Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Boy, this here thread is running on empty.

All this to attain page 300 in the vague hope of winning an error-ridden yet FREE F-14 kit which apparently nobody wants.

 

To sum it up, 3 things I leaned from this thread.

1- the AMK F-14 has fat hips 

2- AMK has initiated one of the most amateurish, deceptive and masochistic advertising campaigns ever seen on the internet 

3- The published sprue photos incited me to go and buy AMK’s Fouga Magister which turned out to be the most pleasurable build I had in months.

 

Three things out of 300 pages ain’t bad. It could have been fewer!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, niart17 said:

Maybe I'm wrong here, but that seems like a LOT of extra work if the main problem to start was the raised panel around the formation strips. I mean don't get me wrong, his work looks incredible and I'm very impressed with the surface finish he ended up with. But to me that looks more like what a car painter would go through in order to get a mirror finish straight show body and not a fighter jet that ends up matt finished and weathered. Obviously his results speak for themselves but I don't know that it was necessary in order to simply get a good surface to paint on. I will say his treatment did seem to make he panel lines appear a little crisper so there's that. And yes, I love that building jig set-up he has. NICE!

 

In fact, it's a funny sidestory described here:https://www.modelforum.cz/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=129855&hilit=amk&start=45https://www.modelforum.cz/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=129855&hilit=amk&start=45

 

After having the same problem (insering the cockpit in the front fuselage part) than Zactoman and cie, , he decided to correct the incorrect formation lights.

To do so, he used the standard procedure used in car modelling to deal with this kind of problem, i.e airbrush a coat of surfacer then grind with wet 2000 sandpaper, the way to loose the less details possible. Doing so, he found this:

 

file.php?id=1535263

 

Machining marks.

Not visible on the bare plastic but kind of stuff which is easily revealed after a airbrush coat of normal paint (not filler).

So a new round of sanding in perspective.

 

And after having to solve the fitting issues with the main parts of the kit:

 

file.php?id=1544527

 

with surfacer and epoxy putty:

 

file.php?id=1545412

 

file.php?id=1545807

 

file.php?id=1545806

 

file.php?id=1545805

 

After all this, he has to put a new coat of surfacer.

He  decided in the end to apply the same wet 2000 sandpaper treatment to the rest of the kit, to avoid any new surprise.

And of course he found new ones, like on the exhauts shrouds:

 

file.php?id=1547237

 

 

So this is the reason why he did it, first erasing carefully the incorrect LO formation lights, then the machine marks, then gaps from the fit issues.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, shion said:

 

In fact, it's a funny sidestory described here:https://www.modelforum.cz/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=129855&hilit=amk&start=45https://www.modelforum.cz/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=129855&hilit=amk&start=45

 

After having the same problem (insering the cockpit in the front fuselage part) than Zactoman and cie, , he decided to correct the incorrect formation lights.

To do so, he used the standard procedure used in car modelling to deal with this kind of problem, i.e airbrush a coat of surfacer then grind with wet 2000 sandpaper, the way to loose the less details possible. Doing so, he found this:

 

file.php?id=1535263

 

Machining marks.

Not visible on the bare plastic but kind of stuff which is easily revealed after a airbrush coat of normal paint (not filler).

So a new round of sanding in perspective.

 

And after having to solve the fitting issues with the main parts of the kit:

 

file.php?id=1544527

 

with surfacer and epoxy putty:

 

file.php?id=1545412

 

file.php?id=1545807

 

file.php?id=1545806

 

file.php?id=1545805

 

After all this, he has to put a new coat of surfacer.

He  decided in the end to apply the same wet 2000 sandpaper treatment to the rest of the kit, to avoid any new surprise.

And of course he found new ones, like on the exhauts shrouds:

 

file.php?id=1547237

 

 

So this is the reason why he did it, first erasing carefully the incorrect LO formation lights, then the machine marks, then gaps from the fit issues.

 

 

 

Maybe it's the old man in me. I did just turn 50. But have modelers lost all sense of what building a model is? The formation light strips can be sanded down in under two minutes. Surround the area with masking tape to protect the detail and have at it. It's done. The "machine marks" will never, ever be seen under paint. Why go to all that trouble for something so pedantic? As far as the puttying, he actually had to you use (GASP!) modeling skills! Oh my! The kit didn't just fall together? Wow! What a horrible kit! (Disclaimer: This is to be read in a light-hearted, sarcastic manner and is not meant to trample on anyone's feelings or beliefs. If anyone feels they have been wronged, the poster takes on no responsibility for any counseling that may be needed.)

 

In all seriousness, do you realize how little putty he used? That's not near what is required for the Hasegawa Tomcat. In fact, the only Tomcat that doesn't require more putty than that is the Tamiya kit. I haven't built the Hobbyboss yet, but it looks like it may not need much filling either. 

