login   |    register
Armor/AFV
For all ground-operating modelling subjects.
REVIEW
Trumpeter VK 3001(H) Pz.Kpfw. VI
c5flies
_VISITCOMMUNITY
California, United States
Joined: October 21, 2007
KitMaker: 3,684 posts
AeroScale: 4 posts
Posted: Saturday, April 18, 2009 - 11:20 AM UTC
Mike High provides an In-Box review of Trumpeter's German VK 3001(H) Pz.Kpfw. VI Ausf. A, in 1/35.

Link to Item



If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!
jet
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Alberta, Canada
Joined: December 30, 2002
KitMaker: 306 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Saturday, April 18, 2009 - 11:35 AM UTC
The kit is pretty good. One thing that has been discussed is the storage boxes on the back of the fenders- were they really there on the real vehicle. Popular feeling is - ...no.
http://www.planetarmor.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5806

http://tinyurl.com/dbxlze

TacFireGuru
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Colorado, United States
Joined: December 25, 2004
KitMaker: 3,698 posts
AeroScale: 198 posts
Posted: Saturday, April 18, 2009 - 12:40 PM UTC
James,

All one can really say about this is... "Prototype." Storage boxes versus Prototype? Can't comment on that. The one thing, while doing the review (based on an assumption) is that it would have been nice to have had the Panzer Tracts volume that covers the Sturer Emil. Something tells me it would have had some reference to it's "birthright."

So, did the "real deal" have the boxes? I'm thinking we'd need to talk to the Henschel folks. HOWEVER.....the one picture I have of the VK 3601 does show the boxes.

Regardless...it's a good kit...one that'll be a joy to put together. There's a post online about this one that talks about, and shows, the nasty seam connections for the idlers and drives. I'm thinking the reviewer got a pre-production version? The kit I have is very clean compared to his photos. So, dunno 'bout that.

I have two kits to finish up ('bout two to four weeks) and then I'll build this one....build log and all. Should be fun.

Mike
jet
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Alberta, Canada
Joined: December 30, 2002
KitMaker: 306 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Saturday, April 18, 2009 - 12:56 PM UTC
That is a different vehicle- sorry , doesn't really clear this up for us.
here is one of the VK30.01(H) showing no boxes


another post discussing the correct configuration of the "storage box/air inlets"
http://tinyurl.com/dls8v8
TacFireGuru
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Colorado, United States
Joined: December 25, 2004
KitMaker: 3,698 posts
AeroScale: 198 posts
Posted: Saturday, April 18, 2009 - 01:37 PM UTC

Quoted Text

another post discussing the correct configuration of the "storage box/air inlets"
http://tinyurl.com/dls8v8



Not to debate it...nor get into a squabble...but it's a "prototype." The photo you showed, shows more than any link could. Based on that picture, which I've saved, I'd say that's enough for me now; they didn't apppear to be there. All's good. Unfortunately, the writer, unequivocally states that they were never there....base this "truth" on one picture??? This is based on??? Further information would be nice.

Regardless, with this information presented (unless something else presents itself), I'd be inclined to build this kit without the boxes.

Mike
jet
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Alberta, Canada
Joined: December 30, 2002
KitMaker: 306 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Saturday, April 18, 2009 - 02:13 PM UTC
Mike - it's all good-
my intent was not to do nothing but add to the information available to modeller's of this kit.
How they chose to use it is their own decision.
In my own case I chose not to sweat it and didn't remove the boxes.

True, I learned a little too late, after it was all together and with a coat of paint but I could have carved them off and repainted, but well it wasn't worth it to me.

Would I do the next one without the boxes? - probably. I still think it is a bit of a mystery as to the configuration of this area- In the above picture it almost appears there is an opening on the side with a some thin rod running parallel.

Perhaps more will be revealed.
TacFireGuru
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Colorado, United States
Joined: December 25, 2004
KitMaker: 3,698 posts
AeroScale: 198 posts
Posted: Saturday, April 18, 2009 - 02:37 PM UTC
James,

NO harm, NO foul. One of the nice things about the Kitmaker Network....we come together, we discuss, we debate, we figure it out. Personally, I'd like to see what you've done...If you will, post here....it'll be a very nice tie-in to what I'll wind up doing. When I get to the build, I'd truly enjoy collaborating with you.

