A quick update.  I stuck a bolt and two nuts to the end of the dummy breech assembly, and now the gun balances perfectly.  Gap filler CA (hopefully) secures everything.  The gun does not really move a lot, but it is fun to play with.  (No snarky comments!)  I didn't do anything to allow the gun to traverse because 1) I am lazy, and 2)  It's not something I wanted anyway.

For those building this kit, you might want to take the time to trim the mounting tabs of all the cleats that attach to the top of the sponsons and hull.

As they come, the tabs cause the cleats to interfere with the sponson/hull fit.  I was careless and didn't notice tnis until the glue set.  So now I have gaps.  Buggers.

I am finding all sorts of little problems with the kit, but the build continues!

Real nice progress,and some good info on the fixes.

I can definitely see why you would need to do something to counter-balance that long aluminum barrel! Nice fix with the breech and polycap.

It's been a while, but I have been tinkering away at this beast.  A couple nights ago I decided to tackle the mounting for the big gun.  DML's engineering falls totally flat here, as they only provide a small pivot bar that is in the wrong location.  The aluminum barrel is long and heavy, so I decided to make a dummy breech assembly with a poly cap to keep the gun in position.  I also moved the gun pivot to the back of the hemispherical mantlet, which allowed the armored cover to move up and down without being pushed out.  A picture is worth a thousand words, so here is the equivalent of four thousand words.

The "tee" bar on top has a sleeve that acts as a stopper, to prevent the gun from depressing.  NoTank Viagra for this model, ever!  I think the sleeve was a coffee stirrer, which I saved while on a trip.  Never throw anything away!  The rest of the parts were made from Plastruct and Evergreen tubing and sheet.  The poly cap is from some unnamed Japanese robot kit.  The "Chopper" cutting tool was really helpful in banging out the bits and pieces.

Note the short plastic sleeve attached to the inside of the armored cover on the left.  It really helps secure the barrel to the cover, and is a highly recommended addition.

Lots of space in that huge hull.  Note sloppy oversized hole in the pivot plate.  My drills were mixed up in the box, so I grabbed the wrong size and didn't check before boring away.  Check twice, drill once.  Gap filler CA is my friend.

:

Just to be safe, I will probably attach a bolt with a bunch of washers at the back end of the breech, to counter balance the weight of the gun.  That way, the poly cap only acts as a friction brake and does not have to support the weight of the barrel.

I hope to get some serious bench time between Christmas and New Year.  Stay tuned!

Looks like you're making good progress on this monster, nice update!

Thanks for the comments, guys!.

I got a little bit done over the weekend:

The upper hull sides tend to angle in, so I glued strip styrene to help with alignment.  The front glacis plate is a tenuous butt joint, so I added more strip to proved a secure gluing surface.

I attached most of the hull fittings and suspension lugs.  Stuff like the cranes and cupolas are still loose, as I will put them on after painting.

The little rectangular blocks are mounting points for the cranes that are used to remove the outer sponsons.  The recesses molded into the fenders are oversize, leading to gaps all around.  If I were to to this again, I would scrape off the molded weld beads, shim two out of the four sides of the recesses with 0.010 strip, sand them flush with the fenders, then add the blocks.  The white styrene block was due to the carpet monster.  I did find the piece the next day while cleaning the room.

The drum shaped objects were meant to be attached ot the sprockets of the outer sponsons when they were being towed.  Infantry were to follow the T28, manually pulling on ropes wound around the drums to actuate the brakes!  Anyway, the weld beads are larger in diameter than the drums, and the drums are actually supposed to sit on plates affixed to the hull side.  Plan A is to scrape off the weld beads and scribe a line around the drum bases to simulate the mounting plates.

A comparison to contemprary standard Allied armor is inevitable.  That's Tamiya's Jumbo Sherman (another "fatally flawed" kit!  on the left.)  I noticed that on the T28's instruction sheet, the cupolas are shown attached with the hatch hinges to the right.  the Sherman has it that way, but I think the T28 should have the hinges facing towards the rear of the vehicle.  The Accurate Armour instruction sheet is proving helpful in identifying the parts and verifying positioning.

I really need to texture the front glacis plate so that I can button up the hull.  A session with some sandpaper and Mr. Surfacer 500 will follow, to clean up all the little parts that were added.  (I just clipped them off the sprue, gave the mating surfaces a swipe with a knife and sanding stick, then stuck them on withTamiya liquid cement.)  And after that, it's on to the dreaded bogie assemblies!

