Jump to content

1/48 Zoukei Mura F-4C and F-4D


Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, boom175 said:

Really looking forward to these accessories! I am building a ZM F-4J  right now and I really like it so when the F-4D comes out I will get the intkes will save a lot of work! Do you have a mailing list so I will know when your accessories are ready?

Thanks

We will make an announcement here when they are ready and we're to buy them.

 

look for a F-4C Wild Weasel kit and stores and pods for all the Vietnam Air Camaign as these kits are rolled out.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in for a set of short nozzles! I want to build my J as a BA jet.

 

The only aftermarket the Z-M kit really needs is interior detail for the canopies, which I think Hypersonic is planning to release at some point. I was a little disappointed that they put so much work into getting the kit (mostly) right, and left out something as basic as the heavy canopy interior framework, just like every other manufacturer in the past. Odd aft fuselage shape aside, I think it's still the best F-4 available. You'd need to spend a lot of $$ on aftermarket parts to bring the other manufacturers' kits up to a similar level of detail.

 

Ben

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me a substantial miss on all of the 1/48 F-4s is the lack of any detail under the canopy longeron/sill. This area was home for the canopy switches and drive rods. This is represented by a big blank area on all three major manufacturers offerings. Aries provided this in their sets and there was at least one photo etched set (KMC?) that captured them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2017 at 5:06 AM, JeffreyK said:

The Academy kit is far from being 'better' than the Hasegawa kit. It has a one-piece fuselage and a few finer details in certain areas, but overall there are far too many shape and detail errors. Its only plus is that it's the only 'modern' tool B model.

 

 

Hate to even ask but what are the issues with the Academy kit? I picked up a couple via trades recently based on several online reviews which were all very positive so it is disappointing to hear such negative feedback...

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Petrov27 said:

 

Hate to even ask but what are the issues with the Academy kit? I picked up a couple via trades recently based on several online reviews which were all very positive so it is disappointing to hear such negative feedback...

Hi,

 

the ones I know about having built a couple are as follows:

  1. Verticle fin is to thick in section and the error goes to the top of the fin caps where the side draw in to make a straight top line
  2. The B wing panel lines and details are wrong
  3. Canopy proportions are off.  the pilot canopy is to short and the length is made upper in the  WSO canopy being to long.  ZM and Hasegawa are identical and correct
  4. The Radome and nose of the Academy is slightly undersized in section forward of the intakes
  5. No " cable cutters as they are called are in the back side of the splitter plated
  6. The intakes track is to small where it mates with the fan and the fan is undersized to scale
  7. Where the ZM is thought to be to flat, the Academy is to curved.

Please keep in mind these are splitting hair type of criticisms, and it builds into a beautiful model.  I would suggest that these are not negative feedback at all, as every model is a compromise of the real thing and many of the real things are different shape and size.   All and all I am very positive about the Academy kit, so don't let a hair splitting discussion get you bummed out.  We are just pointing out a couple of things that or parts will have to make the kit a little better and make the ZM kit even better.  After all, this is for fun and enjoyment....right???

Edited by ghatherly
Link to post
Share on other sites

Gary has nailed it on the head in the way to approach this.

With the Academy and ZM kit we now have two great Phantoms.

The big issue is as kits get better the tiniest of issues get met with the same volume and depth of condemnation that the worst of Trumpeters efforts do.

The recent ZM rear fuselage "discussion" where people ranted on about the fact it "might" have an error and simply ignoring all normal thought process. Even if it did its actually still more accurate than ALL of the other kits in 48th which in the depth of the attacks on ZM people seemed oblivious to.

Somehow the discussion of very minor detail deficiencies or omissionions gets launched into a thermonuclear attack on the manufacturer(ZM, Academygate) in less than 6 posts.

Gary does beautiful resin work so be looking forward to grabbing some of his enhancements for my ZM kits...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dehowie said:

Gary has nailed it on the head in the way to approach this.

With the Academy and ZM kit we now have two great Phantoms.

The big issue is as kits get better the tiniest of issues get met with the same volume and depth of condemnation that the worst of Trumpeters efforts do.

The recent ZM rear fuselage "discussion" where people ranted on about the fact it "might" have an error and simply ignoring all normal thought process. Even if it did its actually still more accurate than ALL of the other kits in 48th which in the depth of the attacks on ZM people seemed oblivious to.

Somehow the discussion of very minor detail deficiencies or omissionions gets launched into a thermonuclear attack on the manufacturer(ZM, Academygate) in less than 6 posts.

Gary does beautiful resin work so be looking forward to grabbing some of his enhancements for my ZM kits...

