I am currently working on the 1944 See thru T-34 Kit. As far as parts count, I think they included everything for the inside except for some figures and the kitchen sink. I have found the extent of the detail to be exactly what I was looking for. I find the picture instructions most helpful. The only thing that I find missing is colour directions for parts. The exterior of the tank is going to require some surface prep as the kits exterior is shiny smooth. T-34s had a cast like surface. But for me I give it a 8.5/10 .

Again thanks for all the input.  I can't help the feeling that if and when i am looking at a specific kit, the question will need to be asked again with that specific additon.

OK...I will pile on....like every company they have their pro and cons.  Some of their older kits are Academy copies or old Skybow kits. In general AFV Club engineered kits are part heavy but have lots of detail. They are not kits for a beginner!! In general they build into a very good kit. Usually fit well with very few pin marks and I have never seen sink marks....mainly because their styrene mix is softer than others and frankly I prefer it. Like most their most recent kits are better than their older kits.

In general, better than Hobby Boss or Trumpeter, more complicated than Tamiya, far better than most of the eastern European companies, on the level with Dragon and at times friendlier.

HTH

Rounds Complete!!

Marc, have the Long Tom and M5 Stuart bothsitting in primer,great kits enjoyable builds.The Stuart came with a metal barrel and a good amount of P/E.If I can build them,you can make masterpieces out of them.

John

I have a couple in the stash and have used their indi tracks on an Abrams. While the tracks did take a bit of time to put together as there are 3 peices per link I like them, they look good and are about 1/3 of the price of Fruils.

Phil

Doogs, please build the Valentine next. I'd like a blow-by-blow. I've been eye-balling the best Valentine on the market and think that AFV's might be an easier build.

As others have said, it's a mixed bag.

I built their Achilles awhile back. Detail's pretty good, but it's a terrible kit to build for several reasons:

1 - The worst instructions I've ever encountered on an armor kit. If you think Dragon has problems, they look like Wingnut Wings in comparison.

2 - Raised ejector pin marks ALL OVER the exterior of the hull. Probably a good 20-25 all told. Had to chisel each one off. WHY? That's ridiculous.

3 - Fussy build for no reason. So other manufacturers can do basically one-piece turrets out of weird shapes and several meeting angles, but with the Achilles you have to assemble each slab side, on and with no locating tabs or ridges or anything? Sweet, thanks.

4 - Rubber bands were too short, one side broke on me.

It came out fine in the end and actually took third in category at ModelFiesta this year, but it was definitely in spite of the kit.

However...I recently received their new Valentine and wow does it look the stunner. Every bit as good as what's coming out of Tasca/Dragon/Bronco these days.

i currently am working on the afv SHO'T KAL and agree it's a tad over engineered but not bad. left and right turret halves were annoying and, given the turret bins are myulti pieces it would have been nice to be ablt to have them open. i didn't thonk i would like the separate fenders but theyt fit fine. i built the STRYKER IFV and the trumperer LAV-III which, hull wise, are almost identical. wheel attachment on both were flaky and i ended up using cya but the builds were close. headlights/frames amndmirrors were anniying on both. i have the afv STRYKER MGS and the trumpeter STRYKER MORTAR CARRIER in the stash. i like rubber band tracks. i have different ways to sag them asd necessary. BUT this is why i do warwheels. currently started an french 8x8 EBR-10. shameful bragging. the STRYKER took a second in post 1945 armor in one contest and the LAV-III took a third in armored cars and another contest.

Yeah, to add to what's ready been said I'm a big fan of AFV Club. Kinda over-engineered and often with bunches of injection pin marks but excellent detail and boat loads of cool allied subjects you can't get anywhere else.

In our Tiger GB going on in our AMPS Chapter, it is pretty much agreed as a toss up that it is a tie between Dragon and AFV Club for the best 1/35 Tiger I kits.

i just got there 8-rad a few weeks ago and the parts look amazing and the instructions seem to be clear I've built there 1/48th tiger and the rubber band tracks that came with it was way way way to short took alot of searching to find a nice set of indy tracks to replace them with but I never did like rubber band tracks anyway

I have a few in my stash and have built one of them so far-the YPR-765 MICV, a real beauty of a kit.

Pros: Beautiful detailing; PE and/or metal barrels often included; if the kit has "vinyl" tracks, they often make a indy length set as an option; good decals; excellent accessories in kit such as jerry cans, pioneer tools, etc.

