Open Book 8th Pennsylvania Cavalry 89th Regiment Pennsylvanian Volunteers, Battle of Chancellorsville May 1863

[Stelios Demiras]

8th Pennsylvania Cavalry 89th Regiment Pennsylvanian Volunteers, Battle of Chancellorsville, May, 2nd, 1863. American Civil War Series. Attack!


Hello friends,
I have in my hands a very interesting figure set that I am sure will be very popular among figure modelers as it has a very good quality and competitive price. The Ukrainian company has set new quality standards in Injection Moulded Plastic Kits so see the following photos for personal evaluation. With this kit also Master Box won the ModellFan magazine Award for the kit of the year 2013 in Category: Figures 1/48 & 1/35.

Company: Master Box
Code: MB3550
Scale: 1/35
Pieces: Two sprue with 91 pieces
Material: High Quality Injection Moulded Plastic More Information: www.mbltd.info or look for the set in your local distributor, dealer or shop.

 

[yeo_64]

These look Very Nice indeed !
Thanks for the "heads up", my friend .
Cheers!
Kenneth.

 

[Steve]

These are really great castings. 1/35 is a pretty odd scale for this period, and unless they release more from it, we are stuck with just those three figures with no option to expand the scene. Still beautiful stuff.

 

[Jarod M. Denver]

I am really interested in this box but the scale always bothered me especially, like Steve said, you would be stuck with just those three figures.

How is the head? Good details or just an "avarage" face?

 

[housecarl]

I am really interested in this box but the scale always bothered me especially, like Steve said, you would be stuck with just those three figures.

How is the head? Good details or just an "avarage" face?

There's always the Hornet option.

 

[ChaosCossack]

Very cool set, definetely on my list.
I agree with the above comments about compatability... fingers crossed that they expand their range in this period. I know they have started a Napoleonic range. The Nappys are more static posed... I hope if they expand either range they stick with more active figures.

That's my two cents

Colin

 

[badger]

great figures which easily convert into other poses/ different heads etc, cant wait to have a go at these.

 

[Ray Welshman]

I used this set for the base for my Strathcona's. I purchased two sets I did run into a problem where the figures didnt fit well on the horses, however the rider that is going down did fit well but the other two didnt. I'm not sure what to do with the other set its in the grey army now

Cheers

Ray

 

[Don Johnson]

Until you have the figures in your hand, and compare them to other ACW figures, the whole 1/35th vs 54mm debate is bogus. We've been over this "scale vs size" issue time after time after time . . .
As mentioned above, several makers produce bare heads, or ACW heads - MRoberts, Shenandoah, Hornet and Historex are four that come instantly to mind - and the same holds true for weapons and equipment, if you REALLY think the Masterbox heads and accoutrements aren't up to your standards (they look pretty damn good to me ).
Buy the figures - otherwise, it is certain Masterbox will cancel any other possible similar projects. Remember - they're running a business!
Remember the single box of ACW Union skirmishing figures from Dragon? They were good plastic figures, but folks on forii pissed and moaned about this niggling detail or that one, and in the end, no second box ever appeared. (And yet Dragon recycles the same WW2 German figures year after year, and apparently sells boatloads - strange...)
This is a real stretch for Masterbox on several levels - action poses over "safer" static models; ACW cavalry over infantry; mounted over foot figures. One can only speculate at the decision process that led to this offering, but several of the company's other WW2 figure sets are also unusual. And given their tendency towards inter-active sets, Defending Confederate Infantry almost have to be in their plans (look at the box art again).

 

[garyjd]

1/32 would have been a better scale. Oh well, I'd like to have a look at them anyway.

 

[Jarod M. Denver]

Mine was just an enquiry about the heads. Since the reviewer took pictures from above, we cannot see the detail of the head, which in my experience really reveals the quality of the moulds.
I have some spare heads, so that wouldn't bother me, but I was curious.
When I have the funds, those I will surely buy and then swap heads

 

[chippy]

" Mine was just an enquiry about the heads." Jarod I bought this set early this year and would say the heads are pretty good no need to look for swaps . I have no complaints regarding the quality of moulding and bear in mind you are getting THREE mounted figures for around £12.00 so any tweaking you feel necessary after you get them they would still be good value .
chippy

 

[ChaosCossack]

My issue with these being 1/35 is not a quality issue (both MB and Dragon do a decent product) but a compatability issue. Most pre WWII subjects are produced in 54mm so it would be difficult to expand a scene with other figs.
That being said, I hope that both of these companies will get explore producing more figs in the "horse and musket" eras. I believe if they put them out there, they will get bought.
For those modellers who enjoy making dioramas, effective and INEXPENSIVE figures would allow for some potentially epic battle dioramas... hint hint

Colin

 

[Stelios Demiras]

Hello everyone,
It is good to see that this post attract the interest of a lot of you. I found a diorama from a Swiss modeller in the website of Master Box showing this set together with other figures ( perhaps Shenadoe?). I would like to know the figures' companies of the Confederate soldiers if someone will recognized them.

Here it is the link
http://www.mbltd.info/diarams_252.htm

 

[Ron Tamburrini]

Stick it up to 75mm and you got a winner !! 1/35th is AFV figure scale

 

[billyturnip]

Stick it up to 75mm and you got a winner !! 1/35th is AFV figure scale

They didn't have AFV's in the civil war Ron.

 

[Don Johnson]

But Colin . . . "54mm" is a size, not a scale.
I have figures, all labeled as "54mm", that are significantly different. A couple are barely 50mm from sole to top-of-head, while others are 60mm for the same measurement. I'm sure you have some of these, as well.
(And let's not even restart the whole "men were smaller, back in the day" discussion.)
We - the whole hobby - are doing a disservice to ourselves by continuing to label figures as 54mm. The term has no measurable meaning (eyes or top of head? we can't even agree on where to measure TO!!!), and it conveys incorrect and confusing information.
Sculptors should provide only one relevant measurement: "this is the scale I used for the weapons/equipment".
Then, we could begin to compare one figure to another, taking into account the range of human body sizes.
Now, I know what you are saying, but I really don't think you mean what you're saying. If I gave you three figures from the same timeframe, but didn't tell you manufacturer/scale/size, you would compare bodies, weapons and equipment, and decide if you could use them together, or not. Hopefully, we all do that, regardless of how the figures are labeled. And I'm sure, if your experience is like mine, you are sometimes surprised at what figures ARE actually compatible, or compatible with a head or weapon swap.
My only argument is "don't rely on the labeling to determine if a figure will or won't work for you". Until you look at them, you will not KNOW.
Thanks for listening!

 

[Don Johnson]

Stelios, yes, from what I can see, the Confederates are Shenandoah figures.

 

[badger]

I will be going to Glasgow modelshow on October 19th and will buy these figures there, I agree that dragon acw figures were a change from ww2 and looked forward to more but none appeared. hope this will not be the case again.

 

[Mike S.]

I hope that they intend and succeed in following through with some Confederate subjects, and it doesn't end here with the one Union offering like Dragon's single attempt at this subject in this scale.