Four T-34 'quick build' models compared - Part 12

QUICK BUILD T-34 COMPARISONS – PEGASUS HOBBIES T-34/85 COMPLETE

Well, here’s the last of the real quick build (if we agree that the Zvezda isn’t really a quick build) and it’s clear to see that the Pegasus T-34/85 has the most surface detail, out-doing either the PSC or Armourfast. It also includes the most additional component parts including optional open or closed commander’s hatches.

However, as mentioned in the earlier detailed summaries the surface detail included in this model – such as vents, grills and panel lines – are a little fuzzy and some of the larger detail is little more than ‘bumps’ (such as the horn). Still, this is a quick build after all.

This actually leaves me with a bit of a dilemma. The Pegasus T-34/85 is obviously great value for money and it also has a certain degree of technical accuracy that the other two quick builds don’t have (the turret is particularly nice), but do you need all this extra detail for a quick build war gaming model?

This question is central when trying to decide which of the three review quick builds is the best. Were is down to value for money and accuracy alone I would have no hesitation in saying that the Pegasus T-34/85 is the best of the three (atrocious tracks aside), but they aren’t the only factors that are important here.

Above: One part that I did feel I had to replace on the Pegasus T-34/85 was their terrible
rendition of the 85mm gun. It was spindly and badly moulded, so I exchanged it for a very
cheap turned aluminium one I found on eBay (if cost were a consideration I would
have made one from some plastic tube).

From a purely wargaming model point of view the Armourfast T-34s make a lot of sense. They have just enough detail, that is crisply done, to pass for the tanks that they are supposed to be, but on the swing side don’t include a lot of superficial extras that don't really add anything to a game.

So in a way it’s a split decision – if you are purely interested in a war-gaming pieces that you don’t have to spend too long making and painting then the Armourfast T-34s are ideal. But if you are into the history of the weapons and really enjoy the modeling the Pegasus is the way to go

…Then again, if you want a early T-34 (Model ’40 or ’43) Armourfast is the only option, so my personal preferences for quick builds would be…

Early war T-34s: Armourfast
Late war T-34/85: Pegasus

Above: I don't know if you can make this detail out but as if to confirm that Pegasus has leanings
toward the more modelling minded war gamer they have actually included little markers for
extra detail that they haven't included. There are tiny circles moulded on the side of the hull
that indicates where you can add the infantry grab rails if you wish.

The only sure thing I can say is that either of these makes is far superior to the Plastic Soldier Company offerings.

So there you have it, are you a war game player that needs a simple and easy to make representation of the T-34 or are you a war gamer who is also into the modeling and history of the vehicle? Well, the good news is there are excellent options which ever you are.

NEXT? Well...I guess I should paint the little army of T-34s I have now!  :D

(NOTE: I am not showing the Zvezda 'quick build' complete as I feel I have to withdraw it from this comparative review. After examining it closely I feel it's definitely more of a display model that's designed to be easily built. Combined with the high price this model then falls out of the range which we should consider as being 'wargame quality' T-34s.)

Four T-34 'quick build' models compared - Part 11

QUICK BUILD T-34 COMPARISONS – ARMOURFAST T-34 MODEL 1943 COMPLETE 

As mentioned in the Model 1943 turret part of this rolling review, I was quite impressed with Armourfast’s interpretation of the ’43 turret. It compared quite favorably with the far more expensive Zvezda turret of the same mark and even – ironically - had more component parts than it.

For this reason, and my slightly less favorable view of Armourfast’s T-34/85 turret, I have decided to a make the T-34 Model 1943 variant from Armourfast’s trio of T-34s.

Of course, ALL of Armourfast’s T-34 variants – including the SU-85 tank destroyer – share the exact same lower hull and one-piece track system. This is facilitated by Armourfast’s clever choice of the early ‘dish’ type solid road wheel, which is the one T-34 wheel you can see used on all variants of war-time T-34 types and sub-type.

The Armourfast model does suffer from an exact amount of simplification – I say ‘exact’ because unlike other manufacturers Armourfast’s simplification of the model consists of leaving out detail rather than including simplified ‘bumps’ and ‘bulges’. This is quite important, I think, as it does give the modeler a chance to improve these models with some judicious scratch building or add-ons without the faff of having to trim off badly moulded representations of the tanks’ fiddly bits. (Proof of the pudding was shown quite usefully in my PSC T-34/85 review model where I had to trim back quite a few of these indistinct bumps in order to add my ‘improved’ versions of these details – like, for example, the grab rails, or the head lamp, or the mantlet cover.)

So, I guess part of the attraction of the Armourfast quick builds is that you can easily go either way with them – keep ‘em simple if you just want ‘armour fast’ or employ a bit of creativity if you fancy something a bit more individual. Quite a nice design philosophy really.

Still, philosophy aside, what is the Armourfast T-34 Model 1943 like?

