login   |    register
Armor/AFV: Modern - USA
Modern Armor, AFVs, and Support vehicles.
Hosted by Darren Baker
HB M911 Tractor new pic and price
tanknick22
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: February 19, 2009
KitMaker: 1,089 posts
Armorama: 1,052 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 20, 2018 - 04:54 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

I was planning on buying the Meng kit, I'll wait and see how they both look now.


Here is the Meng kit unboxed:
http://www.moxing.net/2018/0121/8636.html




so when will the M911 be out?
Wierdy
Visit this Community
Ukraine / Україна
Joined: January 26, 2010
KitMaker: 570 posts
Armorama: 553 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 20, 2018 - 05:43 PM UTC
It is already available in China at 86 USD and is supposed to be on sale from Hobbyeasy since January 25-th.
aleluya
Visit this Community
England - North East, United Kingdom
Joined: January 25, 2010
KitMaker: 247 posts
Armorama: 247 posts
Posted: Sunday, January 21, 2018 - 02:15 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

I was planning on buying the Meng kit, I'll wait and see how they both look now.


Here is the Meng kit unboxed:
http://www.moxing.net/2018/0121/8636.html



what can be sure is those rubber tire needs to be replaced with no doute...what caught my eye is......what are those plastic chains? I don't think meng doesn't have such money to give us metal chain but this?....Big No...
aleluya
Visit this Community
England - North East, United Kingdom
Joined: January 25, 2010
KitMaker: 247 posts
Armorama: 247 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 - 02:26 AM UTC
Hobbyboss official said on their FB which M911 will be released right after Chinese New Year. Well at least Im not so hurry to have the kit on my desk now. Worth if the waiting
Rforand
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: July 14, 2013
KitMaker: 108 posts
Armorama: 89 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 - 03:07 AM UTC
Does the HB kit have an engine the Meng one does npt
HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,342 posts
Armorama: 13,482 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 - 04:59 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Does the HB kit have an engine the Meng one does npt



Their posted sprue shots don't seem to show any engine parts. Price is listed about the same at 115 Euros as well.

Sprue shots on Facebook

None on their exploded diagram either. It only shows the oil pan and bottom of the engine as a flat piece.

Mrclark7
Visit this Community
Texas, United States
Joined: June 04, 2017
KitMaker: 445 posts
Armorama: 431 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 - 05:59 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

I thought the load limit on the M911 w/ M747 trailer was 60-tons? If so, I don't think an M1A1 could be safely transported...







H.P.



well, one could say the first pic, its not actually on the trailer, and the second pic shows it after shedding quite a few pounds. lol
Frenchy
Visit this Community
Rhone, France
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,481 posts
Armorama: 12,269 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 - 06:17 PM UTC

Quoted Text

well, one could say the first pic, its not actually on the trailer, and the second pic shows it after shedding quite a few pounds. lol



So....What about this one ?



H.P.
Vodnik
Visit this Community
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,312 posts
Armorama: 3,908 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 - 06:25 PM UTC
M911 w/M747 was certainly used to transport M1A1. There are some photos of this combination in Tankograd book about US Army tank transporters. Yes, it exceeded the limits of this vehicle/trailer and it caused a lot of failures, but it was certainly used before the "Super HET" M1070/M1000 combination was introduced to service.
RobinNilsson
Staff MemberTOS Moderator
KITMAKER NETWORK
Visit this Community
Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 5,938 posts
Armorama: 4,976 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 - 06:27 PM UTC

Quoted Text

M911 w/M747 was certainly used to transport M1A1. There are some photos in Tankograd book about US Army tank transporters. Yes, it exceeded the limits of this vehicle/trailer and it caused a lot of failures, but it was certainly used before the "Super HET" M1070/M1000 combination was introduced to service.



Posted by me previously in this thread:

"
"With the introduction of M1A1 Abrams main battle tank into service with the US Army, the M911 was unable to carry the load. Vehicles demonstrated poor durability with loads in excess of 60 t during operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. Its replacement emerged as the Oshkosh M1070."
http://www.military-today.com/trucks/m911.htm
max load according to Janes is 54545 kg and there should be a safety margin in there somewhere. It was designed for the MBT-70 and fails (after a while) when carrying the M1.
/ Robin"

Quoting myself, how sad is that ....
/ Robin
Vodnik
Visit this Community
Warszawa, Poland
Joined: March 26, 2003
KitMaker: 4,312 posts
Armorama: 3,908 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 - 06:31 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoting myself, how sad is that ....


Well... I don't know why you did that, considering that I just confirmed what you wrote earlier, but whatever...
RobinNilsson
Staff MemberTOS Moderator
KITMAKER NETWORK
Visit this Community
Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 5,938 posts
Armorama: 4,976 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 - 06:44 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


Quoting myself, how sad is that ....


Well... I don't know why you did that, considering that I just confirmed what you wrote earlier, but whatever...



