New KC Sd. Kfz. vs. New CS Hanomag (1 Viewer)

[GJB22]

Just wanted to see what my fellow KC collectors thought about these two new vehicles. Personally, I've been collecting only KC for awhile now, but I really like the CS poses that come with their Hanomag. The only issue I will have is if they are not to KC scale. The KC Sd. Kfz. is also very nice, I like the winter version better, but I was actually hoping, like some of you, for a Hanomag.

 

[noli-poli]

Just wanted to see what my fellow KC collectors thought about these two new vehicles. Personally, I've been collecting only KC for awhile now, but I really like the CS poses that come with their Hanomag. The only issue I will have is if they are not to KC scale. The KC Sd. Kfz. is also very nice, I like the winter version better, but I was actually hoping, like some of you, for a Hanomag.

Ditto here. Also, I am quite hesitant getting the CS Hanomag. The hinges on the hood looks to big! I guess they did it to feature an opening hood to show the engine. As a result they have to sacrifice scale on that part of the model. They could have used photo-etched parts like they did in the opening door of their Horsch.

N-P

 

[Canadian Samurai]

The hinges on the hood looks to big! I guess they did it to feature an opening hood to show the engine. As a result they have to sacrifice scale on that part of the model. N-P

Good point. On the other hand, the pak 40 barrel on K&C's version looks to be too long and narrow, plus it is missing the passenger side viewport (armored or not).

 

[rpk]

Checking some of the reference material I've been able to dig up, the gun on the Sd. Kfz. 251/22 doesn't look too bad, but the passenger side viewport is a pretty glaring miss. I agree also with the CS hinges being rather out of scale. Looks a little off once you study the piece, same as the missing viewport. Unfortunately I fall in the accuracy and scale camp so these both will end up bugging me.

 

[Phantom Warrior]

Good point. On the other hand, the pak 40 barrel on K&C's version looks to be too long and narrow, plus it is missing the passenger side viewport (armored or not).

Ditto here. Also, I am quite hesitant getting the CS Hanomag. The hinges on the hood looks to big! I guess they did it to feature an opening hood to show the engine. As a result they have to sacrifice scale on that part of the model. They could have used photo-etched parts like they did in the opening door of their Horsch.

N-P

I checked some photos of 251s with Pak 40s and the gun seems to be OK. It is a very long gun which in the photos extends well past the engine hatches as it does in the K&C model. The thickness compared to photos seems OK too.

However, I have not seen a 251 missing a passenger side viewport except for the 251/9 where the passenger 1/2 of the front compartment armour including the passenger side viewport was cut away completely to provide clearance for the short barrel KwK37 L24 7.5 cm howitzer. Probably an omitted detail?

Otherwise an attractive model. I will be getting the summer version.

On the CS model, the hinges are too big and the engine hatch covers are quite thick and are not flush with the hood of the vehicle as they should be.

It's the old balance of quality vs historical accuracy vs features vs cost vs fragility in these models. (That does not explain the missing viewport on the K&C model.) I think Brian added a feature (opening engine compartment and view of engine to give it the disabled look along with the broken track) at the cost of historical accuracy (flush mounted engine compartment hatch doors). My personal preference would have been for non-opening, flush mounted engine compartment doors - the historical accuracy being preferable to me than is the feature of the engine view.

IMO the feature of the dismounting troops is excellent and unique and I will be getting the AK version.

Terry

 

[desk11desk12]

It's a bit early for comparisons don't you think? None of us have seen these models in person.

Carlos

 

[fmethorst]

I like K&Cs whitewash better due to it's uneven field applied look although the underlying base color is grey doesn't make sense for the the Ausf.D which was first produced in Sept. 1943. You can't see a lot of it so I can ignore that.

I don't like the raised engine compartment doors on the CS model as much as the flush ones on the K&C version although they are probably required to allow access to the engine.

The missing view port is disappointing on the K&C version.

The "Normandy" variant appears to wear a late war factory camouflage much like the last Tiger II. The unit emblem appears to be from 19.Panzer-Division which spent pretty much its entire career on the eastern front. It spent June and July 1944 in the Netherlands (refitting??).

Overall I like both the K&C and CS versions and it's great to have this workhorse of the Wehrmacht available to add to our collections.

 

[OzDigger]

Just wanted to see what my fellow KC collectors thought about these two new vehicles. Personally, I've been collecting only KC for awhile now, but I really like the CS poses that come with their Hanomag. The only issue I will have is if they are not to KC scale. The KC Sd. Kfz. is also very nice, I like the winter version better, but I was actually hoping, like some of you, for a Hanomag.

I have several of the more recent CS sets and can confirm their figures match K & C scale so you should be ok with matching their new 251 figures. The figures in the early CS sets were large, being about 1/25 scale, subsequently they reduced the size to blend in better with existing 1/30 scale collections.

Btw, I'm getting the K & C and CS 251 models as they are different versions - as far as I know.

 

[Phantom Warrior]

It's a bit early for comparisons don't you think? None of us have seen these models in person.

Carlos

I agree for the most part, but the discussion so far has been on only things obvious in the photos so I feel comfortable the comments by several Forum members and myself are fair. Once the discussion gets into scale, finish and other topics you need to see on the model in person, then I agree, it's premature.

Terry

 

[Rob]

I have several of the more recent CS sets and can confirm their figures match K & C scale so you should be ok with matching their new 251 figures. The figures in the early CS sets were large, being about 1/25 scale, subsequently they reduced the size to blend in better with existing 1/30 scale collections.

