Discussion Forum > CinC vs GHQ
CinC vs GHQ
Login  |  Register
Page: 1 2

thor
1 post
Sep 17, 2004
11:22 AM
I just found this website and did not know cinc had gone out of business.What happened? I have alot cinc WWII armor from the late 70's and was now just getting back into the hobbie and thinking of expanding my collection.. Back then I found cinc's quality and detail to be outstanding( much better than GHQ at that time) and I'm wondering from you all if they are still of the same high quality. The pictures on the cinc website do not look as nice as the models I have from the 70's (maybe they are not very good photos).It seems as though GHQ has really improved the models from the looks of the website. How would rate them as compared to the cinc models. Thanks all.
Marine Corps Daddy
21 posts
Sep 18, 2004
4:51 PM
Hey Thor Ilike both companies i think the quality is the best for both dispite cnc site(GHC is far better) and also cnc takes forever and a day to come up with new stuff.
My two cents

Semper Fi
Paul
139 posts
Sep 18, 2004
6:38 PM
I really prefer CinC. Their price and quality are unbeatable. Some GHQ aspects are unproportionate. On the Bradley's the shovel looks like it could be used by a 10 foot soldier. The last order I put in with GHQ it took around 2.5 weeks to get the order. My last order with CinC was received in less than a week.

I do wish CinC would put out some new stuff but understand that unless they increase their prices (so they can hire more staff) then I (we) have to be patient.
Peter_Fitz
6 posts
Sep 18, 2004
10:57 PM
I live in New Zealand, and GHQ's shipping rates to this part of the world border on the piratical, and their models cost about 50% more than C-in-C; once postage is incorprated they're more than twice the price. I'd buy from them if they had something I couldn't get anywhere else, but for no other reason.
Michigan
9 posts
Sep 20, 2004
9:13 PM
I have a collection of both companies and while Ghq does add a little more detail, in some cases it is almost too much for 1/285 mini's. I guess the big question is how much detail do you want? If you look at what comes from CNC when it is on your board, it looks realistic and thats pretty much what I want. Something else that I like about CNC, is that their models are solid and not hollow like GHQ. Don't get me wrong, GHQ is an OK company, but for the overallquality and price I like CNC better.
Jal
1 post
Sep 21, 2004
5:08 PM
I agree with the CinC vehicles being solid and the price being unbeatable.

Some other things that I like about the CinC vehicles over the GHQ vehicles is that the CinC vehicles usually have the machine guns attached to a turret or hatch, so it is a lot easier to place them on the vehicles and they usually include a man on the weapon. The CinC helicopters also leave you with the option of having the doors open on the sides (heck, even the Blackhawk includes interior seats!).

I know those kind of things may not make much difference to a lot of wargamers, but I just like to paint and create little battle scenes, so those details add to the scenery, rather then having vehicles with man-less .50 cals or TOWs.

Don't get me wrong - I own a lot of GHQ items as well (especially items that CinC doesn't make), but I make it a point to buy certain vehicles only from CinC (CinC's humvees are exceptional).

Regards
BB63Fan
Guest
Oct 09, 2004
2:02 AM
Hey all,

I'm wondering about model ships... I've been looking around at the GHQ website, and I really like what they have. But then I found this company, and because they don't have any photos of their ship models, I can't really compare! I don't have a collection yet, and I basically want to make a fleet diorama with destroyers and such. I would like to get a pack of 3 destroyers to practice paint on, but I don't know whether to go with CinC or GHQ. Can anyone help?

