Thanks for a very good comparison between the variants. I’ve taken up model tank building again after a few decades of life and am amazed at the quality of models and builds.
Hello there @FeralVG and thanks for watching. I bought these from the same retailer and had no idea why there was such a price difference. I have noticed that some ebayers are asking £25 for the 35065 (should be £15) so be careful. I use a website called Scalemates to make these vids but also to check the "actual" age of the kits as many companies "rebox" kits that are decades old by diffeent manufacturers, so it is a useful tool.
Thanks for this video! In the early 1970s I built every Tamiya German vehicle kit I could get my hands on, and made some dioramas with German tanks hull-down in snow, an 88mm gun emplacement, and so forth. I don't know Tamiya's history but it seems to me that at that time c1969-1975 they were introducing new kits all the time. It always looked forward to visiting the local hobby shop to see if there was a new offering. (I say "local" but it was in fact around an hour's drive.)
Hello there @RichardDCook and thanks for watching, i was spoilt as a teen then as i had several model shops within a 10 to 20 min radius. i was more of an Airfix kid and had a pretty serious 1/72 Air group and a pretty decent 1/600 navy.
Always love seeing kit comparison videos! The new ones obviously have better detail, but it still amazes me what Tamiya was able to pull of in the 60s and 70s.
Hello there @maevethefox5912 and thanks for watching. it was anew thing for me to try, the kits made for a logical comparison, i will try do something similar again in a few weeks. i agree i think the 35065 for +/- £15 is excellent value especially for someone like myself who wants something cheap to have a go at, obviously the later ones are better and i will be having a go at them at some point in the future when i am a bit better at painting and construction.
Hello there @alexeveryman5080 and thanks for watching. i have an Airfix Aston Martin DB5 based off a 40-50 year old mould and it is absolutely awful, covered in flash and seam lines, luckily it was about £4 from a charity shop.
Hi Andy. Well that was an interesting video, its nice to see a comparison between three different iterations of the same vehicle by the same manufacturer. I think the with the earliest model they tried to represent the rolled armour plate like on the real thing. The second (middle) version has a single fan housing missing. That is because on the real thing they put a raised fan cover on because it had a seperate fan for the crew compartment heating system in it. Also when you showed the Shurtzen the one on the bottom was showing the back and not the front, thats why it had the curvature on it. That side is the back, also you can see where the hanging loops are placed on it. The thing with the front mudgaurds is that on the earliest version you only have about half of its full length , thats why they are shorter. Remember we are talking about fifty years of moulding technology difference. Thats why there are so many extra parts on the last version , thats why the barrel is a single part. Its slide moulding. The two more modern kits are by far the better kits but the original is still ok despite its faults. I mean who else was making a 1/35 scale Panther in the late 1960s ? The little scrapes on the hull of the later version can be enhanced and highlighted but lets face it we could do it ourselves with a scalpel blade. Overall these are three good kits but the difference in price reflects the content of the kit and of course the quality of the moulding. Just look at the bottom of the hulls. The firstbone nothing . The other two much more detail , and this is a part that will be rarely if at all seen. Good video bud, and I look forward to seeing you tackle the first one, the most challenging one. Good luck.
Hi Brian glad you found it interesting, i rather enjoyed making it and will be having another go at doing something similar for some other kits at some point.
Hello again @claytonmcclain182 I am planning on putting some paint on the A today. I think that Tamiya kits are generally very good from a building experience; well engineered, easy to follow instructions etc, though i am becoming aware of the inaccuracies and yes some of the kits are from old mouldings that you would think Tamiya would update, their figures on the old kits seem to let them down when comparing the to the likes of Miniart and others. Funny another viewer mention Nichimo the other day, i shall have to Ebay investigate and see if i can get something by them as i also have a bit of liking for vintage kits. i quite enjoyed making this Comparison vid, it was a trial, i think i may have to try a few more. Be Seeing you andy.
I have built 2 of the early Ausf A kits and if you like to upgrade a kit these are great as there is a lot of room for improvement! PE is required and metal tracks are needed as the rubber band tracks on both my kits have been too short. Also a great surface for doing DIY zimmerit! The biggest down side is the fixed swing arms as these require a diorama (if you are going that route) to have a very flat surface !
Hello there @georgebernard8983 and thanks for watching. i am currently building 35065 though TBH there wont be any upgrades as this is my first 1/35 armour build in about 20 years, i suppose you could call it a bit of a practice mule, i have built a bunch of 1/72 aircraft and they seem to be getting better each time i do a new kit, however i reckon the painting of aircraft is slightly different to tanks so this seems like a relatively inexpensive way to get my head around tanks, the other two will be built at some point in the future and may get a bit of upgrading. cheers andy.
The Ausf A kit was originally sold as a motorised kit with a motor. The open panels can easily be covered using plastic sheet. The Ausf D has extended mud guards later removed on the A and G. The holes on the side are for tools
Hello there @user-lw7om1sg1m and thank for watching. thanks a few people have pointed out that the A has the unsightly gaps for the motorized version, i have decided to build it out the box with no additional parts. Yes the holes are for tools and attaching side skirts though i think what i was attempting to describe was the fact that the 35345 has marks all over the body shrapnel/foundary marks, possibly my bad as my description may have wandered off course, happens when you do these thing unscripted, i called a poropeller an umbrella a few weeks back LOL.
Hello there @elite_panzer2958 and thanks for watching. i am currently building the A as its the first 1/35 i have built in 20 years and seems a good starting point. the D and the G i will build at some point in the coming months.
The former modelling nerd here again. 😉 07:55 The left cooling fan grill changed with later versions of the Panther Ausf.G. It got a raised, box-shaped form because a crew compartment heater was installed there. 08:25 Improvement in accuracy. 🙃 09:36 I think you are right, with the marks being shrapnel and bullet hits. 13:35 Smoke ventilator. When the gun breech is opened after a shot it actually releases quite a bit of smoke, that ventilator extracts it.
