special request

[byram]

can i get a picture of a 1/72 scale Abrams next to a MGP Abrams?

 

[Jellicoe]

 

[Jellicoe]

 

[byram]

thank you jellicoe

 

[Fanaticus]

can i get a picture of a 1/72 scale Abrams next to a MGP Abrams?

On the very first post in this thread:
Armor: Comparison Shots

That, and even more.

 

[byram]

silly me, i saw that and thought they were 1:64

 

[Jellicoe]

Not to worry

 

[Dorb]

This stuff looks great. More, more more. Anyone have any Strykers(LAV III).

 

[Jellicoe]

This stuff looks great. More, more more. Anyone have any Strykers(LAV III).

Which stuff?

 

[BuShips]

Thank you Jellicoe and Fanaticus. Good work, all around. I'm a bit hesitant to use anything smaller than the official models, but it does appear that the 1/72 looks a lot better than I thought it would. On the table at several feet away, I'll bet it's hard to even notice.

 

[Jellicoe]

Thank you Jellicoe and Fanaticus. Good work, all around. I'm a bit hesitant to use anything smaller than the official models, but it does appear that the 1/72 looks a lot better than I thought it would. On the table at several feet away, I'll bet it's hard to even notice.

You will not notice the difference between BFevo and 1/72. Take the Abrams for example the MGP has the same height and width as a 1/72 kit/die cast, which makes it too long and thin in reality. You'll notice the length issue a bit when you stand over it, but that's hardly the most important complaint given painting issues, bent rifles etc.

 

[tneva82]

silly me, i saw that and thought they were 1:64

Shows how much oversided 1/72 stuff is these days if they look right next to 1/64...

 

[byram]

silly me, i saw that and thought they were 1:64

Shows how much oversided 1/72 stuff is these days if they look right next to 1/64...

they dont, i just misread what he said in his post

 

[Jellicoe]

Shows how much oversided 1/72 stuff is these days if they look right next to 1/64...

I'd say it was the other way around, the one up to is a pretty accurate 1/72 kit. Comapre the MGP one to pictures and you'll see it is a bit out of shape.

 

[BuShips]

Thank you Jellicoe and Fanaticus. Good work, all around. I'm a bit hesitant to use anything smaller than the official models, but it does appear that the 1/72 looks a lot better than I thought it would. On the table at several feet away, I'll bet it's hard to even notice.

You will not notice the difference between BFevo and 1/72. Take the Abrams for example the MGP has the same height and width as a 1/72 kit/die cast, which makes it too long and thin in reality. You'll notice the length issue a bit when you stand over it, but that's hardly the most important complaint given painting issues, bent rifles etc.

Yes, but which model is wrong in your example? I'd take a guess that it might be the 1/72. When a Corgi M1 hull is compared with a BFE M1 model, the two are identical down to the mm. From that data, either the 1/72 is 'wrong' or the other two both made the same mistake in scale. It is interesting how close the 1/72 appear to be.

 

[Mr Evil]

well im converting up a navy lynx at the mo into a future lynx and usin 1/72 scale kit and to be honest it looks ine.

there is little differance between 1/72 and 1/65 scale to be honest. diferance is like a 6 foot guy standing next to a 5'10" guy from 100 meters away

 

[Jellicoe]

Yes, but which model is wrong in your example? I'd take a guess that it might be the 1/72. When a Corgi M1 hull is compared with a BFE M1 model, the two are identical down to the mm. From that data, either the 1/72 is 'wrong' or the other two both made the same mistake in scale. It is interesting how close the 1/72 appear to be.

This discussion has been had over and over and its really not all that important.

The length of an M1A2 is listed as 387" = 9.83m

MGP Abrams is 14.6cm(ish) x 65 = 9.42m
1/72 Model kit is 14 x 72 = 10.08m

Rather than worrying about the exact accuracy of the dimensions for all those worried about details the MGP is missing smoke grenades, the rear is modeled wrong, the turret equipment bin is too long, etc.. etc.. A 1/72 kit (note not a die cast) is more detailed and the various bits of kit like MGs are more accurate.

BTW despite what I say I like my MGP Abrams

 

[Jellicoe]

there is little differance between 1/72 and 1/65 scale to be honest. diferance is like a 6 foot guy standing next to a 5'10" guy from 100 meters away

Quite so

 

[BuShips]

Yes, but which model is wrong in your example? I'd take a guess that it might be the 1/72. When a Corgi M1 hull is compared with a BFE M1 model, the two are identical down to the mm. From that data, either the 1/72 is 'wrong' or the other two both made the same mistake in scale. It is interesting how close the 1/72 appear to be.

This discussion has been had over and over and its really not all that important.

The length of an M1A2 is listed as 387" = 9.83m

MGP Abrams is 14.6cm(ish) x 65 = 9.42m
1/72 Model kit is 14 x 72 = 10.08m

Rather than worrying about the exact accuracy of the dimensions for all those worried about details the MGP is missing smoke grenades, the rear is modeled wrong, the turret equipment bin is too long, etc.. etc.. A 1/72 kit (note not a die cast) is more detailed and the various bits of kit like MGs are more accurate.

BTW despite what I say I like my MGP Abrams

I'm not being confrontational as much as curious. The hulls of the MGP model and the Corgi are dead-on. That's all I was mentioning. I liked your feedback with the measurements you just supplied as well. What this all says is that the only "really" accurate one is the 1/1 scale version. :lol:

 

[Jellicoe]

I'm not being confrontational as much as curious. The hulls of the MGP model and the Corgi are dead-on. That's all I was mentioning. I liked your feedback with the measurements you just supplied as well. What this all says is that the only "really" accurate one is the 1/1 scale version. :lol:

Yeah I do realise that . The one key advantage is that the MGP ones are more robust than the rest.