Jennings Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Oh. My. God. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
randypandy831 Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Inform me....whats the problem? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Snowbird3a Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Inform me....whats the problem? Go over to Hyperscale's Plane Talking for today. Tony Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted June 26, 2013 Author Share Posted June 26, 2013 It's more like one of those "what's not the problem" kind of things. What a waste. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Captoveur Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 I'm no rivet counter. But that thing looks off. The fuselage looks a little fat, that's just based off my memory of what an F-80 should look like. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
randypandy831 Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 so, what else is new? I guess you had high hopes for this kit? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LanceB Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 (edited) Inform me....whats the problem? I have looked in the box of their F-80A kit, and just looking at the sprues (didn't even need to bring pictures or drawings to the fight) told me: Intakes shaped very wrong Cockpit opening shaped wrong (sides should be straight, but they follow the outline of the canopy and are curved) and placed wrong (opening extends too far aft while at the same time the windscreen appears to be in the correct position for a B or C model, wrong for an A). Canopy and windscreen were wrapped in a protective sheet so I could not check those out, however since the cockpit opening is so far off the canopy must be as well unless it doesn't cover the hole Kit contains ejection seat, which was not fitted to As, no option for bucket seat with armor plate. Also contained ejection seat looks nothing like an F-80 ejection seat. The headrest reminds me of a MB Mk.16 for the F-35 - massive. Might need that if there was a parachute in there, but there wasn't - pilot wore his chute on his back, just like in all the other early seats. Aft fuselage contours wrong, HB made the tail section close to a straight cone, not an ogive cone like the real thing Includes engine like the Monogram kit, without the large grooves in the sides Monogram added for clearance when sliding the tail onto the locking tabs (which is good), however the combustion chambers are positively anemic. Engine looks terrible unless you don't know what an F-80 engine looks like - even with the grooves and funky necked-down exhaust the Monogram engine looks better. Two styles of wingtip drop tank included, the "pre Misawa" tubular tanks as in the Monogram kit (I say "pre Misawa" as I mean the tank style which was cut apart and then rejoined with a new section to make the Misawa tanks) and a "P-38" style (but fatter) style which I have seen pics of but which I think was a Korean War or post-war option, in any event it was rare. See pic above of the RF-80 kit. This is not the F-80-specific teardrop tank that has a fairing to blend it into the wingtip, it is larger than that, was unfaired and just hung off the wingtip rack. While both styles are correct (barring shape or size issues) for an F-80, neither is correct for F-80As in general and certainly not for the decal schemes provided. Even the box art shows the original faired F-80 tank, but they are not included in the kit. Decals looked pretty, but with so much wrong with some very obvious errors of the kit itself I would not assume Hobby Boss got the marking details correct either. TL;DR version: buy Monogram. Perhaps more work, but it will look like an F-80. I have not found it to be a difficult kit - ditch the engine, glue the fore-aft fuselage halves together first with some reinforcing on the inside while taking care to get a smooth join, then glue the complete fuselage halves together, and one area that seems to give people so much trouble is solved. Replace tailpipe with a length of brass tube. I have found the wings are best done (or "better done" at least) by gluing the upper wing halves to the completed fuselage first (watch dihedral!), then when dry glue the lower wing piece to one upper wing while checking alignment. Then once that is dry glue the lower wing to the opposite upper wing, starting at the tip and moving in. Glue the seams on the fuselage belly last. I also recommend adding some thin sheet to the inside of the leading edge of the tail section on the belly, to give something to support the aft belly section of the lower wing piece (and strengthen what would otherwise be a thin butt join). Spreader bars from sprue to push the fuselage slightly apart at the wing roots may also help, depending on the particular kit - I've built several over the years, some needed spreaders, some didn't. Test fit, test fit, and test fit again! A minor pain and it will slow assembly, but doing so also means you really won't need very much putty at all and will spend less time sanding. Edited June 26, 2013 by LanceB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
randypandy831 Posted June 27, 2013 Share Posted June 27, 2013 Yea, the tail is way off and the fuselage is short as well. The width of the wings were off to I think. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gene K Posted June 27, 2013 Share Posted June 27, 2013 I have looked in the box of their F-80A kit, Excellent, excellent post! Thanks. Appreciate the Monogram building summary as well. Gene K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gene K Posted June 27, 2013 Share Posted June 27, 2013 (edited) It's more like one of those "what's not the problem" kind of things. What a waste. Very useful assessment . Thanks. Gene K Edited June 27, 2013 by Gene K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dehowie Posted June 27, 2013 Share Posted June 27, 2013 (edited) http://s362974870.onlinehome.us/forums/air/index.php?showtopic=265634 Intake leading edges are out out but is it just me or do i smell a lynch mob forming. Doesnt look that bad against the FAOW plans maybe we need a lynch mob to head to Japan to round up an string up some plan drawers? The tail is off..the wings are off..how about someone start showing something other than opinion as we all know about opinions and what they are worth.. Oh sorry common sense...quick round up the pitchforks and petrol quickly..while your at it grab the Revell designers to of the 219,Halifax,He-111,B-17 to.. Oh