"External Differences between BTR-70 and BTR-80?" Topic

I am working on the BTR-80, from the BTR-70. As is often the case with trying to work on variants, I'm struggling a bit to synch up the technical drawings and the model.

In this case – as usual – the measurements you can find are little help, since they have such a wide margin for error. The BTR-80 is consistently listed as being 0.1m wider, though it is difficult to see why that is.

My understanding is that the BTR-80 (hull) is basically the BTR-70 hull, only with the rear section modified (the centre chamfer taken out and the rear squared off).

(Obviously, the turret and some of the external details are different.)

Is this correct, or is the BTR-80 actually a slightly different (but almost indistinguishable to my eye on pictures and photos) shape?

The internet is sadly lacking any good side-by-side photos for a good comparison.

Can anyone shed any light on the subject?

The BTR80 has a side door between the 2nd and 3rd wheels on both sides
BTR80

BTR70

Also note the difference in firing ports on the -80 as well.

Damon.

You know, Dragon has had a -70 and a -80 as a 1/35 kit in production for decades (off and on) and you might be able to pick up a couple cheap off ebay. They are reasonably accurate (except for the goofy working hatch hinges). Similarly, I believe Trumpeter has come out with kits too (more finesse means more expensive). if the price is right, might pay to pick up a couple kits as visual references.

Damon.

Just to make it difficult those Russkis interchanged turrets between the two aswell…….

This site is the best:
link

(Link takes you directly to the BTR page, hopefully.)

I know that the BTR 70 has a side door between the 2nd and 3rd wheels that opens forward. Unwary soldiers exiting can get caught and pulled under the 3rd wheel. Looks like the BTR 80 fixed that.

Also the top hatch arrangement rear and forwards of the turret,

Tally Ho!

Thanks for the responces, I wasn't expecting anything so quickly…!

All of that detail I would construe under "surface details," at least as it pertains to modelling, at any rate. Am I to gather, then, that the actual basic hull shape is the same (bar the modifications at the rear end and the aforementioned chamfers being taken off?)

(Are the wheels in the same positions, for example.)

Subsidary question…

What exactly are those bits at the back, either side of the water jet there, that are present on some (presumably more modern) BTR-70s and the BTR-80s? (I haven't modelled them on the BTR-70s on account that the majority of the walkarounds and photos I was using didn't have them on.)

Hello, Aotrs Commander!

About the issue of the rear armor sheet. It's just a bumper.

@UsmanK

Right! Thanks. It always does help to know exactly what the bit is you are looking at does.

On that basis, then, I leave the BTR-70 as it is (seeing as mless had them than did), but put it on the BTR-80, since they all seem to have it on in the photos.

I think on balance, from what has been said here and on the oter modelling forum I asked on, that the basic hull shape is either identical, or sufficiently slight that it's not worth losing sleep over. (Even the 35th scale modelling crowd, the sort that debate where all the rivets are and such, didn't manage to give me a definitive answer; and I figure if it would be something THEY can't tell off the top of their heads, it probably is not an issue that most of us wargamers should get to het-up over.)

From a closer examination of the drawings, I think the part of the confusion is that the BTR-80's rear surfaces are more cantered than the BTR-70's vertical rear surface – but that, essentially, the furthest point of the 80's rear is not all that much different to where the BTR-70's flat surface is. (I had expected that the BTR-80's surface would have been sort of on top of the shape of the BTR-7's but it does not appear to be.) But on a close inspection of photos of the two, the bottom of the hull behind the last wheel is noticeably shorter on the BTR-80.)

The more I do this job, the more I realise basically how unreliable all the measurements of armoured vehicles we are quoted actually are. Since without a literal pictures of where they put the tape measure, it can only ever be a best guess. And even sources like Jane's are not any better in this regard! It is surprising, when you actually come to USE it in this sort of manner, how unhelpful a number in isolation is!

________________________________________________________

On the flip-side, whle faffing about waiting for responces, I did ascertain one of the next jobs will be the Type 63/YW 512 Chinese APC, since I intend to crib that for a scifi version for the not-really-at-all-ESU…!

This month's release (M114) should be Friday (assuming my Shapeways order comes in, since I figured I might as well hold on until I oould show the pictres of the WSF BDRM-2s as well!)

I have a couple of good shots but cannot post on here!

Tally Ho!

Hello, Aotrs Commander!

Here are more or less normal drawings of BTR-70 and BTR-80.

In general, yes – the shape of the hulls is similar in general (but the cutting of armored plates is quite different). The roofs are different for them – in the BTR-80 it has a convex part, in the BTR-70 it is flat, but there are notches on the sides. In addition, the BTR-80 is more common armored hubcaps on wheels.

Yeah, the roof differences, were, as they say, obvious! It was more the fronts in particular (aside from the obvious differences to the splash plates and lights and whatnot) that was what I was looking at.

Armoured hubcaps, though, you say? That is something not mentioned in the write-ups and something I might not have noticed, had you not brought it up! (Given that it is often the case that vehicles of the same type can have different wheels for vehicle to vehicle sometimes.) Heck, I didn't even know armoured hubcaps were A Thing! You learn summat new every day, as I often say. But now that has been so noted, cheers!

Hello, Aotrs Commander!

Here are two photos of BTR-80 – one with armored hubcaps, the other – without them. They are removable, so in principle they can be done, or you can not do.

Right! Ta. Yeah, they should be trivial to add.

I'll put 'em on the BTR-80 by default, then, but if people want them (or the rear bumpers) on the BTR-70s, it's be easy to add them as a seperate model later anyway.

The way I always remembered it in AFV recce lessons was on the rear exhausts:
BTR80 horizontal
BTR70 sloped
BTR60 MORE SLOPED no side doors