 

Why is it so hard to just not be able to say it's a good kit that has some shape issues and requires some care in fitting some of the parts together? When you strip away all the angst about hyperbolic descriptions of the kit being the best Tomcat ever, horrible PR and development, and a lack of forethought by the company (which has absolutely nothing to do with the actual plastic), that's really what you've got with the AMK Tomcat. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Darren Roberts said:

Why is it so hard to just not be able to say it's a good kit that has some shape issues and requires some care in fitting some of the parts together? When you strip away all the angst about hyperbolic descriptions of the kit being the best Tomcat ever, horrible PR and development, and a lack of forethought by the company (which has absolutely nothing to do with the actual plastic), that's really what you've got with the AMK Tomcat. 

Good kit or not, it's all personal opinions, you can't force everyone to agree. It's not a good kit to me, because I simply do not like what I've seen. The shape issue is VERY obvious to me. I can also look pass the sloppy asymmetrical panel line work, that seems to bother some others, but if there is not the Tamiya one, honestly I'd sill be sticking with the Hasegawa one. If it's the only 1/48  F-14 kit ever, then I am not sure... To me it's certainly not the second best, but it's just me.

But the way, the machine marks do not bother me either, but still, it shouldn't be there, it's just an other sign of sloppiness to be honest, haven't seen it on manufacturer's kits(only on the back/inside), haven't seen it on AMK's own MiG-31, does make me wonder what all the delays were all about...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, delide said:

Good kit or not, it's all personal opinions, you can't force everyone to agree. It's not a good kit to me, because I simply do not like what I've seen. The shape issue is VERY obvious to me. I can also look pass the sloppy asymmetrical panel line work, that seems to bother some others, but if there is not the Tamiya one, honestly I'd sill be sticking with the Hasegawa one. If it's the only 1/48  F-14 kit ever, then I am not sure... To me it's certainly not the second best, but it's just me.

But the way, the machine marks do not bother me either, but still, it shouldn't be there, it's just an other sign of sloppiness to be honest, haven't seen it on manufacturer's kits(only on the back/inside), haven't seen it on AMK's own MiG-31, does make me wonder what all the delays were all about...

 

 

 

 

I'm not trying to force anyone to say anything. I'm trying to bring some reason and sensibility to the conversation. It's all about comparisons. Many seem to be comparing it to the Tamiya kit. Of course it's not going to be as good as the Tamiya kit. Not many things will. But how about we compare it against the Monogram kit, or the Italeri kit, or even the old Revell kit? Suddenly this horrible monstrosity of plastic looks like the most unbelievable Tomcat kit ever produced. A more apples to apples comparison would be to the Hobbyboss kit. How does it compare with that? It's probably the better of the two. In regards to Hasegawa, it's all about what one looks for in their modeling. If accuracy is paramount, the Hasegawa kit is superior. But that's about the only thing that the Hasegawa kit is superior in to the AMK kit. Hasegawa has it's own accuracy issues as well.Where does that leave the AMK kit? Right back to my original statement that it's a good kit with some accuracy and fit problems. I'll even change "good" to "decent". 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Darren Roberts said:

I'm not trying to force anyone to say anything. I'm trying to bring some reason and sensibility to the conversation. It's all about comparisons. Many seem to be comparing it to the Tamiya kit. Of course it's not going to be as good as the Tamiya kit. Not many things will. But how about we compare it against the Monogram kit, or the Italeri kit, or even the old Revell kit? Suddenly this horrible monstrosity of plastic looks like the most unbelievable Tomcat kit ever produced. A more apples to apples comparison would be to the Hobbyboss kit. How does it compare with that? It's probably the better of the two. In regards to Hasegawa, it's all about what one looks for in their modeling. If accuracy is paramount, the Hasegawa kit is superior. But that's about the only thing that the Hasegawa kit is superior in to the AMK kit. Hasegawa has it's own accuracy issues as well.Where does that leave the AMK kit? Right back to my original statement that it's a good kit with some accuracy and fit problems. I'll even change "good" to "decent". 

LOL, of course if you except the problems/shortcomings, then what's left will be good or decent?? Anyway, everyone has their own criteria, I don't see the point to argue which kit is superior to which, especially not with kits that are way, way more than 4 years old?

 

I acutally do not think it has been that unreasonable, yes, some seemly small issues were brought out, but those are there afterall, not fakes, and those small issues can rarely been seen on other kits. For me, accuracy issue aside, I've seen rather too much sloopiness to call it good or decent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, delide said:

LOL, of course if you except the problems/shortcomings, then what's left will be good or decent?? Anyway, everyone has their own criteria, I don't see the point to argue which kit is superior to which, especially not with kits that are way, way more than 4 years old?

 

I acutally do not think it has been that unreasonable, yes, some seemly small issues were brought out, but those are there afterall, not fakes, and those small issues can rarely been seen on other kits. For me, accuracy issue aside, I've seen rather too much sloopiness to call it good or decent.

