Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Andrea, the short answer is yes. Sincere Hobby shipped their pre-orders out around the middle of October. I received multiple responses from the mail you posted above, but I have another you can try:

 

shop-289120@fwsemail.com

 

I corresponded with someone from Sincere at that email address. Good luck!

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jonathan_Lotton said:

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/zoukei-mura-tba-f-4e-phantom-ii--1180315

Only the F-4E/ "Long nose" Phantoms are being retooled.  The short nose jets are keeping the old fuselage molds. 

ZM is not "retooling" the long-nosed Phantoms, as they haven't yet produced a long-nosed Phantom to "retool". AFAIK, ZM has never publicly acknowledged their short-nosed Phantoms have any errors. If they have, I have not seen that anywhere. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, madmanrick said:

ZM is not "retooling" the long-nosed Phantoms, as they haven't yet produced a long-nosed Phantom to "retool". AFAIK, ZM has never publicly acknowledged their short-nosed Phantoms have any errors. If they have, I have not seen that anywhere. 

 
Believe what you will. ZM has created a new tool for their F-4E/F line, which is simply a retooling of their existing phantom kits with new components.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, madmanrick said:

ZM is not "retooling" the long-nosed Phantoms, as they haven't yet produced a long-nosed Phantom to "retool". AFAIK, ZM has never publicly acknowledged their short-nosed Phantoms have any errors. If they have, I have not seen that anywhere. 

 

Rickie, dear; Zoukey Mura have admitted that the aft fuselage shape was wrong in the short-nosed range of Phantoms. Now that they're working on the long-nosed versions, they are modifying the aft fuselage shape, a thing I wish AMK would do if they ever were to release a different version of the F-14. Highly doubt it, but still I wish.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Hubbie Marsten said:

 

Rickie, dear; Zoukey Mura have admitted that the aft fuselage shape was wrong in the short-nosed range of Phantoms. Now that they're working on the long-nosed versions, they are modifying the aft fuselage shape, a thing I wish AMK would do if they ever were to release a different version of the F-14. Highly doubt it, but still I wish.  


Why? Why hope that AMK should fix one issue on a kit you have stated about a gazillion reasons not to buy? Why not buy ANOTHER F-14 kit and, you know, just build it. Just buy the Tamiya F-14D already or wait and see if the GWH will be the #1 Tomcat. Man, you should really move on. Don´t buy the AMK kit, don´t waste another minute on it. It´s like throwing good money after bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, erik_g said:


Why? Why hope that AMK should fix one issue on a kit you have stated about a gazillion reasons not to buy? Why not buy ANOTHER F-14 kit and, you know, just build it. Just buy the Tamiya F-14D already or wait and see if the GWH will be the #1 Tomcat. Man, you should really move on. Don´t buy the AMK kit, don´t waste another minute on it. It´s like throwing good money after bad.

 

Competitor alarm, probably paid by both Tamiya and GWH.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ElectroSoldier said:

I missed that post, where was that said?

 

There is no free lunch for free kits.  You must read all 286 pages yourself to uncover this information. 

 

No Pain No Gain.  Be a Real Modeler and use the search function.

 

/s

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Jonathan_Lotton said:

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/zoukei-mura-tba-f-4e-phantom-ii--1180315

Only the F-4E/ "Long nose" Phantoms are being retooled.  The short nose jets are keeping the old fuselage molds. 

ZM isn't fixing the issue with the fuselage. The crease where the spine meets the main fuselage should end near the flap hinge line.

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II — Wikipédia

 

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II - Wikipedia

 

but here's the F-4E "test shot". Overall the ZM F-4 is an outstanding kit let down by this one correctable flaw. Is there a ZM Phantom thread? Best to further discuss there. The AMK F-14 issues however are legion; not singular.

 

Boxart F-4E Phantom II TBA Zoukei-Mura

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hubbie Marsten said:

 

Not for me, Erik; I've never committed. I'm hoping for all of those who did - AMK owe them as much as that. Oh, and don't give me the line that AMK owe anyone anything because that's just bollocks.

It's just that AMK won't ever admit the issues in their kit, period. But that won't matter if the GWH kit is accurate. This odd AMK knob-polishing thing will be forgotten for good.

Incidentally; why do you think AMK needed to retool the fuselage shape on their 1/48 Kfir kit years after they released it...?

Why, Erik; why?    

 

AMK dont owe anybody anything.
The kit is what it is. Why do you think they owe you something?

 

First off there was no promise at all, unless you can find those words then the promise lives only in your mind. secondly the kit is what it is, take it or leave it. Thats it!

2 hours ago, habu2 said:

 

There is no free lunch for free kits.  You must read all 286 pages yourself to uncover this information. 

 

No Pain No Gain.  Be a Real Modeler and use the search function.

 

/s

 

I dont want anything, I was doubting that AMK said it and would like to see it myself.

I cant help thinking somebody will be disapointed on page 300

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ElectroSoldier said:

AMK dont owe anybody anything.
The kit is what it is. Why do you think they owe you something?

