login   |    register
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
REVIEW
Geschützwagen VI 21cm Msr 18
staff_Jim
Staff MemberPublisher
KITMAKER NETWORK
#002
Visit this Community
New Hampshire, United States
Joined: December 15, 2001
KitMaker: 12,441 posts
Armorama: 6,570 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 10:16 AM UTC
Jim takes a first-look at this paper-panzer behemouth from Trumpter.

Link to Item



If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!
warreni
Visit this Community
South Australia, Australia
Joined: August 14, 2007
KitMaker: 5,862 posts
Armorama: 709 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 11:25 AM UTC
For some reason the detail in the rating box is not coming up..

It amazes me how model companies like Trumpeter do not engineer their kits to remove the ejector pin problem. I have a feeling that it is more to do with not waiting sufficient time for the plastic to cool before ejecting the sprue from the mould more than anything.
CMOT
Staff MemberEditor-in-Chief
ARMORAMA
#406
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 10,629 posts
Armorama: 8,362 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 07:22 PM UTC
Jim having built the earlier version of this from Trumpeter I can say it is identical with the exception of the gun barrel and possibly some elements of the gun carriage, the rear support is included in both kits. I am an avid fan of most Trumpeter kits however this one leaves me cold as having built the earlier version, the faults on this version are more prominent as regards sink marks and push out marks. I feel Trumpeter has let people down with this kit due to the afore mentioned faults with a very high price tag, I can only assume that the original mould is not holding up very well.
metooshelah
#011
Visit this Community
Jerusalem, Israel
Joined: February 06, 2009
KitMaker: 1,505 posts
Armorama: 1,303 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 09:19 PM UTC
what's the size of the lower hull? seems like a big vehicle
Plasticbattle
#003
Visit this Community
Donegal, Ireland
Joined: May 14, 2002
KitMaker: 9,762 posts
Armorama: 7,443 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 09:29 PM UTC

Quoted Text

It amazes me how model companies like Trumpeter do not engineer their kits to remove the ejector pin problem. I have a feeling that it is more to do with not waiting sufficient time for the plastic to cool before ejecting the sprue from the mould more than anything.


That extra engineering would more than likely add to the cost as well. Ejector pins are a neccessity, and when you have large flat pieces, with details on both sides, one side is going to suffer. Waiting until it cools more, means the smaller pieces on the same sprue would be cold and possibly be damaged when being ejected. To put all the bigger pieces on the same sprue is not always possible, so the only other option is to break it down more, meaning more pieces. Im guessing its done like to limit the overall costs, as well as losing customers with too many parts/un-necessary assembly.
On the plus side, they are not deep (because of size and quantity), so give them a generous brush with Mr. Surfacer 500 or some other putty, and sand them ... they should be easy enough to deal with.
My biggest nit-pick with this kit is the one piece tracks. If I was considering buying this, Id also have to consider AM tracks.
Thanks for the review and images Jim.
PantherF
Visit this Community
Indiana, United States
Joined: June 10, 2005
KitMaker: 6,188 posts
Armorama: 5,960 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 16, 2010 - 12:40 AM UTC
Very nice, detailed review. You guys don't know how lucky we are that these are available to us to take a peak inside the box.


- Jeff
staff_Jim
Staff MemberPublisher
KITMAKER NETWORK
#002
Visit this Community
New Hampshire, United States
Joined: December 15, 2001
KitMaker: 12,441 posts
Armorama: 6,570 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 16, 2010 - 09:51 AM UTC

Quoted Text

what's the size of the lower hull? seems like a big vehicle



27cm

Illini
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: March 27, 2003
KitMaker: 320 posts
Armorama: 230 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 16, 2010 - 10:09 AM UTC
I totally agree. I ordered this kit because of it's "new" packaging, and model number (VI). I thought this would gow well with the 21cm Morser I reviewed recently.

I also have the original 17cm version, and spent some time yesterday comparing the two. The only difference, is between the two sprues that provide the barrel and breech parts. Otherwise, they are identical. Even the instructions are identical, except for where these parts are assembled.

I was also dissapointed to learn that the 17cm and 21cm morser kits are also identical except for these same sprues. Each has several "not used" parts that are used in the other. Economy of scale - yes. Honesty?


