Sd.Kfz. 251/9 Ausf.C (early) half-track AFV Club 1/35
- Thread starter Ron2
- Start date
Jakko
Well-Known Member
Beware that the fit of the upper hull to the lower is apparently poor at the back. I haven't built one of these myself, but I've read that in several places.
Also: quite brave to take an AFV Club kit as your first armoured vehicle — they're generally not simple to build, but very well-detailed.
Also: quite brave to take an AFV Club kit as your first armoured vehicle — they're generally not simple to build, but very well-detailed.
I could see there was quite a bit of detail when I looked at the kit- almost didn't get it because I don't enjoy putting five tiny pieces together to make one small piece but it didn't look too bad with that. It'll either come out good or I'll use it for a diorama later!
Jakko
Well-Known Member
On the positive side, unlike the Sd.Kfz. 251s from Tamiya and Dragon, this one is the correct width 
Haha. Well i wouldn't know any of that. It's much smaller than I anticipated.On the positive side, unlike the Sd.Kfz. 251s from Tamiya and Dragon, this one is the correct width
Jakko
Well-Known Member
Compared to American halftracks, these look fairly small, yes, but it also seems that way because they're so much lower and more sleek-looking. If you put them side by side, they're not actually that much different in overall size — and about as big as a Sherman tank.
![Pampers Sensitive Baby Wipes, Clinically Proven, Fragrance Free, Unscented, Water Based, Hypoallergenic, Multi-Use, Hand Wipes 336 Wipes Total (6X Flip-Top Packs) [Packaging May Vary]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41KLBHu9CAL._SL500_.jpg)
I am digging this little build, little in size not parts. 8 sprues, 1 tiny PE sprue- about 1 inch by 1 inch, that's 2.54cm for you metric users! Haha. Lots of details. The front end on this was much more involved, not overly, than I expected. Some of the directions are a bit vague but nothing that cannot be figured out.
Attachments
Edbert
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2024
- Messages
- 3,121
I've only touched one, a late-war 1/35 Stuart. Let's just say it is in a box in the closet right now. I will say it is me not the kit to blame, but it was very intricate, particularly for a small subject matter.
No I meant it's small in 1/35.
Jakko
Well-Known Member
I wanted to know for sure now, so here's a comparison between my early war M2 half-track car and my French Indochina Sd.Kfz. 251 Ausf. D Excuse the dust, I didn't bother to remove that before taking the photos. The tiles are 5 cm square, or 2 inches for you US customary unit users 
The front axles are aligned here. The Sd.Kfz. 251 is longer than the M2 (whose body is slightly shorter than the better-known M3 half-track personnel carrier, though the overall length of the two is almost identical), but the extra length of the 251 is mostly in the rear overhang, which your Ausf. C largely lacks. In terms of height they're almost identical. My impression is still that the 251 looks smaller because it's sleek while the American half-tracks look like armoured trucks.
(Both are Dragon kits, BTW, so the Sd.Kfz. 251 is about 3 mm too narrow while the M2 is correctly sized.)
Excuse the dust, I didn't bother to remove that before taking the photos. The tiles are 5 cm square, or 2 inches for you US customary unit users
The front axles are aligned here. The Sd.Kfz. 251 is longer than the M2 (whose body is slightly shorter than the better-known M3 half-track personnel carrier, though the overall length of the two is almost identical), but the extra length of the 251 is mostly in the rear overhang, which your Ausf. C largely lacks. In terms of height they're almost identical. My impression is still that the 251 looks smaller because it's sleek while the American half-tracks look like armoured trucks.
(Both are Dragon kits, BTW, so the Sd.Kfz. 251 is about 3 mm too narrow while the M2 is correctly sized.)
I wanted to know for sure now, so here's a comparison between my early war M2 half-track car and my French Indochina Sd.Kfz. 251 Ausf. D
View attachment 186414View attachment 186415View attachment 186416View attachment 186417
The front axles are aligned here. The Sd.Kfz. 251 is longer than the M2 (whose body is slightly shorter than the better-known M3 half-track personnel carrier, though the overall length of the two is almost identical), but the extra length of the 251 is mostly in the rear overhang, which your Ausf. C largely lacks. In terms of height they're almost identical. My impression is still that the 251 looks smaller because it's sleek while the American half-tracks look like armoured trucks.
(Both are Dragon kits, BTW, so the Sd.Kfz. 251 is about 3 mm too narrow while the M2 is correctly sized.)
I see you've seen my little joke about metrics! Maybe down the road I won't develop Alzheimer's and I'll be able to say "It's because of that forum- had to keep doing math all the time to understand wha they were talking about!" I like the weathering on those.
Couldn't sleep last night so did a bit more work. I've done a steel base coat that I'll paint over. I will then use sanding sticks, toothpicks etc to create wear in spots. I prefer doing it this way as I end up with scuff marks and feel it looks more natural. That is probably just in my head because no one has ever said "wow that looks so natural!" I have used chipping fluid in the past but prefer this. I'm still very pleased with the details. The alignment pins tend to be small on this kit- or in may cases do not exist - the wall
Mounted pieces had no alignment pins but were clearly marked so I'm guessing that is the reason.
I feel the steering wheel is out of scale- it dwarfs the drivers seat and imo looks comical. I also felt the drivers seat portion that is sat upon was too long in comparison. It looks like a modern couch where the seat is very long and you either have to have long legs or multiple cushions behind you.
