Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
Ranger_Chris61

1/48 Tamiya A6M2 Review/Preview

Recommended Posts

 

Returning to aircraft subject matter this week with a look at Tamiya's 1/48th scale A6M2 Zero kit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.  That was a nice review.  You highlighted the strengths and weaknesses of the kit.  Well done.

 

Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can it be a preview when the kit has been around since 1973?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IF there is EVER a point of reviewing a kit several "modeling generations" behind the current one it should be addressing "issues" in the light of the current knowledge.

And that is sadly lacking. Cockpit may be "unusable" but on the same token it needs to be made clear there are NO aftermarket replacements for this particular kit.

Wheel wells were praised however they're horribly shallow, misshapen and detail is wrong. Not to mention incorrect propeller spinner size (there should be actually 2 of them included since both Mitsubishi and Nakajima schemes are offered), color call outs (for both details and camo schemes) and dubious markings for V-103.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect he posts these to get viewers to his videos, not to really provide useful information so since you guys have viewed same (I didn't) it has served it's purpose...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I viewed one once, found it lacking in any useful information, and don't intend to view any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this review is excellent for those who haven't been building models for very long, or maybe are considering it for the first time.  For various reasons, I think these people are a more important audience than me.  And speaking with would-be modelers offline, they tell me they're intimidated by the cost, and their (mistaken) suspicion that this hobby is too hard to get into as an adult.  Balanced assessments of old kits are a good remedy for both impressions.

 

That said, I'd suggest that the reviewer remember that context.  I've built a half-dozen of these kits and think they're a blast.  Basically they're great for the new modeler that wants a historically famous plane, but cannot (yet) believe that anyone would pay $40+ USD for a plastic model kit.  They read Saburo Sakai's memoir, or Sakai/Caiden's Zero, or watch Tora! Tora! Tora!, and then want a kit to build.  Amazon has this cheap with prime 2 day shipping.  Done.  Sure, the kit cockpit isn't much compared to later Zeke kits, but for beginners, it is completely usable.  For the newbie, it's more important that the parts fit without too much fuss.  And let's be honest; under a closed greenhouse canopy it's a struggle to see much more than the kit has on board.  Add some seatbelts made out of masking tape - now you're modeling!

 

If you've built the kit, I'd also mention that gap in the wingroot.  Some sheet styrene of the correct thickness is a quick fix for that.  

 

Remember, normal people don't yet know or care about the fine details of an A6M2 Type Zero Carrier-Based Fighter.  Yet.  We need to lure them into this hobby before they become maladjusted detail-mongering fanatics who part with irresponsible quantities of money for build-it-yourself toys.  :rolleyes:

 

Edited by Fishwelding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One should remember that we haven't all been building models our entire lives. An old kit may be "new" to many modelers who're returning as adults or just getting interested in the hobby. When I returned to scale modeling as an adult, I had never seen a Tamiya kit. Revell, Monogram, AMT, Lindberg, ESCI and Italeri were the brands that I was familiar with, and had access to, as an American kid in the 1970's.

 

After doing some surfing and reading blogs and forums, I was left with the impression that Tamiya kits were the pinnacle of fit, finish, and quality. If it came from Tamiya, it would be a great experience. So, I bought the 1/48 Ki-84 Hayate. I had no idea that it was a 1960's era tooling--the box top design looked inline with all their other kits and there were no obvious clues given. Then I opened the box and started building. It was clearly not a modern kit. Very toy-like, raised panel lines, poorly fitting parts, etc. A video like this would have helped me to avoid the Tamiya and go with the much newer and better tooled Hasegawa kit.

 

Try to consider that there are other people who are new to the hobby and will find his videos useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think it would be a lot more effective to just post somewhere like here: "Who makes the best 1/48 Flying Dingbat kit?" and then maybe do further research on the answers than wander the internet viewing amatuer video kit reviews.....

Share this post


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

I would think it would be a lot more effective to just post somewhere like here: "Who makes the best 1/48 Flying Dingbat kit?" and then maybe do further research on the answers than wander the internet viewing amatuer video kit reviews.....

The "thing" about the entire internet, and you're experiencing it right here with ARC, is that the bulk of it is "amateur".  What, exactly, in your opinion, would constitute a "professional" kit review, exactly? Maybe I'm taking this comment out of context, but it sounds like you're just another hater. The premise that you're ragging on someone for simply being enthusiastic about their hobby is... very off-putting. It's a hobby. I'm sure if someone is making a living at it they'll be very attuned to the suggestion of what is more effective. Most of what we do, as hobbyists, is wander the internet viewing amateur content. Correct me if I'm wrong and my sincere apologies if so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/5/2018 at 9:45 PM, RCAFFAN said:

I suspect he posts these to get viewers to his videos, not to really provide useful information so since you guys have viewed same (I didn't) it has served it's purpose...

