Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
Sign in to follow this  
Otto

Trimaster/DML Vs. old Eduard Fw-190A

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I attempted to do a search here to find something with no luck. For the low price, I have a chance to buy either the older Eduard Fw-190A or the Trimaster/DML kit. Which is the more accurate of the two, or in general which is better? I am quite sure this must have been covered here before but I just can't find anything. I know that the DML kit has been boxed by many other manufacturers including Italeri, Hasegawa, ProModeler, Revell, and others. I just want to build one just out of the box. No frills and thrills.

Edited by Otto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In terms of outline correctness the old Trimaster/Dragon/DML kit is better than the old Ed (not to forget the Hasegawa which is based on the Trimaster). The old Ed suffers from bad cross section of the fuselage - the new edition looks good. The only (very minor) glitch of the new ED I found  up to now is the too rounded shape of the inner weapon bay hatch. 

The FW 190 wing had a twist in the AoA of the airfoil (responsible for the roll rate) which is better represented with the new Ed than the Hasegawa, haven´t compared it to the DML.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the help. I will than get the DML kit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have since gotten a lot of honest opinions and have found out that both kits are lousy. Both have some major fit issues and I don't feel like putting a bunch of time into this build. I am not a big German fan and the only reason I am interested is because I can put Czech markings on it in the original German paint scheme. I want to be able and build this thing complete over 2-3 days. Since the best reviews are for the new Eduard A4 kit, I will wait until the new A8 is available and buy a set of overtrees when they are available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I’m surprised. I have to say that the original Eduard A kits have been a joy to build. Detail is excellent and pieces fit like a glove. Only filler was on trailing edge of wing to fuse for (by the flaps because the gap was too large).  The tail is too think where it meets the spine but other than that they are gorgeous kits. And for the price the detail is unbeatable.  Alignment can be tricky but you know how the saying goes: if you take your time it’s a real gem. 

 

I know nothing about the Dragon/Trimaster kit but detail looks decent. 

 

I highly recommend the Eduard A kits (and all the other Fw 190s they make). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the irony. I also posted this on a British website and a Czech website. I have received about a dozen replies on each of those vice the two split replies I have received here on a US website. On the Czech website it is a unanimous Eduard is by far the best and on the British I get mostly DML or that they are both bad . So I just ordered a set of overtrees from the Czech republic for the NEW tool A8 kit. That seams to be getting rave reviews. I don't like to buy Tamiya or Hasegawa kits because they are overpriced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Otto, do you have reference pics of the Czech 190's? I've never seen or heard of them before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were a few of them but only one made it into the Czech air force after the war. It just had the German markings and codes painted out and re-marked with the Czech roundels. The one or two photos of it are in black-n-white but it has been represented a few times in color drawings. There are still a few remnants left of it in the museum in Prague. The Czech designation for it was S-90. All I can give you is this from a Czech modeling sight. That is about the best info available. https://www.modelforum.cz/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18164&hilit=Fw+190+cs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/14/2019 at 11:53 AM, Andreas Beck said:

In terms of outline correctness the old Trimaster/Dragon/DML kit is better than the old Ed (not to forget the Hasegawa which is based on the Trimaster). The old Ed suffers from bad cross section of the fuselage - the new edition looks good. The only (very minor) glitch of the new ED I found  up to now is the too rounded shape of the inner weapon bay hatch. 

The FW 190 wing had a twist in the AoA of the airfoil (responsible for the roll rate) which is better represented with the new Ed than the Hasegawa, haven´t compared it to the DML.

 

  The new Eduards 190s are a huge improvement, but still show a too cylindrical cowl influenced by the Fluegwerke newly built versions with Russian engines... This will likely be difficult to correct without using the excellent Hasegawa cowl, because the entire top half should taper.

 

  I still look forward to the new Eduard, because the very accurate Hasegawa has a right wingroot 1 inch thinner than the left, combining this with a one inch thicker wingtip, so that the right wing has a completely different taper to the left, making symmetry near impossible...

 

  Trimaster is very so-so, poor cowl, prop and truly awful bulged canopy,  yet is way better than Eduard, which is the worst 190 in 30 + years for outlines (20% too wide canopy top, absurdly cylindrical cowl, thin tail, ect..)...

 

  Robertson

Edited by Robertson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a set of overtrees ordered for the new Eduard kit. I also heard that the old Otaki/Arii has a pretty good outline. If that is so, I have one of those and can use the cowling from that on my Eduard kit.

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...