Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Gene K said:

Thanks, BoeingDriver, VERY well done ... assuming that's your video.

(I subscribed to your channel).

 

Gene K

 

P.S. The video quality is really good, but I had some trouble understanding because of audio echo. And "Smokey Joe"?

 

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

Thanks, BoeingDriver, VERY well done.

(I subscribed to your channel).

 

Gene K

 

P.S. The video quality is really good, but I had some trouble understanding because of audio echo. And "Smokey Joe"?

 

LOL.  No sir, not my video.  I was looking for reviews last night and saw it; thought I'd share.  

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

 

A reference to the J79 engines I imagine...

 

Yup,  but I hadn't heard the Phantom called "Smokey Joe" as the reviewer does. It was always easier to spot the smoke than the airplane -- just follow the trail 'till you see the white helmet ... and then pick up airplane. Camo helmets made it harder. :stooges:

 

Gene K

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
5 hours ago, Ben Brown said:

Can't find any pics of the new D sprues, yet. I hope they include the early D front instrument panel and glare shield. I'm lazy and don't want to have to backdate a late version.  :whistle:

 

Ben 

I got two F4c's from Spru Brothers a couple weeks ago, and was so impressed that I see two F4d's headed my way. Only disappointment was with the decals selection. Pretty, but also a little boring.

gary

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's shitty is the fact that instead of saying "yes we know there's a shape error, unfortunately we cannot fix it"..they're denying it's even there. 

At least AMK recognized there was a problem and fixed it, ZM seems insulted to even entertain the notion that they messed up..which they did. 

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

What's shitty is the fact that instead of saying "yes we know there's a shape error, unfortunately we cannot fix it"..they're denying it's even there. 

At least AMK recognized there was a problem and fixed it, ZM seems insulted to even entertain the notion that they messed up..which they did. 

Off with their heads! 

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

What's shitty is the fact that instead of saying "yes we know there's a shape error, unfortunately we cannot fix it"..they're denying it's even there. 

At least AMK recognized there was a problem and fixed it, ZM seems insulted to even entertain the notion that they messed up..which they did. 

Have you any idea what it cost to cut a new mold for the main fuselage?  Right now we have a $75 kit that's at the top tier of the food chain. Not perfect, but when compared to the others; there's no contest. I wish they'd fix it like you do, but I also know what it takes to cut irregular compound curves and get them right. 

gary

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

What's shitty is the fact that instead of saying "yes we know there's a shape error, unfortunately we cannot fix it"..they're denying it's even there. 

 

I don't think they ever denied it, they just never talked about it. Or did they?

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

What's shitty is the fact that instead of saying "yes we know there's a shape error, unfortunately we cannot fix it"..they're denying it's even there. 

At least AMK recognized there was a problem and fixed it, ZM seems insulted to even entertain the notion that they messed up..which they did. 

 

...I'm working on a remedy, I think the shape is beginning to look quite good.

J

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, ChesshireCat said:

Have you any idea what it cost to cut a new mold for the main fuselage?

10-15kUSD perhaps ? The problem is that they probably want to do Es, F or G boxings. If they don't fix the rear fuselage engine bulges cross-section problem in later boxings, quite a few people won't buy them especially given the high retail price. If they do, the people who will have bought the C/D/J/S will whine asking for revised sprues. Whatever ZM does or doesn't do, they're not in a great situation. Now of course the world will continue to turn, perhaps most people don't care and I'll spend my money elsewhere so I guess it's ok.

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

What's shitty is the fact that instead of saying "yes we know there's a shape error, unfortunately we cannot fix it"..they're denying it's even there. 

At least AMK recognized there was a problem and fixed it, ZM seems insulted to even entertain the notion that they messed up..which they did. 

 

Show me a single kit that is an exact replica of the real thing and I will eat my shorts.

 

The ZM Phantom is the absolute creme of the crop for 1/48 Phantom kits.

 

The 1/32 Tamiya Phantoms are full of errors. Yet nary a word on them.

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

 

Show me a single kit that is an exact replica of the real thing and I will eat my shorts.

 

The ZM Phantom is the absolute creme of the crop for 1/48 Phantom kits.

 

The 1/32 Tamiya Phantoms are full of errors. Yet nary a word on them.

