at at help

north3 · Jan 8, 2010

im sure ive seen this answered somewhere but i cant find it...
how accurate is the amt/mpc AT-AT kit in terms of proportion
is the head in proportion to the rest of the body for example ?
im hoping to scale it , to make some blueprints and from them a studio scale version but cant find any reliable drawings
i know some of the detail is not correct but what about the rest....?

Colin Droidmilk · Jan 8, 2010

north3 said:
im sure ive seen this answered somewhere but i cant find it...
how accurate is the amt/mpc AT-AT kit in terms of proportion
is the head in proportion to the rest of the body for example ?
im hoping to scale it , to make some blueprints and from them a studio scale version but cant find any reliable drawings
i know some of the detail is not correct but what about the rest....?

All I remember about my kit is that although it seemed pretty close there was definitely something wrong with the leg positioning or the feet somewhere because the feet would have stepped step on each other if it had been articulated.

Robiwon · Jan 8, 2010

I think the newer and larger Revell kit is more accurtae than the older MPC kit.

BrundelFly · Jan 9, 2010

Revell did one?

Stormy320 · Jan 9, 2010

I would find another source. That is a ton of work to realize when your done it's not accurate.

MonsieurTox · Jan 10, 2010

Robiwon said:
I think the newer and larger Revell kit is more accurtae than the older MPC kit.

The Revell AT-AT head is the worse thing Ive ever seen, it's hard to figure it actually represents an AT-AT head... I think the MPC is better for the head.

Jon, I sent you the measurements you need.

north3 · Jan 16, 2010

has anyone any thoughts on why these 2 are so different ?
one is the MR head and the other is from the archive ,the photo was apparently taken by MR when researching the
walker.(see here http://www.modelermagic.com/?p=7013 )
they also seem to be different sizes the MR seems to be about 125mm long while the one from the archives is about 118

apparently MR scanned the original to make theirs so why such a big difference ?

Junk Pilot · Jan 16, 2010

north3 said:
has anyone any thoughts on why these 2 are so different ?
one is the MR head and the other is from the archive ,the photo was apparently taken by MR when researching the
walker.(see here http://www.modelermagic.com/?p=7013 )
they also seem to be different sizes the MR seems to be about 125mm long while the one from the archives is about 118

apparently MR scanned the original to make theirs so why such a big difference ?

I don't understand why MR used the shi tty cast copy to take the reference photos from?

at at help

north3

Well-Known Member

Colin Droidmilk

Sr Member

Robiwon

Master Member

BrundelFly

Master Member

Stormy320

Sr Member

MonsieurTox

Master Member

north3

Well-Known Member

Junk Pilot

Sr Member

Similar threads