Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums

Sign in to follow this  
Martin @ AMK Models

AMK 1/48 Kfir New Tool

Recommended Posts

Wouldn't it be better and make more sense to list the F-14D pre-order's second try in the F-14D thread thus keeping this thread on track for Kfir fans?

 

Regards,

Don

Share this post


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

The gallery won't show as it's probably private.

I'm still here too. Can't post pics here due to Photobucket and haven't bothered switching to another photo hosting site. 

 

If you have the re-tooled kit, check your fuselage halves and Mk.82s. My fuselage halves seem to have a rough texture all along the upper fuselage, like anti-slip, but probably from unpolished metal surfaces. 

 

As for the Mk.82s, the ones I have are all misshapen. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, PlasticWeapons said:

I'm still here too. Can't post pics here due to Photobucket and haven't bothered switching to another photo hosting site. 

 

If you have the re-tooled kit, check your fuselage halves and Mk.82s. My fuselage halves seem to have a rough texture all along the upper fuselage, like anti-slip, but probably from unpolished metal surfaces. 

 

As for the Mk.82s, the ones I have are all misshapen. 

 

 

 

Mine all look great.  No issues.  Perhaps something with just that box?

 

Cliff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, let me try this Imgur site to host pics:

 

See if this works. It's a sideview photo of the Mk.82s.

W3Rpc2K.jpg

 

Fuselage, right half

AO1Fs45.jpg

Edited by PlasticWeapons
Testing photo uploading

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, PlasticWeapons said:

See if this works. It's a sideview photo of the Mk.82s.

W3Rpc2K.jpg

 

efqeXcQ.gif

Edited by Laurent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, those Mk. 82's look terrible and completely unusable. Fail indeed.

Share this post


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

Wow, those Mk. 82's look terrible and completely unusable. 

While the Mk. 82's are clearly unusable, at least they CAN be replaced by aftermarket (not that they should have to be, mind you). For me the epic fail is the fuselage surface, which is clearly going to require significant sanding and has the potential to remove surface detail. THAT is unacceptable to me. No modern kit should go out the door in this condition, shame on AMK for this.

 

Rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ouch!

those new issues on the kit saddens me a lot. i was hoping to get that new issue of the kit as soon as it shows in stock in my favorites vendors.

now i'll think i'll wait till AMK acknowledge these new issues, and certify that the sent kits are now free of any defects... unless that i'll pass my turn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I have the old AMK Kfir kit and am quite happy with it myself. Honestly, what is wrong with it (the old kit) that warranted a whole new release from AMK? Is there a side-by-side comparison of the two kits anywhere?

 

Regards,

Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The original Kfir release by AMK missed the "Coke bottle" or "pinched waist" of the aircraft. This release corrects that missing detail.

 

Here are the other photos I posted in the Facebook group, I'll share them here. If you look closely (photo quality may have degraded from uploading), you might be able to see some scratches and surface imperfections picked up from the mold during injection process. Did AMK do final QC check/mold polishing of the metal mold at all? I see circular tool bit marks on the new-tooled parts, especially the GBU fins and the Mk.82 bomb bodies. In any case, the single piece weapons will need some clean up of the seam lines/plastic flash, so get ready to putty and sand.

 

I'm a bit worried about the future AMK F-14D kit quality, even with all that extra detail being put into it, if the new-tooled Kfir parts are the latest AMK standard. I think I'll just wait for the Tamiya F-14B/D to be released. :)

QU7st4a.jpg

3REqeX4.jpg

5RQ619f.jpg

sp2T8h0.jpg

oRoJQau.jpg

045g95y.jpg

b6xQ4AM.jpg

Wk5UfLn.jpg

9dSVKMe.jpg

Edited by PlasticWeapons
Added additional photos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bannana-ing is an extraction problem, not a tooling problem.  Looks like they're running the molds too quickly.  So it's probably going to be a problem with more than one kit, but *may* not be there on *every* one.

 

Tool marks...  I wonder if they tried to push this out the door quickly (and cheaply?) in order to raise funds for the F-14.  It doesn't look *too* bad though - yeah, it sucks that you have to smooth the area out, but it looks like it should be a pretty straightforward, quick job.

 

Bent fins... that's a feature.  Just like the 1/72 Kfir.  See, they could have just given you two bombs, and they'd be fine.  But instead, they decided to give you four bombs, so they'd get damaged in transit.  Because that protects the rest of the kit.  Yup.  Totally meant to do that.  :rolleyes:

 

As for the differences between the kits, this review from ModelWeb highlights the differences: http://modelweb.modelforum.cz/2017/12/06/iai-kfir-c2c7-amk-148/

 

11-PICT1377.JPG

Edited by MoFo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the clarification MoFo on the Mk.82s. The original ones from the first Kfir release are still included (the two-piece ones) so no loss there. One GBU and the Bullwinkle pod suffered bent fins but the pod is repairable with hot water. 

 

Now to find some Eduard resin replacement bits...

Share this post


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

. For me the epic fail is the fuselage surface, which is clearly going to require significant sanding and has the potential to remove surface detail.

