sharkmouth Posted September 23, 2014 Share Posted September 23, 2014 Enough already... Thanks Saul for posting the sprue photos. You're welcomed to the photos and to reuse them as long as my name isn't removed. I don't mind if people continue with constructive criticism. Pointing out what could be better is always welcomed in my book. Simply wringing their wrists and whining as to how bad a company is doesn't help. This company is producing some gems and simply needs to get their teams to the same level. Since I build armor, I can tell you that their GAZ-67B and UAZ-469 are both exceptional (albeit expensive). Regards, Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted September 23, 2014 Share Posted September 23, 2014 (edited) Well given from the images of the actual kit the shapes look fine except the intakes. Unless you know very much about the real airplane, then it doesn't look at all fine. But if you like the kit, that's perfectly fine with me. I don't, and you're not likely to change my mind any more than I'm likely to change yours. You're not wrong and I'm not right, nor vice-versa. Edited September 23, 2014 by Jennings Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sharkmouth Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 OK, I got a Revell/Monogram kit on the way so as to take comparison photos and see if cross kitting is no only doable but worth it. Regards, Quote Link to post Share on other sites
BillS Posted September 24, 2014 Author Share Posted September 24, 2014 Just like when I started the thread on the Academy F-4 months ago, the same has happened on the '106, hence my remark "it's like throwing a rock at a wasp nest"...everybody comes out stinging! I have a couple of thoughts to add to my original review. First, I sat down last night and compared the Mono to the Trump piece by piece. I must be blind in one eye and unable to see out of the other, but I just don't see where all the hoopla is over the intake shape, they are so dang close particularly in profile. I also pulled out my old Burin Do special on the Dart and looked at the scale plans. Both Mono and Trump have panels depicted pretty close to the drawings and one piece of plastic compared to the other. I counted the missile bay door hinge nodes in a belly shot of the real jet then compared it to Trump. It was really hard to tell but it looks like there are 20 on the real jet give or take. Trump has 19. Originally I disparaged the cockpit in Trump. Actually the console detail comes reasonably close and I've decided to use it on my first model and add embellishments. I stick with my opinion of the seat. It's gonna get a True Detail replacement. I haven't decide what to do with the sidewalls; Trump's are totally unsat. Oh, I compared cockpit tubs 3 ways, Black Box, Mono's and Trump's. Using my Dash 1 as a reference, the Mono kit part is the most accurate followed by Black Box. The Black Box stick is best as are their side walls, decking behind the seat and their glare shield. As far as the AIM 4s and AIR 2, again very, very close in dimensions but Trumps has more detail and the IR seeker head for the AIM 4 is provided as a clear part. I stick to my original comment on quality of molding on Trump, it's cleaner, sharper; Mono is a little spongy here and there although there is more complete gear well and missle bay detail in Mono but not by light years. Here's the thing, I spent hour after hour staring at F-4s, T-38s (particularly) and F-16s et al in the Air Force with the sole intent of learning as much as I could to build better models. I can't remember the exact shape or placement of individual panels and details. When looking at the three contemporary T-38 kits in 48th I see pluses and minuses to all three based on memory. Although Trump's T-38 has shape issues in some places, it still has detail Sword and Wolfpack lack and in photos of the finished model I've seen (mine is in the "to build" pile) it still is a decent replica. I agree, Trump should not be getting major shapes wrong providing the availability of the real thing to measure, conversely I wouldn't relegate Trump to the junk pile either. I'm willing to bet their 'six will look pretty dang good and have less issues with fit vs the time tested, very sweet Mono kit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jgrease Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 (edited) Bill, thanks for your insights. Common sense returns to modelling. As for the rest: :deadhorse1:/> No, really. :deadhorse1:/> Edited September 24, 2014 by jgrease Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ThePhantomTwo Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Bill,excellent comments on the Trumpeter 106 kit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