Hello again @thomaskositzki9424 LOL i think we are all modelling nerds, anyhoo being a nerd is cool these days LOL. thanks for the info, a few people have suggested that the marks are sort of foundry marks from the steel production process, though TBH i think i prefer the shrapnel explanation.
@@TheNoviceModeller I don't think they are. Never seen them on the real ones. I live 50 km from the biggest German tank museum in Munster and have been there at least 10 times. As you can imagine, me being a pretty hard-core modeller, I REALLY looked at the details on the exhibits. Face-hardened steel plate is smooth. It only starts getting pock-marked if it was exposed to enemy fire for a while.
BTW, I had the original ausf A version, from late 1975, and the holes in the base were to allow controls for an electric motor. Yes, believe it or not one of the selling points was that you could set it off using type D battery powered motor. From memory, it went in a slightly elliptic drift to the right and I scarcely bothered with it again. It might also explain why there is that gap between the base and the hull since it had to be opened to replace batteries, etc. For some reason, there is very little information on the net about Tamiya's use of electric motors. I also had a Leopard I which had a more sophisticated wired control unit which at least allowed some directional control. Again, I cannot even find a single reference to this on the web..?
Hello there @Muninman62 and thanks for watching. Yes a few pointed out the reason for the wholes TBH i was not aware of it originally having a motor, LOL if it was a bit eratic that is hardly surprising i seem to remember any motorised toys i had in the 70's and early 80's being a bit of initial excitement followed by baffled disappointment, and lots and lots of batteries.
Nice comparison. In MHO, the reason for the smooth finish on the plastic hull/turret parts for 35170, the early Panther G, that tank is intended to have Zimmerit applied; the box art shows it and the application of it is somewhat detailed in the instructions. Hope it helps and keep it coming!
Hello there @ole5539 and thanks for watching. Yes the zimmerit is very obvious on the cover art, though most Tamiya kits i have handled are very smooth in texture compared to the other two. I reckon i shall have to have a go at the zimmerit at some point.
The oldest kit was meant to be motorised as were most of the early tamyia kits . The scaling on the early kits is often all over the place in terms of detail. These kits were very cheap even for the time at about £2.50 and were made for children to build and were moe of a toy than an accurate representation.
Hello there @johnludmon7419 and thanks for watching. a few other viewers of made similar comments. I bought all of these at the same time from the same retailer and as a novice had no idea why there was such a variance in price, i just shrugged my shoulder and paid the money. I am currently building the 35065 and as a "practice" kit it is fine, seems to be going together quite well, the others i will build at some point when my 1/35 skills are a bit better.
@TheNoviceModeller I am surprised that it is still in the range now they released the modern kits. At least it is cheap. Some manufacturers have a habit of reboxing old kits and charging the same as a new tool, which is a bit of a rip-off.
LOL yes i have a few "reboxed kits" however this 35065 can be a bit problematic, there are some rather unscrupulous traders on ebay, i have seen this kit on "buy it now" in the £40-£50 bracket and people asking £25 to £30 is quite common.
@TheNoviceModeller If you have an original 1970's kit they are worth money as a collectable especially if it has the motor and the "action" box art. Possibly these are the expensive ones. otherwise, this is a £10 to £15 kit tops.
At 18:22 the double-breasted tunic with wide lapels is the pre-war/early war black Panzer uniform. The one that looks like British Battle Dress is the M44 tunic which was indeed Germany's copy of the British uniform.
With the 1993 edition Tamiya did a separate Maybach engine kit ( Also fitted the Tiger models) You could choose to add more detail and have the engine cover hinged up - It may still be the same with the later kit. The 1969 kit would be fun for paint experiments but is just not as good looking as the later models
Hello there, i am currently building the 35065, is my first 1/35 build in 20 years so is good for practice, gone together ok, the others i will do some other time. LOL i actually have the Maybach engine kit.
@@TheNoviceModeller I have just built 3 of the Suyata 1/48 Panthers - 2 full detail and 1 closed up - all for rail transport ruclips.net/video/TZPX5kT1BlY/видео.html With these new kits with all the internal parts you feel bad when you just want to build the tank as it would look in action with all hatches closed
Put simply, Japanese mfgs. were geared to simpler motorized kits in the beginning. As the rubber band tracks inevitably broke, the novelty wore thin. Their attention turned to increasing detail and realism. There may still be a place for the simpler or entry-level kits, but you would need to show a demand with fewer young people taking up the hobby.
Tamiya do good kits i am in no doubt about that, though the older ones are a bit flakey now, still more than good enough for the likes of me to practice on though
"Hey, I'm a young person taking up the hobby..." I go to say, before suddenly realizing I'm 40 and that ... I don't exactly count as a young person anymore hahaha
I remember building a motorised Leopard when I was a child in the seventies. No, those tracks did not last long, from excitement to big disappointment!
Great comparison, thanks. Of all the WW2 German tanks I have to say that Panther's don't really do it for me, but saying that I am in the process of building two of them. They are both Italeri kits that came with glue on plastic zimmerit sheets so my intention was to build one with the kit zimmerit and one with zimmerit made from "No Nails" using the Tamiya zimmerit tools. Overall I'd say that the "No Nails" method wins hands down, the kit zimmerit is pretty crap in comparison.
Thanks Martin, i have heard of both the zimmerit sheets and of the utilization of glue to replicate it, was thinking of perhaps trying it on the G as per box art, after more investigation, whenever i get round to doing it. LOL "Panthers dont really do it for me , but i'm building two" i know that feeling also.
Hello there @HenrikFredriksson-oi4lz and thanks for watching. I should probably have a look at Adam Manns page, as i am not familiar with it. I think possibly as i am a novice both to this Modelling malarkey and RUclips lunacy that i look at things from a different perspective, i am also a Libra (scales "i normally consider astrology to be nonsense" but) i like to think things through in a balanced style, there has to be a positive somewhere, even if presented with something that is inferior. This comparison vid for me was an experiment, that i rather enjoyed and it seems that you viewers appreciate, so i will try to pick out a few more kits from my mountain of models and do a few more in the coming months. regards andy be seeing you.