Email: Peaches_dc@hotmail.com
Fred
2 posts
Oct 11, 2004
8:37 AM
I love CinC as a company. The people are great to talk with and the service is fantastic. On the other hand, I prefer GHQ's models, probably because of the exaggerated detail that makes them look more real, to me at least. After GHQ and CinC, Scotia probably comes in third place. Some of their models are very good. RoS/Navwar also make some good pieces. Skytrex models leave much to be desired. On the other hand, all have extensive ranges, make many things that CinC and GHQ don't, and have some gems in their product lines. Some day I'll put them all in a spreadsheet. Does anybody know what was in the In-Service Miniatures line? Are there other microarmor manufacturers not mentioned above?
mick
Guest
Oct 12, 2004
11:21 PM
I buy what I have to from ghq. I prefer c-in-c. I have replaced almost all of the ghq turrets on my M1A2's and they look alot better, also I am in the process of adding mg and tow launchers to my ghq hummvs and hope to finish soon, thats if Brad ever gets back to me with a price for what I need.I have done alot of converting to c-in-c.

Mick, Be good and be safe.
fulcrum
57 posts
Oct 14, 2004
4:44 PM
I love CnC's prices but I'm sorry to say GHQ is starting really pump out the new stuff. Around 5-10 new miniatures each 3 month period. Also GHQ is putting out the newer stuff for China,UK......

CnC has the best price to quality but GHQ has the best selection and new releases

My 2 cents

Last Edited by fulcrum on Oct 14, 2004 4:45 PM
SecretAgentMan
1 post
Oct 18, 2004
7:20 PM
Thanks, guys, that was a really helpful thread. I'm new to all this and only knew about GHQ until recently.
PCallahan
Guest
Oct 19, 2004
9:23 AM
While GHQ pieces tend to have more detail, CinC details are crisper, and when painted, far more likely to look good from a foot or more away.

In addition, many CinC models just feel right on the table, certainly much better than their GHQ counterparts, such as the M60A3 and the M578.

Finally, CinC minis come in those little boxes -- invaluable when you're trying to store a hoard of tanks. Better than PanzerKeepers for large models or anything with antennae.
SecretAgentMan
4 posts
Oct 24, 2004
9:33 AM
Thanks, PC!
Anonymous
Guest
Nov 30, 2004
12:14 AM
Useing products from both I have found that I prefer CinC minatures, because of weight, packaging, and cost. The blister packs used by ghq are just plain cheap.
Mage Knight Kevin
7 posts
Nov 30, 2004
4:15 PM
I know this is a CnC forum, but to be honest, as a purchaser and painter of both manufacturers' products...my painting method seems to visually favor the GHQ stuff. That being said, I love the CnC M4 Shermans, and a couple of other cool things that GHQ doesn't make. But when I compare a GHQ deuce-and-a-half (for example) to a CnC deuce-and-a-half, I have to say I like the GHQ version better.

YMMV
Kevin.
Anonymous
Guest
Dec 03, 2004
11:12 PM
I have a collection from both companies and to be honest, other than things like the fact that cnc models are solid, which I like, I am not sure that I would want to rate one better than the other. Maybe I am just new to this hobby, but when I look at the quality of the miniatures from either I am astounded. The amount of detail is incredable and the moldings themselves are clean, accurate in scale and fun to paint and play with. I guess that I am just grateful to have both companies around.
Carl67
3 posts
Dec 19, 2004
2:11 PM
GHQ and CinC both compliment each other well in my opinion. Especially when your creating WWII M4 Sherman units and you like to add some variety to your units with tanks that have different appearences. From the good old American standpoint you need some healthy competition out there to keep it interesting in this business as well.

Last Edited by Carl67 on Dec 19, 2004 2:12 PM
Marker23
8 posts
Jan 21, 2005
6:21 PM
Are GHQ and CinC models the same size? Cause i have some Ghq and some cinc and the cinc models seem a little smaller.
ltcincbj
3 posts
Feb 02, 2005
8:29 AM
My experience in handling dozens of different vehicles made by both companies is that GHQ are slightly larger (their Tigers are huger) and the turrets are definitely larger in proportion to the chassis'. The only model from GHQ that I actually prefer is their Sheridan, with just about everything else the crispness of the casting by CinC just beats out whatever else may be going on. {The boxes are also a BIG plus and I have a crate of empty CinC boxes that I go to whenever I need to. I break my vehicles down into combat units of ten to twenty five or so, and keep them in 'other' boxes (plastic soap boxes, metal eye-glass cases, sucrets' boxes, small match boxes) as combat teams.}
GHQ has this enormous range of models and high production thing (along with high prices) going on but it appears pure quality and service are the path that CinC has chosen and I personally prefer it that way.
Of course those hollow hulls on the GHQ are a detail I cannot stomach and I HAVE to fill every one with epoxy or liquid metal.