Luckily, with the most visible characteristic being that very distinctive ‘hexagonal’ Model 1943 turret, and having already noted that AF made a good job of that, this quick build model fairs quite well and I think you can produce a very attractive model with it.

Of course, you are still lumbered with Armourfast’s infamous one-piece tracks, but these are only one part of the three major parts that go up to make this model – the turret, hull and running gear. So how do I rate them overall?

➢ Turret – Very good
➢ Hull – Average
➢ Running gear & lower hull – Bad

Still, this model is the sum of its parts so you could round out these scores with a favorable ‘Good (but could do better)’.

As a war game table model I think it would be unfair to be too critical, but on the other hand we have seen – with the PSC model – that passable tracks can be made. Had the Armourfast been endowed with the PSC tracks I would have said that it was ‘very good’ overall, given the ability to improve the detail easily.

NEXT: The Pegasus Hobbies T-34/85 complete.

Four T-34 'quick build' models compared - Part 10

QUICK BUILD T-34 COMPARISONS – PLASTIC SOLDIER COMPANY T-34/85 COMPLETE

To complete the Plastic Soldier model I decided to go for the T-34/85 option. Although - as I mention in my earlier turret review of this kit - I thought that the T-34 Model 1943 turret option was the better of the two variations included in the box I decided I would give the '85 a go just to see if I could make it work. You'll see from my photos what you can do to produce a passable war gaming quality T-34/85...

The first thing you will notice, and perhaps most importantly, is that I replaced the hideously oversized PSC gun with a spare Armourfast 85mm I had. In my opinion this is absolutely essential if you want to make a '85 out of the PSC kit. Just don't bother if you are thinking of including the original gun, people will just laugh at you...Seriously!

Next I corrected the mantlet cover slightly. Again, PSC got it wrong. I added the turret grab rails, because it was easy to do but adds character, and finally I made the turret weld out of Milliput to disguise the ill-fitting turret halves. As you can imagine, you don't have to do these last modifications, but if you have the time or inclination they will raise a very sub-standard model into something that is at least on the same planet as far as resembling the T-34/85 goes.

It's clear this is a bad model, by anyones standard, although this isn't because of the use of poor materials or bad moulding techniques. In fact the plastic is quite nice and what detail there is is very sharply defined. The main problem is - aside from the extreme simplification - that everything is so chunky and oversized. Overall the model is too large for the scale.

My theory is that this is because - as someone pointed out to me - that this model is based on a computer generated prototype designed for the smaller 15mm scale. Simply scaling this design up to 1/72 has not worked because features that were exaggerated - in order to work in the smaller scale - are now blown all out of proportion in the larger scale.

So, is there anything that can commend the Plastic Soldier Company 1/72 T-34 box set?

I personally find it very hard to come up with anything. I cannot see how even the most technically disinterested war gamer - to whom the game is more important than the objects he or she plays their games with - can overlook the glaring deficiencies in this model. Certainly the tracks and the Model 1943 turret are not bad for quick builds, but I wouldn't buy this set just for these two items - I'd rather persevere with other similarly priced makes which have less blatant flaws.

Yes, I wish other quick build makers would take a good look at how PSC produces it's tracks as they offer - in my opinion - the best compromise between cost and accuracy for a quick build tracked vehicle, but I wouldn't buy a PSC kit just for this feature alone.

In the end, aside from the review model I picture here I will not be using any of the other PSC T-34 or T-34/85 hull or turret parts in any other model projects. Though I will recycle their tracks - after replacing the road wheels - and include them in future Armourfast T-34 projects.

Don't buy this model.

Four T-34 'quick build' models compared - Part 9

QUICK BUILD T-34 COMPARISONS – TRACKS

If there is one major component on every quick build tank that consistently draws almost universal criticism it is the tracks. The running gear of a 1/72 tank can be the most complicated part of the model to make, what with road wheels, suspension systems and the much maligned vinyl tracks – so it’s no wonder quick build manufacturers try to take the pain out of the process by simplifying the design of these parts.

However, there is a price to be paid for this ‘no fuss’ approach…

1. ARMOURFAST

Let’s start with the most simplified of the tracks systems in this review. Armourfast really have taken the name on the tin to an absurd extreme. I mean, what can be simpler than one big block of plastic?

OK, what's the positive aspects of the AF one-piece tracks.

Well, obviously, they are one-piece! This must be really handy if you are a war gamer and have to make a small armada of tanks – slap these little puppies on the side of your tank, no muss, no fuss. I get it. But what about accuracy?

The road wheels are kinda nice really. Armourfast have gone for the solid ‘dish’ type wheels (metal wheels and rubber tires). This is clever stuff as the dish type wheel was the only T-34 wheel you could expect to see on all of the variants of T-34 – from early to late models – and variations, like the SU-85.