And to address this comment directly, what do you think the goal of posting a video of any subject on YouTube would be? To not get views? Of course he's trying to get people to view his content. That's like, the whole point of YouTube. Why the hate? He makes absolutely zero strong opinions much less anything remotely controversial in his video. It doesn't sound like you have a problem with the content as much as you have a problem with the mere fact that he made the video in the first place, and this, for some unbeknownst reason, annoys you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meatwad, I find these "Review/Previews" irritating as well, so I guess I'm a hater too. The trouble with them IMHO is they're not really useful for anybody. For a novice modeler, the Zero video is really misleading. He says the cockpit is useless, but it's perfectly adequate if one just wants a nice looking shelf model and is probably going to build it with closed canopy anyway. Similarly, he says you're going to have to do extra work on the engine, but the engine's not particularly visible buried in the cowling and partially hidden by the spinner. On the other side of the coin, he doesn't present anything about possible build issues like wing root gaps, nor does he mention that, contrary to the painting instructions, we now know that early war carrier Zeros were not overall light neutral gray. To me the most misleading thing about his videos is that he fails to say anything about the age of the kit he's re/previewing. I wish he could include a clear, simple statement along the lines of "This kit was engineered in the early 1970s. It was a very good kit for its time, and it can still provide a fun building experience and yield a nice looking model, but its engineering and detail don't compare to recent Tamiya kits." I should think that information would be useful either to a novice or to a more experienced modeler who might not happen to know about the kit's pedigree. Beyond that, in terms of the video's usefulness (or lack thereof) for experienced builders, I think Sakai summed it up pretty well above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very well said seawinder.

All those negatives of this review are due to the reviewer's:

- lack of knowledge of the kit market

- lack of knowledge of this particular subject

- failure to build the kit himself.

Third fact is unfortunately common to the vast majority of the reviews. I consider these "in box reviews" the waste of everybody's time.

 

Share this post


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

Very well said seawinder.

- failure to build the kit himself.

Third fact is unfortunately common to the vast majority of the reviews. I consider these "in box reviews" the waste of everybody's time.

I'm absolutely with you there, Sakai. Even a quick, unpainted assembly would be more informative than simply taking a few pictures of the sprues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/25/2018 at 10:34 PM, Meatwad said:

 it sounds like you're just another hater. 

The simple fact that you even use such a trite and ignorant phrase indicates to me that your opinion is one that I simply needn't pay attention to....

There are certain sites online where people try to make a living while providing information and discussion forms for people to learn and discuss their modelling in a serious manner and ARC is just one of those sites but I'm sure that Steve just loves the idea that you call his site amateur. On the other hand there are sites such as YouTube where any buffoon with a video recorder can post something with no control or editing other than general rules as to sex and violence. As I understand it many post stuff there as only click bait to get people to look at their stuff only for the purpose of making money, not to be helpful or useful in any way. Yes there are very useful items on YouTube but there is also a great deal of trash and I view the above mentioned review as not much better than totally useless. There are great in box reviews of new kits online but posting something on such an old kit in such a poorly done manner helps nobody.  The initial post was done just to get people to click on his video and reminded me of a fellow that used to post here just to get people to click on his website which was full of pictures he'd copied from elsewhere on the web.  He would use such lines as "never before seen pictures of" and try to get you onto his site.The moderators here banned him many times as he kept creating new identities just to try to suck people onto his site.  I admit the video here at least was his own work and took some effort but really wasn't much better than that banned guy. I don't hate this guy in any way but have no use for what he has done....... 

Edited by RCAFFAN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I'm sure that Steve just loves the idea that you call his site amateur."

I never called ARC "amateur". ARC is a professional site populated primarily with user-contributed amateur content. If you know anything about Steve, you'd know that he could most likely care less, even if I had.

 

"I don't hate this guy in any way but have no use for what he has done... "

Then ignore the thread and spare us the negativity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having been on this site since three Steves were involved, having personally met Mr. Bamford several times and had a number of PM conversations with him I of course KNOW nothing about him and so will bow to your vast knowledge...........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You lot do understand that you can quietly not like something, right? You can, I promise, even explain why you dislike something without being a pretentious cock. This thread should be pinned; it's a fantastic example of how to not talk to people. Even the Su-33 thread looks tame in comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I watched the full 8 minute review. I have a few comments if I'm allowed to share them. To the previous poster above me - don't you think that since this video was posted on this forum, we can tell the other members, who may be only vaguely interested, what to expect from the video before they click on it? Here is some of my feedback:

 

1) This is an old kit, but Tamiya has also issued a modern Zero. I think it is extremely important to tell the viewer the history of the kit he is looking at to avoid possible confusion. For anyone who may not be familiar with these kits (me included): This is an older Tamiya kit.

2) The word "preview" in the title is very misleading, giving the viewer the idea that this is a modern, soon-to-be-released kit. I assumed the reviewer meant it to be a preview to a build he intends to record and share on YouTube? If so, I really think it needs to be explained.

3) Things are generally pointed out in terms that are not very useful if I want to buy the kit. Surface texture is "nice", the cockpit is "bad/useless", etc. I think the reviewer should tell us in more detail what he means. I wasn't on a very good connection when I watched the video, so I didn't watch it in full HD. I haven't built one of these before and after the review, I still don't know for sure whether the panel lines are raised or recessed. They look recessed? Why not tell us in more detail how it looks up close?

4) When calling for a resin replacement, tell the viewer what is available. So, the kit cockpit is useless. What are my alternatives?

5) The shallow wheel wells really stood out for me, even on the low resolution - I was surprised that there was only praise for the wheel wells.

6) This being an old kit, I think the reviewer should have done some research online and tell us what other people have thought of the fit and engineering. This would be especially useful for beginners who want to use this kit as a cheaper kit to practice on.

7) Overall, I think this type of review would benefit hugely from some preparation. There were lots of uhmms and repetition, which makes it seem that the reviewer just pulled a box from the stash and started recording. With an old kit there is a huge amount of information available on the internet. Why not make the video really interesting and tell us what you learnt as you go through the box contents?

 

Sadly, I will not watch videos from this reviewer again due to the shortcomings listed above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mfezi, I think that sums it up very well indeed.

 

Cheers,

Pip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×