Last Edited by ltcincbj on Feb 02, 2005 8:33 AM
mlicari
11 posts
Feb 03, 2005
8:47 AM
Marker23,

GHQ suffers from a bad case of scale creep. Their miniatures are in no way "1/285 scale". Others have already noted the enormous turrets their tanks have. I will add that the hulls are far more bulky than they should be. Furthermore, the "detail" on GHQ items that people rave about is really silly looking, IMO. Rivets are almost as big as a man's head. Entrenching tools are taller than a man. Jacks are larger than some tanks' main armament. Panel and hatch lines are overemphasized. Track cleats are more than a foot high.

In other words, things that you shouldn't be able to see are prominently displayed. The things that would be visibile consequently have to also increase in size to keep the proportions reasonable. In the end you get some pretty silly looking vehicles.

Mike
LTCBruce
Guest
Feb 21, 2005
8:36 PM
As an infantry 'gamer, the new modern GHQ guys are way too large. They must be 10 feet tall in scale. Their stuff does paint up well, and they have a good range. I LOVE CinC's policy of casting gunners for their MGs, and they also have an m1919a4 LMG. Wish their infantry was not so easy to bend off the stand. They should go with more sitting/prone/kneeling soldiers. Glad to see they are back!!
LTCBruce
Guest
Feb 21, 2005
8:38 PM
As an infantry 'gamer, the new modern GHQ guys are way too large. They must be 10 feet tall in scale. Their stuff does paint up well, and they have a good range. I LOVE CinC's policy of casting gunners for their MGs, and they also have an m1919a4 LMG. Wish their infantry was not so easy to bend off the stand. They should go with more sitting/prone/kneeling soldiers. Glad to see they are back!!
Anonymous
Guest
Mar 30, 2005
4:05 PM
What I don't get is this "solid" and "feel". If it felt like a tank it would crush your bloody hand. And this solid thing who ever looks at the bottom?
Michigan
Guest
Mar 30, 2005
9:14 PM
Nothing personal, I just don't like the feel of my tanks being hollow. Also the extra little bit of weight from being solid seems to help keep them where I put them on the board, slope flat whatever.
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 02, 2005
9:46 PM
Still...WHo looks at the bottom????
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 03, 2005
1:46 PM
I'm quite satisfied,I'm not the one sticking things in the bottom because of a turned stomch now,am I? :):):)!!!
ltcincbj
17 posts
Apr 03, 2005
3:48 PM
This anonymous person seems to be unable to let go of this focus on the scatalogical aspects of his life. He seems to be a bit off his rocker and not mentally healthy, perhaps years of therapy would help him? He seems out of control and incapable of controlling his impulses to say and mis-spell stupid things. Gotcha ((+;

Last Edited by ltcincbj on Apr 24, 2005 3:05 PM
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 03, 2005
4:41 PM
That's EXACTLY my point. :-)
Foxfire.cmnd
Guest
Apr 08, 2005
8:16 PM
I have found the CinC Marder to be completly superior to the GHQ model. I only buy GHQ when CinC does not have the item.
JB
11 posts
Apr 10, 2005
9:50 AM
I really like both (CinC,and GHQ). They seem to have the best on the micro market. My Favorites are the CinC HUMMVs,but for tanks,Infantry, and other vehicles I would choose GHQ. The GHQ has more detail,and I don't beleive they are "out of scale". Some of CinCs are "crisper" but they lack detail. Case in point M60A1s, there are no bussle racks. I really don't like the look of that at all.
By the way CinCs picture of their M48A5 is actually a picture of an M60A1.

