Does anyone like the FOV Tiger tank?

Sabrefan · Post by **Sabrefan** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:07 pm

Thanks to Pickelhaube peaking my interest, I went to Target this evening and picked up the FOV tiger. After getting it out of the box, I must say it looks a lot better than I thought it would. Thanks Pickelhaube.

pickelhaube · Post by **pickelhaube** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:17 pm

Sabrefan wrote:Thanks to Pickelhaube peaking my interest, I went to Target this evening and picked up the FOV tiger. After getting it out of the box, I must say it looks a lot better than I thought it would. Thanks Pickelhaube.

Your welcome. By the way I picked up 3 of them. When I called the store they had 6 available by the time I got there there were only 3 left. So, right or wrong I got all 3 that were left.

Sabrefan · Post by **Sabrefan** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:20 pm

There were three Tiger tanks when I went by Target last night. I picked up the only one left this evening.

Black_Dragon_One · Post by **Black_Dragon_One** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 12:46 am

does anyone know if any of the fov tiger have made it to the OC

thanks

CW4USARMY · Post by **CW4USARMY** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:57 am

GooglyDoogly wrote:
digger wrote:They both have flaws but some things are quite different. And I am not counting rivets.

One has a figure. A good German tanker to me is worth something.
One has an interior.
One has engine detail and more opening hatches.
One has more removable parts.
One has better paint, and weathering.

Again, I am not saying I am not happy FoV is in the mix, but we always seem to treat the new guy with kid gloves. I like my fov figs, but still think my bbi figs are much nicer. I like the zimmermit, but still prefer the 21C offering for a few bucks more.

I know I collect toys. I would just rather they look closer to models, that's all.
Very true, but the 21st Tiger seemed to have been handled with kid gloves as well. Take BBI's Sherman for example. How many have bashed it for having the wrong engine in it?

But then people turn to 21st Tiger and lavish praises on it for being "detailed" because it has interior...a sadly inaccurate interior.

But back to 21st Tiger vs. FOV Tiger...someone criticized FOV for making the "mistake" of not putting zimmerit on the upper surface of the front hull.

But uh...what about 21st? They forgot to put zimmerit on the entire tank!

You're right on the mark googly! With some folks, 21st can do no wrong, and yet every other company can do no right. This isnt always the forum for fair and balanced reviews

.

ostketten · Post by **ostketten** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:08 am

someone criticized FOV for making the "mistake" of not putting zimmerit on the upper surface of the front hull.

It's not a mistake per se, it's pretty clear that some had Zimm there under the shovel, and many did not. It's misleading to call this a "mistake" or flaw, as most of us know the German crews in the field often did things that were not always to "spec" or regulation, and this would include paint jobs, Zimmerit applications, and even modifications to the external equipment on a vehicle. Calling this a mistake is incorrect IMO.

digger · Post by **digger** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:41 am

Take BBI's Sherman for example. How many have bashed it for having the wrong engine in it?

Who said that? I didn't even realize. Still think it's the best Sherman around, and have a feeling I will think so after the FoV arrives, but I am willing to hold judgement.

MG-42 · Post by **MG-42** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:36 am

* After reading Yoxford's post about the Tiger I being discontinued till next Fall '08 , I decided to go down to my local T@RGET to see if they actually had any on the shelf.

* Well , they did. * ... 3 in fact. ... So I bought all of them. * ... They did'nt have any of the WWII figures , U.S. or German. * Figures !

* and I must say , that after inspecting it myself , it LOOKS PRETTY DAMN GOOD ! ... to me.

Mitch v MG

ostketten · Post by **ostketten** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:42 am

After reading Yoxford's post about the Tiger I being discontinued till next Fall '08 , I decided to go down to my local T@RGET to see if they actually had any on the shelf.

* Well , they did. * ... 3 in fact. ... So I bought all of them

DANG, some people have all the luck

But seriously, congratulations Mitch, glad to hear that you scored

I'm making a run to Target today, so maybe I'll get lucky too.

