Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
Jennings

AMK 1/48 F-14!!!

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, foxmulder_ms said:

 

 

errrrrr. lol. It is because as a model it is almost perfect. The mold line etc is absolutely a tiny thing if you can even notice it. All I can say from your comment is that you did not see the model in your hands. I dont have the tamiya f-14 but I have tamiya F-16 and AMK F-14 has nothing short compared to f-16 and details and single piece missiles actually makes it much better. From what I've seen I think tamiya f-16 and f-14 look comparable. 

 

If you can take time off from the crazy toxic environment of this topic and actually look at the model in your hands, it is pretty awesome model. 

 

The AMK kit is a good model, but I wouldn't put it in the "awesome" category. It seems you care about details. In that regard, the AMK is great. But when you add the other issues in (and yes, there are issues), it doesn't surpass the Tamiya kit. The only areas that the AMK kit surpasses the Tamiya kit is in detail and price. Tamiya exceeds the AMK kit in accuracy and ease of build. Does that make the AMK kit bad? Heavens no! But it does make the Tamiya kit overall better than the AMK kit. I posted on Hyperscale that some think it's an "either/or" situation. It's really a "both" situation. Both have their merits and their issues. Pick the one that floats your boat, or build both of them simply for the experience.

Share this post


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

 

The AMK kit is a good model, but I wouldn't put it in the "awesome" category. It seems you care about details. In that regard, the AMK is great. But when you add the other issues in (and yes, there are issues), it doesn't surpass the Tamiya kit. The only areas that the AMK kit surpasses the Tamiya kit is in detail and price. Tamiya exceeds the AMK kit in accuracy and ease of build. Does that make the AMK kit bad? Heavens no! But it does make the Tamiya kit overall better than the AMK kit. I posted on Hyperscale that some think it's an "either/or" situation. It's really a "both" situation. Both have their merits and their issues. Pick the one that floats your boat, or build both of them simply for the experience.

I think thats pretty much exactly how I see it too.

For me the thing that tipped the scales towards the AMK kit was the details like the control surfaces. That the shape isnt 100% isnt really much of an issue as it looks like an F-14 regardless.

It depends on what you want.

The Tamiya kit wasnt really an option because Tamiya missed a trick when they didnt detail it up like AMK did on theirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've found something on the AMK kit that I don't think has been mentioned. I'm about to put on the spine antennas. They call out the same part (O 10) for both the front and rear placement. That's incorrect. The tall TACAN antenna is just behind the canopy and the original, smaller one is behind the GPS dome. They only give you the tall TACAN. Then, when I found the parts on the sprue, they were bullet shaped. I don't know if they were short shots or not. Can anyone with the kit check their's and see what those parts look like. And no, this still doesn't change my mind to being that the AMK kit is horrible! 😂

Share this post


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

I've found something on the AMK kit that I don't think has been mentioned. I'm about to put on the spine antennas. They call out the same part (O 10) for both the front and rear placement. That's incorrect. The tall TACAN antenna is just behind the canopy and the original, smaller one is behind the GPS dome. They only give you the tall TACAN. Then, when I found the parts on the sprue, they were bullet shaped. I don't know if they were short shots or not. Can anyone with the kit check their's and see what those parts look like. And no, this still doesn't change my mind to being that the AMK kit is horrible! 😂

It seems they screwed up the instruction sheet. Forward antenna should be part U 34.

Both copies of my part O 10 are molded properly (with a bit of flash and slight texture on one side) which is surprising considering how many other mold problems my copy has.

 

:cheers:

Share this post


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

It seems they screwed up the instruction sheet. Forward antenna should be part U 34.

Both copies of my part O 10 are molded properly (with a bit of flash and slight texture on one side) which is surprising considering how many other mold problems my copy has.

 

:cheers:

 

Thanks! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cue Buffalo Springfield............. For What It's Worth .............There's something happening here but what it is ain't exactly clear........

 

Cheers Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's battle lines being drawn.
N
obody's right if everybody's wrong

Share this post


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

Cue Buffalo Springfield...

 

57 minutes ago, habu2 said:

There's battle lines being drawn.

I don't think it's time to stop. I thought I had stated that the lines I had drawn were approximate (close enough for government work), but apparently didn't make that point exactly clear. So here, "these lines are approximate" (Red = AMK; Blue = Tamiya = Grumman):
Side_hips_zpsn4na8heb.jpg

Edited by Zactoman
Lyrics conformity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, foxmulder_ms said:

 

 

errrrrr. lol. It is because as a model it is almost perfect. The mold line etc is absolutely a tiny thing if you can even notice it. All I can say from your comment is that you did not see the model in your hands. I dont have the tamiya f-14 but I have tamiya F-16 and AMK F-14 has nothing short compared to f-16 and details and single piece missiles actually makes it much better. From what I've seen I think tamiya f-16 and f-14 look comparable. 

 

If you can take time off from the crazy toxic environment of this topic and actually look at the model in your hands, it is pretty awesome model. 


i think you add quite happily to the toxic environment by ignoring clear issues that people who gave spent good money on kits gave with multiple kits.

