Jump to content

1/48 ZM F-4D is stock at Sprue Brothers


Recommended Posts

On 4/11/2018 at 6:35 PM, mawz said:

Revell Germany and their bloody mixes of paint nobody uses. Really hard to match a mix based on a paint line you can't buy most anywhere with non-standard names.

The colors in a Revell kit are useless. You have to find an alternate reference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Dehowie, this is really simple.

 

If you place three kits of the same subject next to each other, and they are different from each other in spots,,,,at least two of them are wrong. Maybe all three.

 

It doesn't matter which subject aircraft is chosen, 3 kits, not matching, something is wrong on them.

 

When the Academy kit came out, people shouted shut up about the nose and the stabs,,,,,now, since Z-M has a kit, the Academy kit's flaws are a given. (this happens with every new tooling,,,it is "the best", and not to be criticized ,,,until there are newer boxes in shrink-wrap to buy, then that one becomes "best ever" of that subject)

 

I understand the Phantom not having a great, accurate, shape in 1966,,,,,,but, after decades of toolings, in multiple scales,,,,,all one would have to do is correct the criticisms aimed at the other toolings, and hold it up to a gateguard,,,,and the overall shape would be the best ever in the model industry. Then the small details would follow from that.

 

(it also must be realized that if kits are never to be criticized, it is flat out impossible for there ever to actually be a "best kit of ______", deciding that involves criticizing kits) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Rex said:

Well, Dehowie, this is really simple.

 

If you place three kits of the same subject next to each other, and they are different from each other in spots,,,,at least two of them are wrong. Maybe all three.

 

It doesn't matter which subject aircraft is chosen, 3 kits, not matching, something is wrong on them.

 

When the Academy kit came out, people shouted shut up about the nose and the stabs,,,,,now, since Z-M has a kit, the Academy kit's flaws are a given. (this happens with every new tooling,,,it is "the best", and not to be criticized ,,,until there are newer boxes in shrink-wrap to buy, then that one becomes "best ever" of that subject)

 

I understand the Phantom not having a great, accurate, shape in 1966,,,,,,but, after decades of toolings, in multiple scales,,,,,all one would have to do is correct the criticisms aimed at the other toolings, and hold it up to a gateguard,,,,and the overall shape would be the best ever in the model industry. Then the small details would follow from that.

 

(it also must be realized that if kits are never to be criticized, it is flat out impossible for there ever to actually be a "best kit of ______", deciding that involves criticizing kits) 

BINGO!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel thete are also some conparasing to previous best kit,i.e hasegawa F-4.

but who kbow maybe they had it wrong and zm got it right. 

But we are so usef to the shape of the hasegawa that all tge other look wrong

 

Just my 2 cents

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeffrey Kubiak of Hypersonic models and others have already done fairly exhaustive research of this topic and have shown to my satisfaction the inaccuracies of the ZM kit's rear fuselage. It was discussed, along with photos, in earlier threads here on ARC. Here's the thread. 'Nuf said.

 

 

Edited by Mstor
additional info
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...