Suggestion for Dragon

QUOTE: Originally posted by wbill76 I've been spoiled by Dragon indy links and build with them almost exclusively. It's gotten to the point where I don't even look at Tamiya offerings anymore because I know they will have vinyl...

Cheaper too!

My main reason for suggesting it is because of US vehicles, anybody whose tried Sherman links knows exactly what I mean.

As for cost I doubt it would up more than 50 to 75 cents, look at Academy's new stuff, their kits have indys and vinyls and the cost areound the same.

uspsjuan,

Welcome to the forums! Most people who use metal indys likes them from what I've read. I build static kits for the most part and stay with kit indys, but that's just my personal preference.

It's interesting to see the different takes out there on link types vs. vinly, metal, etc. I've been spoiled by Dragon indy links and build with them almost exclusively. It's gotten to the point where I don't even look at Tamiya offerings anymore because I know they will have vinyl...

I'm jumping in late ,but I like indy over vinyl.As one who has spent time with tanks,even the tightest tracks have some measure of sag. i'm going to try my first metal indy's. not looking foward to drilling all those track pin holes. AFV Club has some very good indys that i've used

QUOTE: Originally posted by Anthony On the other hand, what do you think about semi-individual link... Although I haven't start working on it, it looks fine to me. Would you like to see this type in future release?

Anthony,

These type of tracks would also be great as an additional option, but not if they take away the indi links. They will only look proper on flat static displays. If you wanted to mount your tank on a base and have it climbing over a wall or log, it just won't work with the solid lower piece like individual links will. Good idea as a third option though.

Enjoy your modeling...

Hello folks,

On the other hand, what do you think about semi-individual link (i.e. some portions of the track such as area from first to last road wheel is molded in one piece, the portion around the spocket and idle wheel are true individual track). Example is the Italeri M1A2. I have a DML M1A1HA which mold in semi-idividual link. Although I haven't start working on it, it looks fine to me. Would you like to see this type in future release?

QUOTE: Originally posted by Foster7155 It's an interesting option, but I would personally be against it if it raised the price of their kits by more than a few dollars each.

This would be my #1 concern too. Dragon's kits are already expensive enough for someone on my budget.

The little cottage-industry accessory companies are starting to make vinyl tracks. Let them meet the market demand, rather than raising Dragon's overhead. Those who like indy tracks usually have to buy them separately, and it's not the end of the world.


M.

INteresting idea, one I wouldn't mind at all. I generally like the final look of the indy links, but so often they're such a pain to assemble, that a given choice would be great.

Shannon,

Most people have a love/hate relationship with indy links. They used to terrify me to no end until I actually built one with it. German vehicles benefit tremendously from indy links, even torturous ones like the halftracks or Kettenkrads. US/Brit vehicles much less so. I've built one US with indy links even though I had vinyls in the kit with it as a choice so I could compare. Because of how the connector pins work, I'd much rather build US tracks as vinyl one-piece as opposed to indys.

Choice is a powerful marketing tool and I hope more manufacturers begin to offer choice with tracks similar to how they are doing it with PE (you can use kit parts OR the PE fret supplied). This will go a long way towards diversifying the skill level and preferences of those building their kits. Don't like the way the indys turned out? You can always rip them off and use the alternate vinyls or vice versa. This could be done at very little additional cost to the manufacturer and consequently the consumer in terms of kit prices.

you know, individual track links sound great until you realize that you've got individual track links.i feel that you should have a choice and the vinyl tracks are looking pretty good these days( love the ones from AFV Club )

Dragon typically provides way more links than you actually need. The shortages in individual links normally occurs with some AM indi makers. MK comes to mind as one who gives you exactly what they think you need and not one link more.

Enjoy your modeling...

The 3 Dragon kits I've built had extra indy treads but I dont konw about the ones I havent built.

