Thomas O | 29 Aug 2014 9:21 a.m. PST |
Does any other company besides Perry make 28 mm Queens Ranger figures? |
Sigwald | 29 Aug 2014 9:31 a.m. PST |
Old Glory has a set link Hinchliffe makes a pose…or a few…
|
dBerczerk | 29 Aug 2014 9:31 a.m. PST |
Front Rank had three poses in 28mm: officer pointing, rifleman firing, and rifleman advancing. Redoubt also did some Queen's Rangers in their early range of 28mm AWI figures. However, I do not believe they are currently available. Garrison Miniatures did one pose in large 25mm, and the old Hinchliffe range also had one pose, as I recall. |
Thomas O | 29 Aug 2014 10:11 a.m. PST |
How do the Old Glory figures size up to the Perry Figures? |
95thRegt | 29 Aug 2014 10:38 a.m. PST |
But why wouldn't you want to use the Perry figs?? They are most accurate. I've had the OG ones,and they don't compare. Front Rank tend to be bulkier than most figs. Bob |
Thomas O | 29 Aug 2014 11:54 a.m. PST |
I have the Perry Figures and like them very much. We play skirmish games and was just looking for more variation in the figure poses. I agree about the Old Glory figures, and in general don't care for them. And since Old Glory doesn't even have a picture of them on their web site I wouldn't order them anyway. Thanks for the comment that they don't compare. I have a few front rank figures and yes they tend to be bit larger/bulkier than other figures. I will stick with the Perry Figures. |
Rhino Co | 29 Aug 2014 12:15 p.m. PST |
The link above has the photo from the other old glory site, which has the photos. |
Sigwald | 29 Aug 2014 12:32 p.m. PST |
OG compare fairly well with Perry size wise with Perry being only being a little smaller. |
Thomas O | 29 Aug 2014 1:16 p.m. PST |
Thanks, I'm at work and can't access that link, will check it out when I get home to take a look at them. I went to the Old Glory 25's website and they didn't have a picture. |
Sigwald | 29 Aug 2014 6:36 p.m. PST |
I agree with 95th that Perry are better figures hands down but if its variation you are after I believe the size (if not the style) is pretty similar |
AuttieCat | 29 Aug 2014 9:43 p.m. PST |
Question? Is it true that prior to around 1780, most of the infantry companies making up this unit wore a bicorne? Or did this unit always wear the uniform/headgear as per the Perry figures?? TomS. |
GiloUK | 29 Aug 2014 11:41 p.m. PST |
You can use the F&IW highlanders from Eureka Miniatures for the Queen's Rangers highland company. They fit perfectly with the Perry figures. |
Supercilius Maximus | 30 Aug 2014 5:56 a.m. PST |
Do bear in mind that ALL of these ranges – even Alan Perry's – were made in the belief that the bulk of the QRs were riflemen (due to a mistake by Lefferts, copied by Mollo/McGregor). The actual rifle element was a single section of 12-16 men (possibly the best shots from the battalion companies, as there were two "light" companies in the battalion already); I can't recall which year the rifle section was raised, but this group was mounted in the South and their sergeant was killed charging alongside the Hussar troop at Spencer's Ordinary. Use the figures denoted as "light infantry" (musket and bayonet) for the centre companies post-1780. Up to (and including) 1780 the battalion companies at least did indeed wear what Simcoe himself called "miserable contract hats" and would have looked like ordinary British line infantry in cut-down coats. Supposedly the leather caps arrived in the winter of 1780/81. I would also go with Giles on the Highland company (which was essentially a second Light company – see above) and use figures in overalls rather than kilts especially for 1780-82. You could use either the F&IW Eureka or late war Perry highlanders, as we don't know which type of headgear they wore. |
Cerdic | 30 Aug 2014 6:31 a.m. PST |
One or two of these might make suitable figures…. link |
Thomas O | 31 Aug 2014 11:08 a.m. PST |
Thanks all, that gives me some good sources. |