Landships II

Treadhead · Major

1/35th vs. 1/72nd vs. 1/48th ...Opinions?

Vilkata · Brigadier

WWI Armor is a niche market. The companys who make the kits have to try to appeal to as broad a range of clients as they can. Thus, they make a lot of their models acceptable sizes for wargaming. In this way, they capture the wargamer market, aswell as the regular WWI Armor modelling market at the same time.

---Vil.

Peter Kempf · Field Marshal

When it comes to WW1 Military Modelling 1/35 has the obvious advantage of allowing for much more detail, and it's not hard to find 1/35 models that are absolutely *stunning*! I for one sometimes use 1/35 scale models as reference, and I'm envious of the skills of many of the 1/35-ers.

I myself have opted for 1/72 (and 1/76, when applicable). My reasons are the following:

1. Availablity of kits. There are many, MANY more kits in this scale than in 1/35. Granted, with a big variation in quality. But still: you can't beat 1/72 when it comes to the sheer number of kits.

2. Price. For obvious reasons, 1/72 is cheaper. You can get more kits. Try and buy.

3. Size. 1/35 obviously requires more room for display.

4. Size again. Beacuse of the size, you can also find kits of things that are almost TOO BIG to kit (economically) in 1/35, like Armoured Trains, Railway Guns and bohemoths like the K-Wagen or the Russian Tsar Tank.

I think there are pro's and con's to both scales. My choice is a personal one.

Drader · Lieutenant

I'm more interested in the subject than the scale, so it's not a problem for me.

As a result I have WW1 tanks in 1/35th, 1/72nd, 1/76th, 15mm, 1/300th and 2mm scales. Obviously the smaller ones are meant for wargames and you have to be careful what you buy - avoid Minifigs 15mm tanks whatever you do as they are like flatpack furniture, just even more difficult to build .

1/48th would be nice, specially if Tamiya woke up to the fact that the first Japanese tanks were Mark IVs and FT-17s.

Robert Langham · Corporal

Price and size to me, being a poor student means I have still to build a decent WWI kit without breaking it or losing it. Also the range available, for example if i want to build a diorama based around a Model T ambulance, I can have a Mack Bulldog, Whippet, and even a 1/76 armoured petrol locomotive (one day I hope to build a diorama with a narrow gauge WWI railway running alongside a road with tanks etc, ending at a depot)

Centurion · Legend

As an old scratch built model soldier man I've always been used to working in 1/32 (54mm for any BMSS members). It aso meant I could integrate with many car kits (Model T etc) but I've also built in 1/35 and 1/76 (for example converting the Airfix Mk I Male into a Mk V* Female)

Mario Wens · Lieutenant

Peter Kempf wrote:

4. Size again. Beacuse of the size, you can also find kits of things that are almost TOO BIG to kit (economically) in 1/35, like Armoured Trains, Railway Guns and bohemoths like the K-Wagen or the Russian Tsar Tank.

Peter,

I remember visiting Trucks'n'Tracks in Folkstone a few years back as interpreter for MGM, and the stand opposite of ours had a 1:15 scale Leopold Railway Gun on display. It was available as a resin kit!!!

Mario

Roger Todd · Legend

I favour 1/72 scale, partly because I simply like small models, but also because I live in a shoe-box sized flat in London...

Vilkata's point about 1/76 and 1/72 appealing to the wargaming market is a very good one, and certainly explains the scales' popularity. However, I've always thought it a shame that 1/48 scale never really caught on, as it's still nice and small, but large enough to incorporate more detail easily (especially when scratchbuilding!) - a nice balance between 1/72 and 1/35.

-- Edited by Roger Todd at 15:26, 2005-12-14

Tim R · Hero

Until I meet all my friends here at LANDSHIPS, I was primarily a 1/35, 1/32 scale scratch builder, But I have started to build 1/72 & 1/76th scale vehicles. I on the other hand love the larger scale because of the detail you can achieve. Plus I have a large home/ Hobby room were I can display them. I think that makes all the difference. We all love this hobby no matter what scale you prefer, and I believe If I may speak for every one, Just go with what makes you happy .

