Hey Guys,
thanks for the additional comments.
TopSmith,
Thank you for the clarification. I apologize for being on the slow side. Sometimes it takes a while for me to comprehend even with an explanation. With an M48A3, M60A1 and M60A3TTS what do you think of pairing them with Tamiya.s T-55, T-62 and T-72?
James
The M48 and M60’s are kits that I have had for quite some time. I know there are newer, better kits but the Tamiya kits are more than sufficient for me. As I replied to TopSmith I think I can get along with the Tamiya T-62 even being aware of all of its shortcomings. Sometimes the newer kits have so many parts and such that it takes the enjoyment out of building for me. I have very modest skills and am best suited to building modest (simple) kits. Simple kits for a simple person.
Thanks & God Bless You All,
Joe <><
I assume you mean pairing the M48A3 - T-55, M60A1 - T-62, and M60A3 - T-72. Those pairings would work just fine. You know that some of those kits have issues, but they can all be built up without much difficulty and look enough like the real thing to get the point across.
Ken
Hi Ken,
You are correct. Yes, I have read some reviews about the kits. It seems the T-55 is the best of the three. The T-72 isn’t really a Soviet version but represents an export version. And it seems for some (most?) the T-62 should be pitched in the trash. Your statement about “look enough like the real thing to get the point across.” works for me. Thank you for all of your statements and help throughout this post. There are appreciated.
God Bless You,
Joe <><
The Tamiya T-55 is the newest kit in that list, and therefore the most up to date as fare as quality, I like it. The T-62 is from the early 1980s, most kits from that time are looked down on. I built one back then and thought it was just fine. Funny thing is, if you read a lot of these posts, even some of the newest kits need some extra work done to correct flaws, sometimes big flaws. I build a lot of the older kits because I have them and they work for me. So I say go with what works for you.
Ken
Hi Ken,
Thanks for the support. I built maybe two of the T-62s way back and found them to be enjoyable builds. Despite not being accurate they were fun and easy. Is that allowed in the modeling world? . Other kits I thought were fun builds were some of Tamiya’s T-34s. I like to try to be accurate (within reason) but I want my hobby to be fun as well.
A wise man once said, “Funny thing is, if you read a lot of these posts, even some of the newest kits need some extra work done to correct flaws, sometimes big flaws. I build a lot of the older kits because I have them and they work for me. So I say go with what works for you.”
God Bless You,
Joe <><
Why is it always assumed that going the extra mile to add/correct details or inaccuracies is not fun? I find it very fun to add detail and correct kits that may not be totally accurate. Everybody finds a different kind of fun with their builds. Personally though, I prefer to start with the most accurate kit available and go from there. I will dispose of an older kit (usu. sell/trade) when a newer, more accurate one comes along.
I would have to say, without I hope raining on anyone’s particular parade that the Tamiya T-62, whilst an enjoyable and easy build, is flawed, with primarily, a hopeless turret. The “nose” is all wrong.
The Trumpeter one (and I know there are more than the one) too has some issues but I would heartily recommend it over the Tamiya one for a decent T-62; I cannot comment on the Zvezda version - as I haven’t yet acquired it - but of late their kits have been getting better and better.
Hi HeavyArty/BootsDms,
I certainly had no intention of offending anyone and I apologize if my comments have ruffled any feathers. The “fun” comment was in reference to myself and no one else. There was no assumption on my part regarding anyone else and how they enjoy the hobby. I understand that there are folks that have fun correcting the deficiencies in any given kit but I am not one of them. Please remember we don’t all have the same level of skill and finances. What is fun to you could very well be a challenge beyond my capability, thus I accept a kit for what it is and am content. This is a hobby and we derive our fun and enjoyment in different ways. You have your way and I have mine. Let us each go our own way in peace.
God Bless You Both,
Joe <><
We are all different in our model building, hobby, enjoyment, etc. So, @Joe, it’s your model and your time of having fun. If it’s the simplicity of kit drives your enjoyment then so be it. Hope to see your build models here. God bless!
Hi TankCarlN3w,
Thanks for your response. Just right now I’m only concerned with the models I have, that being the M48, M60A1s and the M60A3. An M60A2 would be noce but I have too many kits as it is.
Thanks & God Bless You,
Joe <><
Hi Stikpusher,
To get an M60A2 and T-64 would require the purchase of two more kits. I have too many now and need to get rid of some. I also see the cataracts struck again. Really need spell check.
God Bless You,
Joe <><
Hi Ken,
I’m not so sure that I don’t want a room full of unbuilt kits . It is a matter of not needing them. If I could get rid of some that I have I could justify maybe getting an M60A2 and T-64.
God Bless You,
Joe <><
Technically speaking, we don’t need any new kits. It’s more a matter of wanting, and not wanting any more unbuilt kits around is quite understandable. After all, this is only a hobby, and not a primary source of income and existence for most all of us here.
But if you do get your adversary pairs completed, and have the time and money for more, my suggested pairing is a natural addition to the group.
Best of luck on your project and I look forward to seeing them here.
By way of my lateral thinking (extremely rare these days), of course both M60A2 and T-64 could fire missiles through their main armament (I know Sheridan could too but I’ve sort of placed that in the Recce category as opposed to MBTs).
That was one of the reasons that I suggested the pairing. Also the fact that both were high tech maintenance nightmares when introduced into service. Although I don’t believe that the initial T-64 version had the ATGM capability.
