Jump to content

New Eduard 1/48 Gustav. What's the assessment ?


Recommended Posts

We have a new Gustav hitting the shelves rigth now, and it looks wonderful.

However, rivet counters like me are still waiting for an in-deep review of this kit. In other words - accuracy wise - what is the final word on this new quarter scale Gustav?

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have a new Gustav hitting the shelves rigth now, and it looks wonderful.

However, rivet counters like me are still waiting for an in-deep review of this kit. In other words - accuracy wise - what is the final word on this new quarter scale Gustav?

It's been criticized a bit here and elsewhere for having some errors here & there, but overall looks to be a very nice kit (depending on how picky you are). The front of the lower engine cowl has a little too much bulge to it according to some, and the little bumps in the wing root fairing shouldn't be there for most G-6's. The fuselage spine has a bit of a hump to it that looks a little off, and the exhausts look to large (thick). Haven't decided if I'm going to buy one yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have a new Gustav hitting the shelves rigth now, and it looks wonderful.

However, rivet counters like me are still waiting for an in-deep review of this kit. In other words - accuracy wise - what is the final word on this new quarter scale Gustav?

It looks like it's going to be another wonderful kit from Eduard. It looks like a 109 to me which is all that matters.

That being said, something about your comment above seems a little odd to me....you mention you're waiting for an in-depth review to buy it because you're a "rivet counter." (Your words) And that's something that troubles me about the state of the hobby. If you yourself can't evaluate the accuracy of a kit without the input of the supposed "experts," why would that stop you from buying it? I just don't understand why people are so willing to let minor shape issues and such totally put them off of a kit because others have issue with them. If it's not something you would have known was amiss without the "help" of forum rivet counters...why would it be a problem now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like it's going to be another wonderful kit from Eduard. It looks like a 109 to me which is all that matters.

That being said, something about your comment above seems a little odd to me....you mention you're waiting for an in-depth review to buy it because you're a "rivet counter." (Your words) And that's something that troubles me about the state of the hobby. If you yourself can't evaluate the accuracy of a kit without the input of the supposed "experts," why would that stop you from buying it? I just don't understand why people are so willing to let minor shape issues and such totally put them off of a kit because others have issue with them. If it's not something you would have known was amiss without the "help" of forum rivet counters...why would it be a problem now?

I see no issue with this. I consider myself to be a "moderate" rivet counter but at the same time, I don't have the time or depth of knowledge to do an in-depth comparison of each kit part to the real thing.

There are many folks out there that do an outstanding job preparing detailed reviews (not the fluff pieces you see here or on sites like Cybermodeler) and I find these reviews to be extremely helpful in identifying any short-comings of a particular kit and assisting me with my decision to purchase or pass on a model.

I'm curious why you take issue with modelers that want the highest level of accuracy vrs those that are fine with something less? For each project they undertake, do you expect the former to spend hundreds of dollars on references and hours of time meticulously researching the original subject and then the same amount of time researching the kit for potential shortcomings? If someone chooses to self-perform all this, great. In my case, I have a comfort level with certain reviewers. I will depend on their reviews to provide me with all the info I need to make an informed purchase decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see no issue with this. I consider myself to be a "moderate" rivet counter but at the same time, I don't have the time or depth of knowledge to do an in-depth comparison of each kit part to the real thing.

There are many folks out there that do an outstanding job preparing detailed reviews (not the fluff pieces you see here or on sites like Cybermodeler) and I find these reviews to be extremely helpful in identifying any short-comings of a particular kit and assisting me with my decision to purchase or pass on a model.

I'm curious why you take issue with modelers that want the highest level of accuracy vrs those that are fine with something less? For each project they undertake, do you expect the former to spend hundreds of dollars on references and hours of time meticulously researching the original subject and then the same amount of time researching the kit for potential shortcomings? If someone chooses to self-perform all this, great. In my case, I have a comfort level with certain reviewers. I will depend on their reviews to provide me with all the info I need to make an informed purchase decision.

+ 1 for me although I had the occasion to have a close look at the box content.

For me it has been a definitive NO THANKS.

But I must admit that for those who pay more attention to the artistic aspect of modelling , well this kit is nice. I am more on the historical and shape accuracy side.

