Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
Sign in to follow this  
nmRoberto

Eduard kits?

Recommended Posts

I have Eduard's new 1/48 scale Spitfire right in front of me. Detail is amazing, with nothing overdone or heavy handed. Dry fitting some seems pretty good. Looking forward to building the kit.

Joel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have Eduard's new 1/48 scale Spitfire right in front of me. Detail is amazing, with nothing overdone or heavy handed. Dry fitting some seems pretty good. Looking forward to building the kit.

Joel

I had to laugh because I fiddled around putting in a lot of the little details in the cockpit area which you cant see when you close it up. But.......I know they're there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's isn't the viewing room in a Spitfire compared to a lot of the American fighters. Then again, if you look at my signature pictures, all those aircraft with the exception of the Skyraider, are detailed to the best of my ability. Plenty of glass to see ones efforts.

Joel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just about done with the Eduard's Spitfire IXc cockpit. If it's not the best 1/48 scale WW11 cockpit, it's really close to it. It's that good. Parts fit is absolutely perfect.

Joel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've built several Eduard WW1 aircraft in 1/72. Nice kits with very fine detail, even the standard "weekend" kits (without PE) have some of the most detailed cockpits I've seen even in larger scales.

Their WWII kits are also not that great, their FW-190As being by far the worst out there in accuracy, with 20% too wide windscreens like the Tamiyas...

I do believe this is the first time I've seen "like Tamiya" used in a negative way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's Gaston Marty for you. Honestly I would ignore him.

Edited by nerdling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their recent Spitfire Mk IXs are awesome and nearly flawless, minus 0.5 mm too narrow cockpits and the slightly off wheel well shape.

I used to think their I-16s were great, but then found out their cockpit is 2 mm too far forward or back (can't remember which)... Pretty bad on such a short length...

Their WWII kits are also not that great, their FW-190As being by far the worst out there in accuracy, with 20% too wide windscreens like the Tamiyas... The 190A cowls are cylindrical like the current new-built Fluegwerke 1:1 kits, something no other 190 kit ever got wrong... Their Me-108s, which I used to think were good, are also awful, with no canopy cross-section bulge, awful cowling cheek bulges, and a completely wrong fin chord...

Their 1/48th Hellcat has a plan view fuselage taper from the engine firewall back, instead of the taper starting from behind the main trailing edge, as it should... No paralell lines in the kit fuselage... This was fixed on their 1/72 scale kit...

Their Me-110Gs were fair kits, much superior to the Revell/Pro-modeller, but difficult to assemble. Rear fuselage cross-section was "rounded-corner squarish" in reality, and Eduard went for a true oval... I find that not prohibitively poor depending on how you look at it... They are poor-fitting at the nacelles and fiddly.

Their Mig-21s are excellent, and are among the "new" Eduard's superior quality we can now expect.

Robertson

I've never read so much negativity about Eduard. Wow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's Gaston. Another word for "ignore".

Why is it whenever I hear that name I always think of this

Edited by nerdling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've currently got a Eduard Spitfire IXc Early version build blog going. Getting ready for primer in a few days. Like I said, this kit is amazing. Great detail, nothing heavy handed. Who cares if it is in deed .5mm off in the cockpit. I'm not a rivet counter.

Joel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity, does Robertson ever post any of his builds, or doesn't he build any models since none appear to meet his standards.

Joel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity, does Robertson ever post any of his builds, or doesn't he build any models since none appear to meet his standards.

Joel

nope, hes never had a build thread or shown pics of his builds or at least I've never seen them. most I've seen is comparison photo's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only pics of Gaston/Robertson's "builds" I've ever seen were some hacked-and-spliced parts slathered in putty to supposedly "correct" all the imaginary egregious shape errors.

SN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First I have to say that I have not build an Eduard kit yet (but some are already in my stash), what I know from fellow modellers and what I see when I examine the kits: You don't go wrong taking the MIG 21, their Spitfires (early and late version, mk. IX) and the Me 109 (so far in 1/48 all...that's the scale i' m into).