Passing off their issues as tiny because this kits “perfect”...utter rubbish.

You think sink lines that run the full length of intakes are a “tiny thing”?

incomplete and variable depth panel lines are ok.
I have four AMK F-14’s all with extensive and visible sink lines and marks.

There are other production issues ie decal misregistration and inconsistent panel lines.

So please dont dismiss clear and prominent visual issues that will be plainly visible with washes and matt coats as tiny things as they will stand out like dogs balls with a TPS scheme.

Hyperscales review is quite disgraceful to omit every single production issue i have on 4 kits.

I paid good money for my 4 kits, got shafted by not having weapon sets supplied and to to top it off i got a load of sink lines and underdone panel lines thrown in for free.

If you think this kit is perfect and better than a Tamiya kit you dont even own which has basically perfect engineering, panel lines and dimensions all ill say us go buy the Tamiya kit and see how a model kit should be produced.

 

Edited by dehowie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats the opinion on the wheels? Should they be replaced with the new Eduard set?

The kits tires have a strange "raised line detail" on the tire, close to the hub area. Maybe it can be sanded off to look better?

http://www.hyperscale.com/2020/reviews/kits/p7hg_img_10/fullsize/18_fs.jpg

Boxart F-14D wheels AMK 648530 Eduard

 

Scott

CNJC-IPMS

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/26/2020 at 10:59 AM, dehowie said:


i think you add quite happily to the toxic environment by ignoring clear issues that people who gave spent good money on kits gave with multiple kits.

Passing off their issues as tiny because this kits “perfect”...utter rubbish.

You think sink lines that run the full length of intakes are a “tiny thing”?

incomplete and variable depth panel lines are ok.
I have four AMK F-14’s all with extensive and visible sink lines and marks.

There are other production issues ie decal misregistration and inconsistent panel lines.

So please dont dismiss clear and prominent visual issues that will be plainly visible with washes and matt coats as tiny things as they will stand out like dogs balls with a TPS scheme.

Hyperscales review is quite disgraceful to omit every single production issue i have on 4 kits.

I paid good money for my 4 kits, got shafted by not having weapon sets supplied and to to top it off i got a load of sink lines and underdone panel lines thrown in for free.

If you think this kit is perfect and better than a Tamiya kit you dont even own which has basically perfect engineering, panel lines and dimensions all ill say us go buy the Tamiya kit and see how a model kit should be produced.

 

Maybe you could put them on a sales site like ebay?
Im sure there are many people out there who would want them.

 

maybe if you get your money back you wouldnt feel so bitter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, F-16 said:

Whats the opinion on the wheels? Should they be replaced with the new Eduard set?

The kits tires have a strange "raised line detail" on the tire, close to the hub area. Maybe it can be sanded off to look better?

http://www.hyperscale.com/2020/reviews/kits/p7hg_img_10/fullsize/18_fs.jpg

Boxart F-14D wheels AMK 648530 Eduard

 

Scott

CNJC-IPMS

 

Replace them.
But those brassin is not for the F-14D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, F-16 said:

Whats the opinion on the wheels? Should they be replaced with the new Eduard set?

The kits tires have a strange "raised line detail" on the tire, close to the hub area. Maybe it can be sanded off to look better?

http://www.hyperscale.com/2020/reviews/kits/p7hg_img_10/fullsize/18_fs.jpg

Boxart F-14D wheels AMK 648530 Eduard

 

Scott

CNJC-IPMS

 

 

I have had a look at them on the Eduard site, I don't know if maybe they just show the wrong images for them, but what they show are not D-wheels, those are A and B. That is not to say that there might not have been a few Ds that had those wheels at some point, but the average D did not use those.

Edited by Shadrik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the pics on SB listing..

edu648530.jpg

edu648530b.jpg

 

Scott

CNJC-IPMS

Share this post


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

M

11 hours ago, ElectroSoldier said:

Maybe you could put them on a sales site like ebay?
Im sure there are many people out there who would want them.

 

maybe if you get your money back you wouldnt feel so bitter?

Doubtful......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2020 at 8:13 AM, weirich1 said:

No model kit is 100% folks!

This.

 

Remember all the falderal about the Academy 1/48 F-4B when it was released? Oh, and the shape of the back half of the Zoukei-Mura 1/48 F-4J.

Edited by Grand Toad

Share this post


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

This.

 

Remember all the falderal about the Academy 1/48 F-4B when it was released? Oh, and the shape of the back half of the Zoukei-Mura 1/48 F-4J.

 

What you're doing is comparing apples with oranges. These two kits have just a couple of issues each. The AMK Tomcat has way more than a couple of issues.