I think I bought £15 one for around £9.99 way back in the 80s The G variant, I think I paid around £30-35 Both great kits, as for the newer one? I wouldn't bother buying it, as the G model has enough in it. Thanks for the review tho, Nice to see my hobby hasn't died yet lol, cheers.
Hello there @Hichatsu and thanks for watching. I think the most obvious benefit of the newer one is the imperfections in the steel which i described as shrapnel marks but some seem to thing are foundry marks from the steel production process, though obviously if you were to zimerit it the marks would be obliterated so i probs agree that the middle version is pretty much good enough.
I am doing the very same with 1/48 and 1/35 with Tamiya,Dragon,Suyata, and Rye Field Model kits. I guess I have a soft spot for Panthers. Enjoy your builds.👍
Hello there @michaelnaven213 and thanks for watching. Its a good looking tank, thanks i'll only be building the 35065 for now, will be building the others some other time. Enjoy your interesting builds also.
One thing I recently discovered while modelling is that the size of the side skirts on the G model panther are larger than the side skirts on the D & A variants.
Hello there @anshuldwivedi1919 and thanks for watching. yes the side skirts on the D & G variant are different. I do know that on some tanks, tank destroyers that they were field fitted and possibly came from different sources, possibly a fair reason for the difference?
GOOD VIDEO SIR,MODEL KITS LIKE PEOPLE GOES THROUGH CHANGES WITH AGE.AT 72 ,I HAD A FEW NEW PARTS ADDED TO THIS OLD GLUE TROOPER BODY.BACK IN THE EARLY DAYS OF TAMIYA'S HISTORY THEY MADE MODELS FOR THE MOVIE COMPANIES THAT WERE RC .PEOPLE WANTED THE SAME RC THEY SAW ON FILM AND TAMIYA FILL THAT GAP.THE TAMIYA'S KITS MY BROTHER SENT HOME FROM HIS BASE PX COULD BE MADE RC IF YOU GOT THE PARTS TO DO IT.THAT WAS IN 67 AND IT WAS THE SAME IN 72 AT MY BASE PX. JUST HAVE FUN AND LEARN FOR THE NEXT BUILD.TAKE CARE AND MODEL ON
It's an interesting comparison, isn't it Andy? Clearly a case of changing times and the increasingly desire for quality and accuracy on the part of finicky modelers driving more and more detailed-and expensive kits. If you are a novice modeler, less concerned about accuracy and more driven by price and buildability, an early kit like the Tamiya Ausf A will certainly fit the bill. It has the legendary Tamiya reputation for good fit and modeller friendliness, while still giving a fair representation of the original. And if your main concern is honing your modelling skills, then it may be all that you need. But having those later kits, you cannot unsee the improvement in quality, shape and detail. That sticks in your mind. And, just how long do you expect to be a novice modeller-for the rest of your life? More likely, after you pass through your novice phase, there'll be a much longer period where you will be honing more advanced skills and appreciating the extra quality and accuracy of the newer kits-they'll test you more, but reward you more. You won't wanna go back! By the way, the various pits in the surface texture that you describe as 'shrapnel damage' are really just the natural irregularities you'll find on normal cast armour. Go to a tank museum and get close up and personal with an AFV to see for yourself.
Hi Jeremy oh yes the A is more than adequate for my needs though when i bought the 3 in January i had no idea why the prices were so different i just paid the money and stacked them up. I think the A will make a good practice it especially for painting as i assume the technique for armour is different than for aircraft. have recently bought the "AMMO by MIG" encyclopedia series for armour kits, thought that might be usefull for working through some issues.
I built the basic £15 panther when i was a teen. Most of my early brush painted camo looked crappy but this is one of just 3 tanks i didn’t need to respray
@@TheNoviceModeller Same here. In those days the only paints available were the old Humbrol and Revell enamels. No spray cans in those days, and airbrushes were unaffordable for most kids. You needed white spirit to clean the paintbrushes and they didn't last very long. Thank goodness we have acrylic paint now that can be cleaned in water
On the 35065 there is a lot of gapping above the wheels, i have been told that this is likely due to the kit originally being motorized and may have been so to allow fo r cooling. 35170 has panels pre moulded to fill these gaps in, 35345 has panels to be fixed in place. There are actually Whats in the box videos for each kit in my youtube playlist that may explain the situation better.
I'm building the Ausf D version at the moment it's a great kit just falls together, Detail sets are available for it but you don't really need them the kit parts are just fine.😉
Hello there @mikehanson7328 and thanks for watching, no i'm afraid i;m not referring to the mounting points for equipment, the panels on the 35345 are covered in random marks, i thought they were shrapnel marks, i have also been told they are foundary marks?
Hello there @frankiehensley2928 and thanks for watching, TBH with you i was not really aware of this variant, i have consulted Scalemates a website i generally use for info when making videos and yes there is a 35176 there is also a 35174 based on the G version 35170. According to Scalemates 35176 is a direct improvement of 35170 with "new parts" (the spate version?) so the same moulding etc, 35174 again is an updated version of 35170 with "new parts (steel wheels)" so basically both of these variants are "improved kits" using 35170 as the basis. There are actually 18 variants in the Tamiya catalogue for the 1/35 Panther series including the original motorized versions, that would cost me a lot of money and would make for a rather long video. Both these variants (35174 & 35176) are rather interesting and maybe at some point in the future i will acquire them and review them and compare them to the original variant 35170, which from a genealogical point of view is the basis for them. Yes i think i will add them to my shopping list and when i come to build 35170 i will do a comparison vid comparing the 3 as different variations of the same basic kit. Thanks for bringing this to my attention though to be honest i dont think its a case of "missing it out" its just a case of making a vid on what i already have, hopefully the comparison vid for 35170, 35174 & 35176 will be up some time in the next 6 months. Thanks for your input regards andy be seeing you.