 

To each their own. That's what makes this hobby great. In regards to unreasonable, have you read the entire thread from start to finish? Some of the posts are the definition of unreasonable! 😀

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Darren Roberts said:

 

To each their own. That's what makes this hobby great. In regards to unreasonable, have you read the entire thread from start to finish? Some of the posts are the definition of unreasonable! 😀

 

No way, you have?! I forgot when I started, so far I'm actually fine with it😆  but I'm probably more tolerate as I'm more biased against the kit. Anyway, I very much like the freedom of speech here, and there are of course very interesting informations from Zactoman and other F-14 experts as well, so it's still a great thread to me!

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, delide said:

 

No way, you have?! I forgot when I started, so far I'm actually fine with it😆  but I'm probably more tolerate as I'm more biased against the kit. Anyway, I very much like the freedom of speech here, and there are of course very interesting informations from Zactoman and other F-14 experts as well, so it's still a great thread to me!

You bet I've read it all! I wouldn't miss a single post. It's like the day time soap operas on tv. 😂

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Darren Roberts said:

It's like the day time soap operas on tv. 😂

 

(announcer) "Today the part of shion will be played by delide..."

 

:soapbox:

 

 

(you have to have had suffered thru watching soaps to get that joke)

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, habu2 said:

 

(announcer) "Today the part of shion will be played by delide..."

 

:soapbox:

 

 

(you have to have had suffered thru watching soaps to get that joke)

 

Oh yeah! My sister watched them all the time. Unfortunately, one of her favorites was at the same time that Starblazers was on. It was a fight to see who could get to the TV first!

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Darren Roberts said:

 

Maybe it's the old man in me. I did just turn 50. But have modelers lost all sense of what building a model is? The formation light strips can be sanded down in under two minutes. Surround the area with masking tape to protect the detail and have at it. It's done. The "machine marks" will never, ever be seen under paint. Why go to all that trouble for something so pedantic? As far as the puttying, he actually had to you use (GASP!) modeling skills! Oh my! The kit didn't just fall together? Wow! What a horrible kit! (Disclaimer: This is to be read in a light-hearted, sarcastic manner and is not meant to trample on anyone's feelings or beliefs. If anyone feels they have been wronged, the poster takes on no responsibility for any counseling that may be needed.)

 

In all seriousness, do you realize how little putty he used? That's not near what is required for the Hasegawa Tomcat. In fact, the only Tomcat that doesn't require more putty than that is the Tamiya kit. I haven't built the Hobbyboss yet, but it looks like it may not need much filling either. 

 

Why is it so hard to just not be able to say it's a good kit that has some shape issues and requires some care in fitting some of the parts together? When you strip away all the angst about hyperbolic descriptions of the kit being the best Tomcat ever, horrible PR and development, and a lack of forethought by the company (which has absolutely nothing to do with the actual plastic), that's really what you've got with the AMK Tomcat. 

 

Its a thing these days. Maybe it was a thing back when we were in out 30s too but nobody videoed it so there is nothing saved for posterity.

I started looking around a couple of years back at some of the video builds on sites like youtube and the amount of things that seem to be done for dramatic effect is really quite astounding.

A great case in point is the slime lights on this kit and the machine marks.

They are fixed in such an elaborate way any casual onlooker sees it and is impressed by it all.

Its the same as the mould lines in the canopy. When you write it down it sounds impressive, when you realise what the fix it its really rather mundane and only requires some way to sand it, polishing and some Klear. But when you do it on video and the person watching doesnt really know whats going on it all looks very impressive...

 

It reminds me of the much coined latin phrase;
Omne ignotum pro magnifico

Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot blame a kit, if you are not willing, or not capable to use basic modelling skills to reach to a good result.

 

The deletion of those formation lights would not take me more than 10 minutes with my Dremel and sand paper.

 

This is so exaggerated...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, habu2 said:

 

(announcer) "Today the part of shion will be played by delide..."

 

:soapbox:

 

 

(you have to have had suffered thru watching soaps to get that joke)

Yeah, almost 300 pages and no replacement for habu2 though 😀

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Darren Roberts said:

Unfortunately, one of her favorites was at the same time that Starblazers was on.

 

My Man! Starblazers, yea!

 

One of my ex's had one soap she watched religiously.  Drove me crazy how she could stand to watch that, that... Stuff!

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Tapchan said:

So it has begun:

 

80319846_2364677750511941_28813766284017

Source:

AMK should sell the wings separately maybe :)

 

 

 

This is very interesting. Looks like he did a lot of sanding of the wings to try to make the panel lines less stark. Looks good. And of course all the extra detailing on the slats. But he's showing the its doable. I'll have to see about this when I get back to my Tamiya F-14A. I have the KASL dirty wings, but there are some fit problems with the slats and flaps. Not bad, but kind of difficult for me to deal with without messing things up.

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...