Rick,

 

Since you don't have the kit and I do, let me give you my impression. The "rough texture all along the upper fuselage" to which PlasticWeapons alludes is overstated. It's pretty darn hard to spot visually, but a finger will confirm that there's a thin patch  on the top right fuselage along the spine. It literally took me one whole minute with a fine and extra fine sanding stick to eliminate it. No panel lines were hurt during this operation. -- at all! :thumbsup:

 

If this small texture "issue" is the reason for your not getting the kit, you're unnecessarily denying yourself. 

 

Gene K

Edited by Gene K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't own any of the 1/48 Kfir kits. Does someone here own both ? I'd like to know if the intake size is the same and if the canopy profile has changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waiting to get my hands on the new Kfir here in Europe...

The bomb issue is not nice but not a deal breaker for me since I am after an agressor/fighter config anyway! The new fuselage looks very good. I do not have the old Kfir but I have Mirage kits and they look the same (Kfir is a beefed up Mirage 5 anyway). I can only repeat what I have said befoe...kudos to AMK for acknowledging  constructive critisium and for correcting a major part of their product! I just wish ZM did the same with their Phantoms!

 

cheers

Uwe

Edited by anj4de

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting the old and new fuselage pictures  "MoFo". I can clearly see the difference. Oh well, I have already committed time and money towards the old one so I guess I will just live with it.

 

Regards,

Don.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Avantgardemodel kits team has posted a message on FB about the misshapen mk 82 a few minutes ago.

 

from their FB: (for the non-FB members)

 

***IMPORTANT MESSAGE***

It has been brought to our attention (thanks Ryan Fernandez) that some of the slide molded bombs contained in our latest release 1/48 Kfir are misshapen. 
We have investigated and it seems that some of the first batch of kits were shipped with these errors. 
Whilst we try to get everything right first time, all the time, we recognise that it’s important to do the right thing and replace them all. 
We will be re molding the bombs and sending these out to our distributors very soon.

Our quality is our highest priority and we are just as sad about this. The issue lay with one of the tools so we have taken the tool out of service. 
We use a camera to test each part as it comes out of the tool and this was also found to be faulty and missed the side of the bomb. This is also now changed.
We use a camera because this is usually more accurate than the Mk.1 "eyeball". Perhaps not in this instance.
It's not so easy to see by eye but the issue can be seen when shown in "macro" and that's enough for us to rectfiy.

We all appreciate your support very much and we are sure you’ll allow some leeway in this.

After all, it’s not necessarily the mistake but how it’s handled. 
You have our unreserved apologies if this causes you any delay or inconvenience in building our kit.

Thanks for the ongoing support.

Sio, Martin, Vicky and the team.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

The bannana-ing is an extraction problem, not a tooling problem.  Looks like they're running the molds too quickly.  So it's probably going to be a problem with more than one kit, but *may* not be there on *every* one.

 

 

 

Hello.

sadly,  it is not an extraction problem.

If it was an extraction problem, it would be fixable.

But it is not.

 

It is a design problem.

Simply put: the mk-82 one-piece part is too thick to be molded.

 

The part material is normally PS.

PS admits a wall thickness between 0.889 mm and 3.81 mm.

 

Let's caculate the wall thickness of a mk82 in 1/48.

Diameter of the real bomb body: 10.75 inch so 273.05 mm.

In 1/48, a thermoplastic one-part mk 82 will have a wall thickness of 5.688 mm.

5.688mm is way beyond the chart to make a one-part design in these polymer.

 

So what happens here?

Because the part is too thick,

it takes ages to fill,

it takes pressure to stay at the nominal sizes

and worst, it takes ages to cool.

And because when the part is extracted, the core of the part is not cold, the part continues to shrink internally and the cold surface can't follow this intern shinkrage and this is the result: warpage.

An annex problem here is the fact that the cooling isn't done when the part is extracted, so the part could look OK at first glance, but hours later,  warpage appears.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

Avantgardemodel kits team has posted a message on FB about the misshapen mk 82 a few minutes ago.

 

from their FB: (for the non-FB members)

 

***IMPORTANT MESSAGE***

It has been brought to our attention (thanks Ryan Fernandez) that some of the slide molded bombs contained in our latest release 1/48 Kfir are misshapen. 
We have investigated and it seems that some of the first batch of kits were shipped with these errors. 
Whilst we try to get everything right first time, all the time, we recognise that it’s important to do the right thing and replace them all. 
We will be re molding the bombs and sending these out to our distributors very soon.

Our quality is our highest priority and we are just as sad about this. The issue lay with one of the tools so we have taken the tool out of service. 
We use a camera to test each part as it comes out of the tool and this was also found to be faulty and missed the side of the bomb. This is also now changed.
We use a camera because this is usually more accurate than the Mk.1 "eyeball". Perhaps not in this instance.
It's not so easy to see by eye but the issue can be seen when shown in "macro" and that's enough for us to rectfiy.

We all appreciate your support very much and we are sure you’ll allow some leeway in this.

After all, it’s not necessarily the mistake but how it’s handled. 
You have our unreserved apologies if this causes you any delay or inconvenience in building our kit.

Thanks for the ongoing support.

Sio, Martin, Vicky and the team.

 

 

 

 

 

What a joke.:rofl:

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...