In this way Armourfast only needed to create one-track system that they could use on all their variants of the T-34. Good thinking (though technically they are the late dish wheels with unperforated tires, but that might perhaps be too pernickety).

And then there is the tracks themselves…

Oh dear. For every silver lining there is a dirty black cloud.

The AF tracks are a greatly simplified attempt at the distinctive T-34 wide waffle tracks. They are too thick for a start (probably due to the one-piece molding) but it’s the track pattern – or lack of it – that really niggles. Instead of the signature waffle tread Armourfast has created a wide slatted step pattern.

I won’t harp on about this fudge, but it’s a real shame that a feature that is so synonymous with this legendary tank design has been completely left out.

2. PEGASUS HOBBIES

The next level up from the Armourfast one-piece track component is Pegasus’s multi-piece track system. It is a one-piece track, but all the road wheels are separate individual components.

The road wheels are what were called ‘full-spider’ wheels which entered production in late 1943 so were exclusively associated with the late T-34/85 model. These wheels are nice looking and compliment the Pegasus T-34/85 turret design which I identified as the late war Model 1945 turret.

So, Pegasus have done their homework with the wheels, but what about the track?

Well, like the Armourfast track the one-piece molding has meant that accuracy has had to be sacrificed for simplicity. Again, the waffle pattern tread is missing although Pegasus track profile is a little better than Armourfast’s stepped design.

One nice touch is that Pegasus have chosen to model the tracks in a relaxed ‘sagging’ mode, so there is a little more realism there.

3. PLASTIC SOLDIER COMPANY

After PSC’s disappointing turret and hull components it’s a bit of a surprise to find that they have pulled a rabbit out the hat with their tracks.

The tracks are multi-part affair that you could say sit between the Armourfast and Pegasus tracks as far as complexity is concerned. The road wheels are a one-piece component with all the wheels molded onto a solid frame at the rear, while each track consists of two halves.

The tracks are a breath of fresh air after the two previous models and actually have a passing resemblance to the T-34’s waffle pattern tread!

Unfortunately, after such a good start PSC sort of spoil the effect by not doing their homework and give you a set of very simplified spoked wheels that I think are supposed to be the full-spider variety. Not only are the spokes too chunky but all the perforations in the wheels are filled in.

But, worse than these over-simplifications is the fact that the choice of full-sider wheels means that they are totally unsuitable for the T-34 Model 1943 option that is part of the attraction of the PSC kit. The tyred spider wheels were NOT used on this earlier T-34 variant – only on the late war T-34/85 tank.*

* They were, however, used in combination with solid steel spider wheels (see Zvezda track overview)

4. ZVEZDA

Well, of course, there is a major jump in accuracy and quality of tracks in this model. I think it’s fair to say we have already established that the Zvezda model is actually more of a simplified display quality model rather than a complex quick build kit. It’s a fine distinction and you could argue the point, but I think the tracks in particular give the game away as the complexity takes the ‘quick’ out of this build!

In all there are a total of 18 parts that go into each of the Zvezda’s tracks. To put this into context remember that the whole PSC T-34 model only has a 18 parts in total. So it takes a wee while to put all these parts together.

This aside, the parts are beautiful!

Zvezda have authentically reproduced the Model 1943 with the mixed wheel combination. Because of rubber shortages at the time the Soviets produced this tank with a mixture of two tyred full-spider wheels and three non-tyred spider wheels between them on each track set.

The tracks are – as you would expect – lovely recreations of the wide waffle pattern treads, but best of all they are wonderfully THIN. The track and wheel combination all snap together very cleverly, but does require fitting onto the lower hull’s suspension.

The finished look is very realistic and – in my opinion – beats mucking about with some floppy length of vinyl. Superb!

TO SUM UP...
Well, let’s put the Zvezda aside as it is obviously in a league of it’s own, outside the quick build criteria. This leaves the Armourfast, Pegasus and Plastic Soldier Company tracks.

The star of the show, as far as track treads are concerned, is – amazingly – the PSC tracks. They are the only one of the three that make a brave attempt at realistically reproducing the iconic T-34 waffle pattern treads. However, I don’t think it’s co-incidental that they are the only one of the three to have multipart tracks, separate to their over-simplified road wheels.

Pegasus have gone in the other direction. They have over-simplified tracks but nicely molded multi-part road wheels!

And, finally we have Armourfast bringing up the rear with grossly over-simplified tracks together with simplified (but still good) road wheels.

The message is clear. The more parts the more detailed each of those parts can be.

So which of these options would I pick as being the better option for a T-34 build? Well, it would depend which T-34 you are building. If you are building a late war/post-war T-34/85 the Pegasus wheels are nice, but if you are building a T-34 Model 1940 only the Armourfast wheels fit the bill. The PSC wheels are pretty crumby, and like the rest of the model far too chunky. The Armourfast tracks are diabolical and the Pegasus tracks not too far behind!

