Are MRAP kits out of fashion?

[KurtLaughlin]

My viewpoint as a model consumer:

I pretty much avoid modern (post 1975) subjects because it’s just too difficult to keep track of what’s what. The changes were rapid in the first two decades of this century and references were few to non-existent. (I’m talking about something beyond in-service photos.) If you weren’t interested in modeling a particular vehicle extrapolation was risky because a different unit at the same time or the same unit just a year later might look very different - or there might be completely different vehicle in the same spot. I’m even leery of assuming that the hidden side of vehicle A was configured the same way as vehicle B in the same photo.

I’m also not that interested in desert schemes, so that another hit to the appeal for me.

As you might guess, I’m not a “build a model just to build a model” guy nor a weathering fan looking for the next canvas. These just don’t spark me, like Spanish Civil War, Arab-Israeli War, Vietnam, or most German armor fails to engage me. Whether this view is widespread or not, I can’t say - everybody doesn’t like something.

KL

[Brantwoodboy]

Well stated Sir and I think diversity of build topics makes the hobby an amazing thing I get to see builds that I would never build but somebody else has and done an amazing job on and learn from their techniques and skills

[G.Baran]

There will always be the need for the MRAP’S in the world. Like the Tigers, Panthers, Pattons and any machine of war. There will always beinterest in them . The curious young adult and the retired old men/women who want to see them in model form or live. I just recently found the Marine corps Otter used in Viet Nam. Never knew this was used. That is the joy of this hobby. The investigation of a vehicle. To answer your question. There should always be MRAP’s . Just in different configurations.

[Damraska]

This is the one I picked up…

Someone informed me that the replacement tires I purchased are civilian pattern. Almost all the ones deployed to Afghanistan used an off road pattern tire. I was also told the model needs some work because various bits are missing.

The Buffalo by Bronco has resided on my Want List for a very long time. The complexity of that project is a serious concern. I have not done any research to compare currently available Buffalo models.

Last night, I used Scale Hobbyist and ScaleMates to look for MRAP models. There are quite a few but as stated previously, I know almost nothing about them. Most look like petulant SUVs in severe danger of an immanent rollover accident.

I did see that many MRAPs were used during the Second Battle of Fallujah. That would be a very good engagement to model for a lot of reasons.

[Brantwoodboy]

You are correct about the tires being the wrong kind. I’ve only seen these tires used in training or when there were no overpass tires available. The overpass tires are made to the operator can deflate them to the point that they can drive over a mine and not set it off. That is actually the only good thing that the panda kit has going for it as they have the correct tires.

[Pawel]

Well I just got me a Buffalo with slat armor and I’m just amazed at how many parts are in that kit. While it’s outside of my speciality (Vietnam) I’m just fascinated how ugly that machine is and I also hope to build it out of the box, with no mods nor aftermarket. Some time ago I also bought the Cougar six-by for similar reasons, but when the Buffalo showed up with a good price I couldn’t pass it!
One modeller in Poland just developed a 3D model and 3D print of the mother of all MRAPs - the Casspir:

Casspir 1/35 Projekt 3D

[Brantwoodboy]

You should have seen the ones I got to play with at FT Leonardwood when I went to school to learn how to work on them. They were legends in the route clearance world with double digit IED strikes and they still had the scars and the blast makings on them. I wish I had pictures of them.

[Damraska]

Interesting synchronicity: A couple nights ago, I was reading about how the Germans used French tanks for security patrols during World War II. Tank Encyclopedia recently posted an article on the subject. In essence, MRAPs were fielded to serve the exact same purpose. Kinda weird that one great grandfather of a M-ATV is a Somua S35.

The M-ATV by Rye Field looks like a really nice model. It strongly reminds me of some MiniArt trucks in my stockpile.

Do any MRAPs have armored flaps for the windows, like armored cars in World War II? That would make painting a lot easier.

[Pitar]

I’ve wondered the same thing—MRAPs had a burst of popularity for a while, but you don’t see many fresh builds lately. Which is a shame, because they’ve got such distinctive shapes and tons of weathering potential.

Do you think the dip is just a phase, or are modelers shifting focus to more “classic” armor subjects again? I’d be curious to see if a new-tool kit could reignite interest.

[tanknick22]

I have a habbit of building what is currently in service here is a pic of my 2 MRAPs and a MPCV
going left to right aslo had a husky VMMD but it got damaged in moving stuff around need to build a new one and also would like to add a RG-31 Mk.5
Pands hobby Buffalo A2 with some tweaks done to it such as voyagers photoetch set and added air and hydraulic lines to the arm
RFM M1240A1 M-ATV
Panda hobby Maxxpro dash dxm

[18bravo]

Dudes are still building DML kits from the mid 90’s. I expect we’ll see a resurgence in MRAPs in about thirty years as we whittle those stashes away.

[Uncle-Heavy]

@KurtLaughlin

everybody doesn’t like something.

and that right there is a universal truth

[SableLiger]

Been wanting to build a Navistar Maxxpro Dash MRAP with the mine roller.

I’m just not a big fan of Panda kits.

[Trisaw]

Nothing protects like an MRAP for moving troops on tactical truck wheels, and nothing is as expensive, heavy, large, and cumbersome as an MRAP either.