All the Best

Tim R.

J Fullerton · Captain

I like 1/35, though of course the limited selection is very frustrating. Also the expense of resin kits seems to have risen noticably in the last year or so.

Tim R · Hero

I defiantly agree that resin prices are way out of hand; I also understand that resin is quite expensive, do to me using it for my own personal use in scratch building. But they (the Model Companies) seem to mark there product up way to high. I really wish companies like Tamyia and Dragon would take note of the growing interest in World War One, and produce some new models. I guess I can only pray!!!!! Or hold my breath!!!!

All the Best

Tim R.

Roger Todd · Legend

Resin prices are relatively high in comparison to plastic, but that reflects the niche nature of the market, sadly (something reinforced by the very fact that Tamiya et al are not getting in on the act). A resin kit may only sell a few dozen; add to that the fact that RTV rubber moulds are only good, at most, for fifty decent castings before a new set must be made (that's if even enough sell to warrant a new set of moulds), and the expense of the materials (good silicone rubber costs, and so does good polyurethane resin), and, frankly, I'm amazed that resin kits cost as little as many of them do. These days, a 1/72 scale plastic kit of, say, a King Tiger (which will sell in the tens of thousands), can cost around �10; Cromwell Models' resin Mark VIII is around �20. Double the price. But take into account the nature of the beast and I'm actually pretty impressed that it does only cost double.

Double the size up to 1/35 scale, and you multiply the quantities of materials used eight-fold (because volume, hence mass, increases by the cube of the scaling factor). And buying resin and rubber in bulk doesn't save that much over small quantities. So your resin 1/35 kit maker has to spend eight times the amount on materials when starting up a new 1/35 kit as a 1/72 kit, and that's before he sells a single one! There are not many resin manufacturers big enough to spread that kind of initial investment over other products, which are already making money, before they start to see a profit from their new venture.

There's a similar situation with warships, which is why there's a vast resin 1/700 market in comparison with 1/350.

And here's where I declare my interest - I've had a go at producing a resin kit, so I can understand something of the business. When I decided to make a resin battleship kit, even 1/700 would have been too expensive, so I went for 1/1200 - I spent, maybe, �50 or �60 on materials before I cast my first kit, so not a great deal of money. But had I made it in 1/700 scale, I'd have spent around �300 minimum, and there was no way I could afford that - 1/350 scale, and I'd have been looking at a cool two grand at least. Plus, I don't have any machinery, like pressure pots, vacuum chambers, etc., which the big boys use, and which cost thousands. I have to rely on carefully made moulds and very labour-intensive techniques to make resin parts. The time I spend, however, can't just be slapped onto the final price, otherwise I'd price myself out of business - it's why, for me, it's a business/hobby, and will never become full-time. But it's another reason why resin costs what it does.

Date: Dec 14, 2005

This is an ongoing topic of interest that begs participants; I shall add my two cents worth. Though I know it is the prefered scale here, 1/72 kits, with few exceptions, lack all but fundamental detail and appear toy-like; in my humble opinion. The 1/35 kits are almost exclusively resin( not my favorite medium to work with) who's parts require far too much work for the investment one makes.

Then there's 1/32 white-metal from Scale Link. Ah... my personal favorite. Admittedly, they are display hogs; taking up more space than a dozen 1/72 examples of the same specie. But that is more than offset by the splendor of the finished product, the heft of holding one of their vehicles can only be appreciated after you've built one. And oh, the praise they invite from the occasional visitor who studies your work. Even if the gazer knows nothing of the subject matter, he can ascertain detail that suggest the thing is almost breathing.

Unfortunately, John Piper sold his business some time ago, and the WW1 line he invisioned has stagnatted with his departure. No genuinely new kits have surfaced from the firm since then. (This, dispite the fact that John had started work on masters for; the 18pdr, with limber - 4.5 in Howitzer, with limber - 75mm M1897, with limber - 7,7cm FK16, with limber,.. and so on, and so on.)

