Jump to content

Airfix's new 1/72 Me.109G - save your money


Recommended Posts

I found this completed build here with some excellent close up pics. The more I look at this, the more I ask what was Airfix thinking??? (For the record, I am not criticizing the builder's work or paint job, he did an excellent job there, only the actual kit itself).

I cannot find even one, half-***ed, redeeming aspect that would encourage me to even consider purchasing this kit. Quite honestly, you couldn't give me one - unless to toss it in the dumpster. If anyone were to pose the question of who has the worst kit, Airfix easily wins that one hands down with this "Me.109G" kit of theirs.

Good Lord, even Airfix's older, original 109G tooling is better than this. Did they think that by throwing on some scribed panel lines it would make us oblivious to all the other mistakes they incorporated in this kit? Where does one even start? What did they do, make a crappy copy of a Starfix kit?

I am not talking about a misplaced panel line or the kit being a mm too long or off. When you consider ALL the information now available on the Me.109, there is no excuse for it. We are talking about some pretty glaring errors:

  • - the couch arm rests they planted over the nose cowling for the MG bulges
    - a canopy that looks to be a cross between a regular 109G canopy and an Erla Haube canopy
    - 'retro' underwing cannon pods, these look like a throwback to a kit from the 1950s
    - brutal looking u/c and wheel well doors
    - did I mention the prop blades and spinner that has something sticking a mile out of the tip? Guess that is supposed to be the the nose gun???
    - the air intake looks pretty brutal as well.

Real disappointed with this one (could you tell?). Airfix, hang your head low and can whoever approved this kit in the first place.

Edited by Big Kohona
Link to post
Share on other sites

As an afterthought, I am looking forward to reading some other online reviews of this kit. There is one website in particular that I can think of where ever kit is just ducky... :wub:

Just waiting to see if they even review this hunk o'junk and if they do, what kind of a glowing report they give. :unsure:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Good Lord, even Airfix's older, original 109G tooling is better than this. Did they think that by throwing on some scribed panel lines it would make us oblivious to all the other mistakes they incorporated in this kit? Where does one even start? What did they do, make a crappy copy of a Starfix kit?

Yeah, I think you pretty much nailed it, that thing looks awful (the kit not the builder). I can't think of any reason why anyone would select this over any of the currently available kits, makes Hasegawa and Academy look great and moves Finemolds up to diety status. Fortunately for me I've got more FM's in the stash than I'll probably ever build.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I think you pretty much nailed it, that thing looks awful (the kit not the builder). I can't think of any reason why anyone would select this over any of the currently available kits, makes Hasegawa and Academy look great and moves Finemolds up to diety status. Fortunately for me I've got more FM's in the stash than I'll probably ever build.

You can't fool me, Mike. I know you're just waiting to unload those Fine Molds kits to make room for that new Airfix plastic. Tell you what, being the nice guy that I am, I'll give you ¥1000 a piece for those FM kits. That way your closet will now have space for all those new kits. :)

Hey, a least this post isn't a Rick roll.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You can't fool me, Mike. I know you're just waiting to unload those Fine Molds kits to make room for that new Airfix plastic. Tell you what, being the nice guy that I am, I'll give you ¥1000 a piece for those FM kits. That way your closet will now have space for all those new kits. :)

Hey, a least this post isn't a Rick roll.

Shhhhhh! SWMBO might hear and take you up on that offer!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Good Lord, even Airfix's older, original 109G tooling is better than this.

It doesn't look too brilliant to me, but hardly as bad as that. Frankly, after such a gross exaggeration how much belief can we have in the rest of your comments?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, it's such a disgrace that in this day and age a model kit company can't get everything abso-bloody-lutely perfect that I'm going to write to my MP. No, scratch that. I'm going to complain to the Prime Minister himself! Take that, Airfix!!!

Vince

Link to post
Share on other sites
You know, it's such a disgrace that in this day and age a model kit company can't get everything abso-bloody-lutely perfect that I'm going to write to my MP. No, scratch that. I'm going to complain to the Prime Minister himself! Take that, Airfix!!!

Vince

No need to a smart @$$ Vince. It has nothing to do with the kit not being "perfect", it has everything to do with this kit being so poorly executed, it begs the question, why did Airfix even bother?

The proof is in the pudding. One just needs to look at the pictures of that build to see what a disappointment this kit is. Kits from 30 plus years ago are better than a this "new tooling". How is it that Airfix can bring out a Canberra that looks like a Canberra, a Concorde that looks like the Concorde and several others that are well done, how is it they can foul up so badly on one of W.W. 2's most infamous and heavily documented aircraft?

This is not about being a rivet counter and the kit’s dimensions being off a mm here or there. This is about a new tooled kit coming from a well established company that has more problems with it than a few misplaced rivets.

