RED-STAR WARS, The Umpire Strikes Back!

The T-54/55 in 1/72 scale, Part 2

  A Compare and Contrast of the ACE Ti-67 (T-55) kit and the PST T-54 kit


 

INTRODUCTION

This is Part 2, the compare & contrast construction review for the ACE Tiran 4/5 (Ti-67) and the PST T-54 kits in 1/72 scale.  Part 1, an in-the-box preview, covers the parts on the sprue, instructions and general accuracy.  In constructing and adding extra detail I found quite a bit of variation in minor details in the real Ti-67 and the T-54 tanks.  The T-54 was built over a number of years and the Ti-67 was apparently produced from a number of generations of T-54’s and T-55’s, basically what was captured from Egypt and Syria.  My models were built with a compilation of the common details from a half a dozen reference vehicles.

ASSEMBLING THE CHASSIS

PST T-54/55 Hull & Suspension

a) The assembly of the hull bottom plate, left and right sides and rear plate went smooth after easy clean-up.  Be careful snipping off the sprue and cleaning the nubs.  Detail is sharp and fine.  The PST hull has an open driver’s hatch perfect for a MIG Products Russian tank crewman, or a little bit of a scratchbuilt interior if you leave it open with no figure.

b) The roadwheels are molded well with no need for major sanding to make them true (round).  Oddly, PST’s inside roadwheels are not molded with a Spiderweb pattern like the outside wheels but are plain with holes halfway around (perhaps in hopes that no one will look at the bottom of the tank?).

c) The sprocket is molded well except for a major problem.  When assembled according to the guide notches the teeth for the two sprockets are offset from each other.  This means that to glue the track links around the sprocket we have to snip off a few more sprocket teeth, and the rear sprocket will need a few teeth added.  This is not good.

d) There are two engine decks offered in the kit, one for the T-54 and another engine deck for the T-55.  The instructions tell us to remove ½-mm off each side of the engine deck to allow it to fit correctly.  I noted a nice side with good bolt detail that seemed a shame to cut off so the engine deck was cut in the middle.  As fate would have it, a reference photo was later found showing an engine deck without the edge of bolts!  This could be an error on PST’s part or just one of many production variations in the T-54/55 series.  Overall I am not overly concerned in this case.

e) My assessment is that the engine deck looked more realistic for both models with fine mesh placed over the engine screens.  PART offers etched brass screens, or we may use fine mesh from a fabric store.

f) The individual torsion bar arms are well molded and cleaned up easily.  And the distance between the wheels once assembled appears correct.

g) The torsion bars assembled easily and true on the hull.  With a little trimming of I was able to alter the position of the torsion bar arms so the wheels could reflect rolling terrain.  The wheels were glued onto the arms and carefully lined up with a straight edge. 

h) The sides and bottom plates are detailed and will display well if you chose to display a partly dismantled or destroyed & overturned tank.  I have not yet found any good photos of the sides (minus the wheels) and bottom plate so I cannot comment as to accuracy of either the PST or ACE details in these areas.  In the photos below of the two hulls (the PST on top) we can see the difference between the two.

 

i) My method for dealing with the individual track links around the idler and sprockets was to glue the track links on first and then attach the idler and sprocket, aligning them up with the roadwheels.  The lengths of tracks were added later after painting.  The track lengths were carefully bent to conform to the articulated roadwheels, and to sag realistically on the top rung.  Rather than emulating my method, instead construct the lower T-55 hull including the wheels and tracks before attaching the hull top and turret.  This will allow us to attach the tracks without interference by the fenders and to better get them all straight!  [I should have followed Chaltry’s advice on this!]

j) The driver’s periscopes for both kits are acceptable but a little simplified.  The real periscopes on T-54/55’s appear to raise and lower with a sheet metal cover.  For both kits, a thin strip of aluminum was added to represent the sheet metal cover.  To represent the periscope lenses I used, on both models, strips of exposed 35-mm film.  The cut up camera film can be cut with sharp angles and edges, is shiny and dark like the real glass periscope.  I feel it looks much better than trying to paint them in.

k) Rotate the fuel cell part C14 180 degrees from what the instructions direct us to do.  This is the second large fuel cell from the front.

l) Switch part A6 with part A22 when assembling.

m) On both models adding the fuel lines, with fine copper wire, for the fender fuel cells add a l found that teabag string, coated with white glue, make good in-scale cables.