John's work is now more that 20 years old, but even so, the Scale Link ft17 is a better kit than any other I've seen. The massive MkIV can not be approached by latter efforts in 1/35 from you-know-who. The supporting figures are numerous; in various nationalities. Individual weapons and equipment are most pleasing.

If you can afford them at all, don't pass up an experiment with Scale Link.

Tim R · Hero

Anonymous

I agree with your analogy of Scale Link, I have enjoyed there models for years.

All The Best

Tim R.

Roger Todd · Legend

Anonymous wrote:

...1/72 kits, with few exceptions, lack all but fundamental detail and appear toy-like; in my humble opinion.

Of course that can be true, but you clearly haven't seen Gabriele Zenoni's Mark I kit (near the bottom of this page):

http://henk.fox3000.com/gzenoni.htm

At the end of the day, the choice of scale is very personal, and is made for a variety of reasons. None of us wants to end up having a fight over scale (as I've seen happen on warship boards in the past), and I think we can acknowledge that there are good and bad kits in every scale. There are some howlers in 1/35 scale, I'm sure, but I wouldn't wish to make a sweeping generalisation of the demerits, or merits, of that scale.

28juni14 · Hero

Firstly, please accept my appology for failing to post my identity earlier: I had not intended to be "anonymous".

Roger is correct; scale debates are frustrating, and frankly, annoying. I simply responded to what Treadhead had asked for; opinions. I hope no one concluded I was bashing any other scales; after all, I've either built or bought in just about every scale out there. The final scale selection in my case was based on figure availability. I wanted superior definition with a wide range of subject matter. I've frequently used them to provide visual interest while giving lectures relating to the Great War. Over the years I've concluded the novice has far more interest in subject matter he can clearly see without the close scrutiny my 1/76 items had required.

And yes, I'm very familiar with the master's work. We exchanged information while I was working on an Austro-Daimler M12/16 Zugmaschine. (His is easily the superior to mine.)

Incidently, I'm very impressed with your work, Roger.

Jack Mueller

Roger Todd · Legend

Hi Jack,

I apologise for any offence, no bashing was intended, but I do sometimes have a habit of seeming like I'm having a go even when I'm trying to be emollient! Ah well, the diplomatic corps' loss is world peace's gain...

Now, I'd love to 'get into' 1/35, but living, as I do, in my teeny weeny London shoebox, it just ain't on... At a tangent, it surely can't be coincidence that the Japanese are such masters of smaller scales?

That's why I mused earlier that I've always thought it a shame that 1/48 never took off, it really is a happy medium between the two 'main' scales.

28juni14 wrote:

I've frequently used them to provide visual interest while giving lectures relating to the Great War.

What a great idea, at what level are your lectures? And when are you going to post some pics of your models on Landships? The more the merrier!

And thank you for your kind words, I really should stop surfing and get on with some WW1 modelmaking...

-- Edited by Roger Todd at 23:17, 2005-12-14

-- Edited by Roger Todd at 23:52, 2005-12-14

28juni14 · Hero

My "lectures" are hardly what they may have seemed. Actually, over the winter months I "host" two or three presentations at local libraries. I usually select a theme and provide a "coming attraction" notice some weeks in advance. Often the subjects are elementry; such as weapons innovation, but at least one time a year I like to take them deep; political science being particularly provoking. Last February I gave a presentation on the history of women in combat, which was followed by a lively hour an a half of spirited discussion. My audience is usually about 50% male adults, and the remainder high school students. Their numbers rarely exceed 20-25 people ( normally folks almost as boring as myself). Speaking of which, I hope I haven't put anyone to sleep with this dribble.....

Date: Dec 16, 2005

Not at all! The 'Women in Combat' lecture immediately evokes thoughts of the Women's Death Battalion of the Provisional Russian government. Sounds very interesting! I have to wonder what the audience's take on the subject was.

Roger Todd · Legend

I agree with 'Anonymous', they sound fascinating! I like the fact that you're doing them as a community activity, rather than just in school or college.