So there is no clear winner – UNLESS you somehow mated the Armourfast wheels to the PSC tracks (hint Armourfast!)…

But if I had to choose just one make of quick build tracks I would plump for – ironically – the Armourfast tracks. This is just because the wheels are suitable for a variety of T-34 models and variants and because I have come up with a fairly simple way of improving the look of their tracks.

But in the end, none of them are great.

Four T-34 'quick build' models compared - Part 8

THE ZVESDA T-34/76 (M43) HULL
Number of parts: 20

Above: The Zvesda hull components. You might wonder what that big cone shaped contraption
 is in the middle - that's the device which attaches the turret to the hull. Also, you will
notice that the driver's hatch is moulded shut, which is quite disappointing.

I've been looking forward to looking at the Zvesda hull and it's components, from the moment you get them out of the box you can tell these are quality parts. But then again they should be, at £11 it is by far the most expensive quick build on the market (by comparison the Pegasus T-34/85 works out at £4 a tank).

The Zvesda raises an interesting issue - why would you pay £11 for a quick build, however pretty it is, when you could buy an equivalent Dragon model for the same price? It also begs the question, just who is this model is aimed at?

This model has 20 parts, some of which are very small, so I wouldn't say it's a model suitable for young beginner modellers. And if you are old enough to appreciate the fine quality of the Zvesda moulding and it's nice parts then I would say you are old enough to attempt a Trumpeter kit.

Anyway, the Zvesda T-34 hull component is very nice and the snap together method is clever. BUT - it does require glue for things to fit together properly, I don't care what the instructions say. In fact this is the one model in this comparison that I haven't assembled because some of the parts need to be permanently glued in place - and I don't want to do that yet.

One thing that is worth mentioning is that of all the quick builds Zvesda has managed to recreate a reasonably accurate engine deck. The rear vents, which have been fudged badly on all the T-34s in this review, have been nicely formed with a delicate mesh pattern. This makes me wonder why none of the other quick build manufactures can do this part as well ask Zvesda has.

Other components that make this model stand out from the rest of the herd is the dainty tow hooks and tow cables, the crisp exhaust pipes and the spare tracks. It's a nice package.

But, I do keep coming back to the question - is it worth it though?

For my part the answer is this - I will be buying a few more T-34 models over the next few months and despite the fact I love the look of the Zvesda I will be buying Dragon. Zvesda's price and number of components means that it strays into the domain of the display quality model, something like the Pegasus quick build makes far more sense for war gamers and beginners.

Next: The all important tracks!

Four T-34 'quick build' models compared - Part 7

THE PEGASUS T-34/85 HULL
Number of parts: 17

Above: Plenty of parts but note the detail on the hull bottom, in particular the
rear drive housing. A nice touch.

First off, well done Pegasus for being the first quick build so far that's spot on scale! According to my measurements (based on George Blandford's ' Allied Armoured Fighting Vehicles') The Pegasus T-34/85 hull is - like their turret - 1:72.

It also takes the prize for most hull components, they have gone to town with many of the smaller surface items like very nicely done tow hooks, spare track links and much more including a two handed saw!

Quality of detail…
Ah, well - yes there is plenty of detail - including seams and panel lines - but the quality is a bit vague. Some panel lines are quite rough and faint and the one-piece fuel tanks - although they managed to get the right number for a T-34/85 (3) - are chunky tubes which have been given dents in them which - at scale - are more like great chunks bitten out of them (where's my filler)!

Then there is my biggest bug-bear - the engine deck! Yes, I have more complaints in this area. Pegasus have dodged the whole 'mesh vent' issue by not including any texture at all on in the five rear vent covers. There are just five rectangular outlines! Furthermore, the side vents are nothing more than featureless indentations in the side of the deck area.

Above: The rear deck - oh dear! Oh well, I like the exhaust pipes!

So, what was gained with the inclusion of all the nice little extras was lost in bad execution of the quality of those parts and surface detail.

One area I should comment though was the inclusion of detail on the hull bottom, which included axels. Now while you might debate the necessity of this on a 'quick build' part of this is the drive axel housing at the rear - this is something that is clearly visible at the rear and is easy to include. I wish Armoufast had done this (on their T-34s and their M4 Shermans).

Above: The business end - and yes there are lots of 'bits', and at least it's better than the
rear. Closed driver's hatch I'm afraid.

In conclusion, while I appreciate all the little extra touches I kind of lean toward having less detail rather than badly done detail. Besides this I guess that war gamers who these quick builds are aimed at will not want too many parts to have to put together and paint. And so, because of this, and despite the over-scaling I do rate the cleaner Armourfast T-34 over the Pegasus rendition…

I'd rather have a nicely done base onto which I can add my own extra detail...BUT...I concede that some might prefer having the 'extras' and won't want to bother with fiddling about adding their own. So you have to admit you get your money-worth with Pegasus.