MG-42 · Post by **MG-42** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 12:33 pm

* I don't care what anybody says about this New Tiger tank , I like it ! *

* The turret swivels w/ ease and , I just love how the tracks just lay on the road wheels too. *

--------> This ones a Keeper ! *

Mitch v MG

Sabrefan · Post by **Sabrefan** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:00 pm

Yes, and the paint work on mine is perfect. And FOV did a really good job with the zimmerit application

MG-42 · Post by **MG-42** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:31 pm

* "Copy that Sabrefan" *

Mitch v MG

General Blasto · Post by **General Blasto** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 2:57 pm

BE nice to see a graphic map on where the tiggers are

As of yesterday, no tiggers here in Orlando yet. I just gotta have them now

Perhaps a trip to target later tonight is in my plans

Da General

tmanthegreat · Post by **tmanthegreat** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:09 pm

I found some of the new FOV Tigers today

In short, the tank looked better than I thought it would and the zimmermitt coating is great. Still, I passed on it. My 21c Tigers are simply of better quality and it sort of kills me to get another version of essentially the same tank only to have so little functionality on it - never mind the zimmermitt, paintscheme, or price. I'll stick with my two 21c Tigers for now and be happy

MG-42 · Post by **MG-42** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:18 pm

* I would be willing to bet , that you'll end up getting one eventually. *

Mitch v MG

Post by **aferguson** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:31 pm

bet him an FOV Tiger you don't get one.

grockwood · Post by **grockwood** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:40 pm

I have pointed out several times the BBI Sherman has the wrong engine in it. The M4A3 has the a large gasoline powered Ford V8 engine in it. That is what the A3 designates. The BBI Sherman at best looks like it is supposed to be a dual GMC diesel used in the M4A2 Sherman (A2 designates diesel) which had a different rear upper deck and different back plate and was never issued with a 105mm Howitzer. I have also said though that the 21st Tiger I has many errors.

MG-42 · Post by **MG-42** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:41 am

* Umm ,.. it would be wise to inspect these new Tigers when you get them home or perhaps w/ permission by an associate or manager , even while your still looking at it in the store , for production assembly-line goofs.

* It's a good thing I bought all 3 , because one of them had 2 identical starboard-side rear fenders , so I just simply exchanged it for another one.

* I also noticed that there are no tow hooks for the front and rear. ... The holes are there for them but no U hooks. ... Interesting. ... I looked for what may contain an accessory packet taped somewhere in the box or something , but nada. ... If you really wanted to I guess , is steal some off your 21st. Tiger and use them on your new FoV Tiger.

........ Oh well , I still like this tank very much and does not detract from it's appearance. *

Mitch v MG

ostketten · Post by **ostketten** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:53 pm

I also noticed that there are no tow hooks for the front and rear. ... The holes are there for them but no U hooks. ... Interesting. ...

FYI, I have many good references on the Tiger and not every tank had the hooks installed, a fair number had none at all, some had only one, (sometimes on the left sometimes on the right), the rest had both hooks installed. Just thought I would put that out there before this becomes another issue to debate regarding accuracy.

For what it's worth, this is another pretty easy fix for most people with some modeling skill, sprues from old 1:35 kits can easily be formed to make satisfactory hooks.

newwavepop · Post by **newwavepop** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:36 pm

im not one of the experts here that actually knows the details of these things, but to me the fov looks a little more toyish but i actually like that myself.
it seems like more and more of my 1:18 stuff not just military is getting over weathered, it looks great when i hold it up and look but from a distant i cant see any detail on alot of my figures because its all weathered together.if you know what i mean.

MG-42 · Post by **MG-42** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:39 pm

* If you ask me , the 21st.C Tiger looks very toyish compared to the FoV Tiger. *

Mitch Man !

dragon53 · Post by **dragon53** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:21 pm

I would buy the FOV Tiger---if it looked like the photo on my FOV Abrams box. Unfortunately, it doesn't.

dragon53 · Post by **dragon53** » Sun Dec 30, 2007 2:19 pm

Someone posted that FOV/Target will re-introduce the Tiger in the spring.
If so, will it be the same current Tiger or a "new-and-improved" Tiger?

(If the new Tiger looks like the photo on my FOV Abrams box, I'll buy one).

STUKA · Post by **STUKA** » Sun Dec 30, 2007 9:42 pm

I would buy Tigers if I could find them - Target around here keeps restocking Abrams!!! and putting them on clearance for more Abrams -

Small Scale Military Headquarters

Does anyone like the FOV Tiger tank?

Re: tigers

??

New FoV in 1:18 [+] Tiger I

New FoV in 1:18 [+] Tiger I

New FoV in 1:18 [+] Tiger I

New FoV in 1:18 [+] Tiger I

New FoV in 1:18 [+] Tiger I

New FoV in 1:18 [+] Tiger I