ACE Suspension & hull

a) ACE’s T-55 hull required much sanding, filing and filling with model putty.  The model putty I had at the time was white so it unfortunately does not show up well in the photos against the white styrene ACE used.  With continuous test fitting between filing I was able to achieve a reasonable, though far from perfect fit of the sides, bottom, rear plate, and top hull piece.  The large wheels and hanging tracks will cover much of any rough detail.  I have not yet found any good photos of the sides (minus wheels) and bottom plate so I cannot comment as to accuracy of either the PST or ACE details in these areas.

b) The torsion bars need some cleaning up of flash.  Do this while still on the sprue to keep from handling these small pieces in big fingers.  In fact, most clean-up of flash and seams on most all parts can be cleaned up while still on the sprue.  The instructions tell us to move the idler arms for correct placement.  The roughness of the suspension holes (visible in the photo below) makes this a bit difficult to do accurately.  Do it by eye as best you can.

c) The roadwheels had a lot of flash and are the tires are not flat.  I had moderate success gluing the ACE roadwheels onto toothpicks with white (Elmer’s or School) glue, rotating them slowly on an electric drill against a sanding stick.  After this it was not hard to finish them true by hand.  At least ACE gives the correct Starfish shape to both the inside and outside roadwheels.

d) The roadwheels, idler & sprocket and the tracks of the ACE model were handled the same way as with the PST T-54  described above.

e) The tracks were the most difficult aspect of assembly of both kits.  The tracks of my T-55’s were installed after full construction and painting.  I think this was a mistake and recommend the method Doug Chaltry used and describes in the construction of his ACE T-55.

BUILDING THE TURRET

 

PST Turret

 

1) The fit of the turret with the bottom turret plate went well.

 

2) I find the commander’s and loader’s hatches to not be properly shaped.  The hatch openings should be opened wider though this poses a problem in that the commander’s hatch is too small and could use rebuilding.  When compared to ACE’s cupola’s (which is pretty good and accurate) we can see how much PST is undersized.  I am generally pretty reluctant to say an item is “wrong” but based on all the vehicle photos I have checked out (several dozen) I have not seen any T-55 hatches hat look like this.

 

3) The turret lift hooks are not like ones I’ve seen in photos.

 

4) The grab handles and the attachment loops on the turret sides were simulated with fine wire.

 

5) The two PST 100-mm gun barrels included in the kit (one with and one without a bore evacuator) look about right and the molding seen was not difficult to clean-up.  Doug Chaltry feels the PST gun barrels to be a bit too tapered and prefers the ACE barrel.  ARMO makes a well-done turned-aluminum replacement barrel that appears based on the PST barrel.

 

6) If you recall in Part 1. it was pointed out that the turret ring for the PST turret was smaller than the ACE turret.  Here is where the significance of that comes in.  While the smaller ring is less accurate compared to the real vehicle, what is more critical is that the turret ring is also placed too far forward on the hull.  What this means is that when rotated 90 degrees the turret will not maintain a correct overhang over the fenders.  Visible in the overhead-photo below of the two kits, the front of the PST turret will not overhang enough, and the turret rear will overhang out too far.  In the photo below you’ll note that the left-side armor fillet (that semicircular piece on the fender and under the turret side) is almost totally exposed when it should be mostly covered over by the turret (as on the ACE kit).

Fixes for this problem might be:

 

I.    Don’t do anything and glue the turret facing forward.

II.  Don’t do anything and just leave everything like it is and just enjoy yourself.

III. Use the ACE turret and make the corresponding hole in the hull roof larger.

IV.  Make the turret ring larger with a plastic or copper tube mounted in the center of the turret

        bottom, and make a correspondingly large hole in the hull roof further back.

 

ACE Turret

 

a) The turret bottom plate and turret top needed quite a bit of sanding and trimming to get a good fit into the upper part of the turret.  Again: test fit, trim, and test fit again until its proper.  Unlike the PST turret, the ACE turret ring appears the correct size and location.  In the photo above it appears in the correct position when rotated.

 

b) I thought the ACE turret sat too high over the hull so I shaved and sanded off the raised ring around the top of the hull.  See the scan of the hulls in Part 1.

 

c) The ACE cupolas appear accurate and in scale.  They may need a little filler.

 

d) The turret lift hooks appear accurate.

 

e) The 100-mm gun barrel in the T-55 kit is larger and was more difficult to clean up round.  The ACE kit’s 105-mm gun in the T-67 appears too thick and difficult to clean-up and was replaced with a 105-mm gun barrel stolen from a Hasegawa M1 Abrams kit (with the addition of a short aluminum tube on the end to correct the muzzle).

f) Extra detailing such as grab handles, latches and gear attachment points were produced from fine wire and added before painting, on both turrets where appropriate based on reference photos.

g) From the in-progress photos it is evident that I traded some parts between kits (one reason for this was that the parts would show up better in the photos).

h) Stowage for the Ti-67’s turret and hull bins was made from pieces of plastic and covered in a tarp simulated from glue coated tissue.

i) Both models come with roof mounted machine guns that can use detailing.

j) The fabric gun mantlet cover of the T-55 served as a weather barrier for the turret interior.  Glue soaked tissue paper may be used to make the mantlet more like realistic, wrinkled cloth, and to blend it into the hull.