@@TheNoviceModeller yea I don't have the ausf D it's on my list and the G steel wheel version I'm kinda waiting for it to lower in price a little bit, I'm across the pond so getting certain Tamiya kits are little pricey ATM, 18 variants???!!! That's a lot of camo and some with zimmerit.
Hello again @frankiehensley2928 i have actually done some separate kit reviews on the ones that i have which are slightly more detailed than this stand alone vid. I think there are benefits and some negatives to all of them; i am currently building 35065 which is ahem the more basic version from 1969 and has well many issues, but from a novices perspective it is a good practice kit as well it was £15 and using either of the more expensive variant seems, well silly as this is the first 1/35 i have built in 20 years. Good luck with pursuing a bargain on the other Panthers you want to add to your collection. be seeing you andy
Hello there @darrenharvey6084 and thanks for watching, have learnt that many early Tamiyas had motorized options, whether this lead to the sizing inaccuracies though i do not know.
@@TheNoviceModeller Maybe their first tanks were leaning more to 1/32 the "American" scale for 1/35th vehicles. Though I don't think the sizing suffered from the motorizing option. They just cut big holes wherever needed to fit the motor parts. As they did with that first Panther.
@@johnludmon7419 T-34 turrets were good though, just that the hull was quite off. Never built the M4A3E8 from Tamiya, but did make one using the old MB models running gear conversion and an Italeri turret off their M4A1 kit
Hello there @t55a2 and thanks for watching. When comparing the quality of 35065 to the two more recent kits i kind of agree with you, however as a novice who wants a relatively easy, quick and cheap kit to practice on the 35065 is still a relatively attractive kit. I think that is why i did this vid, as a sort of cautionary observation to fellow novice or less knowledgable kit builders who see a £15 Tamiya Panther and thing "bargain" and hit the buy button.
@@TheNoviceModeller Agreed, but the kit is so awful it would put kids off modelling. We’ve all built one, me included, tbf. The later Tamiya ones are still worth building
I have just bought 3 STARFIX kits from the charity shop, thought i'd better get them off the shelf and save someone some abject misery as they are truly horrendous LOL.
@@TheNoviceModeller For the braver modellers out there, good luck. Ironically, a lot of old kits have good shapes, but moulding tech let them down. The old Airfix P-47 is a great example- I backdated mine to a ‘B’ version by cutting the fuselage in front of the fuselage, turned out well. Then a ‘B’ variant came out . . .
Thanks for a very good comparison between the variants. I’ve taken up model tank building again after a few decades of life and am amazed at the quality of models and builds.
Hello there @FeralVG and thanks for watching. I bought these from the same retailer and had no idea why there was such a price difference. I have noticed that some ebayers are asking £25 for the 35065 (should be £15) so be careful. I use a website called Scalemates to make these vids but also to check the "actual" age of the kits as many companies "rebox" kits that are decades old by diffeent manufacturers, so it is a useful tool.
Thanks for this video! In the early 1970s I built every Tamiya German vehicle kit I could get my hands on, and made some dioramas with German tanks hull-down in snow, an 88mm gun emplacement, and so forth. I don't know Tamiya's history but it seems to me that at that time c1969-1975 they were introducing new kits all the time. It always looked forward to visiting the local hobby shop to see if there was a new offering. (I say "local" but it was in fact around an hour's drive.)
Hello there @RichardDCook and thanks for watching, i was spoilt as a teen then as i had several model shops within a 10 to 20 min radius. i was more of an Airfix kid and had a pretty serious 1/72 Air group and a pretty decent 1/600 navy.
Always love seeing kit comparison videos!
The new ones obviously have better detail, but it still amazes me what Tamiya was able to pull of in the 60s and 70s.
Hello there @maevethefox5912 and thanks for watching. it was anew thing for me to try, the kits made for a logical comparison, i will try do something similar again in a few weeks. i agree i think the 35065 for +/- £15 is excellent value especially for someone like myself who wants something cheap to have a go at, obviously the later ones are better and i will be having a go at them at some point in the future when i am a bit better at painting and construction.
I wonder if they copy and recut new moulds every x number of shots or if original tooling that is 50 y.o. is kept in such a good condition.
Hello there @alexeveryman5080 and thanks for watching. i have an Airfix Aston Martin DB5 based off a 40-50 year old mould and it is absolutely awful, covered in flash and seam lines, luckily it was about £4 from a charity shop.
Hi Andy. Well that was an interesting video, its nice to see a comparison between three different iterations of the same vehicle by the same manufacturer. I think the with the earliest model they tried to represent the rolled armour plate like on the real thing. The second (middle) version has a single fan housing missing. That is because on the real thing they put a raised fan cover on because it had a seperate fan for the crew compartment heating system in it. Also when you showed the Shurtzen the one on the bottom was showing the back and not the front, thats why it had the curvature on it. That side is the back, also you can see where the hanging loops are placed on it. The thing with the front mudgaurds is that on the earliest version you only have about half of its full length , thats why they are shorter. Remember we are talking about fifty years of moulding technology difference. Thats why there are so many extra parts on the last version , thats why the barrel is a single part. Its slide moulding. The two more modern kits are by far the better kits but the original is still ok despite its faults. I mean who else was making a 1/35 scale Panther in the late 1960s ? The little scrapes on the hull of the later version can be enhanced and highlighted but lets face it we could do it ourselves with a scalpel blade. Overall these are three good kits but the difference in price reflects the content of the kit and of course the quality of the moulding. Just look at the bottom of the hulls. The firstbone nothing . The other two much more detail , and this is a part that will be rarely if at all seen. Good video bud, and I look forward to seeing you tackle the first one, the most challenging one. Good luck.
