Jump to content

KOG7777

Members
  • Content Count

    343
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by KOG7777

  1. So these are some of the clearest overall view shots I could find from that in-progress thread on the other site. It's hard to find good photos of the real thing from the right angle, but based on what I can see, I don't see a TON of difference... Just from this comparison (which admittedly isn't ideal), maybe it sort of looks like the nose glass area is a tad undersized on the kit? And maybe the spinners on the kit are a tiny bit shorter/less pointy looking than what I see in the real thing photo? I'm still not really seeing anything too terribly off about the nacelle shape. Not
  2. Thanks for that. Maybe it's just my eyes, but I'm not seeing a dramatic curve downwards on the top of the engine nacelles.
  3. Are there photos online though? I don't have access to the magazine. Do you happen to have a handy link to photos from the early progress? I'd like to see a shot of the assembled kit, from an angle that shows what the fuss is about.
  4. Could someone kindly direct me to photos of the kit parts which clearly illustrate the problems? I'm having trouble finding anything that's not sprue shots or early progress photos. I'd like to see some photos of what the kit, as a whole, looks like built up.
  5. I'll be buying both and to be honest I doubt I'll be able to tell much of a difference between them after they're finished and I'm standing a couple feet from my display shelf.
  6. I'll happily get one for a little over $130 from hlj.com. No reason to be spending $200+...
  7. OK, first of all, many thanks to all who responded. Lots of great input here, very helpful. Some thoughts and questions: Seems like Revell is the only real game in town for european jets (Eurofighter Typhoon, Rafale, Torndao, etc.). That makes things easy. Consensus on 'best kits overall' seems to lean towards Tamiya F-16, Great Wall Hobby Mig-29, Academy F-4, and maybe Airfix Lightning? I'll try to track down those first. Regarding the A-10... I think I actually have the Revell kit from a long ago trip to the Seattle Museum of Flight, and I didn't like it much when I brought it home. More
  8. Haha, no conflict. At least I don't think so. I don't mind if what's in the box is complicated, I just like it to all come in the box to start with. To save the hassle of tracking down hard to find or out of production aftermarket items at a later date when I'm ready to build the thing. That's why the Eduard reboxings seem perfect to me: decent plastic base, additional PE and resin for detail, and nice decal sheets.
  9. I'm sorry of this inquiry seems simplistic. I am no stranger to modeling, but my experience is limited to auto, WWII aviation, and sci-fi subjects. I've long had an interest in jet aircraft (the real ones) but I've avoided getting into the modeling aspect because I am already kept so busy with all the auto and WWII and sci-fi kits I have. But I think I'm finally going to give in, and I'm researching exactly what jet (fighter) aircraft I'd like to add to my stash. So I'd just like to get some experienced advice regarding what's out there on the market... By way of clarification, I'm asking bot
  10. I see a 1/48 Hawker Hurricane Mk. I and 1/48 Supermarine Spitfire Mk. I listed. Are these re-issues or new kits?
  11. From the original post: "It will be interesting to see how this kit will compare to the existing Hasgawa kits and the upcoming Zoukei-**** kits."
  12. What's wrong with the landing gear? All I remember seeing is that they are maybe a bit long, and perhaps a representation of the brake line that isn't ideal?
  13. Surely they wouldn't need to redo every part? Wouldn't revised wings and fuselage take them most of the way? It's not like they also need to redo the wheels and the prop and the canopy and so on and so on... Depending on WHERE the fuselage needed to be altered, they might be able to use the existing cockpit and canopy parts? Obviously they couldn't re-use these parts if the area around the cockpit had to be changed radically on the fuselage parts... But yeah, if new fuselage and wings, combined with existing parts like landing gear, stabilizers, prop and spinner, cockpit could be used, maybe
  14. If Eduard doesn't fix theirs, I'll be excited about the Zvezda. If Eduard fixes theirs, I'll still buy a Zvezda out of curiousity and collector habit, but I'll likely be more interested in building the Eduard kits as I prefer their overall kit presentation (included color PE, better decal sheets, etc).
  15. I'd be happier if they released more russian subjects along the lines of their la-5, yak-3, su-2, etc. Something where there's no modern kit at all rather than just something that 'could be a little bit better'.
  16. Right now on Hyperscale there's an interesting discussion which seems, to me, to indicate that the Eduard kit isn't nearly as bad off as some hyperbolic claims have seemed to indicate. Certainly it may not be perfect (most of the models in my collection from various manufacturers surely aren't either) but neither does it seem to be the grossly oversized monster that it has been painted as. Opinions and standards will vary. As for myself I plan to get a 2nd copy soon. And I do intend to buy the Royal Class boxing and whatever later variants they do. See below: http://www.network54.com/Forum
  17. I thought I had read something somewhere where they said exactly the opposite. I asked a question elsewhere but go no answer, so I'll ask again and hope for better results. IS there a 1/48 Bf109G-6 kit out there today that is actually better overall than the Eduard kit appears to be? I have a Hasegawa Bf109G-6 and an Academy Bf109G-6. Have not built either yet. Are these or any other kits better than the Eduard version? Or is the Eduard version still superior to other currently available kits despite whatever shortcomings it may have?
  18. Which kits currently on the market are expected to be better than the Eduard offering? In terms of overall shape, detail, options, etc? I have some boxings of the somewhat old Hasegawa kit, as well as the Academy kit, but I confess I haven't built them yet or even looked at them much. Is there something else on the market that should be superior to the Eduard kit? I must admit I don't mind a few small bugs (which I can work on fixing, or not, as I wish) if the overall quality is still superior to the older kits I already have.
  19. There was no problem with pointing out the mistake in the decal. The problem was the snide insinuation that the rest of the kit is filled with errors based on.... no evidence really.
  20. http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10209297 Saw this today. Just wondering if anyone knows if it's a new tool or a rebox of some other older kit.
  21. Didn't they just do a 1/48 Il-2? With a 1/72 Il-2 coming up? They don't seem to be limited to 1/32.
  22. Well, yes. I was of course speaking of the standard releases, and not the fancy Limited Editions or Royal Class boxings. Though I do find those Limited Editions and Royal Class offerings to be a lot of fun and good value for the money, so I've picked up all of those as well.
  23. Well, all of Eduard's other 1/48 WWII prop kits have been affordable. I have strong reason to expect the Spitfire won't break this trend.
  24. Thanks. I think perhaps you really do understand the spirit in which I asked my original question. I do understand what you mean about a lot of recent upgrade parts being mostly non-vital, as they simply add an extra layer of detail, rather than fixing any truly dramatic problems. In looking over the Brassin offerings for example, most of them seem geared towards Eduard's own kits (at least in the WWII range) and they seem mostly geared towards bringing details to the 'next level'. With the original kit parts still being quite acceptable if one doesn't want to spend the extra cash on the upgr
×
×
  • Create New...