login   |    register
Armor/AFV
For all military ground-force modelling subjects.
REVIEW
US Army M60A2
barkingdigger
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
ARMORAMA
#013
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Member Since: June 20, 2008
entire network: 3,375 Posts
KitMaker Network: 493 Posts
Posted: Friday, November 06, 2015 - 09:16 PM UTC
Tom puts the new Academy Starship to the test.

Link to Item



If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!
18Bravo
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Member Since: January 20, 2005
entire network: 6,443 Posts
KitMaker Network: 896 Posts
Posted: Friday, November 06, 2015 - 09:27 PM UTC
Nice Review. I think this surpasses some people's expectations - they kit eschews the poly hubs found on earlier Academy releases. It's also nice to see an actual build review as opposed to a history lesson, an appraisal of the packaging, and a speculation as to how it should build up.
barkingdigger
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
ARMORAMA
#013
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Member Since: June 20, 2008
entire network: 3,375 Posts
KitMaker Network: 493 Posts
Posted: Friday, November 06, 2015 - 09:30 PM UTC
Thanks! I couldn't find a decent review elsewhere, so thought I'd fill the gap. Now we wait for the promised DML and AFV Club contenders...
flugwuzzi
Visit this Community
Lower Austria, Austria
Member Since: November 02, 2007
entire network: 596 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1 Posts
Posted: Saturday, November 07, 2015 - 12:30 AM UTC
Excellent review Tom!

I'm really enjoying your build-review. Much better than these "theoretical" reviews. You know what you are talking about. Great work.

Thanks for sharing your experiences during the build.

cheers
Walter
RLlockie
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Member Since: September 06, 2013
entire network: 921 Posts
KitMaker Network: 115 Posts
Posted: Saturday, November 07, 2015 - 01:13 AM UTC
But Tom, surely you should have mentioned how stout the box is (and critiqued the box art) - and where is all the detail of which finishing products you used, with photos of them?

This is dangerously like the sort of review that concentrates on what is actually in the box, how accurate it is and how well it fits together. Didn't you know that such things have no place in reviews these days? And you even cited some references - what is the world coming to?
barkingdigger
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
ARMORAMA
#013
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Member Since: June 20, 2008
entire network: 3,375 Posts
KitMaker Network: 493 Posts
Posted: Saturday, November 07, 2015 - 02:47 AM UTC
"Finishing"? You mean some folks actually manage to finish their kits?

But for the record the box is very sturdy, and the artwork almost makes the tank look effective...
Hisham
Visit this Community
Al Qahirah, Egypt / لعربية
Member Since: July 23, 2004
entire network: 6,856 Posts
KitMaker Network: 276 Posts
Posted: Saturday, November 07, 2015 - 02:49 AM UTC
Thank you for what should be a benchmark for future reviews

Hisham
barkingdigger
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
ARMORAMA
#013
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Member Since: June 20, 2008
entire network: 3,375 Posts
KitMaker Network: 493 Posts
Posted: Sunday, November 08, 2015 - 02:03 AM UTC
Added a small update about the markings.
Saber7
Visit this Community
Kentucky, United States
Member Since: September 05, 2005
entire network: 46 Posts
KitMaker Network: 6 Posts
Posted: Sunday, November 08, 2015 - 05:57 PM UTC
Nice review and the kit sounds like a good foundation. I think I will wait to see what AFV delivers...
M4A1Sherman
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Member Since: May 02, 2013
entire network: 3,877 Posts
KitMaker Network: 20 Posts
Posted: Monday, November 09, 2015 - 09:27 PM UTC

Quoted Text

But Tom, surely you should have mentioned how stout the box is (and critiqued the box art) - and where is all the detail of which finishing products you used, with photos of them?

This is dangerously like the sort of review that concentrates on what is actually in the box, how accurate it is and how well it fits together. Didn't you know that such things have no place in reviews these days? And you even cited some references - what is the world coming to?



Why would ANYONE want to know about what is actually in the box, how accurate the kit is, and how the parts fit together?