Attachments
Jakko
Well-Known Member
What? Where?
I'm just doing my little part in nudging the Americans towards the road the rest of the world saw the sense of centuries ago
It's called "dust"
I'm not sure, but it looks a bit like you may have the steering wheel too vertical. It's angled quite steeply backwards.
What? Where?
I'm just doing my little part in nudging the Americans towards the road the rest of the world saw the sense of centuries ago
It's called "dust"
I'm not sure, but it looks a bit like you may have the steering wheel too vertical. It's angled quite steeply backwards.
Oh we learned the metric system probably back in jr high so that would be 45 years ago. We use it in medicine but otherwise not in any public way.
Jakko
Well-Known Member
Technically, you use it all of the time, just with very odd multipliers The official definition of a yard, since the 1950s–60s (depending on the country), is 0.9144 metres exactly, for example, and the pound is officially 0.45359237 kilograms exactly. From which it follows that inches, miles, ounces, etc. etc. etc. are all also (indirectly, via the yard and the pound) based on metric measurements.
The official definition of a yard, since the 1950s–60s (depending on the country), is 0.9144 metres exactly, for example, and the pound is officially 0.45359237 kilograms exactly. From which it follows that inches, miles, ounces, etc. etc. etc. are all also (indirectly, via the yard and the pound) based on metric measurements.I'm enjoying this build quite a lot. I like the details and fit has been fine. I have not glued the top on yet as I want to hit the inside with a clear coat tonight but there does not appear to be any issues with fit at all. The kit provides plenty of extras, guns, ammo, shells. Tracks are rubber but that does not bother me, I've never had difficulty weathering rubber and I'm not quite as sloppy joining the ends as I used to be. For tracks that have sag a dab of glue works good. For the interior wear I had created a base coat of steel so I simply make a light pass where I want to show wear and may use a toothpick or sanding stick in other areas- such as the front suspension area and some of the high points in the interior.
Attachments
kevin
Well-Known Member
The light weathering really looks good.
Thank you
What? Where?
I'm just doing my little part in nudging the Americans towards the road the rest of the world saw the sense of centuries ago
It's called "dust"
I'm not sure, but it looks a bit like you may have the steering wheel too vertical. It's angled quite steeply backwards.
I'm not sure why I could have done wrong. The steering column fit was without any issues. But the steering wheel seems massive - way out of proportion.
Jakko
Well-Known Member
One of your photos shows it to be too vertical. It should be angled like this white line:
That is, parallel to the thing it's attached to. The steering wheel would need to be big, though: not only is there no power steering, it's also at an awkward angle for the driver to turn it.
That is, parallel to the thing it's attached to. The steering wheel would need to be big, though: not only is there no power steering, it's also at an awkward angle for the driver to turn it.
I have this to say about the fit. So I dry fit the top and rear and all seemed well. Then I couldn't sleep, decided to go ahead and glue it- mistake. My gel glue was coming out too thick and I was having issues getting it where it needed to go so I grabbed my bottle of thin CA. Not a good thing to attempt when I was tired but couldn't sleep. I got glue everywhere. Ended up tearing the tip off my finger after gluing it. Glue all over my hands! As a result of my 5 year old gluing skills my fit at the rear was no longer perfect but it was still decent. I ended up having to do a little putty work- left some of it rough trying to emulate a repair. My conclusion is the fit is fine but due to the length of gluing surface and the odd angles it's a modeler error not poor fit.
Attachments
Jakko
Well-Known Member
That's good to know, as if I ever build another Sd.Kfz. 251, I would probably buy the AFV Club kit for it
Yeah so far so good. That may change when I go to install the doors.That's good to know, as if I ever build another Sd.Kfz. 251, I would probably buy the AFV Club kit for it
Jakko
Well-Known Member
Welcome to AFV Club kits
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2024
- Messages
- 1,574
No. The official definition of 1 yd is 3 ft. The official definition of one foot is 12 in.Technically, you use it all of the time, just with very odd multipliers
Edbert
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2024
- Messages
- 3,121
YES! The metric system came afterwards so it must conform when defined. One meter = 39.37 inches, one kilogram = 2.2 pounds, one liter = 33.8 ounces.
But I wonder why, when the busybodies decided to invent a new measuring system out of whole cloth that they did not just say 1 kilogram was 1 pound, or one meter was one yard or one gallon (or quart) was 1 liter. I am forced to conclude they made **** up out of nothing whatsoever, just to be obstinate and arrogant. Anyone who has worked around those with advanced degrees should recognize that trait.
I admit to the logic of a system based on 10s instead of 12s, it clearly has advantages. But having spent a lifetime using miles and ounces I cannot guess how many kilometers away that next hill is when I can guess fairly accurately how many miles it is, or pick out a spot in that field that is really close to 100 yards away.
But in all their efforts to force the world to adopt their methods, why did they stop there, they made up a new system for distance, volume, weight etc. but why did they refuse to reinvent the clocks which are also based on 12s?
Last edited:
Edbert
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2024
- Messages
- 3,121
I've experienced the same, even when not suffering from insomnia. What is the trick for the thin or extra-thin CA, how to avoid it "going everywhere"?
I'm guessing using an applicator that slows the flow. I've used the disposable applicators that fit over the bottle- don't use it that night!
