Help support TMP


"Khurasan T-90 size comparison against Team Yankee T-72" Topic


15 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please remember that some of our members are children, and act appropriately.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Modern Product Reviews Message Board


Areas of Interest

Modern

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Recent Link


Featured Ruleset


Featured Book Review


1,616 hits since 17 May 2019
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Balthazar Marduk17 May 2019 1:16 p.m. PST

Hey guys, over at my blog I did a quick size comparison with some really blurry and poorly planned photos that show off the size difference between Khurasan's T-90 and the TY T-72. Brass tacks: Khrusan made a great looking model, but the T-72 is very tall next to it.

link

22ndFoot17 May 2019 1:48 p.m. PST

Balthazar,

If the T-72 is 7'4" or 2.23m tall and the T-90 is 7'3" or 2.22m in 1/100th each model should be 22mm in height. Which model is closest to that?

If one is way off, I'd probably look for another source, but that's just me. YMMV

15mm and 28mm Fanatik17 May 2019 2:30 p.m. PST

The difference in height is too noticeable between the two. The gun of the T-72 is also way longer. That's too bad as it would be a deal-breaker for me. Thanks for the post.

Tony S17 May 2019 2:56 p.m. PST

I'm going from memory, so I could be wrong, but I seem to recall some of Battlefront's WW2 tanks were also too tall. Mind you, that was back in the day when the tanks were resin. I also had trouble unseeing some of my Panthers towering over Panthers from other manufacturers.

cliff091617 May 2019 3:01 p.m. PST

Battlefront is known for making things larger than normal in size. A prime example is the milan launchers they include in the vehicle kits. Which miniature is closer to being most accurate?

15mm and 28mm Fanatik17 May 2019 3:02 p.m. PST

It could be that unscrupulous companies like BF intentionally make their miniatures incompatible with their competitors' as a ploy to discourage us from buying cheaper alternatives in the same scale.

Balthazar Marduk17 May 2019 3:40 p.m. PST

22ndFoot, I'll break out a ruler later and get back to you on it. I really can't stress enough how nice that T-90 is, though.

leidang17 May 2019 4:41 p.m. PST

28mm Fanatik +1

Mr Jones17 May 2019 5:24 p.m. PST

Battlefront will be the one that is out, no doubt.

Balthazar Marduk17 May 2019 6:29 p.m. PST

The T-72 is around 25mm tall and the T-90 is a hair over 20mm.

Walking Sailor17 May 2019 6:33 p.m. PST

While you've got your ruler handy; I see link that you also have T-55AM2's for both Battle Front and the Plastic Soldier Company?
I have heard that BF runs tall to not have their Infantry tower over their tanks. This suggests that Khurasan would benefit from a 2-3 mm base

Balthazar Marduk17 May 2019 6:34 p.m. PST

I also have a Khurasan T-64B and a box of Team Yankee T-64s. I might get another comparison up tonight or tomorrow because Inremember a thread up here where someone asked what the size difference of those two specifically were.

Balthazar Marduk17 May 2019 6:40 p.m. PST

You know what, Walking Sailor, I'll make a blog post showing it all along with a comparison of Battlefront's US infantrymen and Khurasans evil mid-tech infantry. May as well do it all at the same time.

Balthazar Marduk17 May 2019 8:12 p.m. PST

Team Yankee resin T-55AM2 is about 33mm, plastic TY T-55AM2 is 32mm and the Plastic Toy Compant T-55AM2 is 31mm tall. Something of note here, the PSC model is 68mm long and both Team Yankee models are 63mm in length.

repaint18 May 2019 2:16 p.m. PST

on the real steel, hull length is 6.2 m, or 62mm at 1/100 scale.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.