 

Yes, they do. :rolleyes: Again, not me, but those who've committed.

 

7 minutes ago, ElectroSoldier said:

First off there was no promise at all, unless you can find those words then the promise lives only in your mind. secondly the kit is what it is, take it or leave it. Thats it!

 

Yes, there was. I'll find those words for you. You'll only have to wait until we leave on a three-week's holidays after New Year's Eve day so that I've got plenty of time to review this whole thread. I'm sure my wife will agree. :thumbsup:

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, masanissa said:

but here's the F-4E "test shot". Overall the ZM F-4 is an outstanding kit let down by this one correctable flaw. Is there a ZM Phantom thread? Best to further discuss there. The AMK F-14 issues however are legion; not singular.

 

Because ZM did not made fund raising and, what's more important, decided to promote their kits' quality by deeds, not words. Plus it didn't took them couple of years from announcement to release.

With the time passing people are getting more and more curious. But also get tired of waiting, hanging their decision to buy other F-14 kit month by month.  But finally the release!

And... 4 years and it's you (the kit).

disappointment.jpg

 

Still containing the problems that were pointed out from first test mold, which were first noticed and promised to be fixed, then rejected to be existing, then finally turned into optical illusion farse. "Newer molds" were showing up here and there on modeller shows but every new footage was said to be "not this one" or "old photo" as it had the same wrong shape. And finally, cherry on the top - treating best project supporters like a trash. People risked their money to help fundraise the kit, without any assurance they will ever see the kit. Yet, they receive their kits after long and frustrating e-mail battles, whole month after people who just made preorder week before for $10 and 2-3 months after people who didn't pay anything but were good endorsers (no offense to any of them).

 

This whole story is an example of "how not to release kits and how not to treat potential customers".

 

Oh, I forgot to mention, that anyone who dares to see anything wrong with the kit is being accused to work for competitors. 

 

 

Edited by Tapchan
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Hubbie Marsten said:

 

Yes, they do. :rolleyes: Again, not me, but those who've committed.

 

 

Yes, there was. I'll find those words for you. You'll only have to wait until we leave on a three-week's holidays after New Year's Eve day so that I've got plenty of time to review this whole thread. I'm sure my wife will agree. :thumbsup:

 

No they dont.
A person who isnt you who bought the kit on the crowd funding site got what they paid for. If they didnt receive one then they do otherwise its all in your mind.

For all its problems the kit is what it is and that is what they bought, that is one of the chances you take when you buy on a crowd funding site.

Reading some of your posts you seem personally aggrieved by AMK for the kit they made like its some kind of personal attack. You have involved yourself in matters that are simply none of your business, and you have made them none of your business by stating you are not and will never be an AMK customer. Trying to champion a cause to get the kit fixed is again only in your mind. I know its problems and I would buy it regardless so your efforts are a mute point.

 

You know its there, but you dont know where...

Right ok. dont waste your time on it on my account. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ElectroSoldier said:

No they dont.
A person who isnt you who bought the kit on the crowd funding site got what they paid for.

 

Yes, they do.

:hmmm:I wonder whether the modeller who bought the AMK kit on the crowd funding had committed all the same had they known that the rear end of the kit would be like it is today... Perhaps?

 

12 minutes ago, ElectroSoldier said:

For all its problems the kit is what it is and that is what they bought, that is one of the chances you take when you buy on a crowd funding site.

 

 

In your world, buddy. Not mine. So what did they buy? A kit which was LIGHT YEARS FAR from being as advertised/promised - or whatever AMK did so that modellers would commit?

 

15 minutes ago, ElectroSoldier said:

Reading some of your posts you seem personally aggrieved by AMK for the kit they made like its some kind of personal attack. You have involved yourself in matters that are simply none of your business, and you have made them none of your business by stating you are not and will never be an AMK customer. Trying to champion a cause to get the kit fixed is again only in your mind. I know its problems and I would buy it regardless so your efforts are a mute point.

 

Likewise, if that's the idea you've got about me, I could easily think exactly the opposite regarding your defending AMK. But do you know what? I simply don't care what you think about me; I simply don't care. Fact is the AMK kit is cactus.

 

18 minutes ago, ElectroSoldier said:

You know its there, but you dont know where...

 

What? The fat hinds on the AMK kit? The wrong IFR probe panel placement? Oh, I know exactly where they are, as they're glaring issues in the kit that will just jump at you from every angle. :tease:

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Hubbie Marsten said:

 

What? The fat hinds on the AMK kit? The wrong IFR probe panel placement? Oh, I know exactly where they are, as they're glaring issues in the kit that will just jump at you from every angle. :tease:

 

The IFR probe is positioned incorrectly, but it's not really that noticeable unless you're looking for it. It's kind of like the IFR probe on the Academy F-4's. It's there, but doesn't really impact the kit. As far as the hips in the back, I just worked on that area last night. It's not the sides that are fat. They actually have just about the correct curve. It's the slope of the area outboard of the tails. It slopes down at too much of an angle. The wing seal bag is also oddly shaped if you are doing the wings swept forward. That adds to the strange look of the "hips". With the wings swept back, it looks like pretty good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ElectroSoldier said:

I dont want anything, I was doubting that AMK said it and would like to see it myself.