Early G models didn’t have the raised fan, it was added later. The kit even says ‘early version’, tbf
Hi Brian glad you found it interesting, i rather enjoyed making it and will be having another go at doing something similar for some other kits at some point.
Built them all. Loved them all. The Ausf A was off a >lot
Hello again @claytonmcclain182 I am planning on putting some paint on the A today. I think that Tamiya kits are generally very good from a building experience; well engineered, easy to follow instructions etc, though i am becoming aware of the inaccuracies and yes some of the kits are from old mouldings that you would think Tamiya would update, their figures on the old kits seem to let them down when comparing the to the likes of Miniart and others. Funny another viewer mention Nichimo the other day, i shall have to Ebay investigate and see if i can get something by them as i also have a bit of liking for vintage kits. i quite enjoyed making this Comparison vid, it was a trial, i think i may have to try a few more.
Be Seeing you
andy.
I have built 2 of the early Ausf A kits and if you like to upgrade a kit these are great as there is a lot of room for improvement! PE is required and metal tracks are needed as the rubber band tracks on both my kits have been too short. Also a great surface for doing DIY zimmerit! The biggest down side is the fixed swing arms as these require a diorama (if you are going that route) to have a very flat surface !
Hello there @georgebernard8983 and thanks for watching. i am currently building 35065 though TBH there wont be any upgrades as this is my first 1/35 armour build in about 20 years, i suppose you could call it a bit of a practice mule, i have built a bunch of 1/72 aircraft and they seem to be getting better each time i do a new kit, however i reckon the painting of aircraft is slightly different to tanks so this seems like a relatively inexpensive way to get my head around tanks, the other two will be built at some point in the future and may get a bit of upgrading. cheers andy.
The Ausf A kit was originally sold as a motorised kit with a motor. The open panels can easily be covered using plastic sheet. The Ausf D has extended mud guards later removed on the A and G. The holes on the side are for tools
Hello there @user-lw7om1sg1m and thank for watching. thanks a few people have pointed out that the A has the unsightly gaps for the motorized version, i have decided to build it out the box with no additional parts. Yes the holes are for tools and attaching side skirts though i think what i was attempting to describe was the fact that the 35345 has marks all over the body shrapnel/foundary marks, possibly my bad as my description may have wandered off course, happens when you do these thing unscripted, i called a poropeller an umbrella a few weeks back LOL.
The Panther D is a really good kit and was a fast build with gorgeous detail and texture.
Hello there @elite_panzer2958 and thanks for watching. i am currently building the A as its the first 1/35 i have built in 20 years and seems a good starting point. the D and the G i will build at some point in the coming months.
The former modelling nerd here again. 😉
07:55 The left cooling fan grill changed with later versions of the Panther Ausf.G. It got a raised, box-shaped form because a crew compartment heater was installed there.
08:25 Improvement in accuracy. 🙃
09:36 I think you are right, with the marks being shrapnel and bullet hits.
13:35 Smoke ventilator. When the gun breech is opened after a shot it actually releases quite a bit of smoke, that ventilator extracts it.
Hello again @thomaskositzki9424 LOL i think we are all modelling nerds, anyhoo being a nerd is cool these days LOL. thanks for the info, a few people have suggested that the marks are sort of foundry marks from the steel production process, though TBH i think i prefer the shrapnel explanation.
@@TheNoviceModeller I don't think they are.
Never seen them on the real ones. I live 50 km from the biggest German tank museum in Munster and have been there at least 10 times. As you can imagine, me being a pretty hard-core modeller, I REALLY looked at the details on the exhibits. Face-hardened steel plate is smooth. It only starts getting pock-marked if it was exposed to enemy fire for a while.
BTW, I had the original ausf A version, from late 1975, and the holes in the base were to allow controls for an electric motor. Yes, believe it or not one of the selling points was that you could set it off using type D battery powered motor. From memory, it went in a slightly elliptic drift to the right and I scarcely bothered with it again. It might also explain why there is that gap between the base and the hull since it had to be opened to replace batteries, etc. For some reason, there is very little information on the net about Tamiya's use of electric motors. I also had a Leopard I which had a more sophisticated wired control unit which at least allowed some directional control. Again, I cannot even find a single reference to this on the web..?
I see some others RUclipsrs have mentioned the motorised first kits...
Hello there @Muninman62 and thanks for watching. Yes a few pointed out the reason for the wholes TBH i was not aware of it originally having a motor, LOL if it was a bit eratic that is hardly surprising i seem to remember any motorised toys i had in the 70's and early 80's being a bit of initial excitement followed by baffled disappointment, and lots and lots of batteries.
Nice comparison. In MHO, the reason for the smooth finish on the plastic hull/turret parts for 35170, the early Panther G, that tank is intended to have Zimmerit applied; the box art shows it and the application of it is somewhat detailed in the instructions. Hope it helps and keep it coming!
Hello there @ole5539 and thanks for watching. Yes the zimmerit is very obvious on the cover art, though most Tamiya kits i have handled are very smooth in texture compared to the other two. I reckon i shall have to have a go at the zimmerit at some point.
@@TheNoviceModeller I agree, the older kits do not have the ingrained texture like a number of their competitors.
The oldest kit was meant to be motorised as were most of the early tamyia kits . The scaling on the early kits is often all over the place in terms of detail. These kits were very cheap even for the time at about £2.50 and were made for children to build and were moe of a toy than an accurate representation.
Hello there @johnludmon7419 and thanks for watching. a few other viewers of made similar comments. I bought all of these at the same time from the same retailer and as a novice had no idea why there was such a variance in price, i just shrugged my shoulder and paid the money. I am currently building the 35065 and as a "practice" kit it is fine, seems to be going together quite well, the others i will build at some point when my 1/35 skills are a bit better.
