Master list for the new Korean War range - Input required!

[Mako]

Thanks for the note, but no, that's a 2.36" bazooka, or should be.

The much larger, 3.5" one wasn't produced until 1950.

[Sunray]

The research for the US Marine range was not on my watch, and Techno wasn't the sculptor,    but I have to say from memory the model that we have does look like the 3.5 with the very distinctive metal frame shoulder stock and breech that is not reflected in the M1 or M9 bazooka models.

Can someone fire us up an image of the Marine Bazooka figure ?

[Leon]

Can someone fire us up an image of the Marine Bazooka figure ?

Here you go:

[fsn]

Bazooka = 54" long
Super Bazooka = 61" long

Difference 7"
In 150 = 1.18mm

Not that much larger, surely. 

[Orcs]

Bazooka = 54" long
Super Bazooka = 61" long

Difference 7"
In 150 = 1.18mm

Not that much larger, surely. 

If your "bazooka" was  7" longer than a normal one you would be crowing from the roof tops !!! 

No but I get your point - does it actually justify the cost of making a complete new master.  Surely a" paint job conversion"  painting the "Super Bazookas" a slightly different shade of green to the normal ones would be enough.

[Sunray]

If your "bazooka" was  7" longer than a normal one you would be crowing from the roof tops !!! 

No but I get your point - does it actually justify the cost of making a complete new master.  Surely a" paint job conversion"  painting the "Super Bazookas" a slightly different shade of green to the normal ones would be enough.

Size doesn't matter a lot when sculpting weapons.  Indeed most sculptors will exaggerate things like barrel length to "make it look right reference detail" . Indeed Minifigs RPG7 figure takes it to the extreme. The rocket launcher is  twice the size it should be in 10/12mm scale.  Compare with Pendraken VC figure that is 'nearer to scale'.

Having looked again at the image Leon provided, and the unusual metal frame shoulder stock, I do think we (Pendraken) gave the US Marines (circa 1940s) the Super bazooka, which as Mako has rightly reminded us, was not in issue until post WW2.  Ops ! 

The 3.5 bazooka was long gone before my service.  I only remember the Charlie G in British issue, so never got to handle the weapon.  Ian might confirm if it is indeed the post war model?

The good news is the US Marine figure is good for Korea. 

I have to say that Phil is meticulous about getting period detail right.   Even the style of pockets on a combat jacket and the M43 appropriate over the M41 jacket and he has me sourcing images - as you all know.  Thanks again.  Those South Koreans should be appearing on the cork stoppers as we speak...

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

3.5 " - We only had 0ne for my first year, then got a Charlie G. If it's being carried it breaks in half with a rough thread - it's less cumbersome, but da*ned uncomfortable to carry. It has about the same proportions as the WWII one though.

IanS

[fsn]

If your "bazooka" was  7" longer than a normal one you would be crowing from the roof tops !!! 

As Jimeoin says "I wish I had 12" penis - instead of this monster".

[Sunray]

3.5 " - We only had 0ne for my first year, then got a Charlie G. If it's being carried it breaks in half with a rough thread - it's less cumbersome, but da*ned uncomfortable to carry. It has about the same proportions as the WWII one though.

IanS

Thanks Ian.  The 3.5" had a sling from the pistol grip to the breech end.  I think that's what is reflected in the sculpt.  The earlier bazooka had its sling from the grip to just behind the stock.
Be good to hear from the sculptor .....

[Sunray]

Thanks Ian.  The 3.5" had a sling from the pistol grip to the breech end.  I think that's what is reflected in the sculpt.  The earlier bazooka had its sling from the grip to just behind the stock.
Be good to hear from the sculptor .....

Are we agreed that the bazooka featured in the US Marines WW2 (MC18)is indeed the 3.5" and not and oversized M1/M9 2.36 ?

[mollinary]

Are we agreed that the bazooka featured in the US Marines WW2 (MC18)is indeed the 3.5" and not and oversized M1/M9 2.36 ?

Sorry to intervene in an area about which I know so little, but.......... if you cannot tell the difference from the picture.............. does it really matter??   :- :- :- .   Ducks rapidly behind the sofa.   Chases the ducks out (no idea how they got behind that sofa!) and hides there himself.

Mollinary

[fsn]

If you're going to bring good sense to the forum, I think you need to consider your position.

[Sunray]

Sorry to intervene in an area about which I know so little, but.......... if you cannot tell the difference from the picture.............. does it really matter??   :- :- :- .   Ducks rapidly behind the sofa.   Chases the ducks out (no idea how they got behind that sofa!) and hides there himself.

Mollinary

No need to duck mate- the only issue as far as I am concerned is that Pendraken  inadvertently  already have  the 3.5 on issue via MC18.  Now we may have a few pedantic types on the forum who will now demand an M1 bazooka for WW2 marines.  :- :-

In terms of design for the new Korean ranges however, it will be good to make the new sculpts proportionate to what already is represented in MC18- then they don't optically jar when side by side on the table.  :-   A bit like old T-34 and new T-34 !

That 1940s US Marines can be used for early  Korea/Pusan  (20 July 1950 onwards)with the 3.5 cuts down the number of new sculpt demands and gives the existing range another lease of life.   I will ask Leon if MC18 can be remodelled in a US helmet.

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

I DEMAND AN M1 BAZOOKA

Well someone had too

IanS

[Sunray]

Sorry to intervene in an area about which I know so little, but.......... if you cannot tell the difference from the picture.............. does it really matter??   :- :- :- .   Ducks rapidly behind the sofa.   Chases the ducks out (no idea how they got behind that sofa!) and hides there himself.

Mollinary

It matters to IanS !