Heng Long all metal Tiger 1 in 1/8 scale..

[43rdRecceReg]

re: the thread derailment. If you look under 'Airsoft barrel recoil', or 'Taigen Airsoft Barrel recoil' in the search box, you'll find numerous references to this feature....often in threads I was involved in, or initiated. The last dealt with using the Taigen turret equipped with Airsoft recoil, and its compatibility issues with various MFUs. In this thread..viewtopic.php?f=195&t=21108&p=191414&hi ... il#p191414
I got the unit working with the IBU2 pro, and a Spectrum DX6i TX. Previously, i found that it did not work with the Clark TK22 board. So, you should bear this in mind when buying the Taigen Airsoft recoil turret. Additionally, there are latency issues between the Taigen unit and the IBU2. The IBU3 works well with it, I understand. I have the unit working perfectly in another Tiger using a standard Taigen MFU.
Back on theme... (thanks Richard for invigilating.. ) ...the barrel recoil on the HL 1/8 tiger, it is there, but might be slightly too subtle, shall we say, for some. Personally, I think it's just about right. Overall, it's a product that can only get better. If only the price would come down, eh?...

[Tread Flintstone]

This tank is amazing! I can't beleive something like this is made and RTR!

But wow is this thing heavy!!! How do you even move this thing around? I guess you'd have to drive it where you want it and apologize to the delivery person!!!

[43rdRecceReg]

This tank is amazing! I can't beleive something like this is made and RTR!

But wow is this thing heavy!!! How do you even move this thing around? I guess you'd have to drive it where you want it and apologize to the delivery person!!!

You could always ride on it, as this happy chap does with his 1/6 scale FOA Tiger 1

phpBB [video]

[Tread Flintstone]

The performance is amazing!! Only thng I can possibly nitpick is the main cannon seems to flop a little when the tank goes over rough terrain...like it's loosely sprung.

I want one!!! I wish it wasn't so expensive...but I surely understand why.

[43rdRecceReg]

The performance is amazing!! Only thng I can possibly nitpick is the main cannon seems to flop a little when the tank goes over rough terrain...like it's loosely sprung.

I want one!!! I wish it wasn't so expensive...but I surely understand why.

If you look at stock WW2 footage of Tiger tanks in motion on rough surfaces, you'll see that the barrel does flop around, and could use the armour equivalent of a jock-strap

[Tread Flintstone]

Lol..that paints a picture...

[Max-U52]

The performance is amazing!! Only thng I can possibly nitpick is the main cannon seems to flop a little when the tank goes over rough terrain...like it's loosely sprung.

I want one!!! I wish it wasn't so expensive...but I surely understand why.

If you look at stock WW2 footage of Tiger tanks in motion on rough surfaces, you'll see that the barrel does flop around, and could use the armour equivalent of a jock-strap

Spoken like a real man. A woman would have said it needs a bra.

[43rdRecceReg]

The performance is amazing!! Only thng I can possibly nitpick is the main cannon seems to flop a little when the tank goes over rough terrain...like it's loosely sprung.

I want one!!! I wish it wasn't so expensive...but I surely understand why.

If you look at stock WW2 footage of Tiger tanks in motion on rough surfaces, you'll see that the barrel does flop around, and could use the armour equivalent of a jock-strap

Spoken like a real man. A woman would have said it needs a bra.

Naughty boy, Gary
I've often wondered how it must have been for gunners in British tanks, though. The buffer for the gun was in fact the Gunner's shoulder. British policy was to be able to fire on the move, and before gyro-stabilization systems were introduced,
the gunner acted as the stabilizer ...a practice not far removed from that of shoulder launched weapons like the Panzerfaust , and so on..but these guns could weigh several tons!. I imagine that would have been a real bone-crunching experience if the gun had been the German 88

[Raminator]

All in the knees, Roy. I believe the gunners in Matilda IIs and Valentines were standing, and the 2 pdr was a very lightweight gun. At only a few hundred kilos, it would have been easy to balance it well enough to shoulder like a huge rifle. I think the practice had to end with the 6 pdr since it was so much bigger and heavier.

[43rdRecceReg]

All in the knees, Roy. I believe the gunners in Matilda IIs and Valentines were standing, and the 2 pdr was a very lightweight gun. At only a few hundred kilos, it would have been easy to balance it well enough to shoulder like a huge rifle. I think the practice had to end with the 6 pdr since it was so much bigger and heavier.

Interesting point, Ram. In fact, the original Cromwell 6-Pounder had the same 'free elevation arrangement'. Here's a passage from David Fletcher's Cromwell book:
"..The free elevation arrangement already described was fine, given a properly trainer gunner, but it made the firing of HE more difficult and in any case demanded a well-balanced gun. This could not be achieved with the hybrid 75mm, so a crude system of geared elevation was employed.." So the gunner's shoulder still supported the six-pounder, until it was bored out to become a 75mm hybrid.
Roy.