@TheNoviceModeller I am surprised that it is still in the range now they released the modern kits. At least it is cheap. Some manufacturers have a habit of reboxing old kits and charging the same as a new tool, which is a bit of a rip-off.
LOL yes i have a few "reboxed kits" however this 35065 can be a bit problematic, there are some rather unscrupulous traders on ebay, i have seen this kit on "buy it now" in the £40-£50 bracket and people asking £25 to £30 is quite common.
@TheNoviceModeller If you have an original 1970's kit they are worth money as a collectable especially if it has the motor and the "action" box art. Possibly these are the expensive ones. otherwise, this is a £10 to £15 kit tops.
Unfortunately the ones i have looked at are just new ones, the same as what i have.
Thanks Andy!
Hello there @Emergenttheory and thanks for watching. no probs thoroughly enjoying myself, more fantastic plastic to come
Very nice like all three 👍. Pit marks is Tamiya attempt at rolled homogeneous armour .
They do give it an edge over the others, thoiugh if putting Zimmerit on kinda makes it a bit pointless.
@@TheNoviceModeller 😱😱😱😱😱😱😱😱Zimmerit hate the stuff 😠😠😠😠😠😠😂😂😂😂
At 18:22 the double-breasted tunic with wide lapels is the pre-war/early war black Panzer uniform. The one that looks like British Battle Dress is the M44 tunic which was indeed Germany's copy of the British uniform.
Thanks for the inr=teresting info on the tunics @RichardDCook
Good idea comparing very similar kits with different price points, very informative.
Thanks @fotograf736 i might have to try it again with some other kits.
With the 1993 edition Tamiya did a separate Maybach engine kit ( Also fitted the Tiger models) You could choose to add more detail and have the engine cover hinged up - It may still be the same with the later kit. The 1969 kit would be fun for paint experiments but is just not as good looking as the later models
Hello there, i am currently building the 35065, is my first 1/35 build in 20 years so is good for practice, gone together ok, the others i will do some other time. LOL i actually have the Maybach engine kit.
@@TheNoviceModeller I have just built 3 of the Suyata 1/48 Panthers - 2 full detail and 1 closed up - all for rail transport ruclips.net/video/TZPX5kT1BlY/видео.html
With these new kits with all the internal parts you feel bad when you just want to build the tank as it would look in action with all hatches closed
They are really impressive i particularly like your rather war weary 321. i am yet to try any weathering, got all the gear but no idea LOL..... Yet.
Put simply, Japanese mfgs. were geared to simpler motorized kits in the beginning. As the rubber band tracks inevitably broke, the novelty wore thin. Their attention turned to increasing detail and realism. There may still be a place for the simpler or entry-level kits, but you would need to show a demand with fewer young people taking up the hobby.
Tamiya do good kits i am in no doubt about that, though the older ones are a bit flakey now, still more than good enough for the likes of me to practice on though
"Hey, I'm a young person taking up the hobby..." I go to say, before suddenly realizing I'm 40 and that ... I don't exactly count as a young person anymore hahaha
hello there @maevethefox5912 so you're a mid-lifer like me LOL.
I remember building a motorised Leopard when I was a child in the seventies. No, those tracks did not last long, from excitement to big disappointment!
Hello there @tgapete01 and thanks for watching. I was born 76, matchbox cars, lego and Star Wars was my staple play tool.
Great comparison, thanks.
Of all the WW2 German tanks I have to say that Panther's don't really do it for me, but saying that I am in the process of building two of them. They are both Italeri kits that came with glue on plastic zimmerit sheets so my intention was to build one with the kit zimmerit and one with zimmerit made from "No Nails" using the Tamiya zimmerit tools. Overall I'd say that the "No Nails" method wins hands down, the kit zimmerit is pretty crap in comparison.
Thanks Martin, i have heard of both the zimmerit sheets and of the utilization of glue to replicate it, was thinking of perhaps trying it on the G as per box art, after more investigation, whenever i get round to doing it. LOL "Panthers dont really do it for me , but i'm building two" i know that feeling also.
Thanx for a very fair reviev, compared to Adam Mann who allway's nitpocking on Tamiya....
Hello there @HenrikFredriksson-oi4lz and thanks for watching. I should probably have a look at Adam Manns page, as i am not familiar with it. I think possibly as i am a novice both to this Modelling malarkey and RUclips lunacy that i look at things from a different perspective, i am also a Libra (scales "i normally consider astrology to be nonsense" but) i like to think things through in a balanced style, there has to be a positive somewhere, even if presented with something that is inferior. This comparison vid for me was an experiment, that i rather enjoyed and it seems that you viewers appreciate, so i will try to pick out a few more kits from my mountain of models and do a few more in the coming months.
regards andy
be seeing you.
I think I bought £15 one for around £9.99 way back in the 80s The G variant, I think I paid around £30-35 Both great kits, as for the newer one? I wouldn't bother buying it, as the G model has enough in it. Thanks for the review tho, Nice to see my hobby hasn't died yet lol, cheers.
Hello there @Hichatsu and thanks for watching. I think the most obvious benefit of the newer one is the imperfections in the steel which i described as shrapnel marks but some seem to thing are foundry marks from the steel production process, though obviously if you were to zimerit it the marks would be obliterated so i probs agree that the middle version is pretty much good enough.
12:28 The contour edge isn't actually the outside, it needs to be flipped around and then it's flat.
Hello there @Hs13h and thanks for watching, ah thanks did'nt notice that, spose it would have been in the instructions that way.
I am doing the very same with 1/48 and 1/35 with Tamiya,Dragon,Suyata, and Rye Field Model kits. I guess I have a soft spot for Panthers. Enjoy your builds.👍
Hello there @michaelnaven213 and thanks for watching. Its a good looking tank, thanks i'll only be building the 35065 for now, will be building the others some other time. Enjoy your interesting builds also.
The vespid 1/72 panther f is amazing
One thing I recently discovered while modelling is that the size of the side skirts on the G model panther are larger than the side skirts on the D & A variants.