This aspect always guides me in the buy or not of a kit ( at least for those like Bf 109 or Spitfire, and believe me this 109 is a very huge step backwards when compared to the fidelity of the Spitfire )

Madcop :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see no issue with this. I consider myself to be a "moderate" rivet counter but at the same time, I don't have the time or depth of knowledge to do an in-depth comparison of each kit part to the real thing.

There are many folks out there that do an outstanding job preparing detailed reviews (not the fluff pieces you see here or on sites like Cybermodeler) and I find these reviews to be extremely helpful in identifying any short-comings of a particular kit and assisting me with my decision to purchase or pass on a model.

I'm curious why you take issue with modelers that want the highest level of accuracy vrs those that are fine with something less? For each project they undertake, do you expect the former to spend hundreds of dollars on references and hours of time meticulously researching the original subject and then the same amount of time researching the kit for potential shortcomings? If someone chooses to self-perform all this, great. In my case, I have a comfort level with certain reviewers. I will depend on their reviews to provide me with all the info I need to make an informed purchase decision.

Me too. Also it's not easy to fully assess a kit from a few online pictures and I'm not going to buy one and then find out I don't like it, I would rather read a good review that details any errors and then I can decide if they bother me or not and it I want to fix them or not or just pass on the kit.

It will be nice to actually see a finished 109 with some paint on!

Edited by Tbolt
Link to post
Share on other sites

I see no issue with this. I consider myself to be a "moderate" rivet counter but at the same time, I don't have the time or depth of knowledge to do an in-depth comparison of each kit part to the real thing.

There are many folks out there that do an outstanding job preparing detailed reviews (not the fluff pieces you see here or on sites like Cybermodeler) and I find these reviews to be extremely helpful in identifying any short-comings of a particular kit and assisting me with my decision to purchase or pass on a model.

I'm curious why you take issue with modelers that want the highest level of accuracy vrs those that are fine with something less? For each project they undertake, do you expect the former to spend hundreds of dollars on references and hours of time meticulously researching the original subject and then the same amount of time researching the kit for potential shortcomings? If someone chooses to self-perform all this, great. In my case, I have a comfort level with certain reviewers. I will depend on their reviews to provide me with all the info I need to make an informed purchase decision.

No. You misunderstand. I don't take any issue with any of that. If you feel you need a kit to be as accurate as possible that's great. I don't have anything against anyone and how they approach their hobby. It's your time, your money, have fun. I just think it's a curious thing when someone wouldn't know that a panel line was in the wrong place, or a bulge misshapen, etc if it weren't for the forum "experts."

The point is...if we were in a void...no internet...no forums...no magazines...no reviews...would as many modelers stress about minutiae the way they do? No. I don't think so. I think people would build more and be generally happier.

My whole point is that it seems like a lot of people (and I'm not saying you specifically) put a lot of weight into accuracy simply because internet "experts" say they have too. I've seen hundreds...LITERALLY HUNDREDS of incidents on forums over the years where a builder was basically ridiculed for accepting a kits accuracy issues and building it as is. Some of these "rivet counters" have zero tact.

They go into a build and basically say "yeah...everyone knows that machine gun bulge on that kit is wrong...so and so makes a resin replacement for next time you build it." Or an example from a recent build of mine: I was setting out to build the Hasegawa FW 190...it has issues with shape at the gun covers...so in my thread someone pops in "you're going to need to fix..." NEED? NEED! NEED?!?!?! Um, no. I should be perfectly acceptable for me to build it as is...why does me deciding to live with that make my build worthless to that individual? Even when someone is as nice as possible about pointing out a problem with a kit...don't you think it could become deflating to someone who doesn't want to fix every nuance, or can't afford to supplement every build with resin...I'm convinced it runs a lot of people away from forums, or makes them scared to share work.

I think that's a sad thing, really. I can't make an assessment of whether or not you or anyone else wants accuracy because you want accuracy, or because the forum trend seems to lean heavily toward accuracy. Peer pressure basically.