      

PAINTING & MARKINGS

 

For the T-54 I modeled as an Egyptian AFV circa 1967.  Though I could find dozen or more good photos of Syrian T-55’s, I found one good photo of an Egyptian tank and this one had no visible markings.  It is therefore finished in sand and brown colors in a pattern displayed in Osprey’s book by Steven Zaloga.  None of the PST kit decals were used.

 

The ACE Ti-67 was finished in Model Master Israeli sand-gray lightened with cream color (this Israeli color actually appears more olive than sand or gray).  The ACE decals unfortunately broke up into little pieces as I attempted to slide them off the wet paper, an unfortunate manufacturer’s defect by ICM who makes ACE’s decals.  ACE replaced my decals though I ended up using decals from my spares box to replace those destroyed before ACE could get me knew ones.  [Several clear-coating products are designed to save old or defective decals.]

 

In the photo below of the PST T-54 is an example of the Salt Technique that was used as part of the weathered desert finish of my Egyptian T-55.  A similar technique was used on the Israeli Ti-67.  The Egyptian T-54 represents a Soviet tank re-painted in desert color once received by the Egyptians.  The vehicle was first painted in its factory coat of paint: a Soviet olive green in this case.  To represent chipping down to the bare metal some areas were painted in dark gray.  After the paint has dried well, wet the areas you would expect excess wear and sprinkle on table salt.  Scrape the salt off or add more depending on the amount of wear you wish.  After applying the final coats of paint simply brush or nick off the salt grains leaving the paint below exposed.  After this continue with the markings and weathering.

       

PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER

 

Both ACE and PST built into handsome and satisfying models that look like T-55’s.  Both have their problems that for me are offset by their good aspects.  As a few have already discovered, probably the best T-55 model in 1/72 will come from an amalgamation of both kits: The ACE turret, cupolas and lift hooks, with the PST hull, storage boxes, gun barrel, wheels and tracks.  Overall I had a great time with both kits.  With the ACE model in particular I felt that I really tested my scratchbuilding skills and produced a model I can call “mine”.  This is a feeling more satisfying than just slapping together a near perfect Revell kit all the time.

 

I have often heard that when installing the upper run of tracks the tracks sagged and touched only the tops of center three roadwheels.  Studying action photos I have noticed that with a fully loaded T-55 the tracks may lay across the top of all five roadwheels.

 

If I had any recommendations to the makers it would be for PST to rework the shape of their turret and correct their cupolas.  The PST model has too much potential for further variants not to correct this.

Go enjoy yourself.

REFERENCES 

TANK BATTLES OF THE MID-EAST WARS (2), Steven Zaloga, Concord Publications (1998).  Good photo reference covering a plethora of Israeli and Arab AFV’s including the T-55 and Ti-67.

AFV Modeler Issue 9, March April 2003.  A British bi-monthly AFV modeling magazine.  Great Photo essay on a T-55 on display, including a number of interior pictures.

AFV Modeler Issue 10, May/June 2003.  Wonderful article on building Tamiya’s T-55 and with in-depth coverage of painting and weathering techniques.

Weathering with the Salt Technique: Fine Scale Modeler magazine, July 2003.

http://smallscaleafv.web3.cz/ANG/index1.html Gary Zimmer’s PST T-55 review.

http://www.ontheway.us/reviews/ACE/T-55%20preview.htm  Doug Chaltry’s in the box preview of the ACE T-55 model.

http://www.ontheway.us/reviews/ACE/T-55%20review.htm  Construction article on the ACE T-55.

http://www.ontheway.us/articles/limited-run.htm  Doug Chaltry’s discussion on Limited Run kits.

http://www.kithobbyist.com/AFVInteriors/t54/t54a.html  Superb article on the T-54 interior.

http://www.jed.simonides.org/tanks/tango-numbers-su/t-55_series/t55-series.html  Info and photos of T-54 & T-55 tanks.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/t54tank.htm

http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/afv/t55/index.html  T-55 and T-55 Enigma at Bovington, England.

http://www.smallafv.nn.ru/inbox/ace_tiran.html  Russian language on the ACE Ti-67 model.