If we post this information often enough we could have a chance of finally answering the question
My first post was on the first page in this thread and the question popped up again on the second page.
Maybe it will turn up again on the third page (if there ever will be one) when someone asks if it is OK to load a Desert Shield / Desert Storm Abrams on the C-HET ....
/ Robin



And in case anyone wonders why the M1070 was NOT used during Desert Shield or Desert Storm the answer can be found here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oshkosh_M1070

Gino already said this before in this thread but I repeat it here. After all, repetitions is one of the fundamental parts of learning ....
Text from the Wikipedia article linked above.
"To meet a U.S. Army requirement for the transport of the M1 Abrams main battle tank (MBT) Oshkosh Truck Corporation (now Oshkosh Defense) proposed the M1070. A contract for 1044 M1070 was placed, with production commencing in July 1992. The contract included an option for 522 additional units.[4]

The final U.S. Army contract for the original A0 version called for 195 vehicles. These were delivered between March 2001 and March 2003. U.S. Army deliveries of A0 versions totalled 2,488.[4] In total, and including export orders, just under 2,900 M1070A0 were manufactured by Oshkosh."
armouredcharmer
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: June 09, 2009
KitMaker: 670 posts
Armorama: 410 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 01, 2018 - 02:00 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Does the HB kit have an engine the Meng one does npt



Their posted sprue shots don't seem to show any engine parts. Price is listed about the same at 115 Euros as well.

Sprue shots on Facebook

None on their exploded diagram either. It only shows the oil pan and bottom of the engine as a flat piece.




Hi Gang, I personally prefer it that way, I cant see the point of putting an engine in a kit if you're going to display it "in action". Do not get me wrong - I bought Meng`s Bradley kits AND the interiors (Three - one to use on a Tamiya kit to build a cavalry fighting vehicle!) but having built these the engines went into the spares box.
If leaving stuff like this out (or in Meng`s case an optional extra) keeps the price down I'm all for it.
retiredyank
Visit this Community
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Friday, February 02, 2018 - 10:09 PM UTC

Quoted Text

their 9A52-2 which totally a joke as they just simply changed the scud model which based on maz7911 into a freak: only the cabin shell is maz543...
Lets see the final result.



Every review I have read would disagree, with this statement.
zedhol
Visit this Community
Ohio, United States
Joined: December 01, 2009
KitMaker: 244 posts
Armorama: 160 posts
Posted: Monday, March 26, 2018 - 07:51 PM UTC
Well, I just got my Meng M911 and all I can say is WOW. I cannot vouch for accuracy or fit yet, but looking at what I have so far, I can't wait to build it.

The subject itself obviously requires that any model will be impressive in size, but that is not the only thing that gives this a WOW factor. Level of detail is exceptional and mold quality is superb. The large parts count is also a reflection of size, but I think it also reflects the intelligent design work that Meng have put in to this kit. There are places where multiple parts are appropriate and in those places this approach has been used and where not appropriate single pieces are used. Furthermore, the molding quality is excellent, none of the mold slip that is so prevalent in Trumpeter/Hobbyboss kits, i.e. the Vickers Medium Mk I that I am currently building. Meng have molded several hoses in plastic (e.g. D26 & 30) that are usable as is with no clean up that, in my experience with HB would often need replacing. Note, I do buy HB kits and look forward to many of their future releases and I don't have their M911 to compare, but just stating previous experience. The quality of the Meng parts are what I expect for the price that this costs and Meng have delivered.

Some more things of note, the kit includes just a few PE parts, but they are right for the places where they are used and there are several jigs to assist folding the PE into the right shape. Also included are window masks, metal tow cable, red and blue wire for the connections and reflective self adhesive metal for the mirrors. Decals are in perfect register and readable. This kit includes everything to make a superb model out of the box. There will be aftermarket that can do more, but for once I won't be buying any.
Wierdy
Visit this Community
Ukraine / Україна
Joined: January 26, 2010
KitMaker: 570 posts
Armorama: 553 posts
Posted: Monday, March 26, 2018 - 08:21 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Well, I just got my Meng M911 and all I can say is WOW. I cannot vouch for accuracy or fit yet, but looking at what I have so far, I can't wait to build it.


Hoping to see your build real soon!
KurtLaughlin
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,290 posts
Armorama: 2,265 posts
Posted: Monday, March 26, 2018 - 08:41 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


Quoted Text

These larger size vehicles kind of suppose to be more accurate than 'normal' kits such as tanks and softskins due to higher prices.



No, they cost more because they have higher design and production costs.

KL


But will they have high sales rate if underresearched and simplified? Those behemoths in big boxes cost a lot and they are not the main profit-makers for manufacturers. IMHO, they are made to demonstrate potential, experience and confidence of design and development team of a particular kit maker, along with their moulding craftsmanship. 'See, that's what we can do!'



Well, as you said, that's your opinion, or maybe just your dream.

Regardless, there's no evidence to say that big kits are more expensive because they are supposed to be more accurate. There is plenty of evidence that they are more expensive because they are bigger.

KL
horrido666
Joined: September 05, 2011
KitMaker: 33 posts
Armorama: 26 posts
Posted: Friday, February 21, 2020 - 02:42 AM UTC
3rd ACR, 1984, New Mexico