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

[lritger]

Oh, I know Jennings. Believe me, I know. But they have a habit of keeping everything in-house, as you well know... *shrug*

Lynn

[sharkmouth]

While I can fix a lot of details, I can't shrink the kit... sad since it needs to be displayed next to my other members of the 109 family.

Worse for me, I didn't check the forums to note that the Emil (which I just received) has a similar issue!

Regards and thanks,

[11bee]

Assuming the info we now have is legit, all I can say is wow.... How on earth could anyone make such a basic mistake? I can see missing some more subjective details like the shape of the nose or the wingroot fairing but being off that far on the dimensions? Embarrassing.

Even if Eduard missed some small details because the G-14 they used as a reference was a rebuild with possibly some non-standard fittings (very common on rebuilt Bf-109's but something that is also well known and Eduard should have been aware of) but I highly doubt that the Germans enlarged the basic airframe during the rebuild process.

If the info on the botched dimensions is correct, the only thing this kit is destined for is the garbage can. Unless of course we are going back to the good old days of "box scale" models (scale a kit up or down so it fits into a uniform cardboard box).

[11bee]

Brett Green's review from Hyperscale:

109 Review

As a rule I trust Brett's reviews, he actually builds models but is conscious of accuracy as well and is usually pretty level headed. I think this kit is a definite upgrade over the older Hasegawa kit, however 1/48 is not my scale so mehhhhh....

Can't access HS from work but if I'm not mistaken, Brett missed a few of the major issues with the earlier 1/32nd Revell Bf-109G-6 review (shrunken buele, incorrect spacing of the MG's) so I wouldn't take everything he writes as the gospel. He does good work but isn't perfect.

I wouldn't pass on the kit just due to the scale issue. Keep in mind that even if 1/48th isn't your preferred scale, the kit apparently isn't that scale anyway so it deserves a second look :)

[Leo Etgen]

Hi guys

From reading the Hyperscale thread, I get the impression that the trouble is that the kit appears to be somewhat larger then 1/48 scale but is proportionally accurate. Is this what others come away with? If so, then the main problem would be that any aftermarket used would have to be specifically designed for this particular kit. As an aside, I also have noticed that Eduard has molded three weld seams on the front of the drop tank forward of the carrying strap. The majority of these drop tanks had two weld seams in that area for what I understand

Horrido!

Leo

[ch9862]

If so, then the main problem would be that any aftermarket used would have to be specifically designed for this particular kit.

Assuming one is OK with the model being in a different league scale :).

[HistnScale]

Interesting that this size issue blew up over the weekend just as I finished up an Eduard Fw 190D-11 and set it on the shelf next to several Tamiya D-9s. First reaction, whoa, either the Eduard kit is on steroids or the Tamiya kits have been going to weight watchers. After some measuring this morning, the Eduard Fw 190D kit is overscale also, but just as the 109 seems to be, the overscale is proportional throughout the kit.

So, are we starting a new "Standard Scale" like maybe 1/46th?

Cheers,

Dave

Edited May 12, 2014 by HistnScale

[Jennings]

How on earth could anyone make such a basic mistake?

It's not so much a question of how you could make such a basic mistake to start with. What stupefies me is how you could have a whole team of "experts" looking at and working on a project for several years and allow such a basic mistake to go uncorrected. If a CAD designer were working in complete isolation I could easily understand it (can't see the forest for the trees). I've made just this kind of basic mistake for one reason or another (conflicting data, etc), and if you don't catch it when you first make it, it's often easy for your brain to become accustomed to it and it's "right" even though to another informed observer it's glaringly wrong. That's why you have QC. Clearly Eduard completely dropped the ball on that aspect of things. They're so confident in their perfection they apparently don't feel the need to QC it.

Edited May 12, 2014 by Jennings

[Tbolt]

Interesting that this size issue blew up over the weekend just as I finished up an Eduard Fw 190D-11 and set it on the shelf next to several Tamiya D-9s. First reaction, whoa, either the Eduard kit is on steroids or the Tamiya kits have been going to weight watchers. After some measuring this morning, the Eduard Fw 190D kit is overscale also, but just as the 109 seems to be, the overscale is proportional throughout the kit.

So, are we starting a new "Standard Scale" like maybe 1/46th?

