AMK 1/48 F-14!!!

[galfa]

46 minutes ago, Rex said:

Does anyone wonder sometimes "who someone is working for?"

 

I only ask, because right after a photo of the AMK and Tamiya rear fuselage pieces, showing how very close they are,,,,,,a post appears that still says that area is wrong.

 

 

 

Rex,

I am in this hobby since when I was 8 years old. Now I am 57. After all these years I call myself a proud rivet counter.

Old Airfix 1:72 kits of my youth were far from accurate, but they were far from expensive.

For the money we spend on kits like the forthcoming AMK, asking for a high level of accuracy it is a legitimate request.

If I discover that such high standard is not meet after spending my money, I am very disappointed and I bet I am not the only one.

Marketing people in forums like this are doing their best. I am doing my best to save myself, and others like me, from buying a kit that does not meet expectation.

 

PS.: Guess what is now on my workbench:

 

Edited November 2, 2018 by galfa

[gtypecanare]

2 hours ago, galfa said:

 

 

Dylan,

 

First of all, congratulations for your beatiful Tomcat!!!!

 

And then, given that I share the same scientific interest, I would suggest you to look again at the rear fuselage because the shape is quite different.

 

Checking the horizontal stabilizers is probably the best way to asses AMK rear fuselage accuracy. Back in this thread, we have good pictures of the AMK horizontal stabilizers. Here is one:

 

 

AMK stabilizer has a very accentuated curvature on its rear of the side where it meets the fuselage.

 

But the same is not true for the Hasegawa and Tamiya stabilizers.

 

Hasegawa:

 

Hasegawa on top of Tamiya:

 

The rear end of both Hasegawa and Tamiya stabilizers are way more straigh than the AMK counterpart. Before challenging Hasegawa and/or Tamiya for their interpretation of the Tomcat rear parts, I think it is a good idea to take a look at the Grumman interpretation of the same area:

 

Thank to this thread, it is very clear that AMK mishaped the upper and lower rear fuselages, the gas bags, and the horizantal stabilizers. As a consequence, I guess that the exhaust cans are undersized.

 

Warning, if you care about accuracy, think about all this before buying.

The Tamiya interpretation is the Grumman interpretation. 

 

Back to the AMK thread....

Edited November 2, 2018 by gtypecanare
repost

[Space Tiger Hobbes]

56 minutes ago, galfa said:

 

 

Rex,

I am in this hobby since when I was 8 years old. Now I am 57. After all these years I call myself a proud rivet counter.

Old Airfix 1:72 kits of my youth were far from accurate, but they were far from expensive.

For the money we spend on kits like the forthcoming AMK, asking for a high level of accuracy it is a legitimate request.

If I discover that such high standard is not meet after spending my money, I am very disappointed and I bet I am not the only one.

Marketing people in forums like this are doing their best. I am doing my best to save myself, and others like me, from buying a kit that does not meet expectation.

 

PS.: Guess what is now on my workbench:

 

Adjusting for inflation: In 1971, when you were 10 years old and paid, say, $10 for a 1/48 model airplane that was equivalent to $63 today, about the price of the AMK F-14. Or said another way, in 1981 when you were 20, the Monogram F-14 was released for around $10 as I recall, maybe less. That's about $30 today, a bargain compared to around $60ish for the AMK F-14, but hardly the same level of accuracy, detail, fit, etc. Or said a third way, that AMK F-14 you could have preordered for, say, $65, in 2018, would have been $10 in 1971 when you were 10 years old. Except that it would have looked like the product of an advanced alien civilization compared to kits of that day. But, of course, nothing like it was available on Planet Earth. If anything has exceeded inflation in the past 40-50 years, perhaps it is expectations. 

[Darren Roberts]

"Camelot!"

 

"Camelot!"

 

"Camelot!"

 

"It's only a model."

 

Sorry, I haven't quoted Monty Python in a while and needed my fix. 😁

[galfa]

While in the old times Airfix, Revell, or Monogram kits were widely available, same it is not true today. Now we need to pay shipping charges.

 

You say that we will pay just $60 for the AMK F-14. But Sprue Brothers lists the same class AMK Mig-31 at $86 and sell that kit at $69. Shipping charges would add another $15.

 

At best we're going to pay the new AMK F-14 $85. I think is a lot of money. I know, that is very debatable, it depends by individual wealth. However, it is three times the price of a Monogram Tomcat back in the early '80. I remember that kit well, it was my Christmas present. 