Hello there @anshuldwivedi1919 and thanks for watching. yes the side skirts on the D & G variant are different. I do know that on some tanks, tank destroyers that they were field fitted and possibly came from different sources, possibly a fair reason for the difference?
@@anshuldwivedi1919 Completely different hull, that’s why. G variant was angled all the way down, D and A variants had the edge tuned down
GOOD VIDEO SIR,MODEL KITS LIKE PEOPLE GOES THROUGH CHANGES WITH AGE.AT 72 ,I HAD A FEW NEW PARTS ADDED TO THIS OLD GLUE TROOPER BODY.BACK IN THE EARLY DAYS OF TAMIYA'S HISTORY THEY MADE MODELS FOR THE MOVIE COMPANIES THAT WERE RC .PEOPLE WANTED THE SAME RC THEY SAW ON FILM AND TAMIYA FILL THAT GAP.THE TAMIYA'S KITS MY BROTHER SENT HOME FROM HIS BASE PX COULD BE MADE RC IF YOU GOT THE PARTS TO DO IT.THAT WAS IN 67 AND IT WAS THE SAME IN 72 AT MY BASE PX. JUST HAVE FUN AND LEARN FOR THE NEXT BUILD.TAKE CARE AND MODEL ON
cheers @ewmhop am lookin forward to finishing the 35065 tomorrow when i am finished with work for a few days.
It's an interesting comparison, isn't it Andy? Clearly a case of changing times and the increasingly desire for quality and accuracy on the part of finicky modelers driving more and more detailed-and expensive kits. If you are a novice modeler, less concerned about accuracy and more driven by price and buildability, an early kit like the Tamiya Ausf A will certainly fit the bill. It has the legendary Tamiya reputation for good fit and modeller friendliness, while still giving a fair representation of the original. And if your main concern is honing your modelling skills, then it may be all that you need. But having those later kits, you cannot unsee the improvement in quality, shape and detail. That sticks in your mind. And, just how long do you expect to be a novice modeller-for the rest of your life? More likely, after you pass through your novice phase, there'll be a much longer period where you will be honing more advanced skills and appreciating the extra quality and accuracy of the newer kits-they'll test you more, but reward you more. You won't wanna go back! By the way, the various pits in the surface texture that you describe as 'shrapnel damage' are really just the natural irregularities you'll find on normal cast armour. Go to a tank museum and get close up and personal with an AFV to see for yourself.
Hi Jeremy oh yes the A is more than adequate for my needs though when i bought the 3 in January i had no idea why the prices were so different i just paid the money and stacked them up. I think the A will make a good practice it especially for painting as i assume the technique for armour is different than for aircraft. have recently bought the "AMMO by MIG" encyclopedia series for armour kits, thought that might be usefull for working through some issues.
I built the basic £15 panther when i was a teen. Most of my early brush painted camo looked crappy but this is one of just 3 tanks i didn’t need to respray
when i did modelling as a teen i used to think the bottle of thinners was for cleaning your brushes with.
@@TheNoviceModeller Same here. In those days the only paints available were the old Humbrol and Revell enamels. No spray cans in those days, and airbrushes were unaffordable for most kids. You needed white spirit to clean the paintbrushes and they didn't last very long. Thank goodness we have acrylic paint now that can be cleaned in water
Wish i could see some of my old 1/72 airgroup from 1988-1990ish they were painted in unthinned humbrols, i recall some of them being very gloopy LOL.
I was confused because the sides above the running wheels were completely open or did i miss anything?
On the 35065 there is a lot of gapping above the wheels, i have been told that this is likely due to the kit originally being motorized and may have been so to allow fo r cooling. 35170 has panels pre moulded to fill these gaps in, 35345 has panels to be fixed in place. There are actually Whats in the box videos for each kit in my youtube playlist that may explain the situation better.
お?!ビール呑みながらプラモ!!
なかなかのいぶし銀模型制作スタイルしていますねぇ!!
(^ω^)b☆彡veryNYSEGUY!!!
こんにちは、@mikazuki230、ご覧いただきありがとうございます。モデルキットを作るときはビールを飲むのが好きです。2月からRUclipsでキットを作ったり、撮影したりしているだけで、とても楽しんでいます。実は「日出ずる国」というシリーズを完結させ、日本酒やラガー、様々な和菓子やお菓子を試飲しながら、10日間で10機の日本機を作ろうとしましたが、この10日間で日本機について多くのことを学びました。このメッセージの下部にシリーズへのリンクを貼りました。メッセージありがとうございます。
アンディ
あなたに会います。
studio.ruclips.net/user/playlistPLq7NxxVyTV6BDe6Hyk52UdMTTcElX0eex/videos
@@TheNoviceModeller
TAMIYAさんや長谷川さんからは昔の戦闘機が1/48＆1/72シリーズで出ています!
日本はゼロ戦と艦攻＆艦爆機等!
対する米英機はコルセア·モスキート·スピットファイア·マスタング等!
ドイツ軍機はBf109E1〜G6·me262等が出ています!
スケールモデルはTAMIYAさんと長谷川さんの方がパーツ同士の組合具合が確りして居るのでとても作り易いですよ!
戦車なら勿論!TAMIYAさんの1/48＆1/35シリーズがとても良いですよ!!
こんにちは再び、はい、私はタミヤのキットが好きで、指示に従うのが簡単で、よく設計されています、私は実際に所有し、モスキート、コルセア、マスタング、スピットファイア、および彼らの1/72の範囲から他の多くの航空機をレビューしました、私はおそらく彼らの1/35キットの約100も持っているので、私はタミヤのファンです。私はいくつかのハセガワを所有していますが、他のメーカーほど多くはありません。私はまだですが、いくつかの軍艦を試してみるつもりですが、私は数日で構築するつもりの1/700マッチボックスキットを持っています、そしておそらく将来タミヤキットのいくつかを手に入れるでしょう。
よろしくアンディ
@@TheNoviceModeller
TAMIYAさんと長谷川さんもWaterラインシリーズを売っています!
