one, I thought Dragon had turned a corner when they revised the cad drawings. Well at least that looks like an easier fix than some of their other mistakes, but I wonder what other problems there might be? What a shame!
I was gonna say the opposite. Thinking it will be a pig to correct but I can't tell what the parts breakdown is from the pics provided here.
iowabrit
Joined: November 06, 2007
KitMaker: 585 posts
Armorama: 557 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 05:40 AM UTC
And they want how much for this POS? I haven't bought a dragon kit since I got caught by the crappy Saladin. Guess I still won't be buying any.....
SgtRam
Contributing Writer#197
Joined: March 06, 2011
KitMaker: 3,971 posts
Armorama: 2,859 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 08:26 AM UTC
Just wait for Voyager to do a photo-etched set, and it will make the the world good again. Currently working on the Conqueror, Aber barrel, Voyager photo-etched, and Master Club tracks.
bots1141
Joined: October 14, 2013
KitMaker: 318 posts
Armorama: 313 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 09:17 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Just wait for Voyager to do a photo-etched set, and it will make the the world good again. Currently working on the Conqueror, Aber barrel, Voyager photo-etched, and Master Club tracks.
Ive been waiting for an update for the M103! The last that I heard was that no one is making an update because the kit is such a disaster!
junglejim
Joined: February 18, 2003
KitMaker: 1,728 posts
Armorama: 1,629 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 10:09 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Just wait for Voyager to do a photo-etched set
How on earth will a photoetch set fix that monstrosity? Do you even see what the big problem is?...or are you trying to be humorous?
Jim
Petition2God
Joined: February 06, 2002
KitMaker: 1,526 posts
Armorama: 1,294 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 10:21 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextJust wait for Voyager to do a photo-etched set
How on earth will a photoetch set fix that monstrosity? Do you even see what the big problem is?...or are you trying to be humorous?
Jim
Yeah, to me it was obvious that Kevin was making a joke.
jasegreene
Joined: October 21, 2013
KitMaker: 751 posts
Armorama: 751 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 11:38 AM UTC
What is Dragon thinking,a two year old could see the difference between the photos of the turret and the Dragon's rendition.This will take a lot of rebuilding or maybe somebody will come up with a aftermarket turret.
Vodnik
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,342 posts
Armorama: 3,938 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 11:56 AM UTC
Quoted Text
What is Dragon thinking,a two year old could see the difference between the photos of the turret and the Dragon's rendition.This will take a lot of rebuilding or maybe somebody will come up with a aftermarket turret.
What is the point of this kit if you need aftermarket turret?... With aftermarket turret and some additional small changes you could just convert M48A1 kit
Particularly that small driver's hatch is wrong shape in the T54E1 kit (still too "pointy" on the left side, not rounded enough), so the hull isn't correct either and requires modifications...
MikeyBugs95
Joined: May 27, 2013
KitMaker: 2,210 posts
Armorama: 1,712 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 12:27 PM UTC
Frankly, I've lost faith in Dragon. I think the entire point of this Black Label line was simply to get these kits out there to take up the market share and ensure no other company can put to market any of the subject at a similar price. Accuracy and buildability be damned - get the subject out to ensure no competition. I really hope Trumpeter takes a hard look at these subjects and starts putting out these kits that Dragon screwed us on. I think the decisions Dragon is making with the Black Label line is going to come around and bite them. And personally I kind of hope so. For the prices we pay we should be getting at least a mostly-accurate, mostly-buildable kit. Slight inaccuracies, I feel, are OK. As long as the shape is right and no serious surgery is needed to get an accurate vehicle, such as with the Black Label line.
CowboyfromHell
Joined: September 18, 2014
KitMaker: 69 posts
Armorama: 68 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 02:06 PM UTC
wow.... just WOW.
Thanks for clarifying. Glad I didn't waste my money on this trash.
Thanks for clarifying. Glad I didn't waste my money on this trash.
barkingdigger
Associate Editor
#013
Joined: June 20, 2008
KitMaker: 3,981 posts
Armorama: 3,403 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 05:25 PM UTC
And yet nobody has commented on the amorphous blob of DS masquerading as the dust cover! So far it looks like all the main bits of turret are FUBAR on this one - clearly aimed at the "WoT" brigade rather than serious modellers. I'll vote with my feet...
tanknick22
Joined: February 19, 2009
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 1,100 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 05:41 PM UTC
Quoted Text
And yet nobody has commented on the amorphous blob of DS masquerading as the dust cover! So far it looks like all the main bits of turret are FUBAR on this one - clearly aimed at the "WoT" brigade rather than serious modellers. I'll vote with my feet...
We should all boycot Dragon
darreng
Joined: January 21, 2006
KitMaker: 789 posts
Armorama: 382 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 05:45 PM UTC
Can I just clarify that those of us who play WoT do care about accuracy I know I do anyway. But won't be buying this abomination.
tankmodeler
#417
Joined: March 01, 2004
KitMaker: 3,123 posts
Armorama: 2,539 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 06:43 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Can I just clarify that those of us who play WoT do care about accuracy I know I do anyway. But won't be buying this abomination.
Darren, I suspect most modellers who play care, at least to some degree, about the accuracy of their models, however the great mass of WoT players are not regular modellers and I suspect these releases are aimed at them, not us. That mass of potential builders really don't know or care much about accuracy, in the game or in a kit.
SgtRam
Contributing Writer#197
Joined: March 06, 2011
KitMaker: 3,971 posts
Armorama: 2,859 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 07:37 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextJust wait for Voyager to do a photo-etched set
How on earth will a photoetch set fix that monstrosity? Do you even see what the big problem is?...or are you trying to be humorous?
Jim
No, I was not trying to be funny. While it may not look good out of the box, with some work and aftermarket parts, it might build into a some what decent model. Sometimes modeling is not just assembly the kit out of the box, it means do a little extra work. And while it may not end up 100% accurate, a lot of modelers would be ok with that.
Bravo1102
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 04, 2017 - 07:58 PM UTC
Call me stupid or thick as a brick ,but just how does photo-etch fix a massively wrong shape and contour? On something like this it's mere window dressing for something that misses the shape of the real deal.
Now what I want to know, could I use this top hull to do a slick M48? Or will Dragon forget Black Label and add a slick M48 to their line-up now that they have a new hull top? They could even do it with German markings.
Now what I want to know, could I use this top hull to do a slick M48? Or will Dragon forget Black Label and add a slick M48 to their line-up now that they have a new hull top? They could even do it with German markings.
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.