 

 

[joscasle]

6 hours ago, Darren Roberts said:

Everyone is missing the simple truth...the girl has some nice curves! 😁 Keeping the wings swept will help, but as others have said, it seems there's too much curving area around the horizontal stab. That will still be evident with the wings swept. Just from looking at it, a quick (well, maybe inexpensive is a better term) fix would be to sand down the area by the horizontal stabs to flatten the rear fuselage out a bit. You'll need to then sand out the curve to a flatter shape on the horizontal stab itself. That shouldn't be too difficult, as it would just be towards the ends. The attachment point should stay the same. It still looks to be a pretty nice kit. I'm wondering if the GWH kit is being made in conjunction with AMK. The parts breakdown looked an awful lot like the AMK kit. If it is, I wonder if it, too, will have the same rear shape. I just know I get to build more Tomcats!

I do not know what is the point of buying the AMK F-14D if it is only going to be built with the wings retracted, since the biggest advantage over the Tamiya is the possibility of being able to build it with the wings spread out. Honestly, if I'm going to put together all Tomcats with retracted wings, I only buy Tamiya's F'14D.

[andrew.deboer]

33 minutes ago, Darren Roberts said:

"Camelot!"

 

"Camelot!"

 

"Camelot!"

 

"It's only a model."

 

Sorry, I haven't quoted Monty Python in a while and needed my fix. 😁

 

I thought it was a VF-14 reference...

[Mstor]

1 hour ago, Darren Roberts said:

"Camelot!"

 

"Camelot!"

 

"Camelot!"

 

"It's only a model."

 

Sorry, I haven't quoted Monty Python in a while and needed my fix. 😁

 

Neee, Neee, Neee!!

[Andrea Bolla]

1 hour ago, galfa said:

While in the old times Airfix, Revell, or Monogram kits were widely available, same it is not true today. Now we need to pay shipping charges.

 

I'm not too much younger than you and I strongly believe that today we have much more opportunities to have better kits and lower prices than in "old times". Shipping charges rant is just ridicolous, never had a kit falling on my desktop without any cost (beside parents gifts when a boy); maybe in old times there were more brick and mortar shops, but visiting them it was not free of costs.

 

1 hour ago, galfa said:

At best we're going to pay the new AMK F-14 $85. I think is a lot of money.

 

And the Tamiya one on your workbench costs just twice the AMK...

[Rex]

Cool, Galfa,,,,I also started at 8 years old,,,,,,,in 1965.

 

I had hoped to keep "perceived inflation" out of this, mostly because the cost of a kit gets divided, buy the income never does.

 

And given our ages and the changes that we should have seen in our income, above just ordinary inflation to minimum wage, a $50 kit really is a reasonably cheap kit.

 

(now, if someone on here is still only getting 50 cents US per lawn on Saturdays, I deeply apologize for offending your earning potential, yup, it took me 1 1/2 lawns to buy a 1/72 kit back then, and I pay $50 for a guy to mow mine if I need it done faster than I can get to it)

Edited November 3, 2018 by Rex

[galfa]

@Andrea,

1) "Shipping charges rant is just ridicolous, never had a kit falling on my desktop without any cost..."

 

In the "old times" Airfix, Monogram, and Revell were available at a walking distance from my house. I wonder in what kind of place you lived your younger years if you needed over $15 of gas to get a grocery, a toy, or a hardware store.

 

2) "And the Tamiya one on your workbench costs just twice the AMK"

 

The Tomcat on my workbench is Hasegawa. To cost half of my Tamiya Tomcat, the new AMK Tomcat should not cost more than $45, including shipping. However, accuracy wise the Tamiya Tomcat is worth every Penny. Sadly, same is not true for the AMK Tomcat.

[Darren Roberts]

5 hours ago, joscasle said:

I do not know what is the point of buying the AMK F-14D if it is only going to be built with the wings retracted, since the biggest advantage over the Tamiya is the possibility of being able to build it with the wings spread out. Honestly, if I'm going to put together all Tomcats with retracted wings, I only buy Tamiya's F'14D.

I'm buying it because I love the Tomcat and I want to build at least one kit from every manufacturer. It also looks to be a great kit in spite of the rear fuselage issue. Another positive is that it seems it will be cheaper than the Tamiya kit by $20-30. Don't get me wrong, the Tamiya kit is great. I've built five and have three more in the stash. But the Tamiya kit is not the end all-be all of Tomcat kits. It's an engineering marvel, but some the detail is a bit on the weak side. 