Four T-34 'quick build' models compared - Part 6

THE ARMOURFAST T-34 HULL
Number of parts: 14

In the tradition of Armourfast quick build models the manufacturer has chosen to dispense with much of the surface detail rather than adding badly done and grossly simplified protrusions. This results in a very 'clean' and spartan surface.

Like the Plastic Soldier Company T-34s this model comes with fuel tanks (2), cupola MG and engine deck. But also adds two stowage boxes, driver's hatch, exhausts and a head lamp. [Though it should be noted that 2 fuel tanks is correct for a T-34/76 (M43) the norm for a T-34/85 was 3.]

The external fuel tanks come in two halves which must be glued together and there is a rather obvious seam as a result that will require filling and sanding. The rest of the parts are, like the hull itself, simplified and a bit lacking in detail.

You should note that while a separate driver's hatch is supplied that there is no actual hole in the front of the hull. Therefore if you want to model this hatch open you will have to cut a hole to the correct size yourself.

Quality of detail...
What detail there is is passable but one aspect stands out as obviously bellow par - that is the five rear ventilation ports at the rear of the separate engine deck component. These are hideous and are just five stippled rectangles. I mentioned this issue when I looked at the PSC T-34 engine deck and I maintain that I would have preferred it if Armourfast had chosen to represent these vents in a similar way to the PSC ones.

Part of the simplification of the hull's surfaces are the absence of any of the T-34's panel lines and while you can put back in some of the missing surface 'ornamentation' there isn't really a way of reconstructing these missing seams and recesses.

That said, this model is what it is - a quick build kit designed for table-top war gaming, and as such the minutiae of accurate detail is not required.

In conclusion, I would have to say that I prefer the Armourfast hull over the PSC one. Should you wish to 'accurize' this model it is far easy to do when you can add extra features - such as grab rails and so on - if there is no badly attempted 'nubs' there to begin with. It is fairly faithful to the general layout of the T-34 and the scale sizing is acceptable (again, unlike the PSC model which has a few over-sized elements on the hull). Though the Amourfast is over-scale, by my measurements it's a couple of millimeters over all way around (as was their turret).

Overall a very pleasant rendition which is only let down by the terrible rear vents.*

Above: The completed Armoufast hull, if anything it is perhaps a little too bear and could
use some texturing and weld seams to give it some character.

* Note: There is a photoetched accessory pack made by Hauller for the original HaT version of this model that is available quite cheaply on eBay if these vents really bother you.

Four T-34 'quick build' models compared - Part 5

THE PLASTIC SOLDIER T-34 HULL
Number of hull parts: 9

Moving on from the turrets to the main component group in the kits - the hulls - let's look at the least complex of all the quick build T-34s I am reviewing - Plastic Soldier's T-34. Despite the fact that this is the simplest model in this review it is also the only model which offers a option to build two different variants of the T-34, the Model 1943 or the T-34/85. As such what few parts there are do include an optional item. If you chose to build the later war T-34/85 tank then you can pop on the front mounted spare tracks links. (LOL - whoopee-do!) :wink:

There are two things that impressed me about the PS hull components, the external fuel tanks and the engine deck. The fuel tanks are moulded in one-piece, most other makes go for a design which is composed of two halves and as such have to have some filling and sanding to create a smooth looking one-peice tank. The engine deck is very crisply moulded, with all the various ventilation ports nicely crafted. I'd venture to suggest that PS has done a nicer job of the vent ports than Armourfast has with theirs - *although* it should be noted that while they look nice the five rear-most vent ports are completely inaccurate as the real thing had a mesh inner-section and not these horizontal ribbed spars. Still, it looks nice and will look OK after some pin-washing (and is far better than the horrendous Armourfast 'stippled' rear vents)...

The hull component itself is very spartan and bereft of a lot of the smaller details (much like the Armourfast models) though Plastic Soldier did have a crack at representing tow hooks, grab rails and two cables - though they are dreadfully simplified and I prefer Armourfast's philosophy of simply leaving out such detail rather than including it badly done, as PS has done. The tow cable and grab rails are particularly horrible and will have to be shaved off if you want even the most basic level of accuracy...

The rear hull is OK, and actually not badly attempted, even some rivets have been included. But the exhaust pipes are moulded as part of the hull component, this is perfectly acceptable in terms of it being a wargaming model though I think PS have overdone the seam around the rear access hatch...

The overall look of the completed hull is a mixed bag and I don't think it will look all that bad once painted and at a distance. But I have to say that I much prefer the Armourfast hull design to this, the dreadfully half-hearted attempts to represent some of the detail on the Plastic Soldier T-34 hull let's it down badly and combined with some obvious over-exaggeration in sizing (the external fuel tanks and cupola MG are much too large) let down the care they have taken in the areas of the engine deck and the spare track (which has a nice track pattern on it).

