Quality gripe

Hi Don,

I can only agree that quality differs, but still a lot of the model coming from smaller companies, will not be available from the mainstream companies. The Tamyia, Hasegawa, Accurate Miniatures are fairly good fitting, Hasegawa depends on the vintage of the molds. Trumpeter has a lot of issues also, but fairly good fit - my main complaint is over engeniering raising the price unnessecarily.

Revell has a lot of very nice model from never moulds, but their older kits vary a lot. Special Hobby/Azur is actually pretty nice, without being as good as a new Revell/Hasegawa.

You mention European modelmakers in general, but only name one example. Pricy is probably a question of where You are, buying in the US for me is very expensive - not the kits them selves but import tax, customs etc. Could also be an issue with Europeean stuff in the US.

I reached that point a long time ago. Some manufactures are better at some things than others...I buy from the better ones and ignore the rest.

...in the end it's like anything else - it all comes down to what you want out of what you're buying.

I agree that the prices for some of these limited runs are hard to take, when combined with the low quality (re: Mach 2), and half the time I can't justify the cost, in today's economy. On the other hand, when it's a must-have, I try to remember that it's modeling, not paint- by-number. I prefer the challenge, and often will even hunt up an old vac-form of something that's now available in resin or limited-run. Endless Tamiya Messerschmitts would get boring after a while.

You can sell all the Spits you can mold--but that SO3C from Czech Model is selling from Squadron at less than a third of its original price. Lot of risk in short run, lesser known subjects, and I'm willing to take a chance, after a review or two, on the kind of kit no worse than the ones I cut my teeth on. That's why they make sandpaper and files.

I have been building quite a few oddball aircraft from smaller manufacturers lately, having become bored with the offerings from large companies. I find Mirage to be good but part location can be pretty vague, Special Hobby to be fiddly with far too much PE and resin and ICM to be all over the place with big variations from one model to the next. The ICM P-51D was excellent but their Israeli Spitfire MkIX had quite a few warp problems, probably due to removal from moulds before fully cured. It's really a matter of what you want to build and putting up with some variation in quality to build rtare aircraft. I would rather put a couple of weeks of effort into a Mirage PZL 37A Los than another Tamiya Zero.

de quoted text -

I agree, but I would much rather build a 1:72 Mitsubishi Kamikaze from Mania (that I bought in 1973 for $3.00) that fits like a Hasegawa than frustrate myself with a MPM Ryan Dark Shark where I spent the better part of a week building and tweeking the resin cockpit interior only to find that there's no way on God's green Earth that it will ever fit into rge fuselage. If I want frustration, I'll go listen to politicans!.

I had only built one Trumpeter aircraft, though several of their ships. Turns out I lucked out on that plane (F4U-4), one of their best kits (and no wing fillet). I found several of my friends had built other trumpeters and all had fit problems. I take back what I said about Trumpeter.

Yeah, I am in US. In addition to the Eastern Europeans I have had real issues with French Battleaxe.

I have bought several Special Hobby kits because I like the oddball aircraft, but I have had fit issues with them all, especially the wing/fuselage fit. In a couple of kits the empanage parts fit poorly also.

The Old Man wrote: : : If I want frustration, I'll go listen to politicans!. : I think you meant "brain damage", not "frusturation".

I hear brain damage results from listening from political pundits (aka "talking heads") as well.

Bruce

The Old Man wrote: : : part of a week building and tweeking the resin cockpit interior only : to find that there's no way on God's green Earth that it will ever fit : into rge fuselage. : So, did the designers forget to consider the fuse and cockpit sidewall thicknesses?

Bruce

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Bruce

urden =A0 =A0Austin, TX.

Was my own damned fault I guess, just like my wife always says.... I shoulda placed the cockpit floor in the fuselage and tested the other side against it. (This is SOP now because of this) In the case of the Shark, there was almost a quarter-inch gap between the fuselages halves, caused by both the floor and some of the other interior pieces. I'm tempted to go back and build it ala the Monogram Bearcar, i.e. minimal interior, just to get it finished. A lot of that cockpit can't even be seen after the canopy is in place.

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Bruce

Burden =A0 =A0Austin, TX.

One idea is to dry fit first--you might end up assembling the cockpit walls to the fuselage and then filing the floor and back to fit.

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Bruce

urden =A0 =A0Austin, TX.

No, I mean frustration. In New York State, I sat and watched as the Republican minority lured a pair Democrat politicans from New York City with promises of political power and a promise to the one to drop legal procedings against him (he is accused of slashing his girlfriend in the face with a wine bottle). They then held the State Senate hostage for over a month while trumpeting loudly how it was the Democrats' fault. During that time nothing got done and they all collected their wages. ~I~ won't be voting for any incumbants, but downstate (da City) most likely will, so nothing will ever change.

Hi Don,

I did build the F-4U-4 and agree its a nice kit, but it does have issues as weel. Why bother to make a tail wheel and hook that can move when the doors and main gear can't! The wingfold is supposed to work, well maybe it's jus me, but mine has to be either folded or fixed (with non kit parts - read spar) the wing will hang on the fold if trumpeter parts are used. Why go trough all the trouble of making movable rudder, elevators and ailerons, and the make the stick in neutral with the visible atenuators? The flaps are a pain, but looks nice when done. Painting instructions is off too, but no big deal here. The -4 is all blue.

Their Wildcat is pretty much the same, the wingfold is not "workable", but makes for a nice folded wing. All the movable flying surfaces are nice here and can be positionen (and fixed in position with a drop of cyano)

The Mig 3 and P-40 are nice kits too, a lot simpler and cheaper. No major issues here at all, fit or otherwise.

Still have the P-38 and Avenger in the stash - they are expensive but nice - and a bit intimidating....

Claus Gustafsen

"D>> Hi Don,

The Old Man wrote: : : No, I mean frustration. In New York State, I sat and watched as the : Republican minority lured a pair Democrat politicans from New York : City with promises of political power and a promise to the one to drop : legal procedings against him (he is accused of slashing his girlfriend : in the face with a wine bottle). They then held the State Senate : hostage for over a month while trumpeting loudly how it was the : Democrats' fault. During that time nothing got done and they all : collected their wages. : Was that the "palace coup" where they got some fool to read "something", and the fool realized about halfway through what was going on?

The 'pubs then claimed that the motion gave them control of the NYC government or some fool thing?

Never did hear how that one turned out.

Agreed on never voting for the incumbent. And I never vote an uncontested seat, either.

Bruce

Here we're well into 100+ days sans budget. One house is held by the Dems, the other by the Republicans. They were handed the budget last February and still can't get together on it. Yeah, they're getting paid all the while.

Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Bruce

e Burden =A0 =A0Austin, TX.

I'm beginning to think that the next time we have a shooting war with somebody, instead of bombs, we should load up all the politicans into the bombers and drop ~them~ on the enemy. But that's probably against the Geneva Convention...... 8-P

Yeah, I agree about the wingfold and the flaps. I had intended to fix wing down, so it didn't bother me.

I positioned the elevators down and the rudder and tailwheel turned. That meant I had to install the control column pushed forward and the rudder pedals bent asymetrically. But that is true on almost any kit that I change control positions. Also I had ailerons askew, so control stick is to side as well as forward.

I remember a Curtiss Helldiver with this problem (most likely a Japanes kit in 1:72). The only way to show it was to mount the wings in the folded position and glue them there. Any attempt to show them in the flight position looked like crap.