Edited November 3, 2018 by Darren Roberts

[Darren Roberts]

35 minutes ago, galfa said:

 

The Tomcat on my workbench is Hasegawa. To cost half of my Tamiya Tomcat, the new AMK Tomcat should not cost more than $45, including shipping. However, accuracy wise the Tamiya Tomcat is worth every Penny. Sadly, same is not true for the AMK Tomcat.

 

Why don't you wait until the kit is released before making that statement? Did you look at Dave's comparison picture of the AMK and Tamiya rear fuselage areas? They look pretty close to me. Now, if the AMK kit comes out and it indeed does have the pronounced curves, then you can trumpet to the heavens that it's wrong. However, you might find yourself eating some crow if it gets released and it looks fine. Some hubris and restraint is always a good thing. Just an FYI since you care about accuracy, the Hasegawa kit has some issues, so I wouldn't say that's a great kit either. 

[dryguy]

3 hours ago, galfa said:

@Andrea,

1) "Shipping charges rant is just ridicolous, never had a kit falling on my desktop without any cost..."

 

In the "old times" Airfix, Monogram, and Revell were available at a walking distance from my house. I wonder in what kind of place you lived your younger years if you needed over $15 of gas to get a grocery, a toy, or a hardware store.

 

2) "And the Tamiya one on your workbench costs just twice the AMK"

 

The Tomcat on my workbench is Hasegawa. To cost half of my Tamiya Tomcat, the new AMK Tomcat should not cost more than $45, including shipping. However, accuracy wise the Tamiya Tomcat is worth every Penny. Sadly, same is not true for the AMK Tomcat.

Galfa, I don't usually get involved with these sort of mudslinging contests on Arc, but I feel I have to add my 5 cents. The photo that Dave has shown with both the kits superimposed shows essentially zero difference. I really cannot understand why you have already made up your mind that that AMK tomcat is inaccurate, and that it will not be worth 'every penny.' 

Until not so long ago, we ll built Hasegawa tomcats; a kit which I did not enjoy building, does not come with weapons, and has its own accuracy issues, small though they may be. BTW the hasegawa F14D is incorrect in it's afertburner area.

I expect the AMK tomcat to be much more buildable than the hasegawa kit; in fact one thing you have to credit AMK with is clever engineering and buildability. Yes we all know that tamiya sets the standard in this regard.

 

I guess I really just cannot understand how the AMK kit is still dissmissed as being inaccurate after the pictures Dave has posted.

Regards

Gareth

[delide]

To be fair, the differences of the stabilizers galfa showed is rather clear to see, so it’s an other thing to look at in the final kit, it’s different shape would indeed suggest other shape problems as galfa said.

 

The comparison Dave has posted, shows one angle only, which is bascally dead on from above to the tail portion, yes, the difference from this angle is minimum,  but it’s a 3D shape, you can design a kit that match the 2D top view, or a side view of the real thing perfectly, but when viewed from other angles it can be a different story.  In this case there is an inclination of the top surface from the engine to the outside, which will affect how the curves look from other angles.

 

What am I trying to say is that, like to anything we shall not take a narrowed view, that is from one angle only in this case. So let’s wait to see the final plastic, then we can view the subject from any angle, theoretically from infinite amount of angles! :-) That is BTW pretty much why I love models.

Edited November 3, 2018 by delide
Typo and others

[Tapchan]

The comparision Dave Roof posted shows clearly there is difference. On Tamiya kit the side line starting from first panel line behind cushion up to the end of panel is more or less straight while same zone in AMK kit shows constant curvature. It may not look big from 2d view, but in 3d it is way different. Anyway it seem worth to see who's gonna be faster to release own kit - GWH or AMK.

[delide]

13 hours ago, gtypecanare said:

The Tamiya interpretation is the Grumman interpretation. 

 

Back to the AMK thread....

OT. Indeed the Tamiya looks spot on to me , you meant Tamiya is supported by Grumman? That's really cool,  how do you know if I may ask?

[Darren Roberts]

1 hour ago, delide said:

OT. Indeed the Tamiya looks spot on to me , you meant Tamiya is supported by Grumman? That's really cool,  how do you know if I may ask?