Revell and Tamiya Spitfire kits are dogged for not having the "right" gull wing look, Revell gets dogged as their new Lancaster wings do not have enough dihedral, Hasegawa's Lancaster for having a canopy escape hatch in the wrong place and outboard engine nacelles without a fairing to the wing - yet in my eyes, these are not major issues, those Spitfires still look like Spitfires, those Lancasters still look like Lancasters (and with a little elbow grease the little "problems" are easily fixed). That cannot be said of the new 109G from Airfix.

A new kit comes out and yes, there is an expectation of accuracy and resemblance to the aircraft it is intended to represent and yes, even a few little errors or glitches, no kit is perfect. This Airfix kit is so far off base it is not even funny - well perhaps it is. It's laughable that an established company like Airfix who has dodged the bankruptcy bullet (how many times?) should be producing kits of this quality and yet want to stay in business.

At one of the other forums, a member lamented that "they (Airfix) insist on farming out the work to the Whizzo Toy and Novelty Manufacturing Co. in downtown Shanghai...or wherever the hell it is! Long gone are the days of Airfix products proudly 'Made in England'." I think that sums it up rather well with respect to the overall quality of this particular Airfix offering.

That being said, some of those "Shanghai" companies, Trumpter, Fine Molds, etc. are giving us some excellent kits, so it is not right to be knocking them. I am sure it was some big wig at home office who John Henried the approval for this thing they call a Me.109G...

Edited by Big Kohona
Link to post
Share on other sites
You know, it's such a disgrace that in this day and age a model kit company can't get everything abso-bloody-lutely perfect that I'm going to write to my MP. No, scratch that. I'm going to complain to the Prime Minister himself! Take that, Airfix!!!

Vince

Who's demanding perfection? I think reasonably to somewhat accurate isn't too much to expect. There is literally a dearth of reference material on this aircraft, is it too much to ask for a new tool kit to even be in the ballpark?

It's a shame we can't have an intelligent discussion about a new release without these kind of silly remarks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It doesn't look too brilliant to me, but hardly as bad as that. Frankly, after such a gross exaggeration how much belief can we have in the rest of your comments?

Graham,

In all seriousness after seeing those test shots, I'd take the old tool G-6. It may have been plagued by all of Airfix's old vices but it least it had a reasonably good shape. I can get rid of rivets and scribe panel lines if I have to, but this new release just appears to be bad all the way around. Shame, could have been a good alternative to Hasegawa and Academy but I don't see anyone who takes modeling even a little serious having any interest in this thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, after looking closely at the old Airfix G-6, it appears that the new kit is more or less an update of the old one. Get rid of the rivets and raised panel lines and the similarities are striking. Doesn't appear that the wheels or landing gear were updated at all.

Edited by The Mikester
Link to post
Share on other sites
Who's demanding perfection? I think reasonably to somewhat accurate isn't too much to expect. There is literally a dearth of reference material on this aircraft, is it too much to ask for a new tool kit to even be in the ballpark?

It's a shame we can't have an intelligent discussion about a new release without these kind of silly remarks.

And the original post, which I'm afraid was bordering on hysterical, was an intelligent way to start a discussion? I have no problem with discussing the reletive accuracy of any kit, but when one side begins by howling 'What did they do, make a crappy copy of a Starfix kit?' it hardly sets the thread up for a reasonable discussion. Much better, perhaps, to start with 'I've seen the new Airfix kit and X, Y and Z need improvement'. But then, maybe I'm old fashioned.

P.S. Not wishing to turn into a grammar teacher, but a 'dearth' means a lack of something. A 'plethora' means an excess of something.

Kind regards,

Vince

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is funny to me that the dreaded Hobbyboss easy kit Gustav still looks 100% better in my eye than does the new Airfix one. I keep hoping that the seeming distortion of the nose is a result of the camera used, it just looks too long to my untrained eye.

Matt

Link to post
Share on other sites
And the original post, which I'm afraid was bordering on hysterical, was an intelligent way to start a discussion? I have no problem with discussing the reletive accuracy of any kit, but when one side begins by howling 'What did they do, make a crappy copy of a Starfix kit?' it hardly sets the thread up for a reasonable discussion. Much better, perhaps, to start with 'I've seen the new Airfix kit and X, Y and Z need improvement'. But then, maybe I'm old fashioned.

P.S. Not wishing to turn into a grammar teacher, but a 'dearth' means a lack of something. A 'plethora' means an excess of something.

Kind regards,

Vince

So the way to quell the "hysteria" is to throw fuel on the fire with another inflammatory post? A bit late to claim the moral high ground.

Thanks for the correction on my misuse of dearth, should have caught that on my own. BTW, it's spelled "relative" not "reletive".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all.

just to "pour oil on troubled water".

Mikester, i think Vince's remarks were 'tonge in cheek' i.e. a joke. Sorry twisted English humour.