niart17 Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Ugh. Enough already. Buy it or don't buy it. Thanks Saul for posting the sprue photos. So you're saying that one should base their decision to purchase on....what exactly? I mean if nobody should post things that they find wrong with the kit as much as those that find what's right with it, then how can anyone make an educated decision? Simply because there is a kit of a certain aircraft doesn't mean it should be praised, just as much as just because a certain company produced it it should be bashed. BUT I will say that once a company establishes a pattern, either good or bad, then it's hard to break that perception. So if a company comes out with a lot of kits with errors, then most people are prone to look for what is wrong with the next kit and will have to be shown that there are none before they will part with their money. If it weren't for those that are willing to show what's wrong as well as what's right, then a lot of people would be unhappy with a purchase. So then, why try to silence those giving an assessment? Bill Quote Link to post Share on other sites
habu2 Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 I don't mind when errors are pointed out - AND VERIFIED with measurements and photos etc - but all the bashing is unnecessary and immature. There's a big difference betweet "the intakes are 3 degrees off when compared to the real jet" and "Company X totally screwed up the intakes, all their kits are junk, why can't they do anything right"... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 but I just don't see where all the hoopla is over the intake shape, they are so dang close particularly in profile The hoopla isn't about the profile AFAIK but about the face view. Did you notice KursadA's Trump vs Mono front comparaison photo ? And to the photo of the real thing ? conversely I wouldn't relegate Trump to the junk pile either. IMHO what belongs to the junk pile are the bad kits and bad models. Trumpeter kits often are good kits but not great models. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
niart17 Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 (edited) I don't mind when errors are pointed out - AND VERIFIED with measurements and photos etc - but all the bashing is unnecessary and immature. There's a big difference betweet "the intakes are 3 degrees off when compared to the real jet" and "Company X totally screwed up the intakes, all their kits are junk, why can't they do anything right"... So it's verbage? I understand what you're saying, but on the flip side, some people can simply "see" something is wrong but don't have the mechanical background or tools to be able to document mathematically or specifically what is wrong. Like a car review for instance. Sometimes a driver just knows that the car doesn't feel good turning and doesn't feel like it wants to stop very well. They don't have to have a skid pad and braking distance set-up to measure exactly what their feelings are telling them. They simply know that the car feels like a bad driving car. Same with models. To some a model just doesn't look like subject "A" and they can't tell you precisely why, just that the intake look catiwhompas or the canopy is "fat" or whatever. Their opinion is just as valid in my eyes. Bill Edited September 24, 2014 by niart17 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sharkmouth Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 So it's verbage? Bill, it is the verbiage indeed. I spent money on this kit. I bought aftermarket decals for this kit, I have a Monogram Delta Dart coming to help me fix this kit. For one, I want people to tell me what it wrong so I can decide for myself whether it is something I can fix or have to live with. What should not be part of the discussion is to refer to the kit as fecal matter, hide it under tarps, bury it under sand, or any other comment which can only serve to make people (like me) who spent money on the kit and would enjoy themselves feel like fools. I don't build out of the box. For those that do, they will decide if they can live with the accuracy or not. I don't expect them to have much filler work to do. Others may be tempted to try their hand at correcting issues others point out (and for which I thank them). This is the reason for the Monogram kit, I may perhaps graft parts to improve this one. Not once will I want to silence someone telling me a kit doesn't look right. Yet, enough already with those that feel they must put down a manufacturer or all their kits. The discussion is about this particular kit. regards, Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sharkmouth Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 While I await delivery of the Monogram kit, would detail images of the parts help in keeping this thread on topic? Regards, Quote Link to post Share on other sites
F-16 Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 Instruction sheet is posted here: 1/48 Trumpeter F-106 Instruction sheet. Scott CNJC-IPMS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