Btw, I'm getting the K & C and CS 251 models as they are different versions - as far as I know.

This is interesting,they've reduced size and softened the faces a bit,it would make their figures more attractive as some of their poses are very good.

Rob

 

[Phantom Warrior]

I have several of the more recent CS sets and can confirm their figures match K & C scale so you should be ok with matching their new 251 figures. The figures in the early CS sets were large, being about 1/25 scale, subsequently they reduced the size to blend in better with existing 1/30 scale collections.

Btw, I'm getting the K & C and CS 251 models as they are different versions - as far as I know.

Yes they are different Oz. One has a cannon and ... Oh! I guess by different you mean different Ausf? Yes, the CS 251 is Ausf C and as far as I know the only /1 made so far in 1/30 scale and I believe the /1 versions of all Ausfs made the /1 the most produced AFV in the German army. So I believe the /1 version is critical for any collection of armour and the dismounting troops with firing MG emphasize the way the /1 version was used in combat.

As for scale, no way to be sure until I get them side by side, although I am not expecting any problems.

Terry

 

[OzDigger]

Yes they are different Oz. One has a cannon and ... Oh! I guess by different you mean different Ausf? Yes, the CS 251 is Ausf C and as far as I know the only /1 made so far in 1/30 scale and I believe the /1 versions of all Ausfs made the /1 the most produced AFV in the German army. So I believe the /1 version is critical for any collection of armour and the dismounting troops with firing MG emphasize the way the /1 version was used in combat.

As for scale, no way to be sure until I get them side by side, although I am not expecting any problems.

Terry

LOL - you cheeky Phantom you

I think I'll get the K & C Summer version - will look good with their new KT imo

 

[OzDigger]

This is interesting,they've reduced size and softened the faces a bit,it would make their figures more attractive as some of their poses are very good.

Rob

Rob, the CS sets are good value imo, I got all their Nijmagen/Arnhem range and I was surprised to find they matched the camo on my HB Autumn Bergepanther Now all I need are some K & C Brit OMG troops to take them on - that range isn't retired yet is it, I did hear a rumor somewhere

 

[King & Country]

Hi Guys,

Much as I hate to disagree with our old friend Conrad (Canadian Samurai) I would like to point out that our Pak 40 barrel is based on the technical specs from Ryton Publications excellent publication “Schutzenpanzer” and George Bradford’s equally excellent. “German Late War Armoured Fighting Vehicles”.

And another thing… Conrad also accuses K&C of missing out a viewport on the passenger side of the vehicle…

Sorry Conrad, but Both viewports can clearly be seen on both sides.

As readers will see from the attached photos and plans this particular 251’s viewports on either side of the vehicle were small, horizontal slits and from all the info I gathered… unarmoured.

So friends… there you have it… even experts like Conrad can make mistakes sometimes.

Hope this sets a few restless minds at ease.

Best wishes and happy collecting!
Andy C.

 

[Capitolron]

LoL ! - I Love It !

Thanks, Andy !

 

[Phantom Warrior]

Hi Guys,

Much as I hate to disagree with our old friend Conrad (Canadian Samurai) I would like to point out that our Pak 40 barrel is based on the technical specs from Ryton Publications excellent publication “Schutzenpanzer” and George Bradford’s equally excellent. “German Late War Armoured Fighting Vehicles”.

And another thing… Conrad also accuses K&C of missing out a viewport on the passenger side of the vehicle…

Sorry Conrad, but Both viewports can clearly be seen on both sides.

Best wishes and happy collecting!
Andy C.

Sorry Andy, but we were talking about the large armoured viewport on the front armour, passenger side and not the slit viewport on the side armour, passenger side.

Terry

 

[Rob]

Rob, the CS sets are good value imo, I got all their Nijmagen/Arnhem range and I was surprised to find they matched the camo on my HB Autumn Bergepanther Now all I need are some K & C Brit OMG troops to take them on - that range isn't retired yet is it, I did hear a rumor somewhere

Oz,lets not go there!

The new 251 will look very nice alongside the KT and the 250/1,K&C are producing some very attractive vehicles in this theatre right now.

Rob

 

[wlindsay]

Hi Guys,

I also noticed the "missing" passenger side front vision port when I saw the pictures a few days ago. This prompted some searching. Most of the photos I found showed the vehicle with both ports, but I did find something interesting in an old Squadron Signal Publication "SDKFZ 251 in Action" This is apparently a photo of a vehicle that is or was part of the Aberdeen Ordnance Museum collection. Looks to me like the vision port is missing.......but it is a poor quality photo, so it could be just the lighting.



regards,

Wayne

 

[Phantom Warrior]

Hi Guys,

I also noticed the "missing" passenger side front vision port when I saw the pictures a few days ago. This prompted some searching. Most of the photos I found showed the vehicle with both ports, but I did find something interesting in an old Squadron Signal Publication "SDKFZ 251 in Action" This is apparently a photo of a vehicle that is or was part of the Aberdeen Ordnance Museum collection. Looks to me like the vision port is missing.......but it is a poor quality photo, so it could be just the lighting.



regards,

Wayne

If the passenger side armoured viewport was closed, we would see only a narrow slit like the side viewport, and there is a mark in the photo where that slit would be, but the photo is quite unclear. The drivers side viewport is visible in the photo as it is flipped open and sticks out.

Terry

 

[lancer]

I like both of the new vehicles by KC & CS. I hope to be getting both. Not to worried about a missing vision port or hinges that might be over-large, just happy to have some excellent new half-tracks for my counter-attack. -- lancer