 

 

Hi

 

I think it all depends on the personal priorities of people. I first of all look at the general measurements and shape, details only come second. For me the hoizontal stap issue or the air co intakes on the Academy offer are not the end of the world since replacement parts are available (Hypersonic). The canopy I already tested...it can be swapped for a Hasegeawa one, so also no big issue. The nose section I so far did not realize...will have to see it first. Now...the fuselage issue on the ZM kit is a different story, once you detect it, it is very obvious, at least to me. Correction may be possible but I have not seen it done yet...it will for sure involve major putty and sanding work and re-scribing. That...and the very high price of the ZM kits is a bit of a hold back for me...will get a F-4S though since I like the type and markings. I wonder really how in the age of digital measuring and with tons of real planes around and good models to look at such a major flaw on the fuselage could happen. ZM would have a super winner...even at the price they ask...if they fixed that!

 

thanks

Uwe

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, dehowie said:

Gary has nailed it on the head in the way to approach this.

With the Academy and ZM kit we now have two great Phantoms.

The big issue is as kits get better the tiniest of issues get met with the same volume and depth of condemnation that the worst of Trumpeters efforts do.

The recent ZM rear fuselage "discussion" where people ranted on about the fact it "might" have an error and simply ignoring all normal thought process. Even if it did its actually still more accurate than ALL of the other kits in 48th which in the depth of the attacks on ZM people seemed oblivious to.

Somehow the discussion of very minor detail deficiencies or omissionions gets launched into a thermonuclear attack on the manufacturer(ZM, Academygate) in less than 6 posts.

Gary does beautiful resin work so be looking forward to grabbing some of his enhancements for my ZM kits...

 

 


You can't call the ZM kit the most accurate Phantom ever when they botched a very obvious curvature on the fuselage. It doesn't matter how great the cockpit is if there's a giant crappy mistake that you can see plain as day on the outside. 
There's no might about the ZM fuselage..there's an error. 

Edited by Jonathan_Lotton
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jonathan_Lotton said:


You can't call the ZM kit the most accurate Phantom ever when they botched a very obvious curvature on the fuselage. It doesn't matter how great the cockpit is if there's a giant crappy mistake that you can see plain as day on the outside. 
There's no might about the ZM fuselage..there's an error. 

 

Oh brother, it's minor and it is the most accurate Phantom

on the market.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, anj4de said:

 ... once you detect it, it is very obvious ... .

 

 

Is that an oxymoron?

 

8 hours ago, anj4de said:

I wonder really how in the age of digital measuring and with tons of real planes around and good models to look at such a major flaw on the fuselage could happen.

So Uwe, what kind of digital measuring did you do, and which ton of real  planes and good models did you  look at?

 

OK, OK, I'm just pulling your chain ... it's just that I have trouble "detecting this major flaw" as you call it.

 

Gene K

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, dehowie said:

Gary has nailed it on the head in the way to approach this.

With the Academy and ZM kit we now have two great Phantoms.

The big issue is as kits get better the tiniest of issues get met with the same volume and depth of condemnation that the worst of Trumpeters efforts do.

The recent ZM rear fuselage "discussion" where people ranted on about the fact it "might" have an error and simply ignoring all normal thought process. Even if it did its actually still more accurate than ALL of the other kits in 48th which in the depth of the attacks on ZM people seemed oblivious to.

Somehow the discussion of very minor detail deficiencies or omissionions gets launched into a thermonuclear attack on the manufacturer(ZM, Academygate) in less than 6 posts.

Gary does beautiful resin work so be looking forward to grabbing some of his enhancements for my ZM kits...

 

 

could not have said it any better!

glt

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


You can't call the ZM kit the most accurate Phantom ever when they botched a very obvious curvature on the fuselage. It doesn't matter how great the cockpit is if there's a giant crappy mistake that you can see plain as day on the outside. 
There's no might about the ZM fuselage..there's an error. 

YAWN!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Gene K said:

 

Is that an oxymoron?

 

So Uwe, what kind of digital measuring did you do, and which ton of real  planes and good models did you  look at?

 

OK, OK, I'm just pulling your chain ... it's just that I have trouble "detecting this major flaw" as you call it.

 

Gene K

So you Gene were obviously the man who did the measurements for ZM? Otherwise I can not understand your "valuable" comment from above. As I said a bit further up, peoples individual expectations on things may differ. For me, things that can be fixed with either AM or a bit of scratching are not critical...a flaw in the fuselage that requires more then just changing parts is a lot worse then changing parts. 