I think the meaning behind the first post was aimed at a 'review' without the kit.

This is a new tool, just released in the U.K. that has still to find it's way across the pond.

The original 109 i can remember building back in the sixty's, at the time it was great,

Ahh, age and experience!!!

But in defence of Hornby, a new tool at around five and a half quid (err, about $9 U.S.)

as against what for a Hasegawa?

The Fine Moulds 109 is the one to go for, but, at a price.

If you have kids you know what i mean!!

Hope this helps, and stays the "war" before it gets nasty.

:salute:

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've yet to see the new 109G closely, but it does not seem to have the "banana" fuselage of the original, with its nose higher in the air than a debutante at a ball. Let alone the anorexic fuselage. The only part of the old kit which looked like the original was the spinner, which I added to an Italeri 109.......

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi all.

just to "pour oil on troubled water".

Mikester, i think Vince's remarks were 'tonge in cheek' i.e. a joke. Sorry twisted English humour.

I think the meaning behind the first post was aimed at a 'review' without the kit.

This is a new tool, just released in the U.K. that has still to find it's way across the pond.

The original 109 i can remember building back in the sixty's, at the time it was great,

Ahh, age and experience!!!

But in defence of Hornby, a new tool at around five and a half quid (err, about $9 U.S.)

as against what for a Hasegawa?

The Fine Moulds 109 is the one to go for, but, at a price.

If you have kids you know what i mean!!

Hope this helps, and stays the "war" before it gets nasty.

:cheers:

Paul

Actually Paul, while this kit may not have made it across the pond to the distributors here, Hannants does have the kit in stock and thanks to the Royal Mail and Canada Post, these can be had by anyone, pretty much anywhere - the distributors no longer control our flow of plastic... :salute: So do not be assuming anything with respect to what I have said about this piece of garbage. I was fortunate to be able to make use of some one else's built kit and posted pics. Personally after having examined my copy of this thing, I didn't see that it was worth the effort to waste time taking comparison pics - other than Airfix and a few other people here, most of us seem to know what an Me.109G looks like - Vince and Aggy, email me and I will send you some references to assist you further with what is and what is not a 109 and for that matter what makes and what does not make a decent, new tooled kit.

The way Vince and Aggy go on with their staunch defense of this thing, you'd think one of them had a hand in designing and marketing the damn thing.

The price is not relevant if you wish to compare kits, unless it is apples to apples. I'd take a Hasegawa 1970s vintage 109 over this one anyday and I'd definitely pay the difference for a current Hasegawa offering. Even if one wanted to attempt to bring this Starfix, er Airfix thing to some sort of decent standard, it'd be less costly running with the Hasegawa kit and if you are a real 109 addict, you are quite right and would most certainly be better off just purchasing the Fine Molds kit.

I am sorry Paul, one cannot defend Airfix over this kit, it should not have seen poduction.

Mikester, you may have hit the nail on the head there, I never even thought of it that way. I think I'll drag out my old Airfix 109 and do a little comparing.

Bottom line, the whole purpose of my post was to put it, in no uncertain terms, what a wasted effort this kit is and to save others from tossing their money away on it.

I pulled no punches unlike a certain other website whose numerous and often rose colored glasses kit reviews, where every kit is wonderful - but of course, if you give an honest review, I guess the freebies would dry up then - right? Aggy you ought to save your comments for them, because how can anyone take that website seriously?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do kids build models anymore? At all? If so, I imagine that there might be a market for low cost kits, since accuracy won't be much of an issue to the young ones.

I know that when I was a kid, I just enjoyed building models of things... I didn't know anything about accuracy.

That said, I'd prefer to stick with the more expensive, but higher quality kits these days. I have a number of 1/48 Hasegawa Bf109Gs already.

But for young folks on a budget, then by all means.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Do kids build models anymore? At all? If so, I imagine that there might be a market for low cost kits, since accuracy won't be much of an issue to the young ones.

I know that when I was a kid, I just enjoyed building models of things... I didn't know anything about accuracy.

That said, I'd prefer to stick with the more expensive, but higher quality kits these days. I have a number of 1/48 Hasegawa Bf109Gs already.

But for young folks on a budget, then by all means.

Oh yes!

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.p...mp;hl=menagerie

My own 10-year-old is working on an Airfix 1/48th scale Red Arrows Hawk at the moment.

John

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi all.

just to "pour oil on troubled water".

Mikester, i think Vince's remarks were 'tonge in cheek' i.e. a joke. Sorry twisted English humour.

I think the meaning behind the first post was aimed at a 'review' without the kit.

This is a new tool, just released in the U.K. that has still to find it's way across the pond.

The original 109 i can remember building back in the sixty's, at the time it was great,

Ahh, age and experience!!!