Despite all its warts, this kit has got me back onto the workbench.  I have had the model doldrums for a while now, and nothing seemed to be able to get me out.  I spent most of Saturday building the thing, ignoring stuff like laundry, the yard, etc.

Hi G,

I know absolutely nothing about this particular piece of armour other than it's release caused quite a stir amongst some og the chaps at my model group as it was right up their street. Anything WWII & allied and they are happy - oddly enough German WWII armour takes the back seat in my group! The excitement when the Meng Tortoise was released was unbelievable!

I obviously didn't raise a smile at the news as it's just something I wouldn't be buying as, 9 times in 10, I simply build German, ideally Eastern Front and WWII! That's all I need to usually look for in a new kit!

Now then, the one thing they DID debate - A LOT - was that the T28 kit supplied tracks from Dragon are very incorrect. Be this true I know not but I'm sure the guys know their stuff?

I've seen the photos of the tracks - has this been confirmed?

Ben  

Heya Real G,

Major thanks for taking the time to photograph and post!!

This is a Holy Grail kit for me, too --- I remember as a kid seeing a scratchbuilt T28 in the old Military Modeler Magazine as a kid and wondering if I'd ever see a kit of this beast!   Definitely going to build min "Berlin '46} combat mode.

Sure I wish it was perfect (is any kit...??), but in the end, warts and all,  it sure looks like a T28 to me... Can't wait ta get my paws on one when my LHS re-stocks.  It'll definitely be an attention getter on the club table --- if I ever make it through the suspension, of course. Thankfully, my seven year old son is a fledgling modeler (of course, he loves cars), so maybe I can coerce him into helping the Old Man out with the bogeys!

And yep, I'd love to see an M103 and an MBT-70 (Commander just released this in resin BTW) in styrene, too.

Thanks again, G, and please keep the info and build log coming!!

With Regards and Aloha,

Johnny B.

Hey all you guys who have the kit, or are waiting to recieve one, feel free to post your thoughts and progress on this thread as well.  It would be beneficial to get input from all.  I'm no armor expert, I just like weird subjects.

Speaking of weird, is anyone working on the Meng Tortoise?  A group build, maybe?  "Super Heavy Armor Build, aka The Great Turtle Race!"

I am thinking that it is now no longer unreasonable to wish for esotreric armor kits, like the Conqueror, M103, MBT-70, T-10, or maybe even that wacky Soviet "UFO tank":

http://www.network54.com/Forum/47208/message/1346231343/Strange+Russian+tank+repainted

I had read that it was shaped like that to resist nuclear blasts!

Thanks for rhe blog ,this will be helpful when I tackle mine.

Rob Gronovius

treadwell

Don't know why any one would bother with DML's... they messed up the suspension very badly in rushing to get it out.... not even close to the real deal... my 2 cents

tread

Some folks won't care about the error, whether it has been corrected or not. Personally, I don't care about the error or whether or not I am building the more accurate T-28 of the brands available. I'd probably buy the one I find cheapest.

Yeah, the T28 is cool but not $200.00 cool - aka I'll pay $60-70 for the DML kit but $180-200 for the AA kit is just more than I'm willing to toss out esp if the side skirts cover the inaccurate suspension.

Very happy to see the tracks, assembled some AFV Club three part per link tracks for a M46 and not in the mood to do that again for awhile...  

Here are a couple of photos of the contentious sponsons and tracks.

DML's sponsons:

AA's sponsons:

DML's tracks are identical in width to a standard M4A3E8 Sherman tracks, as the Sherman sprockets are used.  I didn't take a photo comparing the DML and AA sprockets, but the AA one is larger in diameter but narrower in width.  I think only the experts who count sprocket teeth will notice the difference, as the assembly is hidden behind the side skirts.

DML at least matched the tread pattern to AA's, as it is subtly different from the Ez8 Sherman/Pershing tracks.

I am still pasting on the dozens and dozens of suspension pieces onto the hull.  I don't look foward to assembling the sixteen sets of bogies, with twelve pieces each.  And then there are the road wheels and idlers to clean up after that!  Sorry for crying like a little girl, but most of my other armor kits have just a torsion arm, a bumper, one or two wheels, and a poly cap.

I am glad DML provided DS tracks, as I detest end connector/pad/center guide indy tracks.  Another nice thing about DS tracks is that their end connectors are usually slide molded, as is the case for the T28.

treadwell

Don't know why any one would bother with DML's... they messed up the suspension very badly in rushing to get it out.... not even close to the real deal... my 2 cents

tread

Some folks won't care about the error, whether it has been corrected or not. Personally, I don't care about the error or whether or not I am building the more accurate T-28 of the brands available. I'd probably buy the one I find cheapest.