I did not measure any planes...and I do not have to to support my opinion. I am a potential customer and if a company wants my money they have to deliver to my expectations. If yours are different...good for you and the provider.

With ZM price wise playing in the same league as Tamiya I would expect the same level of accuracy. Tamiya's new Tomcat is a kit after my taste, it may not be the most detailed one around but it's accurate as far as everybody says so far. That's important for me...others may think differently. I remember the outcry when it became clear there would not be any dropped slats and flaps...did not bother me one bit!

On the R&D subject...ZM is a Japanese company? If yes...they have tons of Phantoms in country they could have looked at! The same goes for a German company...we have lots of Phantoms here as a reference. All in all it's sad that ZM did not acknowledge their mistake...and subsequently fix it. Eduard did when their first 109G fell through on general shape and measurement issues...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've told folks at least a dozen times about cutting a mold with a compound curve or an uneven curve in them, and 98% failed to grasp the issues involved. You can feed perfect data into the CNC computer, but it will never come out perfect unless it's built to cut compound curves from the get go. What it takes is often closely guarded, and nobody molding plastic airplanes will receive that knowledge. Yet it's out there.

 

Second issue is the so called art of measuring a Phantom (or whatever). Just the grand idea of doing this is flat scary if you plan on being in the finite. A laser is not the end all measuring device. Highly affected by air drafts, dust in the air, and even the growth and shrinkage of the floor it sets on. I'd seriously doubt anybody has access to a controlled atmosphere room big enough to allow a Phantom to acclimate  over two or three weeks. That alone can cause you a ton of grief. Just doing a laser scan over a weekend will drive you nuts sometimes, and that laser is only as good as you "buck" it in. Just the air pressure changes in the tires will throw you off, let aone the growth of the sheet metal verses shrinkage.

gary

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2017 at 10:38 AM, Jonathan_Lotton said:


You can't call the ZM kit the most accurate Phantom ever when they botched a very obvious curvature on the fuselage. It doesn't matter how great the cockpit is if there's a giant crappy mistake that you can see plain as day on the outside. 
There's no might about the ZM fuselage..there's an error. 

 

Geez, don't buy it then. You sound like you'd rather slit your wrists......

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, phantomdriver said:

Can't argue with that...:rofl:

 

52 minutes ago, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

Geez, don't buy it then. You sound like you'd rather slit your wrists......


Seriously?

 At what point did that thought pop into your head and go "you know, that's a good thing to post"

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Jonathan_Lotton said:

 


Seriously?

 At what point did that thought pop into your head and go "you know, that's a good thing to post"

 

 

The second I read that you were lathered over what is the best F-4 kit on the market....Just don't buy the kit ok? And don't be a TROLL.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

The second I read that you were lathered over what is the best F-4 kit on the market....Just don't buy the kit ok? And don't be a TROLL.


Pointing out that there's no question on if there is a shape error (there is) and then saying how wonderfully accurate it is (when it does have a shape error both in the tail and the nose) is not me being "lathered" or anything like that. I'm not saying it's a bad kit, but I'm also saying that for the money they're expecting for it ($75.00 plus shipping from SprueBrothers) and the hype surrounding it..that it wouldn't have had those contour issues.  It's not like it was a burner can that can be swapped out, or a cockpit, or a pylon..modelers have been doing that since injection molding started for kits. 

It's no different than people pointing out the shortcomings of the Hasegawa Tomcat, or the GWH Eagle, or the GWH MiG-29..it doesn't make them bad kits..and there's no need to passionately defend the accuracy of these kits and to shield them from any critical evaluation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

One small thing,,,,,,,disagreeing with a group of people about the quality of a kit is very much NOT being a Troll.

 

"Trolling" is a post that is made just to stir up a bunch of people on a message board to get them to react, and the Troller doesn't need to even agree with what he posts.

 

Geez, that word gets overused and in the wrong context so often these days. Instead of what it means,,,,,,it now can be used by every Acrylic paint user to call every Enamel paint user a "bad name."

 

Disagreeing "for real" though,,,,,,,,is not Trolling. Another guy in this thread that disagrees in one direction a year ago about a kit, and now points out his perception of that kit's errors in order to prop up the newer Phantom kit,,,,,,,,,,that sort of flip-flopping IS Trolling.

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

... ,disagreeing with a group of people about the quality of a kit is very much NOT being a Troll.

 

Well, Rex, using irrational in-your-face language as he did ("here's a giant crappy mistake that you can see plain as day on the outside.") certainly is trolling for retorts.

 

Gene K

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...