All good points! and I agree with all the points of view. As one who is moving into the more challenging aspects of modelling, it's only natural that to achieve a more normal and realistic look on ones track assembly, that the individual links seem are the more accepted way to build. My biggest objection to the individual track buildup is that more often then not, there is no provision for mistakes or broken parts! Extra links would go a long way in converting those of us who are prone to making a mistake here and there. I really want to stay with the individual link concept now that I have built a couple. semper fi, mike

I agree that there should be an option as far as tracks are concerned. While indies are very good with German (and Russian) armor (to simulate sag), one-piece vinyl tracks are better for most of the American and British armor. I have no problem with indies for US or British armor but they just take so much time...time that can be better spent on other modeling chores.

The tendency to have sprues with the same or similar letters can be a head scratcher at times with Dragon, no doubt there. I chalk it up to them using the same parts in different kits so the chances of having a "B" and a "b" sprue are greater. When I open up a new Dragon kit I always study the part layouts on the instructions and check every sprue to insure I have it straight. I've even gone so far as to attach little Sharpie marked flags from masking tape around the sprue frames to aid in identification while building.

i have two "B" sprues, although one set of "B" parts is identified as "b" in the instructions.

the "F" and "I" (i think) sprues are molded as one sprue.

and the parts are on the sprue in no real apparent order.

the instructions are vague as far as parts placement (fender support)
direction of piece (hatch hinges)

on my 1/72 Tiger, they left a piece out of the instructions and drew it as if it were molded on!

but i am still having fun.

Giving people options for the tracks would be nice. Indies can be very intimidating to new modelers. If they really want me back, they'll hire somebody to fix their instructions. In a pinch, if I really like the kit, I can fix fit problems without grumbling too much, but I hate instructions that misidentify parts, and/or don't accurately and clearly show how they go on.

They could really make a challenging build if they designate all parts as B1.

I know some of their kits have a B sprue and a b sprue, which is kind of confusing.

I did their Panzer III M/N recently and there was the same deal- two sets of two sprues with the same letters. I think they were F and H. There was something weird with their B sprues too, but I don't think it was a double use of the letter. I think it was from their Stug III kit and labled that way, but I don't remember.

my suggestion for Dragon involves the numbering of parts on the sprue,
the lettering of the sprue, and molding two different lettered sprues as one piece.
oh, and did i mention there are 2 different sprues labeled "B" ?

and some times they leave pieces off of the directions . . .


but it IS a nice kit.

extra tracks?
yeah that would be nice too.

on Dragons M4A2 russian sherman its supposed to come with viny tracks,
its not out yet to confirm

I was wondering what it would cost Dragon to make a run of vynil parts and what they would pass along to the consumer, myself.

It's an interesting option, but I would personally be against it if it raised the price of their kits by more than a few dollars each.

I've got to go with wbill76. I prefer individual track links and from a modeling standpoint, I'm a newbie with armor kits. I've only been building armor for about a year and in that time my 2 indi kits were far more enjoyable than the 6 vinyl kits I built. In fact, I'll be going back to one of the vinyl kits and replacing the track with indi's.

Enjoy your modeling...

QUOTE: Originally posted by wbill76 Interesting idea...Academy does this on many of their newer kits, giving you both the vinyl set and the indy set. Kind of a pick-your-own-challenge level while still leaving the fundamental kit intact. Personally I prefer indys and seek them out over the rubber band for German armor. My preferences are the opposite for the Sherman family since they didn't sag and were tensioned pretty tight.

I agree with you Bill. I think Dragon has lost some sales among the newbies and by adding both would drive up their sales.

I have had sucess in making Tamiya's rubber bands sag using a small drill bit to drill a hole where I want it to sag and glueing some parts of small paperclips in there. The wire gets painted the track color, is almost impossible to see and pushes the track down to create the sag

That's not a bad idea at all. Some of the new vinyl tracks look pretty good once they are painted up and as for indies, the Pz 1 is a prime example of a kit that could appeal to a broader range of skills if it had an easier way to do the tracks. Those links are VERY small and Very fragile looking. I have done a few indies and they still scare me into shelving it for a while/

Interesting idea...Academy does this on many of their newer kits, giving you both the vinyl set and the indy set. Kind of a pick-your-own-challenge level while still leaving the fundamental kit intact.

Personally I prefer indys and seek them out over the rubber band for German armor. My preferences are the opposite for the Sherman family since they didn't sag and were tensioned pretty tight.