I'm going to wait for the AFV CLUB and DRAGON M60A2 kit reviews before I make any reckless leaps in buying mine.
Cuny12
Visit this Community
Australia
Member Since: April 04, 2010
entire network: 372 Posts
KitMaker Network: 26 Posts
Posted: Monday, November 09, 2015 - 11:00 PM UTC
Nice review I was looking at the Dragon Release and the one thing that kind of puts me off is the lack of Pe shown in the cad drawings on the box art if this is the case I would prefer to go with the AFV club kit or this kit itself I'm not into spending an extra 10 dollars on Pe screens when they realisticly should be included.

Cheers Ben.
M4A1Sherman
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Member Since: May 02, 2013
entire network: 3,877 Posts
KitMaker Network: 20 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 - 06:31 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Nice review I was looking at the Dragon Release and the one thing that kind of puts me off is the lack of Pe shown in the cad drawings on the box art if this is the case I would prefer to go with the AFV club kit or this kit itself I'm not into spending an extra 10 dollars on Pe screens when they realisticly should be included.

Cheers Ben.



Hi, Ben! Well, there are a few different schools of thought (not to say that you're wrong) as far as aftermarket PE sets + Resin Updates are concerned, one of which is my own philosophy:

I wait on building the best kit available, because I like to buy the best aftermarket PE sets, Resin Updates/Corrections kits, Metal Barrels etc on the market, then I glean the best of the aftermarket bits and pieces out of the various aftermarket kits, and use them on my model. Expensive? YES!!! But, I wind up with a model that meets my own personal standards. Again, I must stress that that is just me- In NO WAY do I imply that your or anyone else' way of building models is wrong. Quite the contrary! I'm just ridiculously OCD when it comes to my models!
C_JACQUEMONT
Visit this Community
Loire-Atlantique, France
Member Since: October 09, 2004
entire network: 2,425 Posts
KitMaker Network: 103 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 - 05:05 AM UTC
Great review, very thorough, thanks Tom! I have built the Adler conversion on a Esci hull (with your 3D printed air cleaners), and wrote a build blog on a French forum. I'm in the process of reviewing the Academy kit as well, waiting for the DEF Model update set to get started on construction.

Cheers,

Christophe
TankCarl
Visit this Community
Rhode Island, United States
Member Since: May 10, 2002
entire network: 3,559 Posts
KitMaker Network: 678 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 - 06:13 AM UTC
As a former crewman,I still see some room for improvement.
The CBSS bulge is off a bit.The rear grill doors,had their lower edge extend over and slightly down past the bulge,and those bolts for securing them were there. It looks like the bolts for holding the back deck on,at the rear, are still tiny.I recall them as being 1 1/16th " bolts.The grenade launchers are soo much better! All they will need, is a small handle for securing the caps in that notch between the tube and the turret. The long sponson box ribs are correct,2 shorter ones in the middle. I am glad sandsheilds were provided between the rear fender and the armored boxes around the tail lights. Bonus points for the lifting hooks for the cupola. The missing anchor points for the torsion bars should have been engineered into this kit. Lastly, on the top grill doors, the point where the rear of the aircleaner enters the hull, that section should be rounded, not flat.
barkingdigger
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
ARMORAMA
#013
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Member Since: June 20, 2008
entire network: 3,375 Posts
KitMaker Network: 493 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 - 03:12 PM UTC
Carl, your input is spot-on! All your corrections stem from Academy's use of their terrible Tamiya-clone M60A1 hull, when they really ought to have cut new 21st-century tooling. I'm sorely tempted to put the turret onto an Esci hull and bin the Academy parts...
TankCarl
Visit this Community
Rhode Island, United States
Member Since: May 10, 2002
entire network: 3,559 Posts
KitMaker Network: 678 Posts
Posted: Thursday, November 12, 2015 - 05:45 AM UTC
Tom,
I will eventually build all of the new releases, good or bad, just to compare and contrast what each manufacturer has gotten right
( Academy's capped grenade launchers) or horribly wrong
(Tamiya's 2 fuel fillers, side open air cleaners ,poor searchlight /mount...)