I think he means Tamiya used Grumman design specs, if I'm reading correctly. Whether that's scanning a real Tomcat or using line drawings/blueprints, I don't know. George would have to clarify that. Either way they did a nice job. BTW, he knows because he's the Tamiya rep.

Edited November 3, 2018 by Darren Roberts

[Darren Roberts]

18 hours ago, Dave Roof said:

 

 

There's still a difference, but from the top the curve isn't as pronounced. The difference I'm seeing is the amount of surface area. If you cover up the rest of the AMK picture and just compare from where the vent is out to where the horizontal stab should be, the AMK seems to be wider in this area. It's not much, but it does seem to be there. Is it enough to get your panties in a knicker? I guess that's up to individual modeler. Now, let's get this thread to 130 pages!

[Doppelgänger]

Everyone's able to clearly see that there's quite a difference in the shape of both kits; take a good look at how abruptly the curve ends, toward the bottom of the picture on the AMK kit compared to the Tamiya one - I mean, that's the source of the issue to me, and it's accentuated even more when the adjacent piece (engine shroud), is attached following it.

Also, there's no bump on the aileron pivot area on the AMK kit.

 

18 minutes ago, Darren Roberts said:

Now, let's get this thread to 130 pages!

 

Darren's got a bet; how many pages will this thread reach to when the AMK kit is released on 2018/11/18?

Cheers,

 

Onigiri

 

P.S: Did Martin chime in yet? 

[goondman]

3 hours ago, Doppelgänger said:

Everyone's able to clearly see that there's quite a difference in the shape of both kits; take a good look at how abruptly the curve ends, toward the bottom of the picture on the AMK kit compared to the Tamiya one - I mean, that's the source of the issue to me, and it's accentuated even more when the adjacent piece (engine shroud), is attached following it.

Also, there's no bump on the aileron pivot area on the AMK kit.

 

 

Darren's got a bet; how many pages will this thread reach to when the AMK kit is released on 2018/11/18?

Cheers,

 

Onigiri

 

P.S: Did Martin chime in yet? 

"when the AMK kit is released on 2018/11/18". Huh?

 

 

[Jonathan_Lotton]

The LuckyHobby or LuckyModel or whatever release date is constantly moved due to them needing to do that to keep pre-orders open.  The only "solid" release info we received from AMK was "releasing summer 2018!" 

Obviously that didn't happen, and they've been silent as a tomb since then on ANY release date talk. 

So yeah...the shape issue? Obviously has been resolved, that's not a problem...the persistent problem, as it always has been, is AMK's seemingly consistent problem with even meeting their own stated release dates...not even the community expectation. 

[Raymond Chung]

27 minutes ago, Jonathan_Lotton said:

The LuckyHobby or LuckyModel or whatever release date is constantly moved due to them needing to do that to keep pre-orders open.  The only "solid" release info we received from AMK was "releasing summer 2018!" 

Obviously that didn't happen, and they've been silent as a tomb since then on ANY release date talk. 

So yeah...the shape issue? Obviously has been resolved, that's not a problem...the persistent problem, as it always has been, is AMK's seemingly consistent problem with even meeting their own stated release dates...not even the community expectation. 

Dear Jonathan,

 

Sorry to hijack this thread as LuckyModel has dropped off the AMK line since 2016 January after the Mig-31 shipment. So, LuckyModel NEVER pre-order anything about the AMK. We don't have any relationship on any AMK product, pre-order .... whatsoever. 

 

Regards

Raymond

[Mstor]

6 minutes ago, Raymond Chung said:

Dear Jonathan,

 

Sorry to hijack this thread as LuckyModel has dropped off the AMK line since 2016 January after the Mig-31 shipment. So, LuckyModel NEVER pre-order anything about the AMK. We don't have any relationship on any AMK product, pre-order .... whatsoever. 

 

Regards

Raymond

 

Maybe he meant Hobbyeasy?  But I just checked and Hobbyeasy shows 2018-12-15. So if it was Hobbyeasy, its been pushed out yet again. As Johnathan_Lotton stated, it gets pushed out to keep the pre-order open. It has nothing to do with any release date from AMK.

[Mstor]

4 hours ago, Darren Roberts said:

Now, let's get this thread to 130 pages!

 

Now you have me wondering how the forum software decides to paginate? Lines of text, bytes, posts? If we knew we could figure out when the next page was going to appear. Oh, wouldn't that be fun!