Dueling Stuarts (1 Viewer)

[maddadicus]

I almost hate bringing this up, but has anyone put their Figarti Stuart next to the new K/C Stuart to find that they are the same dimensions. Which begs the question of which one is truer scale to it's line. Should not the K/C be 1/30 and thus bigger. If someone can post a next to picture of the 2 ,you will see what I mean. I am using the Figarti " Honey ". I imagine there are formulas that can be used to shrink down the actual dimensions and apply them to models...I am more forgiving on the accuracy of details than whether my pieces look right together...Michael

 

[Firebat]

I have a scale ruler but I don't have either tank. I am sure someone will shed some light on this, I like the K&C Stewart, if I buy it and no one has measured it yet, I will....Alex

 

[binder001]

If you are interested in comparing the DD67 from K&C with the current M3 or M3A3 you may have a slight problem, the turrets are basically the same, but the hulls are two different models. The M5A1 was based on a welded hull powered by a couple passenger car engines linked through a transfer case. The M3-series used a small radial aircraft type engine. You could look up the Ordnance dimensions and compared them to the models.

One other problem - the K&C will likely come out short of the "proper" length for an M5A1 unless Andy knew about the scale problem with the Tamiya model he apparently used as a master. Tamiya makes fine German tanks, but he often but poor effort or cheap shortcuts into his US tanks. Tamiya designed their M5 to use most of the same hull as their previous M3 Stuart, that left the M5A1 about 6-12 scale inches too short (I don't have the article right here in front of me).

I think we can agree that the Figarti LOOKS like an M3A3 and the K&C LOOKS like an M5A1. Since the US didn't use the M3A3 in combat, the only time they would be together would be if you depict a US recon team meeting British or Free French troops.

Gary