Cons: over engineered- 'why do an assembly in 3 pieces if it can be done in 6 or 8' seems to be their philosophy at times; temperamental fit-  often large mold release pins have to be removed and proper alignment is a chore- probably related to over engineering- sand, test fit, sand some more, repeat; the vinyl full length tracks have a tendency to break after painting and installation- get the indy length replacements;

Overall, not for the beginner but definitely something I would recommend. They make the kits of subjects that are often overlooked by others- especially in modern AFVs and softskins.

wing_nut

Thanks for the feedback lads.  Just had a Bass ale and was feeling very Brit.

Thanks for the feedback lads.  Just had a Bass ale and was feeling very Brit.

I found the instructions to be confusing at times on my Pak 40. Also as stated, over engineered with needless parts increased.
My 251 has both Indy and rubberband tracks. As long as the tracks aren't taught, they will be a timesaver.

Hans von Hammer

Only drawback, and this is a personal preference, is that the few I've purchased have eithe indy-track links, or link and length tracks.. I prefer "rubber-band" tracks..

I have quite a few AFV Club kits and the majority of them came with one piece vinyl tracks. The ones I have that come with single link tracks were the Australian M113A1 FSV, M730A1 Chaparral, M548A1 ammo carrier (all M113-based kits), M48H ROC tank and Sd.Kfz 251 halftracks. I know the rare OOP M88 Vietnam era version came with single link tracks that the M48H included.

All the Stuart series (M3A3, M5A1 early and late), M88A1 recovery vehicle, Scorpion, Scimitar, Wiesel 20mm, Wiesel TOW, M10 Wolverine, M18 Hellcat, M40 SPG, Australian Centurion, Churchill, M41A3 Walker Bulldog (US & ROC versions), Tiger 1 final version, T-34/76 see thru version, and the Dutch YPR765 25mm came with vinyl tracks. These are just the ones I have.

Just because they make individual link track sets for various kits doesn't necessarily mean the kit came with those tracks.

A couple of their older kits, M113A1 FSV and M48H ROC tank, were old Academy kits with some updated AFV Club sprues to convert the kits into the different versions, i.e. the Academy M113A1 for the FSV and the M48A5 turret with M60A1 hull for the M48H. The updated AFV parts seem better than the original Academy pieces.

Their original kits are pretty good, although the plastic used in my TOW Wiesel kit is so soft that it mars if you stare at it too hard. The detail is excellent though.

Like Roy mentions, it all depends on the age of the kit in question and the vehicles you're interested in. They have quite an extensive lineup of stuff in artilery as well as modern offerings like the Stryker that have reviewed well for example. Some builders complain about the kits being over-engineered in terms of parts count and what not but it's best examined on a case-by-case basis. They are considered to be one of the top-tier kit makers out there though in general.

I've built one of their kits and have two others in the stash. I found the plastic to be a little soft and easy to melt with Testor's cement. In my opinion the parts count is needlessly increased, but that said, the kit looks great now that it's done.

I haven't built any yet, but in the areas i am intwerested in i have read some good reviews, mainly on PMMS. I have bought a few of their kits rather then the Dragon alternative. I am just hopeing they live up to expectation's.

Hans von Hammer

Only drawback, and this is a personal preference, is that the few I've purchased have eithe indy-track links, or link and length tracks.. I prefer "rubber-band" tracks..

Most of the ones i have, 251's, have rubber band tracks which i have replaced with metal ones. I think i have only found one of their kits with Indy links.

Only drawback, and this is a personal preference, is that the few I've purchased have eithe indy-track links, or link and length tracks.. I prefer "rubber-band" tracks..

Like most every other company, it just depends.  They have some iffy ones earlier (M18 Hellcat, M10 GMC), some had you asking "Why?" (Tiger 1).  Others are intriguing: ACV Dorcester, Bussig Nag L4500, SdKfz 231/263, many artillery pieces.  In direct comparison with others, AFV Club is usually chosen. 

Very notable recent releases are: Churchill series, Valentine series, M5A1 Stuart, Centurion, M1128 Strykers, LVT-4, M42A1 Duster. -- all favorably reviewed.

I'm looking forward to their M24 Chaffee Light tank.

www.perthmilitarymodelling.com/.../afvclub.htm