Don't forget when they made the Mirage III it was the best Mirage III that time!! Only a CopyBoss copy besides, but not that good as Eduard. Ofc it has some tricky areas to manage...but hey, you are a modeller!? ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just have to love rivet counters. I'm really curious if all those errors are from his measurements, or just taking the word of other rivet counters.

He should have been around in the early 70s when the hobby became mainstream again. Raised panel lines, little to no detail especially in the cockpits. And we didn't care. We were thrilled just to have new releases. No one measured them, because no one cared. We jumped all over every new release and every new decal sheet from Microscale. Times sure have changed.

Joel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FW-190 windshield was 480 mm by 245 mm, this from a relic measured in Hungary by Peter Kormos (matches Hasegawa exactly). Both Eduard and Tamiya got the width wrong by 20% or 50 mm: Their kits would have you believe the width is at 300 mm or more, which is pretty bad for a simple flat rectangle that determines the whole canopy shape... Airfix made a similar error for their Spitfire MK XII's windscreen, but this time by getting the angled sides too wide, which I failed to correct in my kit, one of the putty convered ones I supposedly never built... A flat rectangle is kind of more obvious to spot than a more complicated issue...:

P9275601_zpsd3803304.jpg

Eduard kits were rarely accurate until very recently. I had forgotten their P-39 and its awful blimp-like wing leading edges... Eduard's more recent kits have nothing in common with their past efforts (outside maybe the 110s), not that most kit apologists here would have any ability to notice... You can get their Spitfire Mk IX and Mig-21 in confidence.

Robertson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eduard's 1/48 BF-109 it's a great kit, the BF-110 is good, just a little hard to build. Mig-21 and Spit's are like the 109 very good kits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FW-190 windshield was 480 mm by 245 mm, this from a relic measured in Hungary by Peter Kormos (matches Hasegawa exactly). Both Eduard and Tamiya got the width wrong by 20% or 50 mm: Their kits would have you believe the width is at 300 mm or more, which is pretty bad for a simple flat rectangle that determines the whole canopy shape... Airfix made a similar error for their Spitfire MK XII's windscreen, but this time by getting the angled sides too wide, which I failed to correct in my kit, one of the putty convered ones I supposedly never built... A flat rectangle is kind of more obvious to spot than a more complicated issue...:

P9275601_zpsd3803304.jpg

Eduard kits were rarely accurate until very recently. I had forgotten their P-39 and its awful blimp-like wing leading edges... Eduard's more recent kits have nothing in common with their past efforts (outside maybe the 110s), not that most kit apologists here would have any ability to notice... You can get their Spitfire Mk IX and Mig-21 in confidence.

Robertson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

I think that Eduards kits are nice cheap and you really get a lot for your money ,and when built they do look nice

a little hard to build yes but they arent the only ones mostly built their 190A and 190D and I an am pleased with them.

Cheers

Boris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both Eduard and Tamiya got the width wrong by 20% or 50 mm

Whaoo ! 50 mm, that's 1mm in 1/48 scale. That's really outrageous :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it hilarious that Gaston is recommending the Eduard MiG-21.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can get their Spitfire Mk IX and Mig-21 in confidence.

Are you familiar with the MiG-21 ? With the MiG-21bis in particular ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, I think if Eduard released their Mig-21bis first and only, then the wrong nose would be a much smaller issue, or maybe even went unnoticed. After all there are similar or larger issues with many other kits that went unnoticed. IMO the nose only became a larger problem because people know for certain that there is a small difference, and Eduard has chosen to ignore it.

Whereas a 20% width difference of rectangle windshields is fairly big/easy to notice indeed, even in 1/48, just by looking at the windshield alone, one should be able to tell whether it's a Tamiya or Hasegawa FW190.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Odd how I just measured an Accurate Miniature Fw 190 canopy and it came out to 5.1mm in width. Which if you scaled that up ends up being 240mm wide. So according to your own measurements Gaston that would only be a difference of 5mm and not 50mm.

Share this post


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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...