Bratushka
Visit this Community
Indiana, United States
Joined: May 09, 2008
KitMaker: 1,019 posts
Armorama: 657 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 16, 2010 - 11:30 AM UTC
I just ordered this kit last Friday. I hate to think I am going to have to relive the pin mark nightmare the Geschutzwagen Tiger fur 17 cm Kanone 72 (Sf) kit was! A lot of the marks were near details (hatches and covers) so were tricky to deal with so not to damage or mar details. Easily 3/4 of them would have been visible. I managed to fill them in but it was a chore because there were just so many of them. Some were very deep. Definitely the worst case of that I have ever seen to date! I considered making some of the hull covers removable because it did have some fantastic engine and interior detail, but again, so many pin marks made me unsure if I wanted to bother!

I have yet to finish that kit because it had some deformed parts. I tried to get replacements for it and was even willing to buy them. After a year of getting nowhere with Stevens International and with Trumpeter, filling out forms and sending emails I gave up. Then, one of my cats chewing up some things didn't help matters. I just broke down and ordered a second kit this morning to get the parts to complete it. (no luck asking in BST here) Fortunately I found one for $60 + shipping from China.

Maybe this one will go better.

@ Matan. I can set 3 Panzer Is end to end on the hull with only a bit of overhang! It is big! It took a LOT of paint, too!

grunt26
Visit this Community
Michigan, United States
Joined: July 23, 2005
KitMaker: 151 posts
Armorama: 117 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 30, 2010 - 01:06 AM UTC
I can't hold my tongue any longer! What is it with this "paper panzer" crap? For everyone who claims to build their models to represent history, and I've seen so much great work done on this site, that to me this is equivalent to modeling the USS Enterprise from Star Trek, in terms of realism! ITS SCI-FI modeling!! It DIDN'T EXIST!!! Why waste time on these mythical creatures, build something real, like a unicorn, or little green man from Mars. Plus, great companies WASTING time, money, energy, and materials, to produce these kits. Seriously, I don't get it.
CMOT
Staff MemberEditor-in-Chief
ARMORAMA
#406
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 10,629 posts
Armorama: 8,362 posts
Posted: Saturday, June 12, 2010 - 07:24 PM UTC
Sorry Rod I cannot agree with you as the paper panzers are for the most part fun to build with no one having a dig about this that and the other would never have been done. If you think about this the market mist be there or no one would make the model in the first place. One last thing the chssis for this beast did excist and there are pictures of it with US troops stood on it giving an idea of just how big it was, I do not know if the gun had been made to fit it though.
John_O
Visit this Community
Oost-Vlaanderen, Belgium
Joined: November 23, 2007
KitMaker: 569 posts
Armorama: 322 posts
Posted: Saturday, June 12, 2010 - 10:36 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I can't hold my tongue any longer! What is it with this "paper panzer" crap? For everyone who claims to build their models to represent history, and I've seen so much great work done on this site, that to me this is equivalent to modeling the USS Enterprise from Star Trek, in terms of realism! ITS SCI-FI modeling!! It DIDN'T EXIST!!! Why waste time on these mythical creatures, build something real, like a unicorn, or little green man from Mars. Plus, great companies WASTING time, money, energy, and materials, to produce these kits. Seriously, I don't get it.



Congratulations Rod! You just managed to offend and insult a whole group of model builders with your intolerant and arrogant attitude. I won't be WASTING any more time and energy on this, I need to get back to my paper panzer crap.

J

workbench:
E-75, E-50, SWS UHU, King Tiger 1946, Panther F, ..., Yes, my precious mythical vehicles THAT DIDN'T EXIST!
jointhepit
Visit this Community
Oost-Vlaanderen, Belgium
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 3,829 posts
Armorama: 881 posts
Posted: Monday, June 14, 2010 - 09:01 AM UTC
@Grunt;
Quoted Text

It DIDN'T EXIST!!!




denial, or not enough love

why post this comment?

why did you take time to even read a topic of something that you believe isn't real?


or nor sure anymore?

it's only a simple google away, the answer

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/grille-series-cricket-series.htm

took me 10 seconds