habu2 Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 So it's verbage? I understand what you're saying, ... No I don't think you understood what I meant. My point was the difference in pointing out an error vs. criticizing an error with verbage that disparages the manufacturer. ...but on the flip side, some people can simply "see" something is wrong but don't have the mechanical background or tools to be able to document mathematically or specifically what is wrong. Someone can say a shape "looks wrong" but without quantification it is just an opinion. It may be a valid opinion but it's not a fact without verification. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jgrease Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 So you're saying that one should base their decision to purchase on....what exactly? I mean if nobody should post things that they find wrong with the kit as much as those that find what's right with it, then how can anyone make an educated decision? Simply because there is a kit of a certain aircraft doesn't mean it should be praised, just as much as just because a certain company produced it it should be bashed. BUT I will say that once a company establishes a pattern, either good or bad, then it's hard to break that perception. So if a company comes out with a lot of kits with errors, then most people are prone to look for what is wrong with the next kit and will have to be shown that there are none before they will part with their money. If it weren't for those that are willing to show what's wrong as well as what's right, then a lot of people would be unhappy with a purchase. So then, why try to silence those giving an assessment? Bill I thanked those that provided information and suggested that if you don't like what you see, don't buy it. Look, this nonsense starts everytime someone posts shots of kits from certain manufacturers. The end result is always the same - the people that don't like kits from Trumpeter, Kitty Hawk, etc spend an inordinate amount of time blasting the kit. Saul posted photos of the sprues and people started implying that he wasted his money. That's just silly. If someone buys a kit and likes it, that doesn't mean he's ignorant, misinformed or just silly. It means he wanted a particular kit and he bought it, and his decision shouldn't be disparaged by trolls. That's it. End. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
niart17 Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 umm....ok. I didn't see any disparaging remarks toward the original poster nor any shots at him for buying the kit. He posted his review and others posted what they feel about the kit. It was/is a healthy discussion. I believe the first thing that could POSSIBLY considered an attack of anyone's opinion came with the question to Jennings and the +1. But whatever. I'm sure this won't be the last time this comes up. It's never ending. Bill Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GEH737 Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 I bought one from Hobbylinc.com for $49. I was around them for three years when I was stationed at Tyndall, AFB - and it looks pretty nice to me. The original Monogram kit is now 30 years old and certainly isn't the easiest kit to put together (I've built 3). So... either stick with the Monogram and wrestle with the fit, or get the new one with recessed panel lines, and more than likely - a whole lot easier to put together. My only issue with it is price - if it was around $30 ~ 35, I'd already have three, and more than likely (at this rate), I won't be around when the next one comes out... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jgrease Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 umm....ok. I didn't see any disparaging remarks toward the original poster nor any shots at him for buying the kit. He posted his review and others posted what they feel about the kit. It was/is a healthy discussion. I believe the first thing that could POSSIBLY considered an attack of anyone's opinion came with the question to Jennings and the +1. But whatever. I'm sure this won't be the last time this comes up. It's never ending. Bill So Jennings' opinion was attacked when someone asked if he had the kit? Really? But it was alright when he posted "As long as people keep buying their (fecal matter), they have no incentive to improve their quality." Come on Bill. It's one thing to say "well I don't like they way x or y is done on this kit", but to call it sh*t is infantile. Asking a critic if they have the plastic in hand is a completely valid question. Certain people are always quick to dump on certain manufacturers without ever putting a finger on that same kit. I am always happy to have someone come on these forums and post sprue photos and provide their own opinions based on the reality of having the kit in hand. Every one of these "discussions" quickly degenerates into a slamfest, be it Trumpeter, Hobby Boss, Kitty Hawk - you name it and someone will start the process. As I stated earlier - buy it or don't buy it. If you want to say "x isn't accurate and here's why", I'm all for it. Criticism just for the sake of criticism is just silly. Back up your observations with photos or drawings. End of story. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 I never understood this argument that one has to have sprues at hand to be able to judge a kits faults. Surely, if one has the kit at hand one will find *more* mistakes, not *less*. The issues that this kit has are clear, even through a screen judged from pictures taken thousands of miles away. Those mistakes does not disappear as soon as one has kit at hand. I have helped with design of several kits, and somehow i have managed to spot dozens of mistakes on CAD's. CAD's that are screen grabs (ie probably of lower quality than actual CAD) and obviously before any metal has ever been cut or me having the kit that has not been made yet at hand... