Today I proudly present yet another new page showing better imaqe quality than ever! Now the films, not the prints, were scanned. File size has doubled from 70-80KB/file to 150KB/file, may take longer to load, but you get better quality!
Academy’s Merkava II - by “Art Instructor”:
Have fun!
Well Maniac, it looks decent paint wise, but detail wise there is something very important missing. The anti slip is completely missing and is a crucial detail that AI seems to have forgotten. Not to mention some seams on the ammo case.
It looks so-so. Besides the seam lines on the ammo cans, there are various knock out pin marks on the .50 cal, tow hooks, etc. that should have been removed or filled in. There is some flash and extra plastic around the bottom of the turret as well. Looks like he forgot to paint the tail lights again too. The .50 cal on top of the barrel should line up with the barrel as well, not be pointing upward. Looks to be the standard throw it together as quick as possible job by your “professional” builder.
That’s a very nice Merkava II… I wouldn’t care for the non-slip surface, I have the book Merkava I, II, III Israel’s Chariot of Fire from Concord Publications Company. In that book there are a lot of pics of Merkava IIs and most of them lack the non-slip surface, even in the Merkava III pics, “Mahatz”, the pre-production tank, lacks the surface. The Academy Merkava III depicts this tank, so I’ll detail most of it, but I won’t make the non-slip surface as the tank in the pics clearly lacks it. Thanks for sharing. Most regards.
José
Jose, don’t know where you got your references from, but mine, seem to be a little more legit. I am going by, A) IDF tankers whom I know personally B) IDF Mechanics who work on these tanks personally. C) IDF military vehicles by Mouse House publications. D) Osprey’s Merkava MBT. and Last but not least, Tankograd’s Merkava: A history of Israel’s main battle tank. Anyway, now that I have shared which references I go by, I can safely say that you haven’t seen any Merkava other than a Merkava Mk. 1 INITIAL PRODUCTION without Anti slip. Heck, only a small amount of initial production Mk. I’s had no ball and chains. Regardless of if you care for it or not, it is on EVERY MBT used by the IDF. If someone is trying to replicate a vehicle, they should do it right. If you don’t like the look of it, don’t build it! I know you have built a couple of Merks in your day, but it seems you lack a solid amount or research to say you have seen Merkava I, II, III without antislip unless it was the pre production vehicle used for testing, which only had a lack on antislip for a few propaganda pictures! As for you book, it is good, but you do need to take a better look at your Merks in the pictures. As for Mahatz, it was never used in military conflicts and was used only for show! It sits at Latrun Museum in Israel and that’s that. Academy’s Merkava kits leave little to be desired, especially their Mk. III which has the incorrect suspension and road wheels for the vehicles, and can only be correctly used to model Mahatz, which again never saw combat! This Merkava model presented by AI seems to be portraying a Merkava that is the standard for a combat vehicle and should have Anti slip on it.
Yes, you’re right… Maybe they are pre-production Merkava tanks like the “Mahatz”, depicted in the Academy Merkava III kit, but in your reference you didn’t have the book I have, I told all that before because I have the book… I also have the Osprey book, but I can’t find it right now, I also want to make the non-slip surface, but I don’t know how tho do that particular surface (I was thinking about spreading white glue, then fine sand), and as the “Mahatz” depicted in my book doesn’t has it, I’ll leave it until when I get a Merkava IV. Most regards.
José
Jose, the Anti slip is rather easy to recreate if you have the patience. There are many methods to do it. Mind include Mr. Surfacer 1000 and baking soda. Stiple the mixture on after masking, and you’re all set. The anti slip is rather irregular, so it’s fine to make it not uniform. Here’s a pic of my Merkava III Baz that I did recently.
Maniac: I’m not trying to hijack your thread my friend. Just want to prove a point!
Hi Model Maniac,
Despite the “short comings” pointed out, I still think it is a very good looking job. I’m admitting my own inadequacies as a builder, but I’m still trying to get to that level.
