ChesshireCat Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 Hi Gary I for sure you mean that the Eduard kit is " the nicest " BF109G kit out there till... " I agree with you , but surely not the "best" ! For the time being "Nicest and best" fits only the Spitfire Mk.IX As for Fujimi they could add a complete new nose section as well... ! You'd better wait for the Zvezda at 16-17 Euro. These people know their subjects ! Madcop ;)/> 199% disagree with your post and stand by mine gary Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ya-gabor Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 I know it is a stupid question, but there are all those original Me 109 G’s around in museums. If there is one near you, would it be in the US, or in Finland or where ever, could you please go out there and have a look at those details questioned in so many posts on previous pages of this and other forums dealing with the new Edu kit!? It is fairly simple to make measurements of a wingspan with plumb on both wingtips and marking out the distance on the floor and them measuring it with whatever measuring tool you have, it is a straight line between two points and you need the distance between them. Fairly simple!? That would resolve all the questions once and for all. Of course there is the traditional way used in aircraft manufacturing to use a Theodolite to yield a mm precise dimensional data. This measuring technology has been around for so many decades (centuries) and if it works on real aircraft production then it should work for providing data for kit manufacturing too! If one invests thousands of Euros into a kit production then it would not be a great loos to rent a Theodolite to make some overall (or even detailed) measurements. Best regards Gabor Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 There is no need to go to a museum with a plumb bob to measure the wing span of a Bf109. The basic airframe dimensions are widely known, widely published, and widely agreed upon. Which makes it even more stupefying that Eduard could have gotten them so wrong. You may need to measure certain specific parts of the airframe to get your kit design right, but Eduard doesn't even appear to have done much of that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
madcop Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 There is no need to go to a museum with a plumb bob to measure the wing span of a Bf109. The basic airframe dimensions are widely known, widely published, and widely agreed upon. Which makes it even more stupefying that Eduard could have gotten them so wrong. You may need to measure certain specific parts of the airframe to get your kit design right, but Eduard doesn't even appear to have done much of that. Hi "There is no need to go to a museum with a plumb bob to measure the wing span of a Bf109." For sure they didn't , they were more interested in testing their new beer brand ! If this is the effect it produces, I for sure won't test it ! Or maybe they were too busy with the farm girl ? Madcop Quote Link to post Share on other sites
madcop Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 199% disagree with your post and stand by mine gary No problem Gary , the most important is having fun... Madcop ;)/> Quote Link to post Share on other sites
billw Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 I had looked forward to building this kit, and was willing to correct it's lesser issues. But being out of scale the way it is was a deal breaker for me. So even though I won't be building one, I am curious about the main gear legs. Does anybody know what the straight tube running down the strut is (conduit for the brake line perhaps)? I've looked at literally thousands of 109 pics and have never seen this piece before. Have I missed something all these years? BW Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 I had looked forward to building this kit, and was willing to correct it's lesser issues. But being out of scale the way it is was a deal breaker for me. So even though I won't be building one, I am curious about the main gear legs. Does anybody know what the straight tube running down the strut is (conduit for the brake line perhaps)? I've looked at literally thousands of 109 pics and have never seen this piece before. Have I missed something all these years? BW It's a pneumatic line for the brakes. To the best of my knowledge, it's always been there. Most kits don't represent this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChesshireCat Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 No problem Gary , the most important is having fun... Madcop ;)/>/> the intention of my post was that the Fujimi kit was at a minimum just as good as the Hasegawa, and in many was far better. I know it's not perfect, but a lot closer than most every other kit. The interior sucks on a good day. The nose shape is rather debatable, and many folks that are in the know say it's good to go. Still better than the Eduard in my book. What I like is that they actually did two different 109's, and the one to look for is the modular one with all the options. The decal sheet alone is outstanding (if it's not yellowed), and why somebody out there hasn't duplicated it is a mystery to me. But today, if I were to want to build a bf109G, I think I'd start with the Zvezda F4, and buy the Vector conversion. Then you got it all right in front of you. gary Quote Link to post Share on other sites