Cheers,

Dave

That is interesting, I've just quickly put the Eduard Fw190D-9 kit up against the drawings in Jerry Crandall's Dora book and the wingspan and length of the fuselage seem to match. I'm not saying the drawings are perfect but I would be surprised if they are that off. Maybe they are wrong and Eduard used them for their kit ;)

Edited May 12, 2014 by Tbolt

[Tbolt]

Double Post

Edited May 12, 2014 by Tbolt

[HistnScale]

That is interesting, I've just put the Eduard Fw190D-9 kit up against the drawings in Jerry Crandall's Dora book and the wingspan and length of the fuselage seem to match. I'm not saying the drawings are perfect but I would be surprised if they are that off. Maybe they are wrong and Eduard used them for their kit ;)/>/>

If you want to "fact check" the set of plans you are working with. The actual wing measurement seems to have been 34' 5.5". The Tamiya kit measured 34' 6" and the Eduard kit 34' 10". I don't have Jerry's book so I can't comment on his set of plans.

Cheers,

Dave

Edited May 12, 2014 by HistnScale

[Jennings]

That is interesting, I've just quickly put the Eduard Fw190D-9 kit up against the drawings in Jerry Crandall's Dora book and the wingspan and length of the fuselage seem to match. I'm not saying the drawings are perfect but I would be surprised if they are that off. Maybe they are wrong and Eduard used them for their kit ;)/>

It makes ZERO difference whether it matches a given set of drawings. The well established dimensions of the Bf109G are not open to debate. If the kit scales out to those dimensions, then it's dimensionally correct. If it doesn't, it isn't. It's just that simple. That doesn't mean the kit is 100% accurate, only that the measured dimensions are accurate to scale. There's a lot more to "accurate" than just length and span, but those are a good test for starters.

[HistnScale]

I would agree with Jennings, the kit is not necessarily inaccurate just because it does not scale out to a given set of dimensions or drawing. The problem from an accuracy and engineering standpoint is knowing what "scale" the kit is being built to. In the case of the Eduard kits, it appears that they are, for the most part accurate, just not manufactured to 1/48th scale.

Cheers,

Dave

[Tbolt]

It makes ZERO difference whether it matches a given set of drawings. The well established dimensions of the Bf109G are not open to debate. If the kit scales out to those dimensions, then it's dimensionally correct. If it doesn't, it isn't. It's just that simple. That doesn't mean the kit is 100% accurate, only that the measured dimensions are accurate to scale. There's a lot more to "accurate" than just length and span, but those are a good test for starters.

Which is why I said I was not saying the drawings are correct and I fully realise that there is more to scale than wingspan and length, I said I just did a quick check of those because Dave said the kit seems to be in proportion.

[Tbolt]

If you want to "fact check" the set of plans you are working with. The actual wing measurement seems to have been 34' 5.5". The Tamiya kit measured 34' 6" and the Eduard kit 34' 10". I don't have Jerry's book so I can't comment on his set of plans.

Cheers,

Dave

So the 190 in 1/48th scale is should have a wingspan of 219mm and the Eduard kit seems to be 221mm, Crandall plans are 220mm. So only 2mm over which is less than 4" when scaled up. Works out at 1/47.56th scale, near enough for me - it's not quite the same as is being said about the 109 kit being 14" big in span.

Edited May 12, 2014 by Tbolt

[Andrea Bolla]

Hallo, just received my Gustav from Eduard;

I am comparing the kit with Zvezda 109F and Fujimi modular kit, tomorrow I will post also some pictures: Eduard wing lenght from wing root to tip 94.3mm, Zvezda 91.11mm, Fujimi 91.22mm; Fujimi and Zvezda are almost interchangeable dimensionally and I really like the possibility to build almost every version from a single box(even at the price of a little tricky join of the front fuselage insert) and I used to collect every box found in swapmeet at a reasonable price.

Rear fuselage seems not so bad compared to the first impressions from the early images but the tail is quite a different shape from Zvezda and Fujimi.

Lower nose cowling is quite strange, too bulged like noted in other posts: it seems more like to a Erla type 110 with a wrong oil radiator.

Pictures will follow as soon as possible...

Edited May 12, 2014 by Andrea Bolla

[ch9862]

After some measuring this morning, the Eduard Fw 190D kit is overscale also, but just as the 109 seems to be, the overscale is proportional throughout the kit.

I think Tamiya Ds are malnourished (in addition to being misshapen). Wings are too narrow, fuselage too short and bent. Eduard wings are too wide, but the fuselage is very good. To be clear: I agree that Eduard 190D has issues, but dimensions are very good in my view. Didn't think I'd be defending Eduard 190D, but Tamiya D is just about the worst in 48th where shape is concerned.

My 2 cents, don't want to discourage anyone from building Tamyia kits :).

[nmRoberto]

I won't get involved in the accuracy debate, but it seems to me that this kit is a trifle pricey for a 48th scale kit.

