| sogriffin | 29 Nov 2004 5:28 p.m. PST |
How do Peter Pig vehicles compare to Battlefront vehicles? The Battlefront miniatures are really nice looking, but kind of expensive. Peter Pig minatures look good and are less expensive, but are they close to Battlefront in size. |
| DyslexicBean | 29 Nov 2004 6:32 p.m. PST |
From what I know, they're pretty much similar in size and stockiness. You can probably mix both brands very easily. |
| Cooldude | 29 Nov 2004 6:34 p.m. PST |
Hmm where are you ordering from because where I'm looking Peter Pig is more expensive that Battlefront. |
| tankfan | 29 Nov 2004 6:37 p.m. PST |
A few months back there was a discussion on vehicle size comparison (BF to PP to Old Glory to QRF). Percentage "to scale" length/width/height. Do a search in TMP's back file on this one. I believe there were separate discussions for Panther, Pz III, and Pz IV. By your comments I am guessing you are in the UK or Europe? In the U.S., BF vehicles are MUCH cheaper than PP. Only drawback is BF's are resin w/ metal bits (gun barrels & treads) and PP's are all metal. |
| Martyn | 29 Nov 2004 10:12 p.m. PST |
PP are just superb, up againjst BF I'd pick them anyday - but I don't do WWII, I do AK47. |
| Bungle | 30 Nov 2004 1:44 a.m. PST |
BF & PP figures mix nicely. I originally got PP minis because the BF figures had thin barrels that were often miscast or fragile. The newer BF miniatures have chunkier barrels so are a bit more robust than the old ones.
You can also mix the Skytrex/OG figures in too. |
| Stryker01 | 30 Nov 2004 9:35 a.m. PST |
PP figures are indeed more expensive than BF. Some of the PP seem to have a little more detail than the BF. Take for instance the Battle damaged TigerI from PP. It has incredible detail. The BF TigerI doesn't even compare. The price of the PP TigerI is $15.00 and the BF is $10.00. If you have to make a decison on price go with BF. They both mix well as stated above however there are obvious differences so I don't mix a PP and BF in the same platoon. -TJ |
| GeoffQRF | 30 Nov 2004 12:27 p.m. PST |
...or there is a QRF Tiger 1 from Wargames Inc at USD$7.95... |
| sogriffin | 30 Nov 2004 5:30 p.m. PST |
Sorry guys, I've looked at so many manufacturers lately that I got confused. I got PP confused with another dist. that was selling vehicles 3 for $21. Sorry Tankfan, but I live in Oklahoma. Just consider me a confused 'newbie'. :) |
| sogriffin | 30 Nov 2004 5:32 p.m. PST |
Just one more question, Who would you guys recommend for WW2 15mm Japanese? |
| GeoffQRF | 01 Dec 2004 1:08 a.m. PST |
That sounds like Old Glory that do (did?) the multiple packs. We only do them when ordered direct from the factory (in the UK). QRF have a large range of 15mm Japanese vehicles, and have just added to it. We also have the former Feudal Castings infantry, which are very nice. |
| Blowtorch Battalion | 02 Dec 2004 2:25 p.m. PST |
A quick guide: In general terms, PP is shade over 1/100, OG-Skytrex is a shade under. Battlefront is disproportionately over 1/100, making their tanks a near 20% larger in height, but not so in length & width. PP has few tanks, so I can offer this: PP Tigers are simply the best, hands down. I also prefer their Panthers, as I find the BF's too tall. For Panzer III's, OG, PP & QC mix nicely and are quality. BF's again, is too tall, & more simplistic. For Stugs, PP & BF are comparable, and I especially like the BF F/8's. For T-34's & Shermans, it's PP & OG-Skytrex for me. The BF's are again...too tall. I do really like the BF Panzer IV's which oddly mix well with OG & QC. PP IV's, are OK, but I like the others more. |
| Blowtorch Battalion | 02 Dec 2004 2:29 p.m. PST |
If you want to see the previous discussion on the dimensions, go to the search fucntion, type the word Compared , and search by title. You'll see them. |
| sogriffin | 05 Dec 2004 3:14 p.m. PST |
What do you guys think about the QRF range of figures? Just found their website, but they didn't have any pics. |
| GeoffQRF | 06 Dec 2004 5:25 a.m. PST |
...my fault. I'll try and get a batch of the WW2 pictures back online this week... |
| helmet101 | 06 Dec 2004 8:19 a.m. PST |
Anyone has tried "Gaming Models"? |
| GeoffQRF | 07 Dec 2004 1:06 a.m. PST |
I put up a batch of WW2 pictures last night on the QRF website |
| DrDee007 | 07 Dec 2004 7:00 p.m. PST |
"BF models too tall..." This was discussed in depth once before and BF explained that because infantry are always modelled standing on something (a base, coin or similar) that extra height makes the infantryman too tall when standing next to the tank... |
| GeoffQRF | 08 Dec 2004 1:34 a.m. PST |
..."because infantry are always modelled standing on something (a base, coin or similar) that extra height makes the infantryman too tall when standing next to the tank....." Strange concept. |
| Martin From Canada | 18 Apr 2010 6:04 p.m. PST |
…"because infantry are always modelled standing on something (a base, coin or similar) that extra height makes the infantryman too tall when standing next to the tank….." I think it is a good idea since usually tanks are not based… |