dont forget the Tamiya guys remember the Meter wings or maybe the battle damage patches on the F-4's and those burner cans! Leave no stone unturned in our quest for vengeance against these traitorous kit designers.. Edited June 27, 2013 by dehowie Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LanceB Posted June 27, 2013 Share Posted June 27, 2013 Doesnt look that bad against the FAOW plans Are we looking at the same pics from GeneK? If that is your definition of "doesn't look that bad" (I barely see a single point where the plastic is matching those drawings) then I would hate to see your definition of "bad". Are your glasses out of date or were you looking at the images on a 2 inch cell phone display? The tail is off..the wings are off..how about someone start showing something other than opinion as we all know about opinions and what they are worth.. See above. Oh sorry common sense...quick round up the pitchforks and petrol quickly.. Hey, if you want to pay $40 for a kit that very clearly does not match plans nor photos of the real thing, and you're happy with that, more power to you. That's your opinion and "we all know about opinions and what they are worth.." In the meantime the grownups are discussing whether this kit is an acceptable replica of an F-80 or not (it isn't) and why. If such discussions cause you mental or emotional distress such that your Tourette's starts acting up, may I request you to stay outside the room? Thanks in advance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ben Brown Posted June 27, 2013 Share Posted June 27, 2013 As I posted over on Hyperscale, Fox 3 Studios ( gmasher(AT)netzero(DOT)net ) makes a great P-80A-1/-5 conversion, plus decals and other assorted goodies, for the Monogram kit. He has an RF-80 conversion, too. Follow LanceB's construction notes and the Monogram kit turns out very nice. Definitely with a lot less effort and $$$ than it will take to fix most of the HB kit's ills. Ben (no affiliation with Fox 3, I just like Gerry's products) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gene K Posted June 27, 2013 Share Posted June 27, 2013 Classic. Gene K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lodewijk Posted June 27, 2013 Share Posted June 27, 2013 Is there any Trumpyboss kit where the errors are minimal? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gb_madcat_sl Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 Is there any Trumpyboss kit where the errors are minimal? 1/32 Super Hornet? Not too many gripes with that kit except for the price and weapons. Mark Quote Link to post Share on other sites
deadmeat Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 I'm not a shape Nazi or rivet counter but....that's just flat out wrong looking. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LanceB Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 Is there any Trumpyboss kit where the errors are minimal? The Hobby Boss Fw190D seems to have been well received, as was their Ta152C aside from the radiator issue, and you know how fussy the Luftwaffe fans can be. Trumpeter's 1/32 Swordfish comes to mind as a very well-thought-of kit by everyone except perhaps Tamiya (I think you can guess why...), as were their 1/48 F9Fs and the Hobby Boss 1/72 scaledowns (aside from the canopy, and there are vac replacements available IIRC). Same with the Trumpeter 1/48/Hobby Boss 1/72 Hawker Seahawk. Personally the Hobby Boss 1/72 SH-60/MH-60 look pretty good to me aside from the price - they are expensive. And the Hobby Boss 1/72 "easy kit" F4U-4 is regarded as having a very accurate shape, it is just the cockpit, gear and engine details that are lacking. They can get things right, and I think they both seem to get credit when they do. But they both get a lot of kits wrong. Sometimes it is "little" things like the rivets on their Bearcats, sometimes it is a bigger issue like the spine on the Trumpeter RA-5C kits, and sometimes it is a really sub-par effort like this F-80. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
deadmeat Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 This effort reminds me of the voices of the Muppets after Jim Henson died. Yeah...they sound OK I guess, but you just KNOW something isn't right. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 Is there any Trumpyboss kit where the errors are minimal? The 1/32 Bearcats are OK, other than the weapons, as are the 1/32 and 1/48 Wildcats (other than the 1/48 FM-2 and the original issue, if any are still floating around out there, of the 1/32 F4F-4 - before they retooled just about everything). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lodewijk Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 I beg to differ on the Bearcats. Rivets everywhere, the main landing gear are way too short, the engine exhaust are completely wrong for the -1 and probably for the -2 too, the cowl is wrongly shaped, and the NAS band in the -1 kit is yellow when it should be bright red. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 Yak-38 is seemingly a good kit, although the intakes are wrong for Yak-38M. And fuselage is wrong for Yak-38U. Then again, they didnt have anything to compete against... :) T-50 is arguably better than Zvezda. I am not really interested in F-80, but just taking a quick google search in it is painfully obvious how wrong the HB kit is. :D Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 I beg to differ on the Bearcats. Rivets everywhere, the main landing gear are way too short, the engine exhaust are completely wrong for the -1 and probably for the -2 too, the cowl is wrongly shaped, and the NAS band in the -1 kit is yellow when it should be bright red. You're welcome to disagree. The rivets don't bother me as to my eyes they aren't all that heavy and will be toned down under the paint; I haven't got the gear installed on mine yet but the images I've seen of completed builds that used the kit gear seem to look like the pictures of the real deal in the relationship between the wing, doors, and wheels, as well as the sit on the deck; the exhausts are easy enough to fix; I don't see the alleged shape problem in the cowl so it obviously doesn't bother me; and the decals, while not perfect, are usable - most would paint a band on the fuselage anyway and I'm not using either of those schemes so it's moot - but the reserve band should not be bright red, it should be orange anyway. I didn't say it was perfect, I said it was OK. There's no such thing as a perfect kit and there likely never will be. 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.