Anyway, I was just using your comments to discuss a trend in the hobby. I wasn't attacking you specifically. Hopefully you understand that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Me too. Also it's not easy to fully assess a kit from a few online pictures and I'm not going to buy one and then find out I don't like it, I would rather read a good review that details any errors and then I can decide if they bother me or not and it I want to fix them or not or just pass on the kit.

It will be nice to actually see a finished 109 with some paint on!

Well said & I'm the same way. My modeling dollars are limited and the more I can learn about a new kit, the better. So far, I haven't seen anything on Eduards' 109 that would keep me from buying it, except for the oversized exhausts, and that can be handled with AM. But thanks to this forum and others, I know about it BEFORE I spend the money, and for me that makes all the difference.

BW

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. You misunderstand. I don't take any issue with any of that. If you feel you need a kit to be as accurate as possible that's great. I don't have anything against anyone and how they approach their hobby. It's your time, your money, have fun. I just think it's a curious thing when someone wouldn't know that a panel line was in the wrong place, or a bulge misshapen, etc if it weren't for the forum "experts."

The point is...if we were in a void...no internet...no forums...no magazines...no reviews...would as many modelers stress about minutiae the way they do? No. I don't think so. I think people would build more and be generally happier.

My whole point is that it seems like a lot of people (and I'm not saying you specifically) put a lot of weight into accuracy simply because internet "experts" say they have too. I've seen hundreds...LITERALLY HUNDREDS of incidents on forums over the years where a builder was basically ridiculed for accepting a kits accuracy issues and building it as is. Some of these "rivet counters" have zero tact.

They go into a build and basically say "yeah...everyone knows that machine gun bulge on that kit is wrong...so and so makes a resin replacement for next time you build it." Or an example from a recent build of mine: I was setting out to build the Hasegawa FW 190...it has issues with shape at the gun covers...so in my thread someone pops in "you're going to need to fix..." NEED? NEED! NEED?!?!?! Um, no. I should be perfectly acceptable for me to build it as is...why does me deciding to live with that make my build worthless to that individual? Even when someone is as nice as possible about pointing out a problem with a kit...don't you think it could become deflating to someone who doesn't want to fix every nuance, or can't afford to supplement every build with resin...I'm convinced it runs a lot of people away from forums, or makes them scared to share work.

I think that's a sad thing, really. I can't make an assessment of whether or not you or anyone else wants accuracy because you want accuracy, or because the forum trend seems to lean heavily toward accuracy. Peer pressure basically.

Anyway, I was just using your comments to discuss a trend in the hobby. I wasn't attacking you specifically. Hopefully you understand that.

Well they way things are now has it's pluses as well - it does help people to build more accurate models without having to have a lot of research info and spend and long time sorting out what is right or wrong. Having all this info from other people is nice, they put it out there and you can then decide what you want to fix and it can be quite helpful when there are several kit to choose from for your subject.

Of course there is always going to be those people that get frustrated by the small things and can't see how other people can live with them but I don't let them affect how I build my models - my next model will be Hasegawa's 1/48th scale Spitfire Mk.IX and yes I will NOT be correcting the fuselage size problem :o

Edited by Tbolt
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well they way things are now has it's pluses as well - it does help people to build more accurate models without having to have a lot of research info and spend and long time sorting out what is right or wrong. Having all this info from other people is nice, they put it out there and you can then decide what you want to fix and it can be quite helpful when there are several kit to choose from for your subject.

Of course there is always going to be those people that get frustrated by the small things and can't see how other people can live with them but I don't let them affect how I build my models - my next model will be Hasegawa's 1/48th scale Spitfire Mk.IX and yes I will NOT be correcting the fuselage size problem :o/>

But...but...that 2mm... :D

No..I agree. I'd much rather have things the way they are now. Fortunately, I allow myself to build how I want and deal with (or not) what issues I want to and not let others attitudes effect me. I just think that sometimes newbies come into a forum and they've decided to build a new kit that everyone's talking about...they see all the comments about accuracy...and then feel they have to conform. For the one's who would like to conform and be as accurate as possible it's great...but I can see where it could become overwhelming to some.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an issue with a company that essentially claims their stuff is without flaw, then disrespects and belittles people who prove otherwise.

Never mind...thought better of it.