日本海軍はヤッパリ戦艦(大和)(武蔵)(陸奥)(長門)(金剛)か両社共に人気がかなり有ります!
アメリカだと(ミズーリ)(ミネソタ)(ニュージャージー)等が人気です!
価格帯は3000円〜35000円ぐらいです!
でも一番大きいサイズの戦艦シリーズは流石に手が出しにくい価格です!
(50000円ぐらい)←とても手が出せないような価格!
しかももしパーツを間違ったところに瞬着等くっつけると50000円の価値感か無くなりそうで恐いです!
私は何年か前にTAMIYAの1/35(ピバーMk3)を持って居ました!
There is a short video on building the Tamiya Panther A, 35065 at John Moore scale modelling.
Hello there @michaelcanty4940 and thanks for watching, am half way through it now, though will give it a quick watch.
I'm building the Ausf D version at the moment it's a great kit just falls together, Detail sets are available for it but you don't really need them the kit parts are just fine.😉
Thanks @speedymg1962 i am not into upping the detail / accessories yet the 35065 will be my first 1/35 build in 20 years.
Very interesting video... 👍
Hello there @rwschannel968 and thanks for watching. I may have to try it again with some other kits.
Not shrapnel marks but indicators for tool racks etc
Hello there @mikehanson7328 and thanks for watching, no i'm afraid i;m not referring to the mounting points for equipment, the panels on the 35345 are covered in random marks, i thought they were shrapnel marks, i have also been told they are foundary marks?
I think you kinda forgot one there's a panther type G late version Tamiya 35176
Hello there @frankiehensley2928 and thanks for watching, TBH with you i was not really aware of this variant, i have consulted Scalemates a website i generally use for info when making videos and yes there is a 35176 there is also a 35174 based on the G version 35170. According to Scalemates 35176 is a direct improvement of 35170 with "new parts" (the spate version?) so the same moulding etc, 35174 again is an updated version of 35170 with "new parts (steel wheels)" so basically both of these variants are "improved kits" using 35170 as the basis. There are actually 18 variants in the Tamiya catalogue for the 1/35 Panther series including the original motorized versions, that would cost me a lot of money and would make for a rather long video. Both these variants (35174 & 35176) are rather interesting and maybe at some point in the future i will acquire them and review them and compare them to the original variant 35170, which from a genealogical point of view is the basis for them. Yes i think i will add them to my shopping list and when i come to build 35170 i will do a comparison vid comparing the 3 as different variations of the same basic kit. Thanks for bringing this to my attention though to be honest i dont think its a case of "missing it out" its just a case of making a vid on what i already have, hopefully the comparison vid for 35170, 35174 & 35176 will be up some time in the next 6 months.
Thanks for your input
regards andy
be seeing you.
@@TheNoviceModeller yea I don't have the ausf D it's on my list and the G steel wheel version I'm kinda waiting for it to lower in price a little bit, I'm across the pond so getting certain Tamiya kits are little pricey ATM, 18 variants???!!! That's a lot of camo and some with zimmerit.
Hello again @frankiehensley2928 i have actually done some separate kit reviews on the ones that i have which are slightly more detailed than this stand alone vid. I think there are benefits and some negatives to all of them; i am currently building 35065 which is ahem the more basic version from 1969 and has well many issues, but from a novices perspective it is a good practice kit as well it was £15 and using either of the more expensive variant seems, well silly as this is the first 1/35 i have built in 20 years. Good luck with pursuing a bargain on the other Panthers you want to add to your collection.
be seeing you
andy
The 1969 kit is not exactly 1/35th scale , it is too big . Just about all the early Tamiya 1/35th scale kits are to big .
Hello there @darrenharvey6084 and thanks for watching, have learnt that many early Tamiyas had motorized options, whether this lead to the sizing inaccuracies though i do not know.
@@TheNoviceModeller Maybe their first tanks were leaning more to 1/32 the "American" scale for 1/35th vehicles. Though I don't think the sizing suffered from the motorizing option. They just cut big holes wherever needed to fit the motor parts. As they did with that first Panther.
@@flitsertheo It ruined the Tamiya T-34 kits, hull was too tall due to motorisation
@t55a2 the Tamyia T 34 and their Sherman " easy eight " were all over the place but at the time all that was going if you wanted the kit in 1/35 ish.
@@johnludmon7419 T-34 turrets were good though, just that the hull was quite off. Never built the M4A3E8 from Tamiya, but did make one using the old MB models running gear conversion and an Italeri turret off their M4A1 kit
The 1969 kit is awful- Tamiya really should retire the moulds
Hello there @t55a2 and thanks for watching. When comparing the quality of 35065 to the two more recent kits i kind of agree with you, however as a novice who wants a relatively easy, quick and cheap kit to practice on the 35065 is still a relatively attractive kit. I think that is why i did this vid, as a sort of cautionary observation to fellow novice or less knowledgable kit builders who see a £15 Tamiya Panther and thing "bargain" and hit the buy button.
@@TheNoviceModeller Agreed, but the kit is so awful it would put kids off modelling. We’ve all built one, me included, tbf. The later Tamiya ones are still worth building
@@TheNoviceModeller There was a Nichimo Panther G that was a better kit, from around the same era. Their Sherman M4A1 (early hull) was good too.
I have just bought 3 STARFIX kits from the charity shop, thought i'd better get them off the shelf and save someone some abject misery as they are truly horrendous LOL.
@@TheNoviceModeller For the braver modellers out there, good luck. Ironically, a lot of old kits have good shapes, but moulding tech let them down. The old Airfix P-47 is a great example- I backdated mine to a ‘B’ version by cutting the fuselage in front of the fuselage, turned out well. Then a ‘B’ variant came out . . .