The US Department of Defense divested many MRAPs with the invention of the M-ATV and then the JLTV, which is why I am surprised that the US Secretary of Defense decided to guillotine the JLTV. The JLTV was about the lightest tactical truck with the armored protection offered by the heavier and somewhat less mobile M-ATV. So the M-ATV kind of fell out of favor for the JLTV, which is an improvement over the M-ATV, and the M-ATV which is an improvement over the much larger and heavier MRAP. The M-ATVs and JLTVs are a reduction in size over the larger MRAP, and thus more mobile and way better than a M1114 HMMWV.

When the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq ended, the US Military was flooded with excess MRAPs. It costs a lot of money to ship back all of those MRAPs. Thus, the US Military decided to divest many of them because they were driven hard and most likely needed refurbishment and reset. HMMWVs were often reset to “Zero miles” by AM General by tearing them down, cleaning them, and replacing old, damaged, and worn parts. Doing so to MRAPs would be a monumental workforce task and cost hundreds of millions of dollars and take many years. So, the US Army decided not to do it to all MRAPs and instead spent the money elsewhere towards M-ATVs and JLTVs, in which the FPV drones kind of nixed that idea of armored tactical trucks which I don’t agree with.

It’s the classic case of “Refurbish old or build new” for the US Army and the US Marines. Now with the current Administration, there doesn’t seem to be a need for any new armored tactical truck programs (HMMWV and JLTV programs canceled) which seems very myopic in my opinion to save money for who-knows-what.

[SableLiger]

Kind what General Dynamics Land Systems do to the Abrams tank. We haven’t built new Abrams since the 80-90s; we just take the older ones and send them to Lima, OH to be upgraded and brought back to “Zero Miles” condition.

Same with all the tanks that have been damaged in combat. They get sent back, repaired and rebuilt to “Zero Miles”.

[Damraska]

If leaders of the United States have no more aspirations to police territory subject to an insurgency, is there any need for MRAP vehicles?

Based on what I have read over the last few days, MRAP vehicles are armored cars for patrolling built up, subjugated territory. They are expensive to operate. They guzzle gas. They are terrible off roads. They are too heavy to cross many bridges. They tend to roll. They are very tall and hard to conceal. They have no use in maneuver warfare.

I would park all the unneeded MRAP vehicles in a big, covered, secure, storage facility for future use rather than blowing them out in a fire sale. That is government officials wasting MY MONEY yet again.

Stopping procurement of HMMWVs does not make sense to me. Those are Jeeps. Jeeps still have lots of uses during peace and war.

[Stickframe]

All of this talk about MRAPs reminded me that I really enjoyed building kits of them.

When Panda produced the only MATV kit, I bought and made several of them, each representing a variant. While these kits are not an easy build at all, the results can be pretty nice. I looked in the stash and still have a few of the Panda kits, and one from RFM. I’ve read that the RFM kits go together really well, so am looking forward to eventually building it.

The RG series of trucks by Kinetic build up pretty well, and as I noted before, the details are a bit soft.

I decided it would be a good idea to make an RG-33 AUV SOCOM, twice. These were essentially scratch builds, something that I really wanted to do, and building both was really challenging for different reasons. The first try was fine, but not great, but it was also done about 10 years ago, while the other more recently. The latter turned out a lot better, but it should have, as I have more experience.

As no kit for the RG 33 AUV exists, I used parts from two Kinetic RG-31 Mk5s, parts from an M1083 kit, and a lot of scratch work. The RG-33 is 6x6 and the RG 31 4x4. At first glance the RG 33 AUV can be mistaken for being similar to a Cougar, but once you get into looking at it carefully (which a guy can do thanks to walk around images from @18bravo, thanks Rob!) you’ll find it’s not actually that similar, hence using the RG 31s. Robs pics are really helpful if you are trying to go beyond what the box-art has to offer - on almost each step of a build.

I built two MRAPs, one the Legend resin kit, which came with solid axles. This is a nice kit, but I wanted to show a version with the TAK4 suspension, so scratch built that. I also made the MRV version, which has the TAK4 suspension in front and solid axles in the back (walking beam), which makes sense, as it’s a wrecker. For this I used the front half of a Panda MAXXPRO Dash DMX - as it has the TAK4, and don’t recall what the donor was for the back - but, with some time it worked out pretty well.

I still have a Legend MAXXPRO MRAP kit, and a Panda DashDMX (W/TAK4) in the stash, so might get after them next.

My initial interest in MRAP vehicles was because I could understand their purpose, how their suspension works, and thought they were interesting. I like off-road vehicles and suspensions in general, so these fit the requirement. As I recall, the evolution of these vehicles was just that - at the outset, there was an immediate need for heavy duty vehicles that could accommodate a chassis that would allow/could be adapted to fit a V-shaped hull that was IED/mine resistant. Then came the TAK4 suspension and other versions that were more nimble (“nimble” meaning independent suspension that could more easily maneuver in rough terrain), like the MATV. The solid axle version was similar to a civilian, heavy duty off-highway vehicle, which meant that it worked, but not as well as desired or needed.

Anyway, I’ll likely keep building kits of various MRAPs.

Nick

[JohnTapsell]

For someone of my generation, the MRAPs that floated my boat were Casspirs and Buffels (and Pookies too…).

I recently built the RFM MATV kit in 1/48th and really enjoyed it, but there are few other options out there in a simlar scale