Mike
Tarok
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Victoria, Australia
Joined: July 28, 2004
KitMaker: 10,889 posts
AeroScale: 174 posts
Posted: Sunday, April 19, 2009 - 12:56 AM UTC
Thanks for the review, Mike.
bizzychicken
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Wales, United Kingdom
Joined: September 06, 2008
KitMaker: 967 posts
AeroScale: 5 posts
Posted: Sunday, April 19, 2009 - 03:20 AM UTC
Thanks Mike nice review. Nice one James for the extra info on the boxes. Love the IV, this little baby looks really chunkey with that "Beefed Up" surpension and really clean lines. Thinking I'll Have to get one of these when my working life or lack off it sorts its self out. Thanks guys. This review has got me hooked, especially the turret. Are they two hatches at the sides of the commanders coupla? If so you could really open this up How much info is out there for the inside of the turret, maybe very similar to an Ausf A ? Cheers Guys Geraint
TacFireGuru
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Colorado, United States
Joined: December 25, 2004
KitMaker: 3,698 posts
AeroScale: 198 posts
Posted: Sunday, April 19, 2009 - 03:42 AM UTC
Rudi, Geraint - thanks for the comments.


Quoted Text

Are they two hatches at the sides of the commanders coupla?



On the top of the turret are two hatches, more or less framing the front of the Commander's cupola. On each side of the turret is a vision port...though not "made" to be opened, they could be I guess. Also, on the rear of the turrent, on both the left and right, are pistol ports(?). Those aren't designed to be opened up.

Mike
jet
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Alberta, Canada
Joined: December 30, 2002
KitMaker: 306 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Sunday, April 19, 2009 - 07:58 AM UTC
Here is another's take on the kit... or parts of it
http://www.missing-lynx.com/gallery/german/concretepanzersz_1.html
TacFireGuru
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Colorado, United States
Joined: December 25, 2004
KitMaker: 3,698 posts
AeroScale: 198 posts
Posted: Sunday, April 19, 2009 - 09:09 AM UTC
Thanks James...neat!

I did some more looking around and I wonder: There's a picture of the VK3601(H) on the net....that one distinctly shows one of the storage boxes. Is it possible that they made this kit and utilized something from that? Wish I had the Panzer Tracts for this.....

Mike
TankCarl
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Rhode Island, United States
Joined: May 10, 2002
KitMaker: 3,566 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Sunday, April 19, 2009 - 10:02 AM UTC






It goes together easily.I would have preferred the link and length system trumpeter used on the KV 2 series,however. The turret interior is basic,but I guess there weren't many good references for the true layout.
I agree the molding was okay,I was reminded of mid quality Tamiya in some areas. The lifting hooks on the turret front corneres were not as well detailed as i hoped.
bizzychicken
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Wales, United Kingdom
Joined: September 06, 2008
KitMaker: 967 posts
AeroScale: 5 posts
Posted: Monday, April 20, 2009 - 05:57 AM UTC
Nice to see the kit built up, yes those tracks do look rubber bandy. Nice to see Steve Zaloga 's opened up turret on ML lots of possiblities. Still like the chunky box light shape. Thanks all cheers Geraint
Taeuss
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Manitoba, Canada
Joined: January 03, 2016
KitMaker: 2,997 posts
AeroScale: 2 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 29, 2016 - 09:25 AM UTC
Personally for such a basic kit I was rather nonplussed at the inclusion of rubber-band tracks on a kit that costs as much as this one does. Ditto on the lack of interior detail for a kit that set me back this much. As to accuracy of detail: as a prototype I would imagine that they changed features on it on a frequent basis. They would, I'm sure, try one feature, get feed back during troop trials, and then modify accordingly. Its all good. Except for the lack of interior details. And individual link tracks!
brekinapez
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Georgia, United States
Joined: July 26, 2013
KitMaker: 1,951 posts
AeroScale: 114 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 29, 2016 - 10:27 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Personally for such a basic kit I was rather nonplussed at the inclusion of rubber-band tracks on a kit that costs as much as this one does. Ditto on the lack of interior detail for a kit that set me back this much. As to accuracy of detail: as a prototype I would imagine that they changed features on it on a frequent basis. They would, I'm sure, try one feature, get feed back during troop trials, and then modify accordingly. Its all good. Except for the lack of interior details. And individual link tracks!



Frank,

Have you been enjoying your journey through Armorama history, or are you a necromancer raising corpses for some sinister scheme?
Taeuss
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Manitoba, Canada
Joined: January 03, 2016
KitMaker: 2,997 posts
AeroScale: 2 posts
Posted: Friday, December 30, 2016 - 04:21 AM UTC
(Long pause). May-beee...
Taeuss
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Manitoba, Canada
Joined: January 03, 2016
KitMaker: 2,997 posts
AeroScale: 2 posts
Posted: Friday, December 30, 2016 - 04:39 AM UTC
Actually I'm currently building this kit and was hoping for some insight into it. I was thinking of modelling it without the turret, replacing this with the weights that they used to simulate the turret during trials. So yes, I'm trawling through old stuff, but I'm hoping to "resurrect" the conversation that might have benefitted from a few years of thought.