Last Edited by JB on Apr 10, 2005 9:51 AM
fulcrum
75 posts
Apr 13, 2005
4:24 PM
Not to throw a wet blanket over anyone but....CnC is rapidly falling behind in Modern Miniatures.. They may look better but at least GHQ has more than one item avaiable say for China.The Uk's best APC is still the FV-432 for CnC. Most of my miniatures are CNC but in the last few years GHQ is rapidly gaining ground.

My 2 cents on GHQ vs CnC
----------
Rick

www.redrick.net
Micro Armor Page
Steel Arrows
33 posts
Apr 13, 2005
8:46 PM
I too agree. I hope to see an expansion of the modern catalog with new updated vehicles. I would like to see Modern Italian C1 Arete, Drado IFV, Centauro 8x8.
Canadian 8x8s, Leo-1s with new applique armor kits.
Israeli M60s and Centurions with reactive armor, M113s with stand off armor kits, Merkava 2 and 3Baz updated applique armor kits.

Enough Said!
----------
"On The Way!!"
JB
12 posts
Apr 14, 2005
7:47 PM
To Itcincbj:
Yes you are right it appears to not be an M60A1 after much study. The pictures really aren't the greatest.
JB
Wraith
17 posts
Apr 14, 2005
9:49 PM
When I buy I prefer to get CinC. I like the detail and the price is right, especially when I'm kitbashing 10 to 20 minis.

Having said that. Yes, I'd like to see a huge selection from CinC. If memory serves me right one of the messages from when the company restarted lead me to believe that 2 people are running the show now. One makes the new miniatures and does all the casting for orders. I also thought that these guys had full time jobs on top of filling orders and running CinC. Mind you this was some time ago and things change, but it does explain the slowness of any new minis and the low prices. (With that in mind GHQ must have a huge staff to make new minis and cast orders, and so the prices.) Making masters, the molds, and doing the casting is an art form . . . These guys have my respect.

I hope the staff of CinC will jump in and give us some insight on what they're up to and future plans.

By the way . . . If CinC hired more staff to create the minis we're wanting, would a slight price increase be all that bad? (GHQ $8.95 for 5 tanks, CinC $6.00 for 5 tanks) Not wanting to shoot ourselves in the foot, but how much would you consider to be fair for more selection?