Above: The Plastic Soldier T-34 hull components built in T-34/85
configuration (with spare track on front).

I'm afraid that even if I were a war gamer the inaccuracies produced in this component would niggle me far too much to have this model in my collection, and as a display modeller I would feel too obligated to spend far too much time repairing the 'damage' done by the bad design to make this hull worth even the low price it goes for. Sorry Plastic Soldier - at least in the areas of the turrets and the hull you have quite a way to go to beat the Armourfast equivalents.

Finnish T-34/85 - déjà vu...Again!

Having reactivated my T-34/85 work for my Finnish I thought this was going to be an easy and quick project. After all, I had already started a Finnish T-34/85 model using the PSC 'quick build' kit...But therein lay the dirty big spanner in the works...

Can you get a plastic spanner? If you could, then I bet it would look like
the PSC's T-34/85 tank!

I already knew - after just a cursory glance - that this model was not the best. There were a few problems, some of which were due to my amateur modelling, but some down to PSC's design. Not a good start, but I was willing to overlook or work around some of these issues until I decided to revisit my original blog posts about this PSC kit and some of the other 'quick build' T-34/85s that I had looked at...

Link to my original 2011 T-34 post: 'Four T-34 'quick build' models compared'

Long story short(ish) - I had originally concluded that the Pegasus T-34/85 was the best of the 'quick build' '85 kits around, much better that either the Armourfast or the PSC '85s. So I went through my draws and pulled out the Pegasus '85 and guess what? Yep, it's definitely the better model!

The Pegasus 'easy build' T-34/85, a cheap and cheerful gem!

It turns out that at some point I had already rectified what I thought was one of the major failings with the Pegasus '85 kit and had replaced their weedy plastic 85mm gun with a nicely turned aluminum one. This kit is now a very nice representation of the Soviet medium tank without resorting to a more expensive 'display quality' kit (you get two of these war game quality Pegasus tanks for £8.99).

I should say that having looked at the PSC '85 again after so long it's failings seems to be immediately apparent to me, perhaps because of fresh eyes. The most obvious fault being that it seemed slightly over-scaled compared the other two T-34/85 models I have - I am sure if I measured it I would find that it is indeed to big.

...Arse biscuits!

What this means is this isn't going to be the quick job I thought it was going to be and I will now have to start my Finnish '85 project again with the Pegasus T-34/85. 

Postscript: When I first did my 'easy build' T-34 comparison reviews I eventually concluded that while the Pegasus T-34/85 was the best of the '85 kits that I would chose Armourfast if I wanted the earlier T-34/76 model (Pegasus didn't make this version). However, fast forward to now - Pegasus now make a 34/76 and if they have done as good a job with their '76 as they did with their '85 then I think they have the easy build T-34 market sewn up (they just need to do a T-34/76 m1943 now to nail it)!

Four T-34 'quick build' models compared - Part 4

QUICK BUILD T-34/76 (M43) TURRET COMPARISONS

I didn’t know that much about the ’76 (m43) version of the T-34 before getting back into modeling. Like most I was more familiar with the original T-34/76 (model 1940) and the later large turreted ’85 variant. So this is all new to me and for base line for accuracy I will have to rely on the Zvezda turret because I have read several reviews that have complimented it on it’s dimensional and detail accuracy.

ARMOURFAST T-34/76 (MODEL 1943) TURRET
Number of parts: 11

Obviously simplified but still contains a rather surprising amount of components for an Armourfast. This model is advertised as being 're-tooled' and a major improvement over the original HaT model on which it was based. This model seems to be based on the Autumn 1943 'Laminate' turret version.

Pros:
- Unlike the Armourfast '85 turret this one isn't oversized
- Generally favorable rendition of all the major components
- Hatches can be modelled open or closed
- Mantlet is accurately off-set
- Sharply moulded, ideal for 'accurizing'
- Has correct 'stepped' bottom for 'Laminate' version

Cons:
- Lacking in most of the fine detail, including weld/cast marks
- Major rivets are excluded, particularly on the gun mantlet
- No side view port
- Gun mantlet is not exactly the right shape and is symetric
- Main periscope & vent are not exactly right

PLASTIC SOLDIER T-34/76 (MODEL 1943) TURRET
Number of parts: 6

Once again the Plastic Soldier turret is the model simplified example among these M43s. However, on the plus side it is far better than their attempt at the '85 turret! It is a 'generic' M40 turret, but I would guess it is *based* on the ChTZ 1942 production model.

Pros:
- Cleanly moulded and what detail there is is crisp
- At least you can tell it is a M43 turret!
- They got the gun a feasible size this time!