Edited by jinmmydel
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an issue with a company that essentially claims their stuff is without flaw, then disrespects and belittles people who prove otherwise.

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?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here it goes again. . . "looks like a ... to me" . . . "is anything better available?"

I am a proud rivet counter, and I do not care if this kit is "better" or "worst" of any other 1/48 Gustav on the market.

What is important for me is the scale accuracy of this kit.

However, I would like to thank you all dearly. It was very helpful.

Cheers,

Edited by galfa
Link to post
Share on other sites

IS there a 1/48 Bf109G-6 kit out there today that is actually better overall than the Eduard kit appears to be?

If you are asking about accuracy, to me it looks better than the competition. Note that I don't have the kit, am going by the pictures posted. Zvezda might beat it if (when?) they get around to making a G-6.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here it goes again. . . "looks like a ... to me" . . . "is anything better available?"

I am a proud rivet counter, and I do not care if this kit is "better" or "worst" of any other 1/48 Gustav on the market.

What is important for me is the scale accuracy of this kit.

However, I would like to thank you all dearly. It was very helpful.

Cheers,

My humble opinion (based on the info available at this time) is that the kit has inaccuracies and would require significant work to address the nose / spine and less significant work to address the wing roots. If judged from a true rivet counter perspective, it is a non-starter out of the box.

Solely from a technical standpoint, the quality of the plastic is outstanding (although from a true scale perspective, I'm not sure if they should have added those thousands of rivets). IMO, Eduard has pushed the state of the art with regard to fine details but dropped the ball with regard to overall accuracy.

As a counterpoint to the above, as others have noted, it does "look like a Bf-109".

Edited by 11bee
Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear the wingroot issue being repeated all the time, but what is it about?

I mean, i know about the bumb, but is there an issue with the wingroot itself?

Edited by Berkut
Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear the wingroot issue being repeated all the time, but what is it about?

I mean, i know about the bumb, but is there an issue with the wingroot itself?

As I understand it, the wing root fairing on the kit is an earlier type (F's & early G's) and is smaller and has a deeper curve requiring the bump to clear the wing attachment bolt. The 'correct' one for most G-6's would have a shallower curve and almost no protrusion/hump to clear the bolt. I think the later fairing came a bit more up on the side of the fuselage, but don't know if you would notice that in 48th scale. Hope this helps.

BW

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people are perfectly happy with less than "perfectly accurate" kits. I don't know why that has to be so hard to understand. It's very rarely I see the "proud rivet counters" acknowledge that their expectations don't unequivocally HAVE to be accepted by everyone else. They get testy when someone suggests that a kit like this one is acceptable in their eyes...there is never any leeway...it's their way or the highway. I don't understand why people just can't accept that people approach the hobby from different perspectives.

The funny thing for me is that the really bad offenders on other forums...strangely...are the one you never see builds from...likely because they obsessively worry about such trivial minutiae that they can't even get a kit off the bench...so in fact, modeling isn't their hobby....ruining it for laymen seems to be what they enjoy most.

:soapbox:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people are perfectly happy with less than "perfectly accurate" kits. I don't know why that has to be so hard to understand. It's very rarely I see the "proud rivet counters" acknowledge that their expectations don't unequivocally HAVE to be accepted by everyone else. They get testy when someone suggests that a kit like this one is acceptable in their eyes...there is never any leeway...it's their way or the highway. I don't understand why people just can't accept that people approach the hobby from different perspectives.

The funny thing for me is that the really bad offenders on other forums...strangely...are the one you never see builds from...likely because they obsessively worry about such trivial minutiae that they can't even get a kit off the bench...so in fact, modeling isn't their hobby....ruining it for laymen seems to be what they enjoy most.

:soapbox:/>

You are 100% correct. I've already stated where my spot on the spectrum lies but I've never had any concerns with others who build something that might be a bit off from the real deal.

Who cares? This is a hobby not a quest for absolute perfection. At the end of the build, if you are happy with the final product then you built a good model.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of people assume their position (on any given subject) is the only "correct" one. And anyone who doesn't agree with it is, by definition, wrong.

Just because someone has a different outlook on something does NOT make them wrong and you right, nor vice-versa. It's just different.

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...