Laurent Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 (edited) Thanks for the pics Saul ! The area were the fuselage is is flatter on Kinetic. This suggests that the wings are set too low on the fuselage. Kinetic seem to have invented panels in the middle of the wing while AMK didn't represent any panels at all on the leading edge. The sharper panel lines of the AMK will make applying a wash on a multicolored model (5-6 coats of paint) easier. Edited July 5, 2013 by Laurent Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raymond Chung Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 Thanks for the pics Saul ! The area were the fuselage is is flatter on Kinetic. This suggests that the wings are set too low on the fuselage. Kinetic seem to have invented panels in the middle of the wing while AMK didn't represent any panels at all on the leading edge. The sharper panel lines of the AMK will make applying a wash on a multicolored model (5-6 coats of paint) easier. Laurent here is the panel, we don't "invent" it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 (edited) here is the panel, we don't "invent" it. Raymond, could you please show reference showing that the panels in the red boxes exist ? Uploaded with ImageShack.us Are they C7 specific ? I don't see them here. Edited July 5, 2013 by Laurent Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raymond Chung Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 Raymond, could you please show reference showing that the panels in the red boxes exist ? Uploaded with ImageShack.us Are they C7 specific ? I don't see them here. Probably vehicle specified. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Williams Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 The panels in the red boxes are not shown on wing photos the Isradecal book either. Seems like a simple fix to just fill the panels. Much easier than have to scribe in missing panels. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 Sure. A few drops of surfacer and they'll be gone (if they're supposed to go). Scribing the leading edge panel lines on the AMK will indeed less easy to cope with. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
polybebber Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 The panels in the red boxes are not shown on wing photos the Isradecal book either. Seems like a simple fix to just fill the panels. Much easier than have to scribe in missing panels. And to deal with the ugly sinkmarks on the wings, the forward fuselage and the pylons on the AMK kit - at least on my kit. Lothar Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dmanton300 Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 And to deal with the ugly sinkmarks on the wings, the forward fuselage and the pylons on the AMK kit - at least on my kit. Lothar If they're in the same places as mine, mine will require nothing more than one application of Mr Surfacer 500 or, more likely, will be pretty much invisible under a matt finish. Are yours heavier? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Williams Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 We've gone from no decent 1/48 Kfir kits (the old ESCI kit doesn't count) to having two new kits out at the same time. Both kits sounds like they will make excellent builds. It's great to have the choice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
a4s4eva Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 What about the Canopy? Anyone have thoughts on which is better? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gregair Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 What about the Canopy? Anyone have thoughts on which is better? The canopy profile on the Kinetic Kit definately looks the best to me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dmanton300 Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 The Kinetic canopy and windscreen is better than than AMK's, both in shape and execution. It's the one area I clearly prefer in Kinetic's kit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sharkmouth Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 (edited) Well, I do not know which one is better as I would much prefer to compare to images of the real thing. So, I do appreciate everyone's input (including Raymond Chung). As is the case many times, the best would be a kit bash using parts form each kit but this is hard work. As for where to get the kit, Lucky Model has both at the same price. I have no idea about a US distributor. Not yet. I like the marking scheme with the Syrian MiG-21 kill. I am steadfast in hoping for Cheetahs as I like the wild sharkmouth schemes (none worn by a Kfir or F-21 that I know of - PLEASE prove me wrong). Regards, Edited November 3, 2015 by sharkmouth Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 I've picked up the two kits from my post office yesterday. There's an issue with my AMK kit: the instructions are missing. I sent a mail to salesATamkhobbyDOTcom and Wesley promptly replied that he'll send the instructions. I'll try to build to build the kits in parallel like Aigore is doing. Kinetic is likely to be an Israeli C7 while the AMK should be a Sri-Lankan C7. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JTF3 Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 I am building it was we speak. I give the detail and parts layout 9.5 out of 10. 9.9 out of 10 on the weapons. building is another thing though. its not fitting perfect. it has that delta wing/body gap that 99% of all delta wing models have. I can get pics as I go if anyone is interested. best thing about the kit is YES! there is little panels to cover and aerials to take off that would be for the C10 version! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.