Cons:
- Slightly over-sized
- 'Stepped' element of laminate turret missing
- Periscope, rails and side port are feeble
- Top mantlet cover is all wrong

[img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7145/6517117285_dcd2ee1784.jpg[/img]

ZVEZDA T-34/76 (MODEL 1943) TURRET
Number of parts: 7

Most impressive snap together design - you really don't need glue (unlike the other 'quick builds'). This feature does explain why it actually has less components than the Armourfast turret! Like the Armourfast this appears to be based on the Autumn 1943 'Laminate' model.

Pros:
- Nicely crisp moulding
- As far as I can determine it's of good scale
- Does include some amount of weld marks and rivets
- Good periscope and air vent
- Nice gun and mantlet (nicest of the group)

Cons:
- Obviously still somewhat simplified
- Side rails missing and side port is poor
- 'Stepped' element of the laminate turret appears to be a little shallow.
- Again, mantlet has been made symmetrical in shape

CONCLUSION:
Well, a bit of a surprise conclusion this time. I did expect the Zvezda M43 turret to be easily the best of the three I looked at, but the Armourfast actually gave it a real run for it's money. Of particular note is the fact that the Armourfast has 3 more components than Zvezda!

Another pleasant surprise was that the Plastic Soldier turret was not as dismal as their T-34/85 turret was. In fact, simplification and slight over-size aside, it is a passable stab at the M43 turret - certainly as good as I would expect from a 'war gaming quality' model.

In the end you should not be shocked that I consider the Zvezda turret the superior of the three BUT not by as much as I expected. In fact, in terms of pure value for money I would have to say that the Armourfast is the bargain of these three. It would make a good subject for a cheap accurization project.

In the end it is so close to call between the Armourfast and Zvezda turret that I will have to reserve comment on the best until I have examined the rest of the models' components in order to decide whether the Zvezda really is the King of the quick builds...

It seems that Armourfast's marketing about their re-tooling and 'improved' T-34/76 (M43) wasn't all hype!  :D

NEXT: The T-34 quick build hull comparisons

Four T-34 'quick build' models compared - Part 3

QUICK BUILD T-34/85 TURRET COMPARISONS
I thought I would split the comparisons down to major components. In this part I am looking at the quick build T-34/85 turrets - next time I will look at the T-34/76 (Model 1943) versions of the turrets...

ARMOURFAST TURRET:
Number of parts: 6

This seems to be a simplified "Flattened Style" turret, summer 1945* production model (differing from the 1944 pattern - most noticeably -  in the design of the commanders hatch). It has the Zis-S-53 gun mantlet collar and the 'flattened' (roughly triangular) area on the sides which give it it's name. But, part of it's simplification by Armourfast sees the bulge for the electronic traverse on the left side and the slight bulge next to the commander's cupola removed and the roof periscopes are hardly there at all...

* Despite being called the '1945' model this variant first appeared in late 1944, as if things weren't confuing enough!


UPDATE NOTE: I've found some additional references that may identify this turret as being closer to the Spring 1944 'Angled-Joined' style of turret - a good article for T-34/85 turret styles can be found here: Missing-lynx.com - The T-34-85 in WWII: A Closer Look

Pros:
- Nicely done twin roof air vents
- Both hatches can be modelled open
- Passable mantlet and nicely moulded gun (if a little large)
- Crisp moulding

Cons:
- Turret seems to be over-sized (too wide)
- 'Flattened' (triangular) facet is a little exaggerated
- Naturally - as a quick build - all rails and lifting rings and other small detail are missing
- Traverse bulge missing (this is a small square 'bump' on the left side)
- Welding (& casting) detail missing
- Gun about 2mm too long and a little thick (but not hugely so)
- Gun mantlet too wide and gun off-set too much
- Gun barrel is not drilled out

PEGASUS TURRET:
Number of parts: 5 (6 if you count alternative commander's hatch)

Again, this appears to be a 1945 pattern "Flattened" turret but unlike the Armourfast version there is some attempt to replicate the original's welding and casting marks. In particular the fluted 'fillets' are discernible near the turret collar and Pegasus have included the traverse mechanism bulge and commander's cupola bulge on the left side of the turret.

Pros:
- Passable attempt at including the distinctive welding and casting marks.
- Alternative commander's hatch is included in the open position
- Periscopes (Mk. 4s) are correctly modelled
- Turret dimensions appear to be closer to scale
- Gun is correct length and thickness

Cons:
- Secondary hatch is moulded shut
- Air vents are little too dome-like
- Naturally - as a quick build - all rails and lifting rings and other small detail are missing
- Gun is a little bent and badly moulded, includes noticeable seams
- Gun barrel is not drilled out

PLASTIC SOLDIER TURRET:
Number of parts: 5

This is the most simplified of all three quick-build T-34/85 turrets reviewed. It is harder to determine exactly which of the '85 turret variants the PSC model is supposed to be due to the extreme simplification, so it's perhaps kindest to say that the PSC '85 is 'generic'.

