Trumpeter’s M1A1 HA - by “Art Instructor” :
For more pics, please try my latest page :
http://www.falconbbs.com/model33c.htm
Have fun!
Not too bad, but as usual, it has some accuracy errors.
First off, the ammo box on the Commander’s .50 cal is on backwards. The angled support should meet the top of the box at the gun cradle. The hand grips on the Loader’s M240D are made out of black resin or metal, not wood. The smoke grenade launchers should be more forward and mounted on the hull sides at about a 30 degree angle pointing up, not on the grunt rails pointing forward. The Combat identification panels are all wrong as well. The ones on the turret side and rear are too boxy and square and should have louvers, not rails running across them. The “square” CIPs on the turret front should be square, not rectangles, they are not tall enough. Lastly, he has his usual clean tracks and dirty hull and running gear.
I guess we are all wasting our breath as it appears you are not passing any of these suggestions for improvement on to him; his models continue to have the same issues.
Actually on the M1A1, there are no handgrips on the .50 cal, but some regular .50 cals have wooden grips that are either painted black or stained a dark wood color. Black resin, black wood or dark wood stain could all be appropriate.
The loader’s M240 does not have resin hand grips either. The grips are bent pieces of metal rod covered with a simple piece of black rubber tubing. The grips are normally either painted the same color as the tank or are just black rubber in color. Now the dismount kit for the loader’s M240 does have black resin grips for the stock and pistol grip.
I would second the comment about the wrongly-shaped Combat Identification Panels, which are too long for their height and much too thick, and the far too clean tracks, and also add that there seems to be some staining/silvering around the decals which should have been taken care of. If you choose to post pictures of your commissioned projects here, it would be nice if you’d accept our criticism, rather than try to argue your way around the facts we bring up. Otherwise, it’s just advertising, which is against the rules.
Overall, it does look pretty good!
Thanks for your comments. Well, there may be some inaccuracies as you guys have pointed out but I think 95% of people don’t know that (myself included). After all, AI did mostly everything according to the instruction sheets and he tried to do his best. In my eyes, it looks as good as the new M1A1 AIM from Dragon which costs more than 3 times this one. I pass on some suggestions to AI from time to time. But as you can see, perfection is endless. There’s always something to be desired… Just let us know what you desire…
I have to disagree with you there. The Trumpeter M1A1 is nowhere near the quality of the new Dragon M1A1 AIM. If you had actually build the new AIM, you would easily see the difference in quality.
That is the difference between someone who buildings quality models and someone who is just building them as fast as he can for someone else. The quality builder goes beyond the often incorrect directions and does some research on what he is building to build it accurately. There is lots of info out there on M1A1s and it isn’t too hard to find detailed photos and other references to get it right. It just takes a little added effort and time.
Model Maniac,
I know you are an avid collector, and you just want to share what you have purchased on these and other boards. The problem is, your builder, is at most, an average modeler. It would be different if below average quality was viewed under the pretense of improvement (which is what this forum is really about). We share our work, ask for critique and move forward with those lessons. There are quite a few folks here that have done a commission build or two, and usually, when you are building for a customer, (outside of kit design issues), things should be as correct as possible.
Your personal satisfaction is not the issue. You certainly have the right to pay for the level of quality that pleases you. However, it is irksome for some of us to see this work on the boards, and not offer up what we see as being obvious issues. We are in this for pleasure, but, basic mistakes and obvious blunders in construction don’t really apply to SCALE MODELING.
Plus, there is a certain measure of contempt involved, as it is troubling to see an individual paying for bad quality. There are many builders that can offer a professionally finished projects at competitive prices. To post the low quality work here, is to invite comments that are less than stellar.
Over the years, we have seen you on the defensive more than once, defending the “art instructor”, both with aircraft and armor.
We know you are a nice guy, but you are one of the few members here that don’t actually build. So, there is a little controversy sometimes when you post your builders work, showing the same errors time after time.
You are obviously proud of the models that you purchased. Model builders are proud of what they have constructed with thier own two hands…BIG Difference.
From beginner level to accomplished level, we are about scale modeling here on this board. What is a jewel to a collector with hundreds of purchased kits on the shelf, can be a real disappointment to a builder when obvious shortcomings are repetively posted here.
I don’t think it’s personal, but there is a lot more respect for a really bad model that was built by a member personally, and who is willing to reap the benefits of better, more experienced builders and thier advice, than a substandard job that was thrown together for a buck or two.
Just my two cents. Scale modelers take just as much pride in the research required to model somewhat realistically, as they do in gluing and painting plastic.
best regards,
Steve