billw Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 It's a pneumatic line for the brakes. To the best of my knowledge, it's always been there. Most kits don't represent this. Thanks for the answer, but you must have better eyes than I do. I don't see it in photos in any of the reference material I have. The brake lines I see running down the strut are smaller diameter and not always perfectly straight & in a somewhat different position. Anyway, appreciate the response. BW Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hal Marshman Sr Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 If that's the brake lines, they're way out of scale, even 1/46th, and lack the flexi hose part that leads past the oleo strut to the rear hubs. (unless of course, it comes as a separate piece) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hal Marshman Sr Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 If that's the brake lines, they're way out of scale, even 1/46th, and lack the flexi hose part that leads past the oleo strut to the rear hubs. (unless of course, it comes as a separate piece) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ch9862 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 If that's the brake lines, they're way out of scale, even 1/46th, and lack the flexi hose part that leads past the oleo strut to the rear hubs. (unless of course, it comes as a separate piece) These clearly are brake lines - pretty weird way to represent them, I agree. Instructions also indicate to use the smaller main wheels for some reason, even though the larger ones are on the sprue. And the rear wheels are both too small - but that's a tiny issue ;). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hal Marshman Sr Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Perhaps Eduard plans to produce a G-10 or -K. That would account for the larger (by that I assume you mean wider) main wheels. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jinmmydel Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 These threads are always good for a laugh. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ch9862 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Perhaps Eduard plans to produce a G-10 or -K. That would account for the larger (by that I assume you mean wider) main wheels. No, I think the sprues are set up for an F/early G down the line - the main wheels look to be 650x150 and 660x160. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
CorsairMan Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Normally my eyes glaze over once these 'discussions' start but those side by side pics sure show a discrepancy! Wow. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 :rofl:/> These threads are always good for a laugh. It's Eduard who are good for a big laugh right now. Sometimes the emperor actually ISN'T wearing any clothes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
BGB Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Hello, Those threads are nice you always learn a lot ,mostly from people that dont buy the object discussed. Cheers Boris Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChesshireCat Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 It's Eduard who are good for a big laugh right now. Sometimes the emperor actually ISN'T wearing any clothes. My favorite 109 series are the "AS" series and the K4 series. There are no intact K-4's that I know of, and they are slightly different here and there. Still not all that far off a late G-10. So with all the latest round of controversy, how can we get a good K-4? Perhaps this is where Zvezda should pick up the pace, and maybe Revell will follow with a K-4 in 1/32 scale! gary Quote Link to post Share on other sites
BGB Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Hello, Buy the Revell 1/32 Me109G-10 Erla and do the Erla K. Cheers Boris Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Hello, Buy the Revell 1/32 Me109G-10 Erla and do the Erla K. Cheers Boris Not a common aircraft, didn't Erla only build a few (< 10) K's? Hoping the next version Revell puts out there will be the G-6/14AS. Also hoping that whatever they release in the future will NOT have that silly three piece upper cowl design. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
BGB Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Hello, Yes maybe not a common aircraft but it was built,only one real pic of it,Dont know if Revell are going to make any AS and I see a lot of nice AM wit a one pice cowl Baracuda is coming wit some stuff soon to, Cheers Boris Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dragonlance Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Hello, Those threads are nice you always learn a lot ,mostly from people that dont buy the object discussed. Cheers Boris Because to them it's evidently not worth buying. Vedran Quote Link to post Share on other sites
BGB Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Hello, I have understood that, but my approach is to take a look for myself before I count something out, (specially on the verdict of people that haven't seen it with their own eyes, either only looking at pics or listening to somebody else that haven't seen it), then I can decide if it's good or not. Cheers Boris Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Hello, I have understood that, but my approach is to take a look for myself before I count something out, (specially on the verdict of people that haven't seen it with their own eyes, either only looking at pics or listening to somebody else that haven't seen it), then I can decide if it's good or not. Cheers Boris So you purchase the kit THEN decide if it's decent or just crap? I have better uses for my money. My approach is to wait a few months after the kit is released, review all of the comments (from multiple sites) and then make a purchase / no-purchase decision. At that point there is typically a consensus on whether a kit is decent or has issues. 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.