Pros:
- Crisply moulded (what detail there is is cleanly defined)
- Like the Armourfast, PS has the shape of the air vents more accurately moulded
- Turret seems vaguely the correct dimension
- Both hatches are separate components and can be modelled in the open position
- A commander's figure is included
- Funnily enough, the PS turret is the only one to include lifting rings (albeit crude ones)

Cons:
- An amazingly bad gun and mantlet - the gun is widely out of scale
- The least detail is included and what there is is highly simplified
- The fit of the top and bottom turret parts is bad and you will have do some shaving to get a good fit
- Naturally - as a quick build - all rails and most other small detail are missing
- There is no attempt whatsoever at weld or casting details
- Gun barrel is not drilled out

CONCLUSION:

Both the Armourfast and Plastic Soldier turrets are made of good quailty plastic of a hard type (good to cut and file), they are clean and sharply moulded. However, they are the most simplified of the three turrets.

The Pegasus turret is made of what seems to be a cheaper and more brittle plastic, but it also includes the most surface detail and texture and has the best implementation of welding and casting marks.

The Plastic Soldier '85 turret is undoubtedly the worst of the three turrets. Aside from it's extreme simplicity and generic layout the dreadful gun and mantlet are no good to anyone - it has been noted by others that the gun itself looks like it is a 120mm gun! This discrepancy is so far out of scale that I doubt if even war gamers would find this turret satisfactory (no disrespect to war gamers intended).

Therefore, I would rank the three turrets as follows - first the Pegasus, then the Armourfast and finally the Plastic Soldier turret.

The Pegasus turret has just enough surface texture and detail to make the actual variant of turret distinguishable and you could further enhance this basic model with some easily applied improvements to make a passably accurate '85 turret. The fact that this seems to be a late war 1945 variant of the turret might be a problem for some, but it would easy enough to modify the 1945 details to retro-grade the turret to the earlier - and similar - 1944 variant (though despite being called the '1945' model turret this variant appeared in late 1944!)

Were I to attempt to 'accuarize' the Pegasus turret I would probably replace the gun with a third-party metal one. Although the Pegasus 85mm gun is the nearest to scale it's very thinness make it prone to bending. And as to the secondary hatch being moulded closed, well most people will be satisfied that you can use the optional 'open' commander's hatch.

(Special note for wargamers - my comments above are based on what I percieve to be 'best accuracy' of the turrets reviewed. For wargaming purposes alone, however, the Armourfast turret is absolutely acceptable, in fact it's lack of superflous detail is probably an advantage if you have to paint a small army of them!)

Four T-34 'quick build' models compared - Part 2

WHAT'S IN THE BOX:-
Right, components, what do you get? Well, they vary quite a lot, here's a run down...

1. ARMOURFAST

Yep, the Armourfast philosophy is less is more!  Turret hatches can be modelled open - no figure included.

Model: T-34/85, seems to be a 1944 composite model with late 'dished' roadwheels with rubber tyers and with rounded front fenders.
Number of tanks in box: 2
Number of parts: 22 (per tank)
Instructions: Printed on back of box
Painting suggestions: None specific, limited to picture on front of box.
Decals: No
Variant options: No

2. PLASTIC SOLDIER

Well, you get a bang for your bucks. Three tanks with the ability to build each in either of two variants! Turret hatches can be modelled open - A Commander half-figure is included on each sprue.

Model: T-34/85 (model 1944 composite) OR T-34/76 (model 1943), full 'Spider' wheels but holes not drilled through. Rounded fenders.
Number of tanks in box: 3
Number of parts: 30 (per tank)
Instructions: Printed on back of box
Painting suggestions: Basic generic painting suggestions on back of box (not unit specific)
Decals: No
Variant options: yes, two turrets and guns are included. One for the T-34/76 and one for the T-34/85.

3. PEGASUS HOBBIES

Plenty of parts for your money. Only commanders hatch can be modelled open - no figure included.

Model: T-34/85 (model 1944 composite) with full 'Spider' road wheels with holes through. Angled fenders.
Number of tanks in box: 2
Number of parts: 39 (per tank)
Instructions: Printed on seperate sheet in box.
Painting suggestions: None specific, limited to picture on front of box.
Decals: No
Variant options: No.

4. ZVESDA

Whoa! Surely the king of 'easy builds'! Plenty to get your teeth into but due to the snap-together format turret hatches are designed to be closed! No figures included.

Model: T-34/76 (model 1943) with full 'Spider' road wheels with holes through.
Number of tanks in box: 1
Number of parts: 62
Instructions: Printed on seperate sheet in box.
Painting suggestions: Printed in greyscale on back of instructions sheet (colour camo examples on side of box).
Decals: Yes, 2 options.
Variant options: No.

NEXT POST: Components in detail and review of quality.