I cant help thinking somebody will be disapointed on page 300

Can't tell you what page, but I can tell you that it was Sio that stated he would gift two kits to the first person to post on page 300. Now as to being disappointed, that's for each to decide for themselves. I can tell you that I am extremely disappointed with the trolls that can't seem to avoid this thread. I keep hoping that a moderator will step in and do some more banning, but alas that is almost as unlikely as AMK sending 4 kits to the first person to post on page 400.

Edited by madmanrick
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Darren Roberts said:

They actually have just about the correct curve. It's the slope of the area outboard of the tails. It slopes down at too much of an angle. The wing seal bag is also oddly shaped if you are doing the wings swept forward. That adds to the strange look of the "hips".

 

Yes, I know about that, Darren. Chris Wilson showed what the problem was with the rear end in the AMK kit.

Today I was watching a build thread of the GWH 1/72 F-14 kit and saw how well they nailed both the  position of the IFR probe panel and the rear end.

The best feature in the AMK kit is the dirty wings, with spoilers. It'd be a shame for me to have to build that kit with wings swept back in order to conceal its dirty secret, stuff.

 

14 minutes ago, madmanrick said:

I can tell you that it was Sio that stated he would gift two kits to the first person to post on page 300. I can tell you that I am extremely disappointed with the trolls that can't seem to avoid this thread. I keep hoping that a moderator will step in and do some more banning, but alas that is almost as unlikely as AMK sending 4 kits to the first person to post on page 400.

 

Strange that a manufacturer would reward anyone with two kits for just having been the one hitting the 300 page first, especially when someone had to pay for just one kit. Also, if that's the way AMK want to promote the kit, they can't complain when people contribute with the post count by stating their dissatisfaction about the kit, much less if someone has to be banned for just having stated not to be satisfied with the AMK kit.

However, I wouldn't even dare call "trolls" to all of those like you, defending an inaccurate kit, tho.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2019 at 7:51 PM, madmanrick said:

What baffles me is how AMK can have one side of the model exhibit something and the other look like it was preliminary at best? If one wing was engraved properly, wouldn't you just transpose those details to the other side (assuming those details are the same)? I can't imagine the details differ from the left wing to the right. The engine nacelles? Perhaps those details do differ from one side to the other? But, again what we are seeing is an example of sloppy work in the design stage AND not indicative of a quality kit. Although the shape errors are vexing, I can at least understand how those could be a function of whatever drawings, etc. AMK may have used. But, the difference in the panel lines is just pure sloppiness and more indicative of a HobbyCrap kit, than something molded in 2019. You also can't justify those kinds of mistakes, since it isn't a problem of interpretation or aesthetic. I always said judge the plastic and the first votes are in and it ain't good for the incumbent.

 

On 12/17/2019 at 3:11 AM, madmanrick said:

Yeah pretty much captures the thought processes of the "completely hate it" crowd. The only thing missing is a reference to the fact that most, if not all of these very same individuals don't and won't own the kit. Which makes their hollow "crying in the wilderness", all that much more ridiculous. I might be able to understand the gnashing of teeth, IF these gnashers had laid out hard earned money, but they did not.

 

The most ironic thing about this whole thing is that you would have thought that AMK had pulled a Kittyhawk Banshee blunder, but in reality the "mistakes" that are present on AMK's Tomcat are VERY difficult to see, even when pointed out and appear to be spotty in many cases (i.e. present in one box and not in others). In fact, reminds me a bit of the Zoukei Mura Phantom "mistakes." I still can't see those, despite having seen countless red line drawings etc. Both of the kits I mentioned look like what they are purported to be, they seem to be great builds and are close to, if not the best kit of the type in quarter scale.

 

Hmm... I thought that your November post was a fair assessment, or was that rather a "crying in the wilderness" too? I'm also confused that "vexing shape errors" = "VERY difficult to see"??? I have to say I'm confused, has someone stole your account??

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Hubbie Marsten said:

 

 

Today I was watching a build thread of the GWH 1/72 F-14 kit and saw how well they nailed both the  position of the IFR probe panel and the rear end.

 

Really?

 

This angle doesn't seem to be represented in pictures that I've seen. 

 

 

 

Screen Shot 2019-12-18 at 3.54.24 PM copy.jpg

Edited by zerosystem
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ElectroSoldier said:

I dont want anything, I was doubting that AMK said it and would like to see it myself.

I cant help thinking somebody will be disapointed on page 300

Page-204 Sio's August 20 post. Whomever gets the first post on page-300 will get two AMK F-14's. Sio/AMK will deliver on their promise no doubt. It won't be me though... if it weren't for bad luck I'd have no luck at all...:crying:.

 

But if I do get the first post on page-300  I will gift one of the kits to another ARC'er to spread the wealth.

 

Happy modeling all!

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...