Last Edited by Wraith on Apr 14, 2005 9:50 PM
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 17, 2005
4:22 AM
Yes, I believe that is correct. Randy Hoffa does all the casting and Brad runs the front end, corresponding, taking orders, etc. At one time CinC was a much bigger organization, with Randy's brother and three or four other sculptors as well. We can only continue to support CinC and you will see it prosper. The quality is too good to keep down. I agree that GHQ has a much larger range of items but so did CinC before it went on hiatus. I am sure we will see more new things come out relatively soon. Its sort of a Catch 22- CinC needs more business to grow, but more business takes time from product development. I know that there is at least one person waiting in the wings to join up as soon as business expands to meet the cost of an addition to the payroll. Don't give up!! There's a bright light at the end of this tunnel.
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 17, 2005
5:57 AM
Certain people will ask CinC to produce a figure that GHQ produces or will ask GHQ to produce a figure the CincC produces. My thoughts would be for the most part going forward to ask CinC to produce something that is not produce in a quality casting. That way, as games we have more choice for a more diverse assortment of merchandise.
ltcincbj
20 posts
Apr 21, 2005
8:00 AM
I am personally appalled at what some companies put on the market, the more so that other people actually buy them. I suspect that they must be newbies to the hobby and don't know what's out there.
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 21, 2005
6:53 PM
Oh, Itecbj is appalled at what people will buy. So he cuts the tank guns off his tanks and apc and sells them.
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 21, 2005
7:53 PM
What kind of homunculus would make such an occurance of a gun tube!
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 21, 2005
7:57 PM
That a very descriceing situation,no?
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 21, 2005
7:57 PM
He must be a "scale creeper"
ltcincbj
21 posts
Apr 22, 2005
9:44 AM
Wraith: I hadn't really considered the needs/uses for people such as board-gamers and comparative reality. Mr. Anonymous makes a point in that I snip the barrels so I, perhaps, should be more charitable towards the less detailed models. When I was very young I used 22 caliber shells and paperclips as soldiers myself. Of course that was in the fifties and there wasn't that much out there.
One thing I don't quite understand is Mr. A's strange fixation with and need to constantly note the cut off barrels though. A bit weird....
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 22, 2005
10:17 AM
speaking as one of the semi nasty, semi detail oriented creatures, who also snipps the the "spagetti barrels" off my tanks; Frankly I don't care what someone uses, in fact if you want to use a Hetzer as an S tank I could care less. To me this is all about having osme fun and gaming. Bear in mind that this is a visual hobby and the extra detail looks great on the game board. As a result when I have extra time I'll work on the realism of my mini's that is why I collect almost exclusively CNC and GHQ. As far as the late nights up giggling to myself, I only do that when talking to my wife about my latest paint job, which I suppose is about the same thing :)
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 22, 2005
10:36 AM
Speaking as one of those semi nasty, semi detail oriented people who also snipps the "spagetti barrels" off my tanks. It dosen't matter to a whole lot me what someone uses on the game board, as long as it looks close enough to be recognized. For example, if some uses a Hetzer in place of an S tank, have at it, at least it looks similar. The point is to have fun playing the game. But bear in mind that this is also a "visual" hobby and as such looks do count. As a result I will spend extra time , when I have it, detailing my models so that they look authentic. It is also why I collect only CNC and GHQ, even out of the box/blister they look fantastic and the detailing only adds to the effect. As far as the late nights giggling to myself, I only really do that when I'm showing my wife my latest paint job, which I suspect is just about the same thing. :)
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 22, 2005
10:38 AM
oops, sorry I didn't thing the first message posted.
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 23, 2005
6:48 AM
As the (apparently) archetypal 'snipper' (since I don't usually bother to wait for the cannon to lose integrity) I am also, inexplicably, hooked on a sense (at least) of realism. I am constantly trying to (intellectually) justify the fact of my clipped guns through (sci-fi, advanced 'science') imaginmechanations refferant the weapon systems that would allow for this without utter loss of viability. [this is really travelling afar from the beginning of this discussion thread] My general thought is that given the imagination required for 'play' with this (or pretty much any) scale it is just not that big a jump to add the sci-fi aspect to justify a laser/phaser/other weapons system.
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 23, 2005
8:43 AM
hey, if it's fun and it works, drive on. To me micro is about imagination and having fun.
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 23, 2005
10:10 AM
Now if you have a snipped off GT do you loose 90% of your range? sounds fair to me.
Anonymous
Guest
Apr 23, 2005
10:11 AM
Why don't you just play Epic 40k?
ltcincbj
23 posts
Apr 23, 2005
4:03 PM
Probably a good question. Dunno. Just really like the looks of WW2 era tanks and some modern as well. Imagination, is funny, it can make a cloudy day sunny....
Besides. I started a separate thread for the snipped barrel crowd to crow on. The essdence of this one was lost about twenty posts back.... and I enjoyed the discussion of differences between CinC, GHQ and other manufacturers. I'd like to get back to that here and learn more. My knowledge is largely limited to these two and I'd like to learn about the (many) other lines as well.


Post a Message
Guest Name

Message

(8192 Characters Left)



Please enter the code shown above and click the 'Post Message' button. This additional step is required to help protect against message spam.