To me this build will help me to aspire to better finishes on my own builds.
I’ve seen several builds by Art Instructor and always enjoy his work. The builds may not be perfect, but that doesn’t mean (to me) they’re not good.
I look forward to seeing more of his work.
I give him [tup] [tup].
Joe [:D] [:D]
Joe
I know I’ve said this before, but PLEASE people, DO NOT use baking soda for ANYTHING in modelling applications where you are mixing it with lacquers, paint, etc…it is FAR too chemically reactive!!! I used to use it for texturizing rust, ya know; mix it with enamel rust paint to give it “grain”–and had a nightmare of ruin happen several years later where the paint reacted with it and made it look like yellow-brown oily ooze sweating out of every surface where I used it. It completely ruined half of my collection! Leave it on the shelf for the Misses!!
BTW, that’s a seriously gorgeous BAZ, CDNtanker!
Actually, Doog, never had a problem in any length of time using baking soda. Only time I did was it being an attractant for dust and the like, it yellowed over time, when I used it for snow. No issues on baking soda for me, too bad you had an instance with it.
Fair enough–ye have been warned![;)]
Many thanks for your kind comments and compliments, especially from Jose and Panther 44.
A little rant here:
Sometimes I get really annoyed at nick-pickers. Why do people nick-pick a model before even asking what the modelers goal was in producing the model. Modeling can be very subjective depending on what the modeler is trying to accomplish. I’m not talking about construction mistakes like a gun barrel glued on backwards or the wrong tracks on a tank. I’m talking about the “your missing this” and “your missing that” comments. I build plenty of models OOB that I know have inaccuracies and are missing things. Sometimes my intent is to just build a nice looking model and not to replicate the real thing in 1:35 scale. Other times I try to correct as many inaccuracies as possible. So how about before critizing someone’s elses work, why not try to understand what the modeler was trying to accomplish. On the same token, maybe when people submit their work, they should explain what they were trying to accomplish. So basically, I think critizism should be based on what a person was trying to accomplish, not what you think they should of done or you would of done.
That works great when the model was actually built by the guy submitting it. When it is a “professionally” built model being submitted by a collector, that has no relevance. He has no goal but to collect another model and no idea about the actual build.
I also disagree somewhat. When you post a model, you are looking for some type of feedback. If all you receive is the obligatorty, “Hey, that looks great,” no one learns anything about improving their skills. If you are given constructive criticism, you can see your mistakes and learn how to fix them, therefore improving your skills and becoming a better modeler. If you intended to leave something off or build it in a non-standard way, you should explain it first or be prepared to explain it when questioned on the build.
Remember where you are. This is the FSM Armor Forum, no criticism allowed.
Personally, I just do not comment on someone’s kit if I do not like it. I guess it is the old grandmother rule “if you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all.”
I do see the benefit of pointing out errors though. If it receives only accolades and some novice thinks that the kit/technique is perfect, he may try to replicate the build, errors and all.
I know, I know. [:I]
But I will fight the insanity every chance I can.[:D]
I’m not saying there should be no criticism. But shouldn’t someone ask for feedback on their model before people jump all over it? It seems like some people are just waiting like vultures to devour a new build that’s been posted.
I believe you are asking for feedback by posting pictures of it. You are posting it for others to see and comment on. One has to be prepared for both praise and constructive criticism. If this thread was full of “Hey, it looks great!!” replies, would there even be a discussion about criticism here at all?
Ok, I’ll agree with you on that point somewhat. I guess this is what I’m trying to say:
I feel that unsolicated critizism or inappropiate critizism will lead to modelers (especially young ones) from posting pictures.
I agree that the builder should give some type of explanation to his build. I disagree about not giving criticism if not asked for or only addressing what he explained in the description.
Like I said above, criticism is necessary to see your mistakes and improve on your next build. You also have to learn how to take criticism and not be offended because someone see something you don’t. Many of the young modelers here have done that and become better because of it. Others have not, so be it. Sometimes life is hard; another good lesson to learn early.