[Robertson]

Hallo, just received my Gustav from Eduard;

I am comparing the kit with Zvezda 109F and Fujimi modular kit, tomorrow I will post also some pictures: Eduard wing lenght from wing root to tip 94.3mm, Zvezda 91.11mm, Fujimi 91.22mm; Fujimi and Zvezda are almost interchangeable dimensionally and I really like the possibility to build almost every version from a single box(even at the price of a little tricky join of the front fuselage insert) and I used to collect every box found in swapmeet at a reasonable price.

Rear fuselage seems not so bad compared to the first impressions from the early images but the tail is quite a different shape from Zvezda and Fujimi.

Lower nose cowling is quite strange, too bulged like noted in other posts: it seems more like to a Erla type 110 with a wrong oil radiator.

Pictures will follow as soon as possible...

So 6 mm total in upper surface appearance, without the fuselage, with 1.4 mm extra within the fuselage itself.

Cockpit opening shoud be 13 mm wide: How wide is it on the Eduard, outside skin to outside skin?

In any case, This kit has now officially fallen off the chart in ridiculousness. Even Tamiya's 1/53 scale Il-2 canopy seems tame in comparison... And with the rudder nearly five inches too long, no, it isn't "Proportional" to 1/46 scale...

This is going to be one of the few 1/48th WWII releases of the year, and this is what we get... Pretty much sums up why I've mostly turned to 1/350 scale ships... Thank God for those...

Robertson

P.S. Oh, and I still can't wait for all those rivet counter quotes putting down people's models...

[scvrobeson]

This is going to be one of the few 1/48th WWII releases of the year, and this is what we get... Pretty much sums up why I've mostly turned to 1/350 scale ships... Thank God for those...

Robertson

So, if you're not going to buy it or build it, why comment on it and bash on the kit? Seems like misplaced effort and bandwidth

[11bee]

I won't get involved in the accuracy debate, but it seems to me that this kit is a trifle pricey for a 48th scale kit.

Yes maybe a bit pricy for 48th scale but for a 1/45th scale kit? Could be well worth it.

Maybe Brassin will be releasing updated 1/48th fuselage and wings?

[11bee]

Brett Green's review from Hyperscale:

109 Review

As a rule I trust Brett's reviews, he actually builds models but is conscious of accuracy as well and is usually pretty level headed. I think this kit is a definite upgrade over the older Hasegawa kit, however 1/48 is not my scale so mehhhhh....

Just had a chance to read Brett's review. His first comment: Accurate fuselage and wing dimensions

I have to admit that I am a bit confused. How hard is it to measure the fuselage and wingspan of the Eduard kit and then do a bit of math and compare the numbers to the measurements of the real thing? Unless there is some controversy over how wide / long an actual Bf-109G-6 is, this should be a pretty simple exercise.

[Tbolt]

I would agree with Jennings, the kit is not necessarily inaccurate just because it does not scale out to a given set of dimensions or drawing. The problem from an accuracy and engineering standpoint is knowing what "scale" the kit is being built to. In the case of the Eduard kits, it appears that they are, for the most part accurate, just not manufactured to 1/48th scale.

Cheers,

Dave

No it's inaccurate because they are saying it's 1/48th scale, which is fine if you want to display it on it's own or with other 1/46th scale (or whatever size it is, I haven't bought one) aircraft but not great if you want to put it next to other manufacturer's 109's.

[Tbolt]

I won't get involved in the accuracy debate, but it seems to me that this kit is a trifle pricey for a 48th scale kit.

Can't say I agree, not for the UK prices anyway. It retails at £27.99, the Hasegawa kit depending on the boxing is between £33 and £38. Academy kit £11.99, Zvezda £17.99. Of course in the Eduard kit you get PE, masks and Cartograph decals, but when the Weekend version comes out it will probably retail for about £16.99, so to me it's good value.

[lritger]

Yes maybe a bit pricy for 48th scale but for a 1/45th scale kit? Could be well worth it.

Maybe Brassin will be releasing updated 1/48th fuselage and wings?

And with that, I think we can close the thread, LOL. :)

Glad someone mentioned the lower cowling- that has bugged me since I saw the initial sprue shots. I know "Red 7" actually has an Erla lower cowling- most folks don't realize that- and even so, it doesn't have the beefy jowl look of the Eduard kit. I suspect the issue is that the kit designer must have rendered the lower cowling sides parallel, when in reality they taper outwards slightly from front to back; that would mean the forward lower cowling would need to angle inwards quickly towards the spinner, which would give the effect seen in photos. It's one of the things I'll want to check once I eventually pick one of these up.

Another thing I noticed in the fuselage comparison shot with Hasegawa which was posted earlier- the Eduard fin seems to be broader in chord. Was that just my imagination?

Lynn