But in defence of Hornby, a new tool at around five and a half quid (err, about $9 U.S.)

as against what for a Hasegawa?

The Fine Moulds 109 is the one to go for, but, at a price.

If you have kids you know what i mean!!

Hope this helps, and stays the "war" before it gets nasty.

:salute:

Paul

Thanks, Paul. It appears cooler heads (I'll exclude myself) have prevailed! :jaw-dropping:

Mike

Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally after having examined my copy of this thing, I didn't see that it was worth the effort to waste time taking comparison pics - other than Airfix and a few other people here, most of us seem to know what an Me.109G looks like - Vince and Aggy, email me and I will send you some references to assist you further with what is and what is not a 109 and for that matter what makes and what does not make a decent, new tooled kit.

The way Vince and Aggy go on with their staunch defense of this thing, you'd think one of them had a hand in designing and marketing the damn thing.

Grateful for the offer of references for the Bf-109G, however I already own as much material on that aircraft type that I care to have, and I see no reason to accumulate any further. As for helping me with knowing what a decent, new tooled kit looks like I'm afraid that as an owner of a couple of the new Wingnuts kits I'm pretty much an expert on that particular subject. You will not find a better designed, engineered and researched plastic model kit of an aircraft anywhere on this planet. I highly recommend them and urge you to buy one.

I can't take any credit for the production on the Airfix kit. In fact, I can't actually see where I have defended the kit at all. I definitely 'Took the Michael' out of your original post, which it seems passed you by. Just the British sense of humour. You see, after having had another fun day in Helmand I found it rather amusing that someone was apparently in a state of apoplexy over what is, in essence, a piece of cheap plastic. Sadly I had more important things to worry about today than the state of the latest release from Airfix. Still, it must be pretty important to you so I apologise unreservedly for making a joke at your expense.

Anyway, it's Pimms O'clock over here so I must dash.

Toodles,

Vince

Link to post
Share on other sites
Grateful for the offer of references for the Bf-109G, however I already own as much material on that aircraft type that I care to have, and I see no reason to accumulate any further. As for helping me with knowing what a decent, new tooled kit looks like I'm afraid that as an owner of a couple of the new Wingnuts kits I'm pretty much an expert on that particular subject. You will not find a better designed, engineered and researched plastic model kit of an aircraft anywhere on this planet. I highly recommend them and urge you to buy one.

I can't take any credit for the production on the Airfix kit. In fact, I can't actually see where I have defended the kit at all. I definitely 'Took the Michael' out of your original post, which it seems passed you by. Just the British sense of humour. You see, after having had another fun day in Helmand I found it rather amusing that someone was apparently in a state of apoplexy over what is, in essence, a piece of cheap plastic. Sadly I had more important things to worry about today than the state of the latest release from Airfix. Still, it must be pretty important to you so I apologise unreservedly for making a joke at your expense.

Anyway, it's Pimms O'clock over here so I must dash.

Toodles,

Vince

:doh:

Edited by The Mikester
Link to post
Share on other sites
Grateful for the offer of references for the Bf-109G, however I already own as much material on that aircraft type that I care to have, and I see no reason to accumulate any further. As for helping me with knowing what a decent, new tooled kit looks like I'm afraid that as an owner of a couple of the new Wingnuts kits I'm pretty much an expert on that particular subject. You will not find a better designed, engineered and researched plastic model kit of an aircraft anywhere on this planet. I highly recommend them and urge you to buy one.

I can't take any credit for the production on the Airfix kit. In fact, I can't actually see where I have defended the kit at all. I definitely 'Took the Michael' out of your original post, which it seems passed you by. Just the British sense of humour. You see, after having had another fun day in Helmand I found it rather amusing that someone was apparently in a state of apoplexy over what is, in essence, a piece of cheap plastic. Sadly I had more important things to worry about today than the state of the latest release from Airfix. Still, it must be pretty important to you so I apologise unreservedly for making a joke at your expense.

Anyway, it's Pimms O'clock over here so I must dash.

Toodles,

Vince

I've heard that you and the word "wingnut" are known to be synonymous with one another... :doh:

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's laughable that an established company like Airfix who has dodged the bankruptcy bullet (how many times?) should be producing kits of this quality and yet want to stay in business.

In the interests of accuracy - which I think we all agree is important - it was twice (Airfix Industries and Humbrol) and in both cases it was the parent companies of Airfix that went in receivership, the kit side of the business remained a profitable and viable business.

Arthur Ward's new book goes into more details.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just back from my local model shop - four new Airfix kits hit the shelf (Spitfire XIX, Bf 109G, Red Arrows Hawk, Hawk 128), the first to sell out was the 109, followed by the Spitfire and they have just a few of each Hawk left looks like Airfix may not have satisfied the cognoscenti with the 109, but the customers like it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...