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jgrease Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Again, if you don't like what you see, don't buy it. I guess I'm just unusual in that I build models to relax and enjoy the experience. I understand that other enjoy looking at pictures on their monitors and posting their dislikes and criticisms. I also understand that those that spend their time "observing" seem to have very pointed criticisms, as if the scale fidelity and accuracy of the F-106 kit will make or break the very fabric of our lives. I know I've said it before, but shame on me for getting irritated with the negative tone this thread and others like it typically take. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 (edited) I guess I'm just unusual in that I build models to relax and enjoy the experience. You're not unusual. You probably belong to the majority but the majority isn't more right than the minority. I understand that other enjoy looking at pictures on their monitors and posting their dislikes and criticisms You don't understand. There's nothing enjoyable in finding bugs because accuracy guys will have to fix or at least mitigate these bugs in some way. Thankfully a growing number of manufacturers use accuracy guys feedback during design so there's less forum rants. Trumpeter / Hobby Boss doesn't seem to have a design QA process. I also understand that those that spend their time "observing" seem to have very pointed criticisms, as if the scale fidelity and accuracy of the F-106 kit will make or break the very fabric of our lives I believe that your sarcastic writings aren't any better than the opinion expressions of the non-constructive POSers branch of the accuracy guys. Posts like KursadA's one are positive: he posted a fact and he didn't tell the reader what he's supposed to think about it. Edited September 28, 2014 by Laurent Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gene K Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 ... I'm just unusual in that I build models to relax and enjoy the experience. I think it's time for you to build a model. Gene K Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jgrease Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Lol. You guys are funny. I like the deflection, especially the part where people want to see me as some overexcited troll. Sorry but I'm not on a par with the posters you want to compare me to. Like I said, I build for fun, and if there's an extra panel line somewhere, or the curve of the nose is off by a couple of degrees, it won't change my life. If that's your bag, like I said, enjoy the fact finding. Comparing a kit to fecal matter is just immature and takes away from your credibility. Lay out your negative points, and show the rest of us unwashed, uninformed hobbyists what you're referring to. That's all. Why the criticism of me for expressing my opinion, which you all seem to rush to defend when the people you agree with express theirs? The hypocracy is thick. I better stop- there's a lot you guys will want to quote here to show my intolerance for others' opinions. Happy modeling. If you actually have one to build... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sharkmouth Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 (edited) As the person who took offense to the fecal matter comment, I ask everyone to please end the off topic discussion as I am over the slight. Other modelers have made me remember that, while a solitary hobby, we all share a lot of the same desire to enjoy it. I received the Monogram F-106 from eBay seller jh9821 who, after seeing my links, sent the kit at no charge! I truly thank him for that and it does prove some points. I remember building the kit a long time ago and not being able to build it with the weapons bay closed. I see that it does include the part but, perhaps I wasn't skilled enough back in 1983 to use it? Comparing to the Trumpeter kit, the outlines are VERY similar. I think cross kitting is truly possible. Wheels on the Monogram kit are MUCH better. The ejection seat in the Monogram kit is awful but the Trumpeter kit provides two. So, one for the Monogram kit! The intakes show what may be the error. The Monogram kit's intake trunks are more square shouldered than Trumpeter's who also made the bottom of the intakes parallel to the ground instead of perpendicular to the sides of the aircraft. Monogram on the left: Monogram on the right: The intakes can be swapped but the differences in curvature will need filling and sanding. I am thinking about cutting them closer to the opening where the curvature may not be so drastically different. I will check back later. Regards, Edited September 29, 2014 by sharkmouth Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jgrease Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Saul, Sorry for the diversion. Again, thanks for the new pics as well- I have the Encore -102 and the -106 may not be far behind. John 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.