 

Actually, what is really surprising about this kit it's that, when it comes to fit and accuracy, is worst of the now over tirthy years old Hasegawa Tomcat.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to keep injecting this concept (pardon the pun) but just because ALL models have flaws, does that mean that the flaws that do exist on any model should not be discussed? Because if that's the case I find that it's going to get REALLY hard to improve anything. Yes, there is a difference between bashing a kit for the sake of bashing it and calling it a piece of worthless goat droppings that should have never been made as opposed to actually pointing out all of these very minor or even potentially major flaws. One approach is absolutely zero help and I don't feel applies to this model. The other approach is actually very helpful to those that wish to build an accurate model and even those that design models in the future. Does AMK read all of these evaluations like what Zacto has been posting? Perhaps, perhaps not. But if I were the person designing models for a living and I came across a thread where there are skilled craftsmen taking a look at the work I'd done and pointing out where I could have improved and using actual hard evidence...well I'd consider that free advice and potentially education. There are some things being pointed out that might not have been realized. Now for the next project, this level of detail might be better. And if your goal is to be the very best, then you HAVE to get to that level of dissatisfaction with your own work. AMK seems to want to reach that goal so the first thing they probably should do is say "we didn't make 100% YET...but we can try harder"

Or we could just say that no kit is perfect and never talk about those imperfections. And never strive for close to perfect. After all, it's just a plastic model. 

Edited by niart17

Share this post


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

Actually, what is really surprising about this kit it's that, when it comes to fit and accuracy, is worst of the now over tirthy years old Hasegawa Tomcat.

 


Where did you get this info from?

Share this post


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

The other approach is actually very helpful to those that wish to build an accurate model and even those that design models in the future.

(my underlining)

 

I think it is no coincidence that the expressed desires of model builders for more accurate and detailed models over the years and the rapid and continuous improvement by model companies in creating more accurate and detailed kits has led to a renaissance of sorts in the quality of models over the last decade. I think we, the customers, have made it clear that we want accurate, detailed and well designed model kits and the model companies have, for the most part, competed heavily in these areas. As customers, our expectations have risen with each new interation of model kit technologies. It is no longer enough that a model "looks" like the subject. It must, to a higher and higher degree, match the subject in shape and detail. All this, plus, we want the models to assemble with relative ease, i.e. parts should fit. It should satisfy everyone from the casual modeler that wants something easy to build that will just "look" like the subject, to the most discerning modeler that wants the shapes and details of the model to match those of the real thing because that modeler will check those details and shapes and will report back to forums like this one. If there are mistakes, the modeling community will know about them in short order.  One might argue that the percent of modelers that participate on these forums as small. Probably true, but the online communities on Facebook are much larger, growing fast and much easier for today's casual modeler to find and participate in. The same information regarding the quality of a model kit will find its way to those online communities as well. That is where a model companies reputation can be built or broken.

 

tl;dr - All that to say, we've wanted better models and over the years the model companies have produced better models. Now, online communities can make or break a companies reputation in those areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/28/2020 at 1:01 AM, ElectroSoldier said:

Maybe you could put them on a sales site like ebay?
Im sure there are many people out there who would want them.

 

maybe if you get your money back you wouldnt feel so bitter?


Im not bitter what i am tired if is guts openly denying the existence if clear and plain issues with the kit?

The kit is “perfect”..blah blah.

Complete denial of reality.

Im not selling my kits but it doesnt mean you cant have a cold rational opinion on exactly where it stands in relation to other 48th Tomcats.

Something many modellers are completely unable to do.
As i said im sure we will see and we have seen some great builds of the kit that doesnt mean its “perfect” by a long stretch.

 

Edited by dehowie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/28/2020 at 6:16 AM, galfa said:

 

What you're doing is comparing apples with oranges. These two kits have just a couple of issues each. The AMK Tomcat has way more than a couple of issues.

 

Actually, what is really surprising about this kit it's that, when it comes to fit and accuracy, is worst of the now over tirthy years old Hasegawa Tomcat.

 

 

I've built both. The Hasegawa kit is much more finicky to build. The AMK has its issues, but it's still easier than the Hasegawa. Not by a whopping amount, but it is easier.

Share this post


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

 

I've built both. The Hasegawa kit is much more finicky to build. The AMK has its issues, but it's still easier than the Hasegawa. Not by a whopping amount, but it is easier.

 

If so, why several seasoned HAS Tomcat builders (some pros among them) have so much problem with the AMK kit?

Edited by shion

Share this post


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

 

If so, why several seasoned HAS Tomcat builders (some pros among them) have so much problem with the AMK kit?

In my opinion it's a mistake to think that because one person, or even a majority of the builders, can build a model without issues, that it means that other seasoned builders won't have issues and vice versa. There's a LOT of factors when it comes to kit builds. Some kits are very consistent and if there are issues it USUALLY means the builder did something "wrong". (Bandai Sci-fi comes to mind, they just work and it's hard to mess up) But others have some areas that if it's not done in a certain way in a certain order, then some small issues snowball into harder builds and trouble down the road. (i.e. the Has Tomcats)That's not to say it's un-buildable or that if you have issues then you're not good builder. It just has to be approached differently. That's the beauty of these forums. Others can benefit from people pointing out potential issues so maybe their build will flow more smoothly. Heck, I've build a kit before and the first time had no issues at all. Then built the exact same kit a couple of years later and because I did one small thing different the whole build fought me tooth and nails. I'm sure we've all been there. 

Edited by niart17

Share this post


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...