The Cadillac reference has been completely misconstrued. What I was trying to say if you are going to pay Cadillac money, the tank should be worth the money. Stowage wasn't in my reference. Stowage is a personal preference. My complaints are with the actually details on the vehicle. For the money I'd be getting no mud holes in the sprockets (same as HL), all molded in handles with poor detail (same as HL), blast panel details are not correct (same as HL), older APU being used on an M1A2 (same as HL), molded in fender rods (same as HL), no external soldier phone on the back of the tank (same as HL), missing ammo trays behind the smoke dischargers (same as HL)... I'm stopping there, but I could keep going and going about the detail issues. I am I making my point clear? These are just ones I can see from quick looks the pictures of the kit. My point it that the details on the kit are on the same level as the HL offering or just slightly better in some cases for a lot more money. The Tamiya Abrams in 1/35 is an old kit and generally regarded in the model community as one of the worst representations of the Abrams currently available. Dragon, Academy, and Meng are producing much better kits these days in 1/35 of the Abrams. It just seems like Tamiya took their flawed 1/35 kit and just scaled it up. All in all it just seems like a half baked release. I would think that if a company was going to spend as much money as it costs to produce a tank in this scale that they would want to produce the best kit on the market and improve upon the current offerings not just re-hash an outdated kit. The kit does have some advantages over the HL offering: better crew served weapon detail, molded on deck texture, better suspension, photo etch grills, and of course the electronics if you are a fan of the Tamiya control package. In general I regard Tamiya as a good company. I've bought their 1/35 kits over the years and bought a Hornet R/C car in my early teens.