| werwulf | 10 Apr 2016 11:54 p.m. PST |
Not going to review the Team Yankee set as it's been done but an observation I noted building my M1's the other day. I decided to do a couple M1IP. Searching to see what the differences were I used a bunch of references and to my amazement I found that the model represented by BF as an M1 is in fact an M1IP or M1A1. The turret provided will NEVER make an M1 as the front turret glacis is the thickened version of the M1IP or M1A1. You can tell by the location of the the front tow cable lug. On the M1 this lug was very close to the angle/seem of the front glacis and the side armor. On the M1IP/ M1A1 there is quite a distance between both due to the addition of armor to the front glacis. Also the angle is different and the distance from the edge of the turret overhangs the Drivers hatch on the M1A1 not so on the M1. Not to impressed with that. I'm sure I'll get called a rivet counter but if you advertise as an M1 make an M1 not an M1A1 that you could just call an M1. My question is why not just do a separate turret! They did a separate deck for the BMP-2 why not do the same with the M1 but for the turret! This is not just a small hickup either. I mean if they provided the turret and the 105 and 120MM I could let it go as lazy, I've got the 120mm just a screw up but BF put the different M1 tool compartments,turret grating/fencing and different drive sprocket, this seems like a deliberate shafting or perhaps BF needs to get a better reference person. Here's evidence: M1:
link
M1A1:
link
|
| freerangeegg | 11 Apr 2016 2:09 a.m. PST |
Since I made mine as M1A1s I don't have a problem with it. |
| PzGeneral | 11 Apr 2016 2:22 a.m. PST |
Here are your pictures. M1
M1A1
|
| Mako11 | 11 Apr 2016 2:35 a.m. PST |
I think I can live with those differences, but good catch on the model(s). |
| werwulf | 11 Apr 2016 2:47 a.m. PST |
Thanks PzGeneral. Thought they had posted. |
| shaun from s and s models | 11 Apr 2016 3:54 a.m. PST |
assuming the drawings are correct, but in 15mm who is going to know or care. |
| skippy0001 | 11 Apr 2016 5:12 a.m. PST |
|
| coopman | 11 Apr 2016 5:49 a.m. PST |
|
| Mute Bystander | 11 Apr 2016 6:58 a.m. PST |
If it matters to him, it is important to him. Myself, they are all targets for bombs, rockets, and laser Guided munitions… |
| Puddinhead Johnson | 11 Apr 2016 7:29 a.m. PST |
It's really hard for me to see the difference. And in 1/100 scale? |
 Extra Crispy  | 11 Apr 2016 7:38 a.m. PST |
Looking at the two images I can see no difference that the OP is talking about. The angle looks the same to me. The noticeable difference seems to em that the A1 has a plate or hatch between the smoke and cable. |
| darthfozzywig | 11 Apr 2016 7:59 a.m. PST |
Piping and turnbacks are the wrong color for that year. |
| 15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 11 Apr 2016 8:16 a.m. PST |
Does it have the right number of rivets though? If not it's a deal breaker and I'll have no choice but to eBay mine and get Khurasan's instead. |
| ScottS | 11 Apr 2016 9:50 a.m. PST |
The other day I played a game of checkers with my kids. Look at the crown on the piece:
Compare that to the crown of St. Edward:
Milton Bradley's crown is NOT! |
| Goonfighter | 11 Apr 2016 1:04 p.m. PST |
I thought all tanks were Tigers, so it's totally wrong anyway. |
| Navy Fower Wun Seven | 11 Apr 2016 1:51 p.m. PST |
Some good laughs on this thread – thanks all! Its pretty clear from even a cursory look at the sprue that BF are intending the model to be used either as an M1 or M1A1, so the the core parts are fudged accordingly to allow a reasonable facsimile of either model… Nothing to see here, move along the bus please! |
| Pedrobear | 11 Apr 2016 8:15 p.m. PST |
I can't really see the difference between the parts highlighted, but I do notice that the barrels are different and that one has the ammo stowage that the other doesn't. |
| GeoffQRF | 11 Apr 2016 11:42 p.m. PST |
Or we offer the M1, M1IP, M1A1 and M1A2 link |
locates some hard-to-find military toys at the dollar store.