Didn't mean to be mean spirited toward DML or any fellow modelers, and if DML has addressed the problem, kudos to them ..... happy modeling guys

tread

Gamera

Cool, keep us posted, I've got to pick up one of these bad boys for myself!

Ditto!

Yeah, the Dragon kit looks good enough for me.  For me, I have only a couple of pics of this vehicle and I can't even see the suspension in them, so I'll get one and be happy, probably even build it.  No one I know will care.  I'll be lucky if they even ask if I built it...I have a lot of non modeler friends.

Doug

DML provides PE arms and control rods in lieu of the standard HVSS dampers, but it looks flat (well duh, it's PE).  But it won't matter too much, as the suspension hides behind the wheels, which in turn hide behind the skirts.  I'm not sure if it is worth the trouble to cut sheet plastic arms and bend up some wire for the control rods.  I don't know if the T28 used stock M4A3E8 road wheels, but at least the DML ones are the same diameter as the AA ones, and they look alike.

For those who are bothered by kit inaccuracies, to each his own.  The T28 was a Holy Grail kit for me, so I am thrilled to be able to build an injeciton plastic kit of it.  The manufacturers ought to be held to a high standard when it comes to research, but hey, as in life you get what you get.  The faults in the kit will not prevent me from building it, and I will not get too picky about correcting things.  I did a rivet-counting build just once in my life, and despite the kit being rather accurate in all details, in the end I decided that I hated doing it that way.

And remember, it's only a hobby! 

treadwell

Don't know why any one would bother with DML's... they messed up the suspension very badly in rushing to get it out.... not even close to the real deal... my 2 cents

tread

I was under the impression that they made a fix on that,thought I read that.

Don't know why any one would bother with DML's... they messed up the suspension very badly in rushing to get it out.... not even close to the real deal... my 2 cents

tread

I started tearing into the kit a couple nights ago.  If you like assembling suspension units, you will love this kit!  I had to study the instruction sheet very carefully when placing the return roller spindles, as they all look alike but are subtly different.  There is a little errata sheet in the box, which should be referred to when adding the spindles.  At first I thought the sprung bogies were a stupid gimmick, but they will help level all those road wheels when the model is done.  I hope.

I really should have assembled the upper and lower hull and taken care of seam work before starting the suspension, but it's not too late.  The front glacis plate is strangely devoid of the "hammertone" texturing that is found on the upper hull.  Time to get out the Dremel and Mr. Surfacer 500 prior to joining the hull.

I will post progress photos soon.

Mines on order from Dragonusa,looking forward to it.

You're my kind of modeler.  You're right, it looks like a T-28.  Heck, half of the newest German tank kits were never more than a drawing on a cocktail napkin but we have "definitive" models of them.  As for Meng or Hobby Boss having a more correct version - remember Meng didn't add non-skid on their Merkava 3 (and it has open sponsons0, and Hobby Boss got the running gear wrong - really wrong - and their Merkava 4.

I got my T-28 direct from Dragon and it is next on the bench

Mechtech,

Price is one advantage that the DML kit has over AA, but it will also be much easier to build.  The AA kit, while it appears to have been well researched, is quite rough in the detail department.  I bought the AA kit back in 2004, and was a little put off by the casting quality of the detail parts.  The hull had a bunch of annoying casting flaws, the biggest one was that the left sponson had an essentialy hollow front fender (big air bubble) and was warped.  I tried the hot water and hair dryer treatment, but the crazy thing keeps springing back to its original warped form.  Interestingly, my DML kit also suffers from the same problem, but I just twisted the thing straight and will add the missing sprocket joiners to help keep the twisted rear end aligned.  Both AA and DML missed the big box structure on the inside rear of the detachable sponsons, and both failed to replicate the thickened armor at the angled front.  This point is moot for me, as I plan on building the kit fully assembled.

I am preparing a to-do list for the DML kit, and will post them as I go along.  There is a lot work to be done, but it's all good.  I won't be going for a 100% correct model, just one that looks the part.  When I buoght the AA kit, I didn't think there was any chance of a plastuc kit ot the T28 being made, so I sucked it in and coughed up the cash.  The picture is very different now.  Despite the rising cost of our hobby, we live in good times.

For me, I think that the main difference will come down to price. Yes the AA kit may be more accurate, but I just cannot justify putting out that much moolah.  If I were able to partake of some AA's kits by winning the lottery or some other means, then yes I might consider the alternative. However that does not mean I won't be watching and drooling.

Cool, keep us posted, I've got to pick up one of these bad boys for myself!