 

Yes, thats true...but the faults on the other kits are in locations where they can be fixed...like the AC scopes on the Academy bird and even the slightly skinny nose...not to mention the wrong elevators that are a piece of cake to fix or just to replace. The fuselage issue on ZM is very, very hard to fix. it would require a whole set of panels to be exchanged in the middle of the fuselage. By puttying such a section in, if it existed, you would loose all details in the sanding process. It's like trying to cut the wheel buldges out of the wings to get a -B wing...doable but really not worth the effort! That and the fact that the price is really high just make it a 2nd class product. I have a -S, it's very nice on details, but going fwd I rather beef up Academy birds with AM parts...

 

This is my opinion, I know others disagree and some are even up to the heels in ZM's back side...interesting wise the German forums have a lot of folks who think like me. I am looking fwd to the first guy daring the operation to get rid of the fat a s s ...;-)

Edited by anj4de
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, anj4de said:

 

Yes, thats true...but the faults on the other kits are in locations where they can be fixed...like the AC scopes on the Academy bird and even the slightly skinny nose...not to mention the wrong elevators that are a piece of cake to fix or just to replace. The fuselage issue on ZM is very, very hard to fix. it would require a whole set of panels to be exchanged in the middle of the fuselage. By puttying such a section in, if it existed, you would loose all details in the sanding process. It's like trying to cut the wheel buldges out of the wings to get a -B wing...doable but really not worth the effort! That and the fact that the price is really high just make it a 2nd class product. I have a -S, it's very nice on details, but going fwd I rather beef up Academy birds with AM parts...

 

This is my opinion, I know others disagree and some are even up to the heels in ZM's back side...interesting wise the German forums have a lot of folks who think like me. I am looking fwd to the first guy daring the operation to get rid of the fat fool...;-)

 

It’s so hard to notice it isn’t even worth the effort to fix IMHO.

 

The ZM kit when built is a gem.

 

The Academy kit is full of shape errors, I’d prefer the Hasegawa kit any day over the Academy kits. I have Academy #3 for 1/48 Phantom kits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be interested in hearing about the shape issues on the Academy birds. I know of the following:

 

-AC scopes

-elevators

-skinny nose

-angle of nose to ground

-bulges on the wings of the Navy birds

 

Intakes do not count in my book since the Hase ones are just as bad...I used XMM ones and am very happy.  The next question then is...what is easily fixable and what not?

 

thanks

Uwe

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

10-15kUSD perhaps ? The problem is that they probably want to do Es, F or G boxings. If they don't fix the rear fuselage engine bulges cross-section problem in later boxings, quite a few people won't buy them especially given the high retail price. If they do, the people who will have bought the C/D/J/S will whine asking for revised sprues. Whatever ZM does or doesn't do, they're not in a great situation. Now of course the world will continue to turn, perhaps most people don't care and I'll spend my money elsewhere so I guess it's ok.

 

Just now, anj4de said:

Would be interested in hearing about the shape issues on the Academy birds. I know of the following:

 

-AC scopes

-elevators

-skinny nose

-angle of nose to ground

-bulges on the wings of the Navy birds

 

Intakes do not count in my book since the Hase ones are just as bad...I used XMM ones and am very happy.  The next question then is...what is easily fixable and what not?

 

thanks

Uwe

better be thinking $1200 and hour at .040" an hour at best

glt

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, JeffreyK said:

 

...I'm working on a remedy, I think the shape is beginning to look quite good.

J

Oh! that's quite interesting! i'd be in for a couple!

because, as great as the ZM kit looks, that shape issue had been enough to prevent me from buying any ZM Phantoms yet. and the Phantom is my favorite scale modeling subject.

for me, the shape issue  is quite noticeable on Navy birds, as the curved shape shows clearly in those big "NAVY" markings.

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

Oh! that's quite interesting! i'd be in for a couple!

because, as great as the ZM kit looks, that shape issue had been enough to prevent me from buying any ZM Phantoms yet. and the Phantom is my favorite scale modeling subject.

for me, the shape issue  is quite noticeable on Navy birds, as the curved shape shows clearly in those big "NAVY" markings.

 

I would also be interesetd in seeing the issue fixed...one way or the